Child abuse should be unconstitutional

The Constitution does not protect children from their parents no matter the severity of abuse afflicted, even if the are rendered mentally retarded or even dead.

In 2018 an investigation went of four children ages 10-3 of extreme abuse at home. The children were, starved, forced to drink hot sauce, burnt with cigarettes, belts and colored coat hangers, all to “teach them a lesson.” Their father, “Jamal Williams is locked up on charges of strangulation, abuse, and endangerment,” explained on WNEP.com

Four year Joshua DeShaney’s father had physically abused him in Wisconsin, The state had taken Joshua into custody but returned him three days later. Joshua had no defense for himself against his father. He can’t stand up to him nor could he fight back. Joshua is only 4 years old and should not have to be dealing with the extreme abuse that his father inflicts on him. “Petitioner’s father finally beat him so severely that he suffered permanent brain damage, and was rendered profoundly retarded,” Said by the DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services.

The damages that had been done to Joshua’s brain line up with those of shaken baby syndrome. The normal life of a kid had now been taken away from Joshua. With the state “failing” to take Joshua away from his father to protect him, his mother faught that they are depriving, “Joshua of his liberty rights, without due process of law, thereby violating his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment,” explained by the Supreme Court, Child Abuse, and the Role of the State.   

Since Joshua was being abused and beaten nearly to death ,the state took no drastic measures due to the fact that under the Constitution children are not protected from their parents. Joshua could have died of the abuse inflicted on him by his father and the Constitution would merely have no concern because the 14th amendment supposedly protecting life, does not protect his.

The court should not stand at fault because essentially the constitution does not protect children from their parents. That means that the government is not at fault for Joshua’s abuse. All states just assume that it is the constitution’s job to protect children. However even though the government isn’t required under the constitution to protect children, in certain scenarios it should be. Joshua DeShaney could have easily been dead if he had stayed with his father any longer, but because it was his father abusing him the government under the followings of the constitution did not protect Joshua’s life. They returned Joshua back to his father and left it up to his mother to fight for his well being.

Cited sources

1.) D.O., Shelley co. “The Supreme Court, Child Abuse, and the Role of the State.” Psychiatry Online, 2017, psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2017.121101.

• Reference they used.

3.DeShaney v Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989), pp 190–213 Google Scholar

2.)“DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services.” LII / Legal Information Institute, Legal Information Institute, www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/489/189.

3.)New York Times Upfront . DeShaney v. Winnebago County Social Services. part of the New York Times magazine , 2007.

4.)“Couple Charged in Frightening Child Abuse Case.” WNEP.com, 10 May 2018, wnep.com/2018/05/10/couple-charged-in-frightening-child-abuse-case/.