Separation from children consequence of law-breaking


By Holly Audette

Wednesday, June 20, 2018

Since when does the left care about children being with parents? They’ve promoted single-parenting like it is worthy of a trophy, largely ignoring the crisis in urban areas like Chicago where parents lose their lives routinely. They’ve talked about the “village” being responsible for raising kids, undermined marriage as an institution, created generations of children dependent on government and dismissed the role and significance of fathers to the point they are mere sperm-producing machines, even calling for the end of Father’s Day. According to the Pew Research Center, “the share of U.S. children living with one unmarried parent had more than doubled since 1968, jumping from 13 percent to 32 percent in 2017.”

Children are without parents daily for a myriad of reasons. Some because their parents risked being able to be with their children by breaking the law. They are separated from their children as a consequence and put in detention to be held responsible for their choices. How many photos have you seen of women in jail, giving birth to their child while in jail and then, and then, and then? Their child is removed from them and their place of incarceration. Another child separated from a parent. Who exactly is responsible for that child not being with an incarcerated parent? Only one person is responsible for that. The incarcerated parent.

The left is using this tragedy of choice to claim our policies are “heartless.” The truth is, our policies demand a parent detained for breaking the law loses the right to associate with those they choose to. That should be the case in every circumstance. The fact you are a parent is all of a sudden of significant status? Since when? The non-offending population of citizens is required daily to provide for and care for children born to people unprepared or unwilling to provide for them themselves. Each of those children was created by two people. How important is it to the left that those children are so often “without” a parent?

This issue is absolutely not about the left’s concern for children being with parents. It is about the law. They don’t largely claim incarcerated parents in jail for burglary have the right to be with their children. The truth is they simply either do not think it should be against the law to cross our borders without permission or they do not think it is an important enough violation of the law to warrant incarceration which requires separation from their children. That has always been their posture and they have failed miserably to convince Americans of it.

The immigration detention laws have not changed, Children have been separated from parents for years. The difference is the law prohibiting entry without permission is being enforced and every parent put in to criminal proceedings who breaks immigration law. Why? Because they committed a crime. The left doesn’t want it to be a crime and they turn to pulling heart strings in an exaggerated and disingenuous manner in hopes of convincing others. I recommend “The Truth About Separating Kids” in the National Review for facts.

The children are housed, fed and given medical treatment. No one wants parents and children separated. But parents who choose activity that risks this are responsible, along with those encouraging them to do it.

According to the Homeland Security secretary, fraudulent asylum applications using children have increased 315 percent. Look at Europe. If you want to see a completely transformed culture here like there, just let the crocodile tears influence our policy and let bad characters use “families” as an opportunity to enter our country. If you need asylum, go to a port of entry. Legally apply for the process. Do not enter the country illegally because you do not want to go through the process our laws require. You are not entitled to come here. Liberal immigration policies have cost many countries. Look at the struggle to deal with those costs after the fact. This country would be foolish to follow that example. We are generous, we do not need to be so to a foolish fault.

Holly Audette is a small-business owner active in political and civic causes.