First of all, there are remedies available for child abuse and neglect that are short of removing children from the home. Depending on the case, Child Protective Services (or whatever it's called in your neck of the woods) can make periodic home visits, can set goals (for maintaining sanitation, for example), can require the parents to take classes or the kids to get counseling, and can forbid certain activities.

Based on what we know about balloon-dad, I am not calling for taking away his children, but I think it's appropriate for CPS (as inept an agency as they tend to be, largely because they get to operate outside the light of public scrutiny) to get involved.

Here's how I see it. I have never once, through my behavior, caused one of my kids to throw up, much less caused it through conduct that was probably illegal and certainly immoral. This fellow has done it twice. And I don't think it's outside the realm of prediction that what he put the kid in the middle of would seriously overstress him.

That is psychological abuse. It may not be psychological abuse of such a permanent or shocking nature as to justify removal, but it is, quite simply and I think undeniably, psychological abuse.

I think CPS needs to do something more than just wait for the next barf-inducing stunt. Pick from the menu above.

Articles of this nature somewhat jokingly speak of "stupid" parents, but it is possible that they are mentally ill parents, too.

But mentally ill and stupid people raise children all the time, and sometimes lovingly, and though sometimes their children grow up to be mentally ill and/or stupid, too...that's life.

You have to figure by the very nature of what is involved in appearing on the worst of the reality TV shows, that the adults who choose to appear or place their children on the air are "different" from those of us who would prefer to spend the most private moments of our lives IN private. Again, we are witnessing a kind of "abnormal behavior," but of a kind that usually hurts no one and often earns money for the principals that they would never earn in any other part of their life. (Michael Caine, speaking of his poor beginnings said, "There were two ways out of the ghetto...show business or sports.")

From my grazing of reality shows over the years, I've found that many "real people" who give their careers as "waitress" or "bartender" on a "reality show" move rapidly after appearing on that show to become what they really wanted to be in the first place: actors. Reality TV is simply another audition route to stardom.

For the most part, the reality TV world moves on a sliding scale from lucrative(a good career move for the "Idols" who find work)) to harmless(no career, but it looks like fun to be on TV that one time) to disturbing to disgusting to dangerous.

The "balloon boy" father, on the evidence, is somewhere in the range from disturbing to dangeous, and a little CPS intervention may be in order. For what its worth.

"as inept an agency as they tend to be, largely because they get to operate outside the light of public scrutiny"

This is bullshit. Most child protection agencies operate in a responsible manner. Its true that court records are always closed in cases involving children. (There are lots of good reasons for that.) However, decisions about custody and parental requirements are actually made by a JUDGE, not social workers or CPS administrators. The parents can hire a lawyer, etc. Its all very fair and there is plenty of oversight. Social workers can be fired for doing their jobs badly and sued for malpractice, just like any other licensed professional.

Me: as inept an agency as they tend to be

You: Most child protection agencies operate in a responsible manner

We've both made pretty sweeping statements for which there is a dearth of evidence. I can certainly point to horrendous screw-ups here in Western Pennsylvania that have led to the death of a child or to a child killing an abusive parent. And these are cases where the family was under CPS observation at the time. I venture to say that if those cases had been followed by the public, there would have been outrage -- and change -- long before anybody died. I stand by the proposition that CPS tends to be more inept than other government agencies, and that the reason for this is the lack of public oversight.

Also, I strongly doubt that CPS workers can be "sued for malpractice." Well, of course they can be sued -- this is America, after all -- but I suspect they have fairly solid immunity for anything short of recklessness.

You think that a few bad cases that got lots of media scrutiny prove your point? What about the tens of thousands of cases that didn't go bad? A doctor would be thrilled by that error rate. Plus, sometimes no matter how hard you try, a scumbag parent or foster parent can frustrate the system and still harm a child. Social workers can only do so much.

And, yes, you can really sue them. Here is a link for purchasing liability insurance from the National Association of Social Workers: <link>

You really need to learn a little more about the practice of social work before you shoot your mouth off any further. Ignorance is no excuse.