Parents Lose Custody of 'Adolf Hitler' and his sisters

Children Given Nazi Names Won’t Be Returned to Parents

Quote :

A New Jersey couple who gave their children Nazi-inspired names should not regain custody of them, a state appeals court ruled on Thursday.

The state removed the three small children of the couple, Heath and Deborah Campbell, from their home in January 2009. A month earlier, the family drew attention when a supermarket near the family’s home in Holland Township, in west-central New Jersey, refused to decorate a birthday cake for their son, Adolf Hitler Campbell, now 4. He and his sisters, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell, who are younger, have been in foster care.

A family court determined that there was insufficient evidence that the parents had abused or neglected the children, but a three-judge appeals panel, in reviewing that decision, determined that there was enough evidence not to return the children to their parents’ custody. The panel sent the case back to family court for further monitoring.

Maybe if they hadn't made such a big deal over the birthday cake?

Quote :

Last year, Heath Campbell accused the state of removing the children because of their names and said government officials were relying on unproven accusations made by a neighbor and by an ex-wife who charged him with abusing her years ago.

Of coure, they have to be lying.

Quote :

In the ruling on Thursday, which did not mention the names or the birthday cake, the court found that there were myriad reasons that proved the need for continued protection services for the children. According to court records, both parents are unemployed. The court found that both parents were themselves victims of childhood abuse and said that they had not “received adequate treatment for their serious psychological conditions.”

Mr. Campbell, 37, cannot read, and Ms. Campbell, who is in her mid-20s, left school before finishing the 10th grade, according to court records.

Well I can see how the parents would have a hard-time finding jobs to support the family. How do you manage to get through school and never learn to read?

Remember folks; if you can't afford anything better, give the gift of child abuse; the gift that truly keeps on giving, and giving, and giving, and giving....

and let me guess, they only investigated the parents because of the cake incident.

I was about to say "okay, they gave their kids some pretty warped names, but that shouldn't be a reason to take those kids away from their parents" . . . and then I read the rest of the article. Thank god for "think before posting."

Definitely some weird shit going on here. I hope those kids get placed with a saner family.

Hmmm...

I don't know. This really gives me pause for thought.

On the one hand, yeah, these people don't sound like the greatest parents in the world, for a very long list of reasons.

On the other, I would really worry that this case would lead to parents who don't have all the advantages in life losing their kids because of someone saying something. A parent can be illiterate, or have a low level of education, or have psychological issues, or very poor/unemployed, and still be a loving, caring parent. A person can even have beliefs that the majority of people would find repulsive, and still love their child (though as a result of those beliefs, harm to the child may result).

The really sad thing is how is this gonna affect these poor kids. Are their parents warping them from the cradle, essentially? Yes. But I don't doubt that they love their parents, because that's the nature of a little child. They love and trust their parents unless those parents repeatedly and flagrantly betray that trust to them. And if these parents have been "good parents" to the children (not physically or emotionally abusing them -- you could argue that the names constitute a form of abuse, but I'm arguing things like hitting, slapping, name-calling, sexual abuse, etc.), well, the kids are gonna really miss their parents. This will probably be very traumatic for them.

It's a really bad situation all around. Maybe taking them away is for the best. I really don't know.

Quote :

A parent can be illiterate, or have a low level of education, or have
psychological issues, or very poor/unemployed, and still be a loving,
caring parent. A person can even have beliefs that the majority of
people would find repulsive, and still love their child (though as a
result of those beliefs, harm to the child may result).

I admit this one gave me pause as well. I was under the impression that when the judge said "psychological issues," though, they were working off evidence of the parents being seriously non compos mentis.

If said psychological issues aren't real, though (if) and everything else checks out, they should probably give the kids back. Giving a kid a name like Adolf Hitler is a classic facepalm moment, but I don't think that a name alone is considered child abuse. But I stand by my original comment--it sounds like crazy waters run deep in this case.

Yeah, uh, if illiteracy and psychological problems were reason enough to keep kids in the foster care system from their parents, I can tell you right now there'd be a shit of a lot more children in the foster care system.

And the only reason they even bothered to look into the parents' literacy and background is because they have stupid, worrisome names, brought up cos of the cake thing.

Yeah. Smells a little like bullshit.
Not that I'm not worried about individuals who name their kids White Supremecist things, but that's... Yeah.

For those keeping score, being unable to provide for your kids and naming them after fascists gets them taken away. However, being unable to provide for your kids and trying to pray their cancer away means you can keep them*.


*: Although if you do this and the kids actually die, the jury will throw the book at you. Seems to me that you could save the kid's life by being stricter earlier, but what do I know?

Isn't giving your children embarrassing names somewhat prejudiciable to them? OK it might not be that much (even if really, really creepy) but whatever.

Khajidu wrote:

Isn't giving your children embarrassing names somewhat prejudiciable to them? OK it might not be that much (even if really, really creepy) but whatever.

It's likely not going to help them win friends and influence people. Even if a child their own age is too young to know who Adolph Hitler is, you can bet your life they're going to go home from school and tell mom and dad about their new best friend.

Rabid Badger wrote:

Khajidu wrote:

Isn't giving your children embarrassing names somewhat prejudiciable to them? OK it might not be that much (even if really, really creepy) but whatever.

It's likely not going to help them win friends and influence people. Even if a child their own age is too young to know who Adolph Hitler is, you can bet your life they're going to go home from school and tell mom and dad about their new best friend.

This, for a start. And when they're adults? How will any potential employer take them seriously? If not worse.

Quote :

A family court determined that there was insufficient evidence that the parents had abused or neglected the children, but a three-judge appeals panel, in reviewing that decision, determined that there was enough evidence not to return the children to their parents’ custody. The panel sent the case back to family court for further monitoring.

This tells me that the kids aren't being taken away from the parents forever. The court is just holding on to the kids for a bit longer so they can have more time to investigate these parents and decide.

I think I understand the courts decision. Yes, naming your kids Adolf Hitler and AyanNation is... unorthodox, but it's not child abuse. However, when you look a little closer at this family, both the parents seem rather disturbed. The court was probably just as hesitant to make this ruling as we are hesitant of making a judgement on it.

It may not be a good legal reason to hold the kids, but something about this family certainly does leave a bad taste in the mouth.

The parents didn't abuse their children, but it feels like they painted big targets on them, captioned 'Kick me'. Leading to potential abuse from other people.
That may be why the judges are reluctant to give the children back. Well, on the other hand, the potential harm is done.

Well now I know what to name my kids. Thank you, crazy people.