What wonderful news to take into the New Year. The news of the success of the
California Baby Safe Haven law in 2003. What a great way to open the New Year!
Jean
========
CALIFORNIA
http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/8031556p-8967325c.html

Marjie Lundstrom: It's a year-end wrap: 'Safe haven' law and other topics

By Marjie Lundstrom -- Sacromento Bee Columnist
Published 2:15 a.m. PST Thursday, January 1, 2004

The new year begins, but some old-year business dangles.
In keeping with my resolution to get organized -- to stop making new piles (or
moving around the old) -- I bring updates on columns past.

And, I hope, a smattering of good news on which to begin the year.

ANOTHER BABY SAVED: The cheery holiday news release from the California
Department of Social Services was barely dry last month when something
unscripted -- and altogether fitting -- happened in Fresno.
Just as the state was lauding the success of the Safely Surrendered Baby Law,
another newborn was arriving at a Fresno hospital. The mother reportedly could
not care for the 1-day-old boy, born at home, who is likely to be adopted by a
family longing for a child.

The law, which took effect in 2001, allows parents to surrender newborns within
72 hours of birth at California emergency rooms or other "safe haven" locations
(in some places, fire stations) without fear of prosecution.

The numbers tell this success story, especially since the state was finally
able to publicize the law this year. In 2001, only two babies were safely
surrendered; by the end of this year, there were 21. Even more encouraging was
the drop in illegally abandoned babies found dead -- 11 in both 2001 and 2002,
but only one this year.

"This is the season when a lot of people across the country are celebrating the
birth of a newborn," said outgoing state Social Services Director Rita Saenz.

"I think it's a particularly good time to give some thought to and appreciation
for the reality that we've had many more safely surrendered babies ... and less
and less dead babies."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------

I wonder where Marjie Lindstrom is getting her stats. One would hope that
the State of California can do better than this. One abandoned dead baby in
2003 in California. I think not. But then perhaps it depends on
definition. Here's my records:

January 24, 2003: MODESTO--Police arrest Kristin Machado, 35, for killing
baby shortly after birth and burying it under boards and grass behind
Economy Inn where she gave birth. Machado had 2 other children and 2 others
were relinquished for adoption. Adoptive parents of one child wanted to
adopt this baby, but she turned them down. SOURCES: Modesto Bee, January
25, 2003; San Francisco Chronicle, January 26, 2003; KCRA-TV, January 28,
2003; Modesto Bee, February 1, 2003; Modesto Bee, August 8. 2003

January 28, 2003: WESTCHESTER--Transient digging through trash bin under
apartment complex finds body of infant girl wrapped in plastic. SOURCES:
KABC-TV, January 28, 2003; LA Times, January 29, 2003

February 4, 2003: SANTA CLARITA--Newborn boy's body found in trash at condo
complex. SOURCES: KNBC-TV, February 4, 2003; Santa Clarita Daily news,
February 22, 2003;

February 12, 2003: TORRANCE--16-year old suffocates newborn son. SOURCES:
KABC-TV, February 12, 2003;

May 6, 2003: MARINA DEL RAY--Body of full-term newborn found floating in
Marina del Rey Channel. SOURCES: KNBC-TV, May 6, 2003; San Gabriel Valley
Tribune, May 11, 2003;

July 11, 2003: FRESNO--Newborn found in apartment complex dumpster.
SOURCES: KFSN-TV, July 11, 2003;

August 14, 2003: NORTH HILLS--Maria Legarda, 23, charged with kiling
newborn and putting body in trunk of car. SOURCES: Riverside
Press-Enterprise, August 14, 2003;

November 20, 2003: SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY--Body of newborn boy found in
trash at Ft. Irwin military base in Mojave Desert. SOURCES: LA Times,
November 20, 2003.

There are other cases of bodies of newborns discovered where neonaticide was
the initial diagnosis, but later autopies ruled stillbirth

Marley


"BabySafeHaven" <babysafehaven@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040101111441.15319.00001933@mb-m12.aol.com... What wonderful news to take into the New Year. The news of the success of
the California Baby Safe Haven law in 2003. What a great way to open the New
Year! Jean ======== CALIFORNIA http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/8031556p-8967325c.html Marjie Lundstrom: It's a year-end wrap: 'Safe haven' law and other topics By Marjie Lundstrom -- Sacromento Bee Columnist Published 2:15 a.m. PST Thursday, January 1, 2004 The new year begins, but some old-year business dangles. In keeping with my resolution to get organized -- to stop making new piles
(or moving around the old) -- I bring updates on columns past. And, I hope, a smattering of good news on which to begin the year. ANOTHER BABY SAVED: The cheery holiday news release from the California Department of Social Services was barely dry last month when something unscripted -- and altogether fitting -- happened in Fresno. Just as the state was lauding the success of the Safely Surrendered Baby
Law, another newborn was arriving at a Fresno hospital. The mother reportedly
could not care for the 1-day-old boy, born at home, who is likely to be adopted
by a family longing for a child. The law, which took effect in 2001, allows parents to surrender newborns
within 72 hours of birth at California emergency rooms or other "safe haven"
locations (in some places, fire stations) without fear of prosecution. The numbers tell this success story, especially since the state was
finally able to publicize the law this year. In 2001, only two babies were safely surrendered; by the end of this year, there were 21. Even more encouraging
was the drop in illegally abandoned babies found dead -- 11 in both 2001 and
2002, but only one this year. "This is the season when a lot of people across the country are
celebrating the birth of a newborn," said outgoing state Social Services Director Rita
Saenz. "I think it's a particularly good time to give some thought to and
appreciation for the reality that we've had many more safely surrendered babies ... and
less and less dead babies." -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------

"BabySafeHaven" <babysafehaven@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040101111441.15319.00001933@mb-m12.aol.com... What wonderful news to take into the New Year. The news of the success of
the California Baby Safe Haven law in 2003. What a great way to open the New
Year! Jean

Too bad it is a tissue of bull****. For someone whose reputation rests on
preserving the the memory of dead infants, I'd be careful distributing this
opinion piece, which renders all but one of California's dead abandoned
babies in 2003 non-existent to score cheap sentimental journalism points. .

Ron
======== CALIFORNIA http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/8031556p-8967325c.html Marjie Lundstrom: It's a year-end wrap: 'Safe haven' law and other topics By Marjie Lundstrom -- Sacromento Bee Columnist Published 2:15 a.m. PST Thursday, January 1, 2004 The new year begins, but some old-year business dangles. In keeping with my resolution to get organized -- to stop making new piles
(or moving around the old) -- I bring updates on columns past. And, I hope, a smattering of good news on which to begin the year. ANOTHER BABY SAVED: The cheery holiday news release from the California Department of Social Services was barely dry last month when something unscripted -- and altogether fitting -- happened in Fresno. Just as the state was lauding the success of the Safely Surrendered Baby
Law, another newborn was arriving at a Fresno hospital. The mother reportedly
could not care for the 1-day-old boy, born at home, who is likely to be adopted
by a family longing for a child. The law, which took effect in 2001, allows parents to surrender newborns
within 72 hours of birth at California emergency rooms or other "safe haven"
locations (in some places, fire stations) without fear of prosecution. The numbers tell this success story, especially since the state was
finally able to publicize the law this year. In 2001, only two babies were safely surrendered; by the end of this year, there were 21. Even more encouraging
was the drop in illegally abandoned babies found dead -- 11 in both 2001 and
2002, but only one this year. "This is the season when a lot of people across the country are
celebrating the birth of a newborn," said outgoing state Social Services Director Rita
Saenz. "I think it's a particularly good time to give some thought to and
appreciation for the reality that we've had many more safely surrendered babies ... and
less and less dead babies." -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------

<<<I wonder where Marjie Lindstrom is getting her stats. ....
Marley>>>

Your argument is then with the "California Department of Social Services" and
"outgoing state Social Services Director Rita Saenz."
Isn't the point here that there is another living, breathing baby, and to quote
Ms. Saenz".. and less and less dead babies."
Let them go on to live productive lives in the State of California, and 44
other states with successful Baby Safe Haven laws.
Happy New Year.
Jean

"DSAngelMom" <dsangelmom@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040103104833.12262.00002551@mb-m05.aol.com... <<<I wonder where Marjie Lindstrom is getting her stats. .... Marley>>> Your argument is then with the "California Department of Social Services"
and "outgoing state Social Services Director Rita Saenz." Isn't the point here that there is another living, breathing baby, and to
quote Ms. Saenz".. and less and less dead babies." Let them go on to live productive lives in the State of California, and 44 other states with successful Baby Safe Haven laws. Happy New Year. Jean

My argument is with inaccurate record keeping and questionable methodology,
which you and other proponents embrace, and which the State of California
apparently does, too. You'd all be kicked out of Statistics 101 by now.
Don't you have any comments on this poor record keeping and shoddy
reporting? Don't you feel it would be wise for TPTB in California and other
states to actually know what they're talking about before they talk to the
press? Wouldn't it be to your benefit that if what you say is true about
SH, that the state use correct information to reflect your beliefs, not make
public incompetents of themselves? Of course, if the state claims that
there was only 1 deadly abandonment, when in fact, there appears to have
been many, it is to your benefit. I can't believe that I'm the only person
watchdogging this.

BTW, how can anyone live a productive life in California?

Happy New Year!

Marley

In article <20040103104833.12262.00002551@mb-m05.aol.com>, dsangelmom@aol.com
(DSAngelMom) writes:
<<<I wonder where Marjie Lindstrom is getting her stats. ....Marley>>>Your argument is then with the "California Department of Social Services" and"outgoing state Social Services Director Rita Saenz."Isn't the point here that there is another living, breathing baby, and toquoteMs. Saenz".. and less and less dead babies."Let them go on to live productive lives in the State of California, and 44other states with successful Baby Safe Haven laws.Happy New Year.Jean

So we should just forget about the dead babies that were found. Funny but you
didn't seem to think so once upon a time. Why you even claimed to adopt a dead
baby to give it a proper burial. Funny how your attitude changes to fit your
agenda.

KL

"DSAngelMom" <dsangelmom@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040103104833.12262.00002551@mb-m05.aol.com... <<<I wonder where Marjie Lindstrom is getting her stats. .... Marley>>> Your argument is then with the "California Department of Social Services"
and "outgoing state Social Services Director Rita Saenz." Isn't the point here that there is another living, breathing baby, and to
quote Ms. Saenz".. and less and less dead babies." Let them go on to live productive lives in the State of California, and 44 other states with successful Baby Safe Haven laws.

It's plainly a lie that there was one fatal abandonment in California in
2003. Lindstrom could have checked her facts, she's a regular columnist at
the Bee and should know the basics of journalistm if not practice them. But
her role in this column is not to illuminate, it was to propagandize for
baby dumps. The fact is there have been more fatal abandonments in CA since
the passage of the baby dump laws, not less. The more it's publicized, the
more dead babies.

Ron

Happy New Year. Jean

"KL" <klbjornme@aol.comjunkhell> wrote in message
news:20040103121348.21232.00003201@mb-m13.aol.com... In article <20040103104833.12262.00002551@mb-m05.aol.com>,
dsangelmom@aol.com (DSAngelMom) writes:<<<I wonder where Marjie Lindstrom is getting her stats. ....Marley>>>Your argument is then with the "California Department of Social Services"
and"outgoing state Social Services Director Rita Saenz."Isn't the point here that there is another living, breathing baby, and toquoteMs. Saenz".. and less and less dead babies."Let them go on to live productive lives in the State of California, and
44other states with successful Baby Safe Haven laws.Happy New Year.Jean So we should just forget about the dead babies that were found. Funny but
you didn't seem to think so once upon a time. Why you even claimed to adopt a
dead baby to give it a proper burial. Funny how your attitude changes to fit
your agenda. KL

Yeah, isn't it strange that all those dead babies are suddenly swept under
the rug so-to-speak, to meet an agenda.

Marley

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:kXCJb.33827$Pg1.8201@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net... "DSAngelMom" <dsangelmom@aol.com> wrote in message news:20040103104833.12262.00002551@mb-m05.aol.com... <<<I wonder where Marjie Lindstrom is getting her stats. .... Marley>>> Your argument is then with the "California Department of Social
Services" and "outgoing state Social Services Director Rita Saenz." Isn't the point here that there is another living, breathing baby, and
to quote Ms. Saenz".. and less and less dead babies." Let them go on to live productive lives in the State of California, and
44 other states with successful Baby Safe Haven laws. It's plainly a lie that there was one fatal abandonment in California in 2003. Lindstrom could have checked her facts, she's a regular columnist at the Bee and should know the basics of journalistm if not practice them.
But her role in this column is not to illuminate, it was to propagandize for baby dumps. The fact is there have been more fatal abandonments in CA
since the passage of the baby dump laws, not less. The more it's publicized, the more dead babies. Ron Happy New Year. Jean

It;'s time for me to work up some stats. CA 2003 reports were rather
painless to go through last night. Somebody needs to tear the fact-proof
screen.

Marley

<<<Of course, if the state claims that
there was only 1 deadly abandonment, when in fact, there appears to have
been many, it is to your benefit.>>>

As you say it "appears" to be something different, but then again you don't
have the data such as police reports, HHS reports, documentation that the HHS
Commissioner has.

<<<BTW, how can anyone live a productive life in California?>>>

I don't know, I guess you could ask Ron about that.

<<<So we should just forget about the dead babies that were found.>>>

We NEVER forget about the tragedies of babies that are found dead of an
abandonment, and it's the memory of every one of this babies that drives us so
hard to get the next baby into safe hands through one of the successful 45 Baby
Safe Haven laws across the country. We don't waste our time with foolish
parodies, we do the work that needs to be done getting the information out
about those 45 successful Baby Safe Haven laws.
Jean

>Subject: Re: CA - It's a year-end wrap: 'Safe haven' law and other topicsFrom: babysafehaven@aol.com (BabySafeHaven)Date: 1/3/2004
We NEVER forget about the tragedies of babies that are found dead of anabandonment,

Neither do I and saddened at your promotion of safe havens as a diversion which
results in not getting prenatal assistance to the mom who truly abandons and
leads to the continuation of these infant deaths. Kathy J

"Ron Morgan" <rhyzome1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:kXCJb.33827$Pg1.8201@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net... "DSAngelMom" <dsangelmom@aol.com> wrote in message news:20040103104833.12262.00002551@mb-m05.aol.com... <<<I wonder where Marjie Lindstrom is getting her stats. .... Marley>>> Your argument is then with the "California Department of Social
Services" and "outgoing state Social Services Director Rita Saenz." Isn't the point here that there is another living, breathing baby, and
to quote Ms. Saenz".. and less and less dead babies." Let them go on to live productive lives in the State of California, and
44 other states with successful Baby Safe Haven laws. It's plainly a lie that there was one fatal abandonment in California in 2003. Lindstrom could have checked her facts, she's a regular columnist at the Bee and should know the basics of journalistm if not practice them.
But her role in this column is not to illuminate, it was to propagandize for baby dumps. The fact is there have been more fatal abandonments in CA
since the passage of the baby dump laws, not less. The more it's publicized, the more dead babies. Ron

As part of the Baby Moses Mighty Wurlitzer she doesn't have to check facts.
There is no need to correct lies or even mistakes because the goal is to
propaganidze the public with sensational "factoids" that create a "truth."
It's what social scientists call "micro-marco disconnect" where a rumour--or
in this case misinformation--spreads through the community, but is
eventually seen to be false. However, on the macro level--the societal
level--the misinformation just keeps on spreading. Baby Moses: The Urban
Myth as Politcal Truth.

Marley Happy New Year. Jean

"BabySafeHaven" <babysafehaven@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040103131759.10854.00001276@mb-m24.aol.com... <<<Of course, if the state claims that there was only 1 deadly abandonment, when in fact, there appears to have been many, it is to your benefit.>>> As you say it "appears" to be something different, but then again you
don't have the data such as police reports, HHS reports, documentation that the
HHS Commissioner has.

And you don't have access either. Thanks to the secret keepers in
California, the California Birth and Death Indices, which were open for
public viewing for nearly 100 years were sealed from public access last
year. Bastard Nation, the AAC, genealogists, bankers, public policy wonks,
and historians (among others) opposed the sealing of these public records.
I would think, however, that if your cause is so pure and perfect, you'd
want real facts and figures to back you up, not fantasy factoids. And since
there are no set professional standards defining "baby abandonment" the
entire genre is subjective. What might be dangerous or deadly abandonment
in one jurisdiction, is not in another. <<<BTW, how can anyone live a productive life in California?>>> I don't know, I guess you could ask Ron about that. <<<So we should just forget about the dead babies that were found.>>> We NEVER forget about the tragedies of babies that are found dead of an abandonment, and it's the memory of every one of this babies that drives
us so hard to get the next baby into safe hands through one of the successful 45
Baby Safe Haven laws across the country. We don't waste our time with foolish parodies, we do the work that needs to be done getting the information out about those 45 successful Baby Safe Haven laws. Jean

Then why are you so quick to diminish their memories and believe what a
columnist from Sacto says?

Marley

BabySafeHaven wrote:
<<<Of course, if the state claims that there was only 1 deadly abandonment, when in fact, there appears to have been many, it is to your benefit.>>> As you say it "appears" to be something different, but then again you don't have the data such as police reports, HHS reports, documentation that the HHS Commissioner has.

No, just published reports of dead infants. It'll be interesting to see what Ms
Bureaucrat's successor says, the Gropenator has done a good job thusfar choosing
state department heads, although his fiscal folks are troglodytes.
<<<BTW, how can anyone live a productive life in California?>>> I don't know, I guess you could ask Ron about that.

I dunno, I spent the morning drafting a resolution for the Board of Supervisors to
the State to reinstate a program that provided supplemental nutrition, ie. food,
to 5000 San Francisco low-income seniors. Then I did home repair, mostly changing
out electrical fixtures. No floods, fires, or seismic events, so as Ice Cube said,
it must have been a good day, didn't have to use my AK....
<<<So we should just forget about the dead babies that were found.>>> We NEVER forget about the tragedies of babies that are found dead of an abandonment, and it's the memory of every one of this babies that drives us so hard to get the next baby into safe hands through one of the successful 45 Baby Safe Haven laws across the country. We don't waste our time with foolish parodies, we do the work that needs to be done getting the information out about those 45 successful Baby Safe Haven laws.

Pimping dead babies when it suits you, forgetting them when it doesn't. You guys
are a piece of work, one for the ages...

Ron
Jean