Texas Boy Punished for Wetting Bed Dead from Dehydration…Test to be Parent?

November 3, 2019 0 By Jose Scott


Here’s an incredible story that makes me wonder
whether an evaluation should be done before people are allowed to parent children. A boy
has been found dead of dehydration as a punishment for wetting the bed in Texas. A couple is under arrest, Louis, for punishing
their 10-year-old son for wetting the bed by refusing to give him water. The boy died
of dehydration. The one thing I am not clear on is, it had been five days, and my understanding
is you can’t actually die of dehydration in five days. What I believe happened is that the boy choked
on peanut butter because his throat was so dry from the five days of not drinking water.
So in a sense, it’s an indirectly died from dehydration situation. Doesn’t matter, it’s
still obviously child abuse, and the parents are under arrest. Louis: I think you can die within five days. David: Is that… Natan: You die in just three days of dehydration. David: From no water? Louis: Yeah. David: He had food, but no water. Really?
In three days with food but without water, not in the desert? Louis: Well, depending on the food, it could
have water in it. Natan: Yeah, I mean, if you’re eating watermelons,
you’ll be fine. David: Oh, good. Louis: Fruits, vegetables are mostly water. David: Well, the “Dallas Morning News” is
reporting that Jonathan James died just on July 25th, and court documents really are
outlining the fact that the last few days of his life were a complete horror. Five days
without water. He was forced to stand at the window in a room without air conditioning.
And you know, Louis, in Texas it gets incredibly hot with that sun down there. You’ve spent
some time there in another life. And his twin brother Joseph said that on the
day he died, he got peanut butter stuck in his throat, he collapsed, hit his head on
the floor, an ambulance was called, it was too late, and he died later at the hospital. And people emailing me saying, again, when
we talk about, these were… these were God-fearing parents, Louis. Does a story like this prove
that God exists, when you see that parents are capable of making a kid die in such a
pointless, inhumane, cruel way? It’s an incredibly sad story. And it really brings up the question… well,
number one, the parents have not even been charged with murder at this point, or even
manslaughter. The charges are something along the lines of… you know, I don’t remember
the charge, but it is not the major charge that seems that would be warranted here. So
hopefully that can be escalated. That’s number one. Louis: Right. David: But number two, should there be an
evaluation done of parents before they decide to have children? And this is not an abortion
question, this is not to see if the mother should be forced to have an abortion, calm
down, that is not the discussion, but to see if the parent should be allowed to keep and
parent that child. Because you have to assume that… I’m not
saying this would resolve all of the problems, but some of the parents who would be capable
of keeping a kid away from water for five days, we would be able to notice that there’s
something wrong in just a basic interview with a panel of three mental health experts,
would we not, Louis? Louis: Not necessarily. David: Some. I’m not saying all, but some
of these, we are going… Louis: Some, yeah, definitely. David: OK, so is that… should that not be
considered? I mean, let’s… Louis: Well, first of all, sounds like a monumental
undertaking. David: Think about it this way. And I’m not
suggesting that this is the answer, but I just want to present it in a different way.
If you want to drive a car, OK, you’re required to spend I don’t know how many hours it is
in driver’s ed, you’re supposed to be doing driving practice with a certified person,
and then you have a test with a police officer, and then at any point, your license can be
revoked, OK? You can just have as many kids as you want. There’s no check or balance in any way to
determine whether you’re a competent parent. If physically you are able to get yourself
or get someone pregnant, you can have a kid, and that’s it. Yes, there are chid protective
services, the kid could be taken away from you if the right reporting is in place and
people find out, but is there not a faulty standared here in terms of who is qualified
to be a parent or not? And I know this is touchy stuff. Louis: Very. David: And again, I’m not suggesting this
should be done, I’m asking the question whether more oversight is needed. How many kids could
be safer? And again, the question is, if they are put into foster care, how many will also
have disappointing, sad experiences in foster care? Louis: Right. That’s another question. And
if you do implement something like this, I would imagine that the number of children
going into foster care because of it would be huge. David: So you’re agreeing with me that a huge
number of parents would be determined to be incompetent to parent a child? Louis: Absolutely. David: But you just don’t think it would resolve
all of them. Louis: No, it wouldn’t. And I just think that
it would… it would just cause such a huge mess overall, trying to do something like
that. David: All right, well, but is a mess really
a reason not to look into ways to keep kids from… Louis: Well, when you’ve got buildings full
of kids that have no parents filling up in city after city… David: So you’re saying it would be better
to risk the five-day dehydration death, because there’s orphanages that are full? Louis: I’m saying overall, things like this
are pretty rare, even with completely incompetent parents. David: Natan, what do you think on this? I
mean, the resistance to doing any kind of testing, or, rather, evaluation before someone
is allowed to parent a kid would never be received well. Natan: No, and I think this is a slippery
slope. I mean, you would then open the door to having a bunch of discrimination preventing
certain types of couples from having parents, whether they be gay, you know, black, immigrants,
etc. I mean… David: Well, what’s an example of that? I
mean, I don’t think there would be, because some… we’re not talking about because the
parents are gay or black, what’s a specific… Natan: No, officially it wouldn’t be because
of that. Louis: No, no, what the panel… David: Hold on, hold on. Natan: It would open the door to the… like,
just as when you get fired, the supposed reason why you’re getting fired or you’re not being
allowed to have kids is one, but it’s really another. David: It would open the door to the bias
of those on the panel. Louis: Right. Natan: Absolutely. David: Interesting. That’s an interesting
point. Let’s wrap up because we have to get to Dr.
Sid Wolfe next. Make sure to like us on Facebook, www.Facebook.com/DavidPakmanShow. And get
one of our t-shirts at www.DavidPakman.com/gear. Pictures are coming in of people with their
t-shirts. Keep them coming. Back after this. Announcer: The David Pakman Show at www.DavidPakman.com. Transcript provided by Subscriptorium Multimedia
Linguistic Services. For transcripts, translations, captions, and subtitles, or for more information,
visit www.Subscriptorium.com, or write us at [email protected]