" it is about time the court system takes a child when there is a pattern of neglect...than to take the attitude the child is better with the "family" Sometimes, this is NOT the best choice, as evidenced with the other children being taken out of the house and rights severed. The parents have proven they can't be good parents, the state needs to continue to protect this baby too...too bade people don't have to take tests before they can become a parent "

" To "a mom": TOTALLY agree. I think people should have to get a special license (via a VERY tough exam) to procreate. People will spew this and that about it is their "right" to have a child, but in the end, it is NOT their right to abuse or neglect a defensless, innocent child in ANY way, shape, or form. This does not only include direct mental or physical abuse, but also neglect in the sense of poor nutrition and/or allowing a child to become overweight/obese (Just like mommy and daddy!) And it is protecting these children that should trump any rights an adult may have. "

" look these people has very right to have their child.did they do anything wrong?NO!!!! they did not its some crap that a wife and husband had their baby takin away from the Parents.I think that the other kids should be able to see their parents "

" so mrs brown neglected other children, Did Mr Brown? is he the father of her other children? does he have any rights here? "

" OK, the mom's got a history with the other 3 kids & that's why they were taken away. Maybe I'm an idealist but I think this child should at least have a chance to be with the mom & dad & that HHS supervision/monitoring of some sort should be in place to ensure the baby's safety. Do think the state has the "guilty until proven innocent" instead of the "innocent until proven guilty" mentality which I think is sad. Also, this case should be based on its own individual merits & not by what has happened before. Maybe Mrs. Brown has changed because of Mr. Brown. "

" better safe than sorry ... let them prove themselves (especially if she has already proved herself unfit) to get this baby back .... no ones has the right to abuse children and anyone who thinks differently obviously is not a good parent either "

" You people are talking about raising a human being, not taking care of a goldfish. Your desire to experiment with the child's well being to "make sure" the mother really is dangerous to her child before removing the child to someplace safe is ridiculous. Three strikes is enough, and a baby needs a lot more care than 5, 6, and 7 year-olds. Nine months from now when the child is being removed from the home for real reasons, people will be screaming that the baby wasn't removed sooner when authorities knew the environment wasn't fit for children. With this history, I think it is fair to err on the side of caution. "

" I hate to use the old addage of three strike and you're out but seriously, this lady was given 3 opportunities to prove that she could be a good mother. In all 3 cases she proved she couldn't. So, the state had to step-in and terminate rights. Now, when the state terminates rights on a parent it's a last resort. It's when every attempt to bring a broken family back together doesn't work because of abuse. The state also explains that IF your rights are terminated as a parent, that ALL the children that you have now and will have in the future will be removed because you have shown contempt for the processes that they've taken for reunification. So, to all that have said "It's not fair", I say it's not fair that her first three kids had to be abused and neglected before the fourth could have a good start to life. "

" you know what would of been nice? if they system acctually worked. she might of been a questionable mother, but who's to say he is a questionable father??? my mother was insane, but somehow she hid it from CPS behind her two-faced attitude and weasle wording around their questions. My father was the saint. I turned out fine, who's to say that this isnt the same situation i was in. all i can say is prove it. here are a few wise words from me on how to look at the future of our children: THOSE WHO TEACH YOU TO TALK, TEACH YOU TO THINK. "

" The mother has already proven she is not responsible. And as for the father, he was in the picture when the other children were removed in July. He did nothing to correct her behavior then so why would anyone think he'd be better now. I doubt he's going to be with the child 24-7. I just wish we could stop them from having any more. "

" I remember not too long ago when our community was in an uproar over the number of abused and murdered infants and children in this state. At that time, everyone was demanding the state take steps to protect our kids. Now that they have, you all have reneged on your requests. I am also a mom, and if I had my two babies taken away because I was unfit, then I would expect to lose any I have in the future. I do believe people can change, but it takes a lot of time and effort. Besides, we don't know all the details of what caused her to lose her parental rights in the first place. LJS doesn't specify, so before you jump all over the legal system, take a step back and think about it for a minute. I'm positive the necessary actions were taken to protect this baby. "

" mmmmm Just my opinion but I think any parent who strikes out in Mrs. Browns situation or even has abortions should just have there tubes tied or for dead beat dads, get the good ol' snip snip done. (not saying Mr. Brown is that, I dunno but just in general) What does Sparky say "stupid people shouldn't bread" "

" NOT AN INNOCENT FATHER. He chose to make a baby with a woman who lost custody of her previous children. If he was serious about the welfare of his children, he wouldn't have chosen her. "

" While I certainly understand the good intentions of many people who are concerned for this child, I have to ask the question: are we guilty till proven innocent these days? It would seem so. I remember a better time, in a better USA, before terrorism had turned our constitution into toilette paper. "

" In response to Dee"doesn't the father have any rights?" You live in Nebraska, even the best father in this state has very few rights - even in trying to protect his children! "

" Dee, a dad has no rights in the eyes of the court. I have witnessed several divorces and they all end up the same. Dad is required to pay so much child support he can barely get by. The amount is usually much more than what the kids require and mom doesn’t have to show any justification for what she gets, so she ends up blowing it on herself. To top it off, dad then gets his kids for 65 days a year. (Every other weekend, every other holiday, and 1 week in the summer) And these were good dads who deserved a lot better. Not the fathers who ignore their responsibilities, or for some unfathomable reason, don't want to be a part of their children's lives. The mother in one of these divorces didn't even want her children, not to mention she was also and ex-con and into drugs. They were in dad's care for two years before they went to court to finalize the divorce. When they finally did go, all she wanted was more money from dad, but some idiot judge gave her the kids instead. She walked out of the courtroom saying "I don't know if I can handle them". Dad got his standard 65 days though. "

" I thought that was the purpose of terminating ones rights as a parent? that any other kids you had post termination would also be taken away? "

" Maybe HHS had to take the approach better safe than sorry. This is a human life, Would I want the responsibilty of that babys life weighing on my shoulders if I was the HHS worker who had to remove the child... and knowing that her 3 previous children were removed. on the other hand...... I don't know the background/reason for the removal of her 3 children, or how long ago this happened, but people change...people mature, and hopefully people do learn from consequences....So maybe she did do some maturing, maybe she met the man of her dreams, and just maybe she is ready to be a responsible parent. I would like to think she has, and maybe she could show the state she's ready to be a parent now, and take some parenting classes, demonstrate to HHS that she learned from her mistakes. Show them that you are ready to be a responsible parent. "

" Okay, so maybe Mr. Brown hasn't been accused of abusing or neglecting any of his own children but he decided to have a baby with a woman who has had 3 children taken out of her care and her parental rights taken away? Gee, that in itself doesn't really make a great parent. The fact that she has proven that she can't or won't be a fit mother then it is great that the state took this baby away before she could do it any harm, physically, mentally or emotionally. Why wait until it is too late when she has already shown what kind of a mother she is "

" I personally know a recent case where a foster child was removed from her foster home, where she had been living since she was 30 days old. She was removed at age 2 yrs., 11 months and returned to her birth mother, the same birth mother who had 4 children already permanently removed for neglect, and has since given birth to a 6th. The system is full of problems, at our childrens' expense. "

" the state gives theese people power to come in and ruin a mans rights to his child i thought in this country we are innocent til proven guilty its seems that he has to prove his innocense when he is guilty of nothing but bringing a baby into this world i'm not sayin the mother does deserves the chance to prove herself obviosly she cant care 4 any1 but herself if she cared about the baby or her husband she would remove herself from the home and take the right steps to gettin all of her children back not just the 1 she says she deserves the chance with "

" This wasn't just her child though. The contempt that HHS in many states has for the father, unless they are paying child support of course, is reprehensible. Next someone will jump in here blaming him for marrying her. If the State wants to remove her parental rights, fine, but I hope that fathers step up and use that as a basis for contesting questionable parentage where the father has to pay child support anyway regardless of paternity. If the father is not allowed rights to paternity in a marriage except at the whim of the State why should they pay child support? I don't pay bills if im not the legally responsible for them. I could act like a doctor and get thrown in jail, but if I 'act' like a father to a child that is not mine-known to me or not, Im legally on the hook? Nice to know. "

" These parents are sorely mistaken by thinking that having a children is their "RIGHT". It is a privilege to be able to even have children, some people who would love nothing more than to have a child of their own would be wonderful parents and people like this just keep trying to populate the world because they think it is their "RIGHT" to have them, but not their right to care for them or love them. What is wrong with this world when some people cannot have kids and people like this keep reproducing and neglecting or abusing their kids? "

" In my opinion, taking the baby was the right thing to do. It had only been a couple months since the other three children were taken away. I'm sure the father does have rights, but his choice to stay with the woman who got her children taken away has an effect on those rights. Just like if one spouse is a drug user, or abuser, or whatever, if you choose to stay with that person, even if you don't do those things yourself, you lose custody. It's what's best for the children, not what's best for the adults, who can take care of themselves and make their own decisions. I'm not saying she should never get her kids back, but only 2 or 3 months is not enough time. "

" I wholeheartedly agree with the folks here who support the removal of this baby. This so called "right to enjoy their family" bit is absolutely ridiculous. The state needs to act because of the pattern, she's proven her character to be unworthy of motherhood (regardless of biological abilities). Maybe the father hasn't technically done anything wrong, but he married and made a baby with someone whom he knew was having state involvement with all three kids. I've worked professionally in mental health for over 10 years. This is a good move for good reasons. For you guys out there, if that isn't a few hundred giant red flags out there for bad motherhood potential, what is?? If he would be truly wanting a stable healthy wife to raise his 84 children, he would have definitely picked a healthy stable woman. He was an idiot about his choice in a woman, and now he has the gall to play victim just like she's doing. Unbelievable. "

" I can't imagine having a baby taken away two days after birth, but I couldn't imagine having 3 of my older kids taken away either. Some people think that this baby should be put in harms way before the state takes action? That is crazy. Those older kids probably have so much baggage, but hopefully they are in a good home now. So sad for the kids. "

" Can the state also step in and teach this "mom" about "birth control"? "

" Why does this woman think her genetic code is so awesome that she needs to keep pumping out spawn. Aren't there enough people in the world already? Or is she going to just keep trying until she thinks she can get the rearing thing right? Enough already. I kind of doubt she has college money saved up for the other three as it is. Maybe work on their future for a little while. Unless she just wants to raise more irresponsible adults who neglect their kids. "

" It's interesting how many people can jump to conclusions about what should happen and what the state should do and what you all think should happen when you all have no idea who these people are and how hard they are working to turn their lives around and do all the right things to be good parents. Most of you have absolutely no idea what this couple has been through. You have no idea where they have been what they have done, right or wrong. You don't know but yet you are the first to judge. Just like "WOW" said, i know this case... "WHEN i worked... you don't even work there anymore.. do you even know who mike brown is? probable not. do you have any idea how hard he has worked to support his new family that he doesnt even get to see... noooo. People do change. People do turn over new leaves. You all cast stones like you've never done anything wrong. My suggestion would be to all of you that you drop your stones and think before you throw. "

" State law says that if parental rights have been taken away from a parent, any subsequent child will be taken away. So for this lawsuit to go anywhere, state law will need to be changed. Parental rights are removed after years of working with parents to assist them to become better parents. "

" we dont know all the facts, they have a reason to take that baby, the state just doesnt jump the gun and take a baby, i feel for the father, he wasnt guilty of the previous kids being taken, as far as we know. too many abused kids out there people, way too many and if this will save a baby, then i applaude the state for doing so. if they really want the baby back, take some classes, agree to home visits. "

" So is Mr. Brown going to be around the ENTIRE time this child is around this mother? If not, then SORRY....this innocent child cannot be subjected to the same history that its siblings were. She had three tries to make it right and couldn't...why should she have another chance where there is a helpless human life at stake? Learn how to parent or DON'T BE A PARENT! "

" Absolutely, this is the right thing to do. Obviously the mother was neglectful to the point of causing some serious damage to her previous children, or this never would have come to light. 'Right to enjoy your family'?? I wasn't familiar with this constitutional right. But why didn't you ENJOY your other children?? If anyone else has come from an abusive/neglectful family (and I have) you know what a big deal this is (in a good way). I'm glad someone was looking out for that baby very early on. Let's not wait until people damage their children before they take them away. "

" have these people read the constiution? there's definitely nothing in the first amendment about a right to a family. that's just ridiculous. and obviously they had a reason to take the baby, it's not like the state goes door to door removing children from houses. there must have been a legitimate reason for it. "

" They don't have the other children back either, Duh! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that this is a protective measure by the state to make sure it doesn't happen again. These people obviously can't take care of themselves or other children, even dogs take care of their pups the best they can. It's sad to say, and I hate to be the one that brings this up but this give new meaning to the word sterilization. "

" They still have options. They didn’t say they terminated parental rights, they removed the baby. Mom, take some classes or whatever you WERE/are supposed to do… Dad, if your baby really means that much to you, you should do whatever you have to do to get your child back, even if that means putting your child before your child’s mom. Get out on your own and when “mom” proves she does deserve to be a parent, she will be. "

" Not enough info. I don't understand - why aren't the parents suing to get the older children back too? If they are good parents (doubt it) they would make the same effort to get ALL their kids back, not just #4. "

" I guess my thought, when reading these comments about how she should have had the right to be with this child, makes me think that you people are suggesting that this child doesn't have any rights. These children are not like goldfish and "Oh, well she let 3 go but maybe this one she will get it right!" This is a child, she had three other children that she couldn't take care of and had to be removed! She is a bad parent or maybe just a woman that can't be a mother. I think that if in a few months, you that thought she should be able to keep this child, would be singing a different tune if it was reported that this baby had been abused or neglected. Children are not toys, they are human beings that need someone to speak on behalf of them. Maybe this child will have a chance! "

" Those of you who think this 3 times over convicted negligent Mom should get another "TRY" with this baby are the same people who will be moaning and complaing that she should not have had custody of this baby when something unfortunate happens,"due to her history"... FOR ONCE the state of NE is being preventative instead of reactive as it often is in 98% of other issues. "

" Once again, situations like this are evidence why a license to breed should be required. If your license is revoked, your children, and all future children, will be taken from your custody and not returned until you've proven yourself fit for parenting and had your license reinstated. We require a license to drive a car and to buy a handgun...both of which are objects that, when left alone, hurt nobody. However, we don't require a license to have a child that, when left alone, will die. "

" These people are selfish. Going and having another baby, but wasn't taking care of the other 3 children. They knew exactly what they were doing. It wasn't fair to the other 3 kids, but then bring ANOTHER child into the world. Come on. The courts are here for a reason, it is OBVIOUS, the other 3 children needed protection.......and yes, that is right to remove the 4th child. Constitutional rights my behind, they lost their rights to bear children after neglecting the other 3. "

" First Amendment Right to "enjoy" their family? The children she bears have a right to proper care. Thank goodness someone stepped in on this one. She needs to stop having children. Sounds harsh, but if she couldn't handle caring for her other 3 children, then yes, a pattern has been established. God bless those poor little innocent kids. "

" instead of having more kids maybe she or they should have fought to keep the ones she had. Pretty typical...forget the ones you had and just have more. I'm sure we are all paying for these children - they deserve a chance. Good job HHS on breaking the cycle! Now....keep doing it! "

" Did you read the entire article? It said they have 3 OTHER children that have already been taken away last summer, for OBVIOUS reasons....so YES they have done something wrong, and the fact that they are allowed to continue having children is disgusting to me. God help those poor children... "

" So if she got her other 3 kids taken away due to child neglect why let her do it to the baby! They should not get the baby! she didn't care about the first 3 then why all of a sudden this one? "

" Doesn't this whole story prove Ernie Chamber's point? I believe he stated that the media covers cases that are filed without any determination of merit. The Nebraska Attorney General's Office has not even been served yet. Being the first to cover a story is great, but what's the point if you can't give anything substantive. I think I'll file a case, not serve the other party, and get in the paper. "

" so sad but parent like this should not have children if you lose 3 you sure don't need a 4th,5th 6th and on and on.The 1ST AMENDMENT to enjoy family well i say you haven.t done to good were did the other 3 end up? as for the father you need to see what it takes to have your baby i see alot of the mom talking not you hmmmm speak up be a man lets people know what you think its better a child has 1 parent than none at all yes dad look forward to reading your comment about all this and not the mom talking for you "

" I am all for the proactive instead of reactive stance that was taken in this case one kid taken away but THREE it appears the mother did not learn her lesson and it should not be at the expense of the 4TH child. My prayers are with all the children for their well being and safety. "

" Someone mentioned that the state should step in and teach the mother about birth control. Isn't it ironic that the state does the exact opposite? Spend a day in sex education in the schools and all you'll learn is "don't have sex until you're married." HHS and the government is usually ready to step in and fix the problem after the baby is born (or, in unfortunate circumstances, after the child has been abused), but doesn't do anything to prevent these situations to begin with! Ridiculous idealistic government policies create more problems than they solve. "

" I agree that it is right to take this baby until things are worked out with this mother. The comment made by "another mom" is totally true. When I divorced a few years back, my daughter had come to me and said her father was "touching" her. The police were notified, and I was told, "you can stay with this man, but if another complaint comes from either of your kids about their dad, they will both be taken away." I asked him to leave and filed for divorce the same day. I would not risk losing my children for any man, even though it was their father. I did nothing wrong, and chose to divorce for my children. That is what this father should have done I would guess. I would say he was aware of her wrong doings, as it does take 9 months to have a child, and the other kids were taken away in July which is not 9 months ago. If the father truly wants his children, then he will have to be rid of the women, and get his children. I feel the state did the right thing if he is staying with her, and she is not getting any help either (which is not mentioned, so she probably isn't). She needs to prove she wants help, gets that help, and changes her life to be able to get the children back. I feel bad too, so many couples can't have children and would make wonderful parents, then there are those who just aren't. Sometimes life is just not fair. "

" She has been proven guilty by the fact her other children were neglected. Read the law. If she can't take care of those 3 how can they tend a 4th and who's to say a 5th and 6th later? The State did the right thing. A child has a chance for a decent life now.A child is saved from neglect, abuse. "

" To all those yelling about the "rights of the father", don't forget about his right to choose wisely who the mother of his children will be. Don't forget about his right to leave an enept mother for the sake of the child he apparently wants. Before we get our knickers in a tight wad, lets remember that he not only exercised his rights when he decided to marry a woman that had her rights to parenthood stripped away from her, he also excercised his rights to procreate with her as well. so let's all forget about that and cry loud enough until they get their kids back and then cry about the monies given to neglectful parents. "

" You have GOT to be kidding me. Sounds like the lawyer is just as much a piece of crap as the mother! The baby was removed to save her from the hell she put her other THREE children through. The enjoyment of family she got was from neglecting and causing pain of some sort, to her children. The baby should have been removed from Charity!! I'm sickened by the lawsuit. I'm even more frustrated that something this lawsuit could be brought up. Just goes to show, Ernie Chambers and his lawsuit against GOD, was right on!!! "

" I think what the state did was the right thing. It looks like all she thinks about is herself.If he would just leave her he would have his baby.But i guess once bad parents always bad parents.It looks like the child is getting hurt in all this and she don't seem to care,But I guess that is just selfish on her part. I hope this baby grows up not knowing her parents. Atleast she can go to a home were there is love and no abuse or neglect on her part.. I think the parents need help. But knowing her she will just have another baby and go through this again,All she thinks is about herself.. "

" I'll keep saying this as much as I can. We have to do SOMETHING to make these so-called child protective workers follow some FORM of the law. Parents have no due process at all in these cases. People can just walk in and take their kids without a trial in any form. It's wrong, and it's destroying the fabric of our society slowly but inexorably. "

" ..I want to start off by saying that the reporter should have really done his or her research before printing this story. I want all the readers to know that there are two sides to every story and that these parents are doing this all for an act. They got your attention and now they are wasting your tax dollars on sueing the State of Nebraska. I want you all to know that the State of Nebraska did the right thing in this situation and this precious little child is truly better without them. A child is brought into this world not picking their parents and it is our rights to make sure if they are not taken care of that they do get parents that will love, cherish and take care of them. All I ask is for you readers don't feel bad for these parents, their choices in life have finally caught up with them. ALl I ask is that you keep your thought and prayers with this precious little angel in the middle. Want the best for this child and currently this is the best for this child. Time to grow up and quit populating the State of Nebraska. "

" Give the baby back and let them prove they will neglect her too...Why would you keep having babies if you had 3 taken away? More welfare... "

" The state of Nebraska works very hard to reunify children with their parents, even when not appropriate. I work in foster care and the devastation these kids experience is heart wrenching. Three strikes is still too many. Hopefully this baby will not get caught up in being in and out of homes. Way to be proactive, Nebraska! "

" So now she decides she actually wants a kid? Its good to know that all our tax dollars can pay for her NUMEROUS "mistakes?". She should not be allowed to have kids. They [the parents] are a waste to society. "

" To Annonamoose; I know this Mike even more than you and I know the truth and I think that you better put all the recent and past items into consideration before you start being his best bud. You are right people can change but, yet he chose the wrong person. You child(ren) alwasy come first. Think about that. This isn't a stone this is the truth. "

" My personal opinion is that the state took the right measures in securing this childs welfare. If the mother has already 3 other children that were taken away from her then what is the problem with doing the same with this one. If she is a neglectful mother WHY is she having MORE CHILDREN! I take the saftey of children to heart. Our system has every right to protect these innocent little ones from an unsafe situation. Whos to say this baby would be safe and well taken care of. The mother put herself in this mess and it is her problem. She should of taken better care of her first 3 children instead the state took over. Now she wants to sue the state for her baby. What about her other children. Shame on you and maybe she should take parenting classes with her extra time instead of producing more children that she cant take care of. This is very disturbing. "

" Again, what about the father's rights??? His parental rights have not been terminated...the state has no right to take the child from him. Maybe its the best thing for the child, but there is process and it applies to everybody. "

" Just another knee jerk reaction from those jack booted, goose stepping Nazis called HHS. This governmental department is an absolute joke. They have done a horrible job over the years and deserve absolutely NO consideration. It is time this travesty was dismantled and complete rebuilt with all new people. Maybe then things will improve, but I doubt it. As for fathers having rights FORGET IT. During my divorce my lawyer told me the courts dont care about the father. They dont care that many fathers cant afford to support themselves after child support is extorted from them. Sad fact of the matter is if you are female you get the breaks in this state. "

" Have you ever read the legal description of "neglect"? I can guarantee that most parents are guilty. It pretty much says that if your child is unahppy, it's your fault, "neglect". If your child won't do his homework, YOUR fault..."neglect"....if your child acts out at school...again...YOUR FAULT....The defination for this is too broad. "

" This is directly from the HHS website. It doesn't look too broad to me. Please don't make ignorant comments any longer. It's really annoying. Abuse is defined in three ways. Physical abuse exists when a child has an non-accidental injury. Emotional abuse exists when parents always put blame on a child or always reject the child. Sexual abuse exists when an adult uses a child as a part of any type of sexual act. Neglect is defined in two ways. Emotional neglect is when the child suffers from the parent's not giving them chances for feeling loved, wanted, secure, and worthy. Physical neglect is when a parent does not provide basic needs or a safe place to live. Examples are: not having enough food or clothing; not following doctor's orders; not providing the supervision needed to keep the child safe; not having heat in the winter. "

" Ummm. There is something in the constitution about the right to have a family. Check out the 1st Amendment! It doesn't have to explicitly stated in order to be protected under the constitution! The constitution doesn't say I have the right to own a milky way bar either, but that right is protected under the 1st amendment. Seriously. "

" Maybe Mr. & Mrs. Brown should prove that they can care for their other three children first before being allowed to care for an infant. Innocent until proven guilty? We are talking about children here...I think rights come after the concern for their well-being. "

" All I have to say is knowing these two "parents" not very well but enough to say the state has done the right thing. People may change but should we risk the child's well being to find out. I would think not. Pray for the kids well being.They are the ones need it. Anyone who thinks these two should have kids I ask you one thing, why don't you let them baby sit your kids for a night. "

" I am the grandmother of three kids who had neglectful and abusive parents. Each time a child was born we had to go through the process of showing the child was in danger to get the system to remove the child. The last child was removed after gunfire broke out at the house and his life was in danger. I have asked for years where are the rights of the children? "

" we're talking about someone's constitutional rights here. This family had the right to a hearing on the other children. They had the right to present evidence when it was about the other children. They haven't had that right on this child. No, sorry, can't go acting like Nazis and taking people's kids away without giving them a fair hearing. They may be lousy parents, but the state needs to do it the right way and they know that, they're just being lazy and trying to take a short cut. Shame on them. "

" You people all seem to be way of the mark. Whilst I agree that our judicial system has seriously been wanting since Bush's great Terrorism Plan, I think you're missing the point here--it's A CHILD. Let the baby start a good life; no child should have to be resigned to a neglected beginning. Supervised visits is a good start, followed with random house checks (a process that should take months if not years). And besides, the First Amendment makes no guarantee to enjoy a nice life with your family--you yourself guarantee that. Maybe, in some cases, people should be guilty until proven innocent--especially when a young life is involved; let's think about the child's rights before the parent's. I can only imagine what you people would write when the baby was seriously injured or found dead. "

" Obviously you've never dealt with HHS, or you don't have kids. "

" Take the kids away. The parents are only fighting so they can say on government support and get aid. Just having the kid is like a Jackpot in support. They won't get there gas or electric turned off. They will get 200+ in food stamps a month. Free Health Care. I bet the whole birth was written off or paid by medicad. The state supports the kid anyways so why not actually just take them from the terrible parents right from the start. "

" I just want to point out--since it's so often mentioned in posts--that this woman HAS (or should have) had parenting classes, if she's been a part of the system for as long as she has. It's part of the criteria to keep or get your child back. She obviously didn't comply, she didn't care, she couldn't figure it out.....something. And as for the father; like chooses like. If he knows she's lost three children--well, most SANE and healthy men are going to run from that, so let's put the subject to rest. "

" for those who have not worked in this field I want to let you know that HHS does NOT want all these kids. IMO they make parents comply with absolute Minimal standards to keep thier children. I can assure you that the process to terminate parental rights is a process that takes YEARS!! I would guess,the case regarding her other 3 children took anywhere from 3-6 years before the termination went through. AS part of that process the mother is ALWAYS informed that IF the termination goes through the STATE has the authority to take any other child that may be born to her after this process. THis is why many Moms go to other states or hid out when another child is born. IM sorry Mr. Brown didnt have better judgement when picking his babbies mamma, He could possibly get his child back But I'm sure a stipulation would be that the child cannot be around this mother. So its his choice, who is more import. to him. I guarantee that after years in this termination process that the mother knew this would be the case if she chose to have another child. "

" A predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Bravo for whoever made the decision to be proactive instead of reactive. "

" For Christ's sake what are we coming to in theis country? The other case is in an appeals court and this action is based upon earlier government action. Is this Russia of a 100 years ago or Nazi Germany? Did anybody think of education as a means of HELPING this couple? Based upon the lack of facts given in this case, I can't believe this is happening in Nebraska. Give a government authority without responsibility and you have a whole bunch of educated idiots. Just name me 1% of adults who grew up in an ideal household. More than that would be liars. I absolutely do not believe a person is made of his environment. God gave us free will to make ourselves into teh person we choose to be so don't give me that crap line about abusers growing up to be abusers. Both of my parents smoked and drank heavily but I was wise enough to never smoke and rarely, very rarely, drink alcohol. On those counts I am a product of my own choosing. Is neglect considered abuse? I guess so. Are many other parents abusing their children by neglecting them to the care of a daycare center? "

" Anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone. Senator Chambers proved that. Reporters can and do often report without all the information. I know of a child in foster care that should never be returned to the biological family and the state is still working towards reunification. I find it difficult to believe that every attempt was not made to reunify this family. If the story is as it appears, thank goodness at least one judge has the wisdom to give the child a chance at a great life from birth instead of being messed up by the biological parents and the system. Cost to file a frivolous lawsuit and write a sensational news story - for this couple I am guessing probably not much. However wise judges are priceless. "

" Trust me, I was introduced to the HHS system a few years ago and was a foster parent. Before parental rights are terminated, there is a boat load of money and time spent educating parents. The fact that their case is on appeal to the supreme court means nothing, everyone appeals because it's free. At some point in time the children's rights have to be considered. I say, three strikes and this couple is OUT! "

" When children are taken out of the natural families home, in my experience, it is for a legitimate reason. Too many times there are children who should be taken out of their home but are not that it is hard to believe that when a child is removed it is not justifiable. "

" i agree with you 'a mom' i believe that parents should have to take an aptitude test before becoming parents. "

" this is to "a mom". let me ask you something you think parents should take aptitude tests? does that mean you have to also? Unless you all know the real reason behind the termination you have no reason to speak. I am the aunt of the little girl and the 3 that were taken. I also have a 2 year old little girl myself. Maybe before people make assumptions they should know the facts. Its not right for all of you to make rude comments about the parents especially of birth control. If you are a parent yourself you would know that it has nothing to do with welfare. I am a full time student and I work full time. It has to do with love when you give birth you love that child. So would you all please stop with the rude comments. Our family has hurt tremendously over all of this but we are fighting because of love not welfare. "

" I am writing in defense of our family, noone knows anything about this case of the one with MY older three children, or why they were taken or rights terminated, so please practice what is preached about teaching others things, don't be judgemental about something you know nothing about. yes some children are safer in a out of home placement, but not our daughter, my other case is in appeal, all i can do is wait, but for our baby she should be home, she isn't in danger, or neglected. and we don't live off the state, we both work full time and go to school, and see our baby all the time, we dont use food stamps or medicaid, becuase we have our own insurance. It would seem a lot more fair if before someone cuts our family down, and is so harsh towards us please unless you have ever actually met us, or seen me with my children do not be so cruel. I may be stubborn, and strong minded even mouthy at times but an unfit mom, NO im not, i just feel i know best what my children need then the state, one of those things you don't know why i feel this way and i have a right to privacy not to have to say why. We do have a right to be a family, and we're fighting because the state has to have a reason to take a child not come in the hospital room and take her. "

" I thought i would help with some clarification of some comments made. First of all, there is NOT a law that says "if a parent loses termination of parental rights they will lose all subsequent children" this is a misconception of our state statutes, it is a belief that those who work for Dept of HHS have, but it isn't a law. It does however say, that if parental rights are terminated, then children born afterwards, IF the parent(s) neglect that child the dept isn't "obligated (still doesn't even say they can't it is their choice)" to work towards reunification, and preservation. It is sad to see a case in which the newborn child was ripped from the parents right after birth, but I am SOOO glad to see a parent finally take a stand and get it into the Federal Court level and ask them to clarify how it is supposed to work, so this is in their ball court now, and up to them to set the record straight for this couple and probably hundreds of other parents who have lost their new children in such a dramatic traumitizing way. I mean these parents, did they have everything they needed when the baby was born, were they prepared for her, were her needs met, did mom go to all prenatal care visits? Did the state honestly just go in and take a child from perfectly capable parents? I mean did the state bother to look into things before this little girl's birth to see if she had what she needed or if she was truly in an unsafe place? I understood the Mother's rights were terminated and she's waiting on appeal, but it doesn't say the father has ever even had state involvement with any of his children, so why doesn't he get to decide if the child is safe, i mean he knows mom, they're married surely he has seen her with other kids, including her own, he would know. Let's wait and see how this case plays out, let's ask questions instead of accusing and jumping to conclusions we don't know who's really right but im personally excited to find out. "

" I am so sorry to see another case of guilty until proven innocent. I have seen in too many stories where readers of the Lincoln Journal Star are quick to accuse without knowing all the facts. My experience has shown that educated parents who do not agree with the dictates of HHS are the ones most likely to lose custody. If you are an addict or a violent person that admits your problem and agrees to treatment you can keep your child. However, if you deny the accusations made against you, you can lose your child because you are assumed guilty if someone makes an accusation. BTW, placing the baby in foster care is far from guaranteeing that it will be safe or happy. "