Daycare.com Forum
Daycare Center and Family Home Forum>Arizona Ruling On Genital Contact
Pestle 02:05 PM 09-16-2016
Well, this is . . . possibly alarming?
Original ruling here
Commentary from Slate here
The Arizona Supreme Court issued a stunning and horrifying decision on Tuesday, interpreting a state law to criminalize any contact between an adult and a child’s genitals. According to the court, the law’s sweep encompasses wholly innocent conduct, such as changing a diaper or bathing a baby. As the stinging dissent notes, “parents and other caregivers” in the state are now considered to be “child molesters or sex abusers under Arizona law.” Those convicted under the statute may be imprisoned for five years.
How did this happen? A combination of bad legislating and terrible judging. Start with the legislature, which passed laws forbidding any person from “intentionally or knowingly … touching … any part of the genitals, anus or female breast” of a child “under fifteen years of age.” Notice something odd about that? Although the laws call such contact “child molestation” or “sexual abuse,” the statutes themselves do not require the “touching” to be sexual in nature. (No other state’s law excludes this element of improper sexual intent.) Indeed, read literally, the statutes would seem to prohibit parents from changing their child’s diaper. And the measures forbid both “direct and indirect touching,” meaning parents cannot even bathe their child without becoming sexual abusers under the law.
Original ruling here
Commentary from Slate here
The Arizona Supreme Court issued a stunning and horrifying decision on Tuesday, interpreting a state law to criminalize any contact between an adult and a child’s genitals. According to the court, the law’s sweep encompasses wholly innocent conduct, such as changing a diaper or bathing a baby. As the stinging dissent notes, “parents and other caregivers” in the state are now considered to be “child molesters or sex abusers under Arizona law.” Those convicted under the statute may be imprisoned for five years.
How did this happen? A combination of bad legislating and terrible judging. Start with the legislature, which passed laws forbidding any person from “intentionally or knowingly … touching … any part of the genitals, anus or female breast” of a child “under fifteen years of age.” Notice something odd about that? Although the laws call such contact “child molestation” or “sexual abuse,” the statutes themselves do not require the “touching” to be sexual in nature. (No other state’s law excludes this element of improper sexual intent.) Indeed, read literally, the statutes would seem to prohibit parents from changing their child’s diaper. And the measures forbid both “direct and indirect touching,” meaning parents cannot even bathe their child without becoming sexual abusers under the law.
Baby Beluga 02:19 PM 09-16-2016
This just makes no sense to me 
grandmom 02:26 PM 09-16-2016
wow. Just WOW.
spedmommy4 02:27 PM 09-16-2016
Hmmm ... wouldn't it be child neglect if you didn't? What's the work around for that? Under this law, you go to jail no matter what you do.
What's the work around for that? Under this law, you go to jail no matter what you do.
Pestle 02:29 PM 09-16-2016
Originally Posted by spedmommy4:
Hmmm ... wouldn't it be child neglect if you didn't? What's the work around for that? Under this law, you go to jail no matter what you do.
I guess you just affix the child over a barrel and let everything run into it. You can't hose them down, either; "indirect" contact is also off-limits.Hmmm ... wouldn't it be child neglect if you didn't?
What's the work around for that? Under this law, you go to jail no matter what you do.Wonder if it's one of those laws that the lawmakers claim will only ever be enforced when it's real BAD GUYS breaking it. Like when Virginia criminalized all "backdoor" sex but Ken Cuccinelli pinky-promised it wouldn't be used against straight married couples.
Good grief.
Mike 03:32 PM 09-16-2016
Originally Posted by spedmommy4:
Hmmm ... wouldn't it be child neglect if you didn't? What's the work around for that? Under this law, you go to jail no matter what you do.
Maybe they don't want anyone having any more babies. Hmmm ... wouldn't it be child neglect if you didn't?
What's the work around for that? Under this law, you go to jail no matter what you do.
Unregistered 10:21 AM 09-18-2016
Although prosecutors are stating that people just changing their kids diapers won't be held criminally liable, that's not how our justice system works. The law isn't supposed to be left open for interpretation AFTER it's passed.
The Constitution, as part of the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment, does not allow for the passage of laws that will be defined later - people must be aware what the law prohibits so that they can be held accountable when they choose to break it.
Stern also notes that such a change completely reverses roles inside the courtroom, forcing the defendant to prove his innocence rather than the state to prove guilt, and effectively erasing the "innocent until proven guilty" principle upon which the American justice system was built.
The Constitution, as part of the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment, does not allow for the passage of laws that will be defined later - people must be aware what the law prohibits so that they can be held accountable when they choose to break it.
Stern also notes that such a change completely reverses roles inside the courtroom, forcing the defendant to prove his innocence rather than the state to prove guilt, and effectively erasing the "innocent until proven guilty" principle upon which the American justice system was built.
Ariana 06:16 PM 09-19-2016
So many laws they SHOULD be passing like longer sentencing laws for actual offenders but nope lets make laws that make people who change diapers sex offenders 
