<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Florida Registrant Challenges Restriction on Access to His Own Child	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registrant-challenges-restriction-on-access-to-his-own-child/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registrant-challenges-restriction-on-access-to-his-own-child/</link>
	<description>Reforming Florida’s Sex Offender Registry Laws</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2014 13:31:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Ron		</title>
		<link>https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registrant-challenges-restriction-on-access-to-his-own-child/comment-page-1/#comment-1269</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ron]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2014 13:31:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=507#comment-1269</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This is one of the most outrageous and disturbing situations I&#039;ve ever heard of. The fact that a probation officer can unilaterally decide to restrict a parent from their own child is absurd. I would somewhat understand if there was abuse by the individual AGAINST  THAT CHILD, but that is not the case here. In fact, there is no allegation of abuse by this individual against any child!

The Supreme Court has recognized that the parents&#039; right to raise their children has constitutional protection in both the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the privacy provision of the Florida Constitution, article I, section 23.Beagle, 678 So.2d at 1275; Von Eiff, 720 So.2d at 514, 23 Fla. L. Weekly at S585.  

In Beagle, the court held that &quot;the state may not intrude upon the parents&#039; fundamental rights to raise their children except in cases where the child is threatened with harm.&quot; Beagle, 678 So.2d at 1276.  

In my opinion, the actions of the probation officer in restricting this individual&#039;s access to his children is not only unconscionable, but unconstitutional.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is one of the most outrageous and disturbing situations I&#8217;ve ever heard of. The fact that a probation officer can unilaterally decide to restrict a parent from their own child is absurd. I would somewhat understand if there was abuse by the individual AGAINST  THAT CHILD, but that is not the case here. In fact, there is no allegation of abuse by this individual against any child!</p>
<p>The Supreme Court has recognized that the parents&#8217; right to raise their children has constitutional protection in both the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the privacy provision of the Florida Constitution, article I, section 23.Beagle, 678 So.2d at 1275; Von Eiff, 720 So.2d at 514, 23 Fla. L. Weekly at S585.  </p>
<p>In Beagle, the court held that &#8220;the state may not intrude upon the parents&#8217; fundamental rights to raise their children except in cases where the child is threatened with harm.&#8221; Beagle, 678 So.2d at 1276.  </p>
<p>In my opinion, the actions of the probation officer in restricting this individual&#8217;s access to his children is not only unconscionable, but unconstitutional.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
