Kat’s blog: The Flaw in Meghan’s Law

Our hearts go out to the Pennsylvania father who happened to be a registrant and who missed the birth of his third child for no reason other than the fact that he was a registrant. We can all put ourselves in this guy’s shoes and imagine the sense of devastation and embarrassment he must have felt when told he couldn’t attend the birth of his child and then to be escorted out of the hospital by security when he hadn’t done anything.

As I try to make some sense out of this, it occurs to me that it’s the flaw in Meghan’s Law that’s partially to blame.

A flaw that allowed “non-qualified” agents without any information to decide whether someone on the registry was “a risk to the general public.” As I read Meghan’s Law it clearly indicates that it is for “the protection of the public from those who present a risk.”

In this case, hospital administrators and hospital security officers decided, knowing only that the man was on the registry, that he was a public risk. This is the kind of “mis-information” that laws such as Meghan’s Law, encourage the public into believing that everyone on the registry is a risk.

I’d venture to guess that neither the hospital administrators nor the security officers had any kind of professional degrees that would have qualified them to make a determination as to whether or not this father was a risk to anyone in the hospital. The only thing they were aware of was that he was a registrant and they only knew that because he alerted them to that fact as he had been advised by his parole officer and counselor.

I’m not certain as to why his counselor and P.O. advised him to ALERT the hospital that he was there? Is there some PA. law that requires a registrant to alert hospitals if they are on the premises? If so, then where else do they need to ALERT authorities that they are on the premises, grocery stores, doctor’s offices, movie theaters, stores? Is there a list of those places that require ALERTING? Unless the hospital has some specific posted written rule against allowing registrants on the premises, this ALERTING   requirement seemed absurd.

By all outward appearances it seems that this father was being “compelled” by his P.O and counselor to ALERT the hospital that he was A) a registrant and B) therefore, “a risk to the public.”

Meghan’s Law is flawed.

The law was passed when grieving parents and those legislators who supported them didn’t want to see another child die at the hands of a child abductor, a child molester or a murderer.

The problem, not all registrants are child abductors, child molesters or murderers.

Not all registrants are or ever were “a public risk”.

And, neither hospital administrators nor hospital security guards are qualified to determine a registrant’s risk, especially when that registrant has done nothing illegal and is on hospital premises for a legitimate reason, such as the birth of their child.

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The same thing happed to me. I was not allowed to enter for the birth of my child. I was set up and false claims used to stop me from entering. The baby girl now 2 years old has no father. My case is now at the DOJ However the real problem is no one has any right to i talk as Americans.

The simple answer is a hearing at my expense and not 2 years after .,…

Thank you kats! My family and I appreciate it very much. I do hope that an attorney will see these and be willing to fight for us.

I lightly joked about money being a big help in the article directly related to my story. However it wasn’t too much of a joking matter. It really would help.

Our family is going through a lot more than just this one incident, however I will leave that for legal counsel.

@moderator – if a known attorney does respond, please feel free to supply them my email to contact me.

K. Moore

The probably is.. everyone on the list is deemed a public safety liability by extension. We’re not even afforded the benefit of the doubt. The media and lawmakers don’t want to humanize us because that would make the label lose it’s power!

@Facts should matter

…”make the label lose its power.”

That’s the key isn’t it?

Think of every disenfranchised group in history that was labeled and looked down upon and how they overcame it. Sure it took a long time to do it and some residual prejudices are there but at least they weren’t backed by government policies.

The only difference now is that we have the internet, inexpensive technology, and social media outlets at our disposal.

With some creativity perhaps something viral could take place that would start blasting the Registry back.

Another thing came to mind thinking about this whole hospital thing.

When this happened, I called Megan’s law to find out what i could do. The person told me that the hospital is privately owned, so there is nothing they could do about it.

That said, what the heck if I went to a store to buy food for my family and I wans’t allowed to buy food to sustain my family’s lives??

If you are open as a service to the public, even if privately owned, you should be governed by the same laws. That is BS!!

KEN M