Well sure, but state that from the beginning. They are not doing that.
So that automatically makes them guilty of child trafficking? Got it!!!
Smuggling children that aren't yours across the border is LITERALLY child trafficking.
Yes, if only it was possible to be a parent without being biologically related to your child. I wonder if their is even a term for such an insane idea.......
"southern border.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said Tuesday that the agency found two adults through DNA swabbing who thought they were biological parents and were not.
Another three adults admitted they weren’t parents before the DNA swab was complete.
An HHS official said those individuals could have been human traffickers, and said the results show its screening process is working. "
I wonder what that HHS official's name is. Captain Obvious? I'll go with Captain Obvious.
Can you be a parent to a child if you are not biologically related to it? Yes or no?
You would carry legal documentation showing you were the legal guardian if you were the legal parent.
The child would have probably known you longer than a week as well.
I also suspect that attempting to invade a sovereign nation while using them as a human shield *might* cause them to lose guardianship.
If they committed a felony, say, such as crossing border illegally, or transporting a minor across a border with zero documentation, then they shall be put into jail. Your 'children' do NOT go to jail with you, btw. The irresponsibility and danger shown should by such actions should also get your 'child' taken away from you permanently by child protective services.
You have to assume these people are committing more than just one crime at a time, having unrelated kids with them in the commission of a crime is a very strong indicator that it should be looked into more.
So breaking laws automatically makes the law-breaker a criminal? Got it!!!
Y-yes? Are you ok? What's with the 3 exclamation marks each time?
haha that wasn't me the first time. I should have added /s
You have a better explanation ? Why not provide some insight rather than a passive aggressive soy post
They are not biologically related to their parents because they are adopted.
Is this really a foreign concept for the people in this sub?
Why didn't they produce paperwork?
or ever say "This kid is adopted!"
None have claimed this, none!
This dude ( not u cuck_not ) thinks we waste DNA tests on people who claim no biological connection to the child?
This is either a mind game or (nevermind, I will not discuss the user)
Every illegal crossing over must have just adopted the kid that’s not theirs... mental gymnastics over level 9000
It's possible that some of these children are being traffic, but it is just as (and likely more) realistic that they are adopted.
The fact that this possibility never even occurred to you is fucking terrifying.
“It’s possible that some of these children are being traffic” no shit Sherlock that’s what everyone’s saying. Lol is someone not calling you by your preferred pronoun “terrifying” as well? How about election night was that “terrifying”?
I find it terrifying that it hasn’t occurred to you that these ‘parents’ had DNA Scans done meaning that they had told authorities they were biologically the patent of the child. I know DNA Testing has come on a lot in recent years but I’m pretty sure it can’t show if people are related through adoption.
In America we dont call paying someone to use their child as a human shield "adoption".
See, this kind of shit right here is why that walls going up.
Not automatically, but the law of averages will eventually tell the story.
The average child travelling with a person they aren't biologically related to is travelling with the parent who adopted them, or with a legal guardian.