National News

Child Removed From Couple’s Home After Abusive “Reward System” Uncovered #Children #abuse #news

An Indiana woman and her girlfriend gave her son marijuana dozens of times in the last three months as a reward for the boy’s good behavior, court records stated.

Susan Glascock and Melissa Burton, both 36, were charged with child neglect after the boy told police he was being rewarded with marijuana for his good behavior and had the drug taken away when he was behaving badly, FOX59 reported.

Police began investigating the family on June 25 when officers responded to a disturbance at the home in Greenfield. Glascock was upset about the amount of money the boy and his mother, Burton, was receiving by selling video games, according to court documents.

Trending: America At Risk As Illegal Aliens Flood Nation With Pandora’s Box of Diseases #IllegalAlien #disease #immigration #epidemic

The boy attempted to intervene during an argument between the two women when Glascock pushed him to the ground and pinned him down.

The boy escaped and punched Glascock before running away, according to the report.

The boy’s grandfather later spoke to police and said his grandson was “in a terrible living condition and needed to be removed.” He added the boy had drugs given to him.

The boy told police he was given marijuana when he “did something good” or “ground him from marijuana” when he misbehaved. The couple also taught him out to roll a joint, court documents stated.

Burton’s son said he was given marijuana at least 50 times in the last three months. The women also admitted to giving the boy marijuana.

The women were arrest and later released on $1,000 bond each. Glascock also faces a battery charge.


To some, this comes as no surprise after a study confirmed their worst fears about same-sex couples.

It’s interesting that while self-styled child advocates, their academic allies, and the sprawling child protective system (CPS) are so ready to find child maltreatment inside almost every family’s front door, they are silent about the harms to children from being brought up by same-sex (male homosexual or, more typically, lesbian) couples.

Almost intuitively, the average person would think this to be a recipe for serious, perhaps life-altering, problems for such children.

The research now coming out suggests that the average person’s instincts are indeed correct—even though the mainstream academic social science and related professional organizations, which long ago became apologists if not mouthpieces for the homosexualist movement, ignore or try to discredit or even suppress it.

Many are aware of University of Texas sociologist Dr. Mark Regnerus’s studies several years ago which indicated—he was careful to avoid sweeping conclusions—that, among other things, children reared in homes headed by same-sex parents were “more likely” to:

have poor educational attainment, cohabit when they became adults, be sexually molested, have sexually transmitted diseases, smoke tobacco and marijuana, be on public assistance as adults, be in mental health counseling or therapy and suffer from depression, and get into trouble with the law.

Another researcher into the subject of children reared by same-sex couples, Fr. D. Paul Sullins, Ph.D., an emeritus professor of sociology at The Catholic University of America who has been connected with the Marriage and Religion Research Institute at CUA and now the Ruth Institute, has convincingly shown that it is the research of the mainstream social scientists who have sought to deny the harm of same-sex parenting that is flawed.

Not only have the sample of people they studied been too small to truly examine the question, but they have studied only what he calls “conveniently available or selected groups of participants, usually parents recruited from homophile sources.”


Mr Americana, Overpasses News Desk
July 8th, 2018


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.