An accused pedophile that harms other people's children has more rights and more protection of his rights, than a parent accused of maltreatment does. What is worse is the fact that the pedophile has more protection of his rights than the children do.

Children are frequently detained, interrogated, strip-searched and forced to endure intrusive physical and psychological examinations. They are removed from their homes -for vague reasons with little or no evidence- and deposited with complete strangers. Frequently, removal from home and all that it entails is far more traumatic for the child than anything in the home environment, per many former foster children who call themselves "survivors" of the system.

One of the biggest problems is the ultra lax standard of evidence allowed in such cases. All it takes is "preponderance of the evidence" which is loosely interpreted as an allegation being "more likely than not." In other words, if 51% of the evidence -which is frequently made up of second and even third-hand hearsay and a caseworker's opinion- points toward abuse, the other 49% of the evidence that may well vindicate the parent can essentially be disregarded.

With the advent of mandated reporting schemes and anonymous reporting, more and more parents are finding themselves the subjects of investigation. Many people think this is not a problem. They believe that they will be dealt with fairly, and that since they are innocent the truth will come out.

It is better to punish 100 innocents than let one abuser get away with it, better to be safe than sorry, right? But, that is not the way our system was designed. The cornerstone of our system is that every person is innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. It was designed that way for a reason; the opposite does not work, and children are suffering because of it.