Monday, 16 February 2026

Don't Mess With Texas CPS [TXwBRfxRSz8]

A newborn seizure at an Austin hospital exposes the aggressive legal tactics of Texas CPS and the controversial state-as-parent ideology driving modern social work.

Texas CPS Jocelyn Houser Foster care abuse Arthur Calhoun Parental rights Travis County

By Mike Hanson Archives | 9m listen | 4 chapters

RSS Transcript

Don't Mess With Texas CPS [TXwBRfxRSz8] cover

About this episode

Texas Child Protective Services seized two-day-old Jocelyn Houser from Brackenridge Hospital in Austin, sparking a legal battle over parental rights and state overreach. Shirley Houser and her husband faced an emergency removal notice alleging physical neglect despite claims of consistent prenatal care. A Travis County judge later granted the state temporary custody, fueling allegations that bureaucratic procedures are being weaponized against families without immediate evidence of danger.

Critics of the foster care system point to federal funding structures and adoption fees as perverse incentives that prioritize state revenue over child welfare. Statistics suggest children are five times more likely to suffer abuse in foster homes than in their original domestic environments. This shift toward state-managed childhood is linked to the teachings of Arthur Calhoun, whose textbook A Social History of the American Family advocates for the state to assume the role of parent as traditional family units weaken. These policies are increasingly viewed as a move toward a socialist commonwealth where community experts replace biological custody.

Family advocate Mike Hanson confronted police and social workers during the hospital removal, highlighting the absence of a judge's signature on the initial paperwork. The recorded incident captures the moment Jocelyn was taken while breastfeeding, illustrating the aggressive tactics used by CPS during their 24-hour emergency window. Shirley Houser remains at the center of this dispute as the 14-day hearing deadline approaches in Travis County.

CHAPTER 01 / 4 Discussion

Texas Child Protective Services Seizes Newborn Jocelyn Houser

Texas Child Protective Services took custody of two-day-old Jocelyn Houser at Brackenridge Hospital in Austin. Shirley Houser and her husband were served an emergency removal notice alleging risk of physical neglect, despite the mother's claims of proper prenatal care and a lack of immediate danger. A Travis County judge subsequently signed a court order granting the state temporary custody pending a hearing within 14 days.

shirley houser· jocelyn houser· child protective services· brackenridge hospital· travis county

00:00 A custody battle caught on tape. The state comes calling shortly after an Austin mother gives her a fight. Our top story, an Austin mother cries out for her newborn child but the State of Texas says she's an unfit mother. Judy the state says that Shirley Houser and her husband don't deserve to raise their two day old daughter. The question tonight is when the state steps in and takes a baby is it kidnapping or protecting a child from danger? Shirley Houser left the hospital with a birth certificate but no baby. This dramatic scene at Bracken Ridge Hospital unfolded Tuesday as Child Protective Services took custody of two-day old Jocelyn Houser it was recorded on home video by family friend and advocate Mike Hanson

00:58 Much of the confrontation was over this notice of emergency removal from the Department of Protective and Regulatory Services. It was not signed by a judge, but it declared baby Jocelyn would have a risk of physical neglect if she were released with her parents. CPS maintains it has 24 hours to get a judge's signature A day later still on pain medication from a cesarean section on Sunday Hauser longs for her baby So when she got hungry, she'd just slide over and start if she wanted. I just...I stayed awake." We felt it was in the best interest of the baby that we take temporary conservatorship. Had had considerable history with that mother. I didn't think like my baby one bit. I took all my prenatal vitamins. I ate properly. I didn't drink. Hauser admits she's had problems but says she still wants her baby back. All I want is a chance

01:56 A chance to prove what I can do, but all I want is a chance. Now, the law allows CPS to remove children without permission from a judge in certain emergency situations. Today, a Travis County Judge signed a court order giving the state temporary custody of Jocelyn. There will be another hearing within 14 days and Judy this is not that uncommon the state removes an average of 42 children a month here in Travis County Whatever happened to due process here in the United States? What ever happened to innocent and proven guilty. You know I've spent several hours over the weekend reading over the case history of Mrs. Hauser

CHAPTER 02 / 4 Discussion

Foster Care System Financial Incentives and Abuse Risks

The foster care system is criticized for allegedly prioritizing federal funding and adoption fees over the welfare of families. Claims are made that children are five times more likely to be abused in foster homes than in their original homes. The removal of children from poor families is compared to historical eugenics programs and described as a form of bureaucratic tyranny.

foster care· federal funding· adoption· eugenics· due process

02:39 And it turns out she's never done anything to her children. They even admit that! She's been poor and she went to the government for help with welfare What Mrs. Hauser didn't know is, that after the state has sucked hundreds of thousands of dollars out of the feds for each child That they then adopt a child out for a couple hundred thousand thousand more and then there's no investigation of the foster parents. Did you know you're five times more likely to be abused in the foster parents homes? There is definitely a place for people to be criminally charged who abuse their children But grabbing someone's children just because they're poor and ignorant, again that harkens back to eugenics that went on right up until 1979 where they drop by and grab your children and sterilize them. And again that was the social workers at that time there so much tyranny that comes in the form of white lab coats and bureaucrats

CHAPTER 03 / 4 Discussion

Arthur Calhoun Textbook and State Parenthood Ideology

Arthur Calhoun's textbook, A Social History of the American Family, is cited as the primary educational material for modern social workers. The text argues that the state must assume a larger role in parenthood as traditional family structures weaken. Critics argue this ideology promotes a socialist commonwealth where community experts and world government replace the custody of parents.

arthur calhoun· social history of the american family· socialism· world government· social workers

03:31 But don't take our word on it. Read from Social Workers' own dominant textbook used in most colleges, the number one textbook, Arthur Calhoun's A Social History of the American Family teaches young social workers and I quote, The family goes back to the age of savagery while the state belongs at the age of civilization The modern individual is a world citizen served by the world and home interest can no longer be supreme. As familyism weakens, society has to assume a larger parenthood. The school begins to assume responsibility for the functions thrust upon it. The kindergarten grows downward towards the cradle and there arises talk of neighborhood nurseries

04:13 Social centers replace the old-time home chimney. The child passes more and more into the custody of the community experts." And it goes on and on to say that, "...The family will end so world government can have its way with a socialist commonwealth..." This is their own top textbook! They're not even hiding this! They got a hit out on the American family! An they've sold you that its okay! Saying well...they had never done anything but they might be crazy and uh... Well we really shouldn't let them have a child Look at that baby. Look how beautiful that baby is." They'll get hundreds of thousands of federal funds, especially if they put it on a couple psychotropic drugs and then they'll adopt it out to somebody. They didn't even have a warrant nothing show up and grab it then by the way she has a house she has a car her husband has a job all this we've read the reports they took our other kids for no reason either I mean this is incredible ladies and gentlemen

CHAPTER 04 / 4 Discussion

Confrontation Between Houser Family and CPS Workers

A recorded confrontation at Brackenridge Hospital shows police and Child Protective Services workers removing a newborn from Shirley Houser while she was breastfeeding. Family advocate Mike Hanson challenged the legality of the removal, noting the lack of a judge's signature on the initial paperwork. CPS workers maintained they have a 24-hour window to obtain judicial approval for emergency removals based on the parents' history rather than current evidence of neglect.

bill of rights· psychiatric evaluation· emergency removal· hospital confrontation· mike hanson

05:03 Now, because they haven't taught us our Bill of Rights or Constitution. They don't need warrants. They don't need anything I don't care how many jackboots say it's okay and how many kangaroo courts in bureaucracy say it's okay Pull the baby off the mother as she was breastfeeding They took her behind closed doors but this is what happened She told us she was begging He said you must come for a psychiatric evaluation And so the police grabbed the baby off of her Again like the Soviet Union Here she has been In my room for two days straight No problems, no medical problems. No health problems And let me just make this clear for the documentation There is no risk for this baby and there's no reason the CPS should be taking this baby again There's no there's no reason why this baby should be taken away from you right? Right! There is no reason at all

05:54 The audience at the CPS is outside the door right now. Yes, the CPS worker and I've already talked to her told her that I was involved with this situation she's gonna call a supervisor back in and we should know in about 10 minutes whether they're going to take the baby or not yeah last child was taken from me and they said I didn't have proper housing but we were living in a motel who's working hard trying to get a place and they still took our child This CPS case worker that's here today said that she didn't see it. That was any problem as long as there is a roof over our kids head and they took our kid last time because because they said we have proper housing, you know? And that's not right this case. River said that She thought that was proper housing but the last case rivers took our kid because They said it wasn't proper

06:48 Yeah, but being poor is not a reason to take children. She's not taking her. I have to say it and she's not taking her. We're not signing anything. There was no physical neglect you guys ain't got proof? You guys lost the other one? Do you have a court order? This is an emergency removal. Signed by who? It's an emergency removal that is good for 24 hours until I see the judge tomorrow. Okay, who was it signed by and who... It's just information to the family that we are removing a child. Okay but its public information. Who was this signed by? Its not signed by anybody. We still have the right legally have rights And I have legally had the right to keep my baby in my chair

07:35 They said that she could leave and they were on their way out the door. Who said she could? The hospital! Not with the baby? Yes, with the baby. Without the baby... No, with the baby. She can leave if anybody else who's in here wants to leave but not the baby. The baby is staying here. No, the baby is going home. The baby isn't even supposed to be discharged until tomorrow. Well you all took my kid last time on a second day now what are you saying that for? Well, the child is gonna stay here. We have 24 hours from the date that we removed the child. Okay, but it's not she's not doing anything I would we have documented that this woman has taken care of her baby She's fed her baby all time and there is no neglect here

08:25 I really am shocked to be American at this time. Because I have known this couple and they have, you know, went to trial and everything. And they have really done what they were supposed to do to take care of children. Now their child's being taken. So are you telling me that you can take my child without a judge saying anything? I will, I have to legally present the case in front of a judge within 24 hours. Yeah please they're taking the baby right now. At that time, the judge determines whether

09:14 Whether we can keep the child out here. You are not the law. We have the right legally to take that child if there is risk or there is a possibility of a crime Well you sat here and said, well there wasn't I didn't say that there was no problem Yes you did. You told me that. We got that on tape yes? You didn't see any problems. You had to call your superiors what you told me. I had to call them to see... Okay they're saying this because of their past but as this child you didn't see any problems I did not. What you're saying is that from what you're telling me, it did not appear that there was a problem with the way your situation was right now. I didn't say that it was a problem as far as... Are you with CPS too? No. Specifically... Who are you with? But we're facing our risks.