Botox mom hoax

A reader, arguing for the necessity of CPS, gives the recent story of the Botox mom as an example of where a CPS intervention is needed. Now it turns out that the Botox mom was a hoax:

TMZ.com obtained a sworn deposition written by Kerry Campbell, whose real name is supposedly Sheena Upton, reading in part:

I Sheena Upton, was solicited by a company in the United Kingdom, to play the role of Kerry Campbell in the United Kingdom newspaper, The Sun. The Sun's story was called "I give my 8 year old daughter Botox". I was provided with the story, instructions and a script to follow for a recorded interview for paid fee. I received $200 for that story.

Upton adds that she was offered a bunch of money by "Good Morning America" and "Inside Edition" to give interviews. She confesses:

The truth is that I have never given my daughter Botox, nor allowed her to get any type of waxing, nor is she a beauty pageant contestant. Yesterday, on May 17, 2011, I went with my daughter to the U.C.L.A. Medical Center....After my daughter received a full medical exam, the results indicated that she has not ever received treatments including Botox or other such injections.

Read the document in full here.

TMZ had the scoop on this, as well as on Arnold's love child. Apparently that is the best source of celebrity news.

CPS has now dropped the case. I don't even think that this was an appropriate case for CPS anyway, even if it were not a hoax. I certainly do not agree with giving botox to an 8-year-old, but there is no evidence of substantial objective harm. It is now common for teenaged girls to get botox. I don't agree with that either, but it is legal and accepted in our society, and hence none of CPS's business.

If botox for kids is really unacceptable for kids, then I suggest passing a law against it. That is what some people are trying to do for circumcision, according to this San Jose Mercury News story:

SAN FRANCISCO -- A group seeking to ban the circumcision of male children in San Francisco has succeeded in getting their controversial measure on the November ballot, meaning voters will be asked to weigh in on what until now has been a private family matter.

City elections officials confirmed Wednesday that the initiative had received enough signatures to appear on the ballot, receiving more than 7,700 valid signatures from city residents.

Initiatives must receive at least 7,168 signatures to qualify.

If the measure passes, circumcision would be prohibited for boys younger than 18. The practice would become a misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or up to one year in jail. There would be no religious exemptions.

The initiative appears to be the first of its kind in the country to actually make it to this stage, though a larger national debate over the health benefits of circumcision has been going on for many years.

Banning circumcision would almost certainly prompt a flurry of legal challenges arguing violations of the First Amendment's guarantee of the freedom to exercise one's religious beliefs. ...

"Parents are really guardians, and guardians have to do what's in the best interest of the child. It's his body. It's his choice," said Lloyd Schofield, the measure's lead proponent ...

No, parents are not just guardians who are obligated to follow some do-gooder's opinion of the BIOTCh. Parents have a legal and moral duty to use their own judgment about their kids, as long as it is lawful.

Some people say that circumcision is child abuse, while others applaud the practice. I say that neither circumcision nor botox are matters for the judgment of CPS case workers. If these things are really ban, then ban them. If they are banned, then law enforcement can take whatever measures that the law provides. But in no case should CPS be making these decisions.