The May 31 article headlined "Lococos out of jail but freedom may be
short-lived," disturbed me. I'm not really able to comprehend what purpose
it serves society, the Lococos or their children to sentence these parents
to one year in jail.
    The Lococos have already lost their kids and have been objects of public
humiliation. Now they're to be placed in cages. "Yet," prosecutors may
rebut, "they were charged with good reason. Although they didn't physically
abuse or maliciously maltreat their children, they did still maltreat them
-- with neglect. The kids were endangered."
    What if society could find a cure for the Lococos' poor parenting skills
other than prison? We might have a happy ending. But do we want a happy
ending, or do we want to punish?
    The Lococos are no threat to society. They have made attempts at being
parents with the children still in their custody. They've attended
parenting classes and have cleaned up their act in an attempt to get their
children back home.
    Further, they have custody of their 1-year-old, Joshua, still at his
mother's breast. What happens to him, other than being traumatized at being
separated from his mother at age 1?
    And how about the older Lococo children in foster care, wishing to be home
with their parents? Who really has endangered these children more -- their
parents, or the judge and prosecutors?
    The Lococos' attorneys currently are trying to keep these "criminals" out
of jail. Societally, our response is not to heal, not to love, not to weep
because we can't cure them of their failings, but to incarcerate them.
    But somebody please tell me: How does this brutal, medieval and heartless
sentence benefit society, the Lococos or their children?