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?