(August 13, 2013 at 7:36 pm)Dena Wrote:(August 13, 2013 at 3:21 am)fr0d0 Wrote: No not clearly at all. Only if you choose to take this anecdote as red rather than what she said was her reasoning.
What? Do you mean "as read"? I've read several articles and watched a video of her discussing the topic.
So are you saying that the reports are conflicting? Because the one linked quotes her as saying the contentious line almost as an anecdote. And her official given reason the much different line of potential harm given the child's immediate environment.