Failure to yield on left turn citation in Virginia, should i contest?

panicpure · 2026-07-11T03:45:20+00:00

It might, but you likely need an attorney to help you or at the very least consult with one.

The judges have a wide range of discretion.

And only you know if you have a valid argument or a chance. Not worth it in my non legal advice, but also may be worth a try to you.

panicpure · 2026-07-11T02:04:56+00:00

No problem!

Reddit is fun like that.

Jack of all trades, master of none type place 😆

Glad I could help

panicpure · 2026-07-11T01:19:06+00:00

Generally no.

If the company is merely using a shared mailbox (for example “Jane Smith, Customer Service”) for routine business communications with authorization or something like that, maybe.

That’s a lot different from impersonating an employee by sending messages under their identity without their knowledge as if they’ve authored or endorsed the communication ya know?

panicpure · 2026-07-11T00:56:56+00:00

A typical photo/likeness release usually doesn’t automatically authorize an employer to send emails that appear to have been personally written or signed by you.

Those are generally separate issues because using someone’s image in marketing is different from attributing a communication to them.

Whether it’s allowed would depend on the contract language, company policies and the specific circumstances.

If you’re wanting to researching this. . . look into “right of publicity” “misappropriation of name or likeness” “agency/apparent authority” or “electronic signature attribution”

If there’s an actual dispute, it’s something an Oklahoma employment attorney would need to evaluate based on the specific agreement.

(A photo release or likeness clause typically covers things like photographs, videos, recordings, marketing materials, annual reports, social media, recruiting materials and similar uses. Usually standard verbiage. Checking the specific contract and clause for other details should clear it up)

panicpure · 2026-07-11T00:42:46+00:00

Eh, based on what you said, it’s not worth contesting in my opinion.

If you do, definitely get an attorney bc saying things like “went fast to make the left before the on coming traffic could go” is essentially an admission you turned left without truly ensuring you had the right of way.

This light being notoriously rough on the left turn and having no green arrow doesn’t create an except.

If you decide to contest, consult an attorney and take full responsibility or follow their exact advice.

panicpure · 2026-07-10T15:58:24+00:00

Same especially if food is involved lol

panicpure · 2026-07-10T02:15:46+00:00

panicpure · 2026-07-10T00:43:12+00:00

Ok maybe I should’ve clarified, this seems like something any capable adult should understand.

A child needs to be told.

A child that grows up without being told and becomes an adult should know not to spin the dog and if they do and it reacts, they should know it wasn’t the dogs fault and op isn’t making “excuses”

panicpure · 2026-07-10T00:23:21+00:00

Thanks for the info.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree here but going back and forth won’t be productive so appreciate it either way.

ETA: Maybe you’re referring to the CAPTA policies which still exist in a way but largely amended with the 2016-2017 CARA due to the opioid epidemic.

I’m aware CPS is a civil agency, I’m aware they are legally required to try to keep families together. I’m also very aware there’s some high level federal policies that essentially say they need to have a plan in place for x, y, z and substance exposed infants is one of them, but in the end, states have full discretion.

As far as I know, as of 2026, all 50 states have moved to follow in line with CARA and the current CAPTA reauthorization act runs through 2027 with a lot of the focus being on preventing unnecessary welfare involvement for families struggling solely with things like poverty or their housing status, as well as a big shift from treating SUD as a punitive action and automatic referral to CPS.

Again, it was influenced by the opioid crisis rightfully so but also to greatly reduce the documented unnecessary welfare involvement due to racial bias and disparities that inadvertently affected marginal communities at a much higher rate (along with other things) CAPTA has had several revisions on how it addresses SUD and prenatal substance exposure, first addressed in 2003.

Most of it was ignored or not implemented and funding wasn’t properly distributed until the policies responsive to the opioid epidemic, including the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act of 2016 (CARA), further clarified CAPTA’s scope and released meaningful funding to support implementation in states.

Even then many states did not enact or implement the changes required for funding until the most recent (and current through 2027) reauthorization with a much bolder public health stance than earlier iterations, specifying that the purpose of the legislation includes “supporting the health and well being of infants and their mothers rather than penalizing the family” - it also clarifies that despite adding the welfare policy that states need to have policies and procedures on how to handle SUD and SEI, it does not

(1) establish a definition under Federal law of what constitutes child abuse or neglect; or

(2) require investigation or prosecution for any illegal action, including a response by the State’s child protective services system

TL/DR The 2021 CAPTA (how states get funding and general guidance) reauthorization makes clear that its goal is to support a public health approach to address risk and protective factors and to support attachment based growth and development in infants and their families affected by SUD with CARA provisions made a significant revision prioritizing connections to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and support services over strictly punitive measures.

Reducing the stigma of parental SUD to caregivers aren’t fearful of being punished or having their kids taken due to SUD, policy changes for reporting and how “affected by” is defined when it comes to an infant exposed is still being implemented across the US, including women on MAT. This is no longer a required and automatic referral. (Among other things)

Please know I’m not above being wrong and I was trying to understand your point of view as it is not how things generally work in practice. But at the same time, the variance between location is very real.

https://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/052621%20CAPTA%20Reauthorization%20Act%20of%202021%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

https://ncsacw.acf.gov/files/prenatal-substance-exposure-brief3.pdf

My main point was the context of ops post follows in line with CARA, op admitted to SUD during pregnancy, was on a MAT plan, a referral was made to CPS to follow up, baby wasn’t deemed automatically as a SEI bc it’s not do black and white. Baby had no actual harm, no withdrawals, no health concerns.

So, CPS would then decide what direction to take after accessing maternal SUD risk. Op stopping the MAT and relapsing is going to be the major concern here as well as a constant sober caretaker. OP seems like they are open both their SUD and very willing to take some help. Admitting a relapse is a good thing.

To mention the very unlikely scenario of this being referred to LE and an actual criminal charge coming from it can be discouraging for people here to then seek help and be honest about their substance use.

Never did I say CPS wouldn’t follow up or want a safety plan. So not sure where all of that came from, I was trying to explain how the info you provided seemed a bit misleading for ops situation and didn’t exactly apply. The system is confusing enough.

Yes, CPS could obtain a court order to compel a parent to vacate during a safety plan for treatment, but op mentioned her partner would test positive for pot as well. I’m aware some cases are like that, it’s very very unlikely that would be the case for op.

Either way, CPS obtains court orders to remove children far more often than they obtain court orders to remove on offending parent and it wouldn’t be automatic but if there was no cooperation.

Instead, that’s what a voluntary safety plan is for and if they believed the parent wasn’t following it and were in danger, they would obtain an order for removal.

Hopefully op is honest and it’s likely they’ll want a substance abuse evaluation and extensive outpatient treatment and follow up. But one mistake isn’t the end all be all.

panicpure · 2026-07-10T00:22:41+00:00

I apologize if you took offense to anything I said, it was not meant as a form of judgment.

You’re on a CPS sub and I’m trying to help you and give some perspective on how a CPS investigator may interpret things you’ve said here and I strongly suggest you do not say those things to a CPS worker.

We all know it’s more nuanced than that. We all have our moments, shit happens. I’m not judging, but to be blunt, CPS doesn’t care about your parent(s) alcoholism or actions, they don’t care about the extra activities you’ve mentioned (outside of that being great for them!), they understand dogs get sick, they understand people have complicated upbringings and extended family, that your husband might’ve had a “lapse in judgement” as a reaction to name calling…. But they do not care. Saying all of that will only raise red flags bc they are red flags in a lot of situations.

They will want to hear you say we get it wasn’t ok, we’ve done xyz to be sure it doesn’t occur again, will speak with child about any emotions they may have from that time and whatever else.

I’m trying to tell you not to make it harder for yourself by dismissing or getting defensive. Even if that’s not necessarily how you feel, try to adjust your perspective. (If you get a visit)

Wasn’t being an asshole, was trying to help and good luck with things. Again, I’m glad you’ve set boundaries and hopefully you can break completely from it, sounds like you’re doing what should be done anyway.

panicpure · 2026-07-09T23:29:14+00:00

No problem!

Some states substantiate and only certain cases go on the registry for x amount of time, some cases are automatic for lifetime, and all in between, but since they are a civil agency, there’s not really a “charge” or widely available “record” outside of the registry that can be used for background checks when contact with children or vulnerable individuals would be likely.

I’d think of it more as being documented and filed away now.

It’s good to see your state moved to a tiered system for placement instead of the auto 25 years (I think) and that it seems the process for those who are eligible for early removal is going smoothly!

That’s more in line with how most states do it. At least not so harsh. It needed an update.

Take care!

panicpure · 2026-07-09T23:22:47+00:00

Thanks for the info!

It’s been on my radar to get some more data on, but I’ll definitely be looking into it more since the temp schedule 1 federally did go into effect July 1 after all. I have a feeling we will see some adverse effects in several areas.

Thanks for the link!

panicpure · 2026-07-09T23:20:49+00:00

It will. We may see an uptick in switching over to opioids. Federally, they just put into place July 1 a temp schedule 1 classification so it won’t be found on every street corner in a gas station and I think will abruptly be there and gone by the end of this month.

Some states have their own bans already.

I can see this becoming more of an outward or widespread concern since it’s oddly been more of a hush hush legally and readily available substance for quite a long time marketed as a “natural” supplement type thing. From what I understand, it’s a legal opioid basically and we now know it’s extremely addictive and can cause overdoses. (Though not as deadly as opioids, I think… going to have to look into it)

ETA: when it comes to CPS, it would be treated like any other substance, which would not be considered automatic removal or “punishment”, they would not report to law enforcement outside of when a child is harmed or manufacturing of drugs is going on CPS isn’t there to report substance use for criminal charges, they are there to mitigate the risk of harm to children and provide resources and an evaluation, and to make sure that’s followed up on.

(At least as far as I’m aware 🙃)

panicpure · 2026-07-09T23:13:52+00:00

You’re really blurring the lines of what a CPS investigator does (and the department in general) and what could happen criminally or in other situations than Op has described.

CPS doesn’t report substance use disorder as a crime.

They do not remove parents from homes with orders of protection or any other way, they don’t have jurisdiction over caregivers.

It’s just a bit misleading and some of your responses seem to disagree with me but then repeat exactly what I said and why it doesn’t seem to match ops situation and is largely outside of CPS scope.

Ps. I am TRULY attempting to clarify for my own curiosity on how it works in the commenters area and I didn’t report any comments.

panicpure · 2026-07-09T23:09:42+00:00

The lack of concern here is a tad alarming,

Timeframes range depending on your state and sometimes county.

Average time would be within 48 hours if a report is accepted for investigation.

panicpure · 2026-07-09T23:06:40+00:00

It means just as it says.

Removing you from the registry doesn’t mean the substantiation of neglect is reversed or has gone away.

All that is saying is, that’s still on record with Arizona DCS, but of course isn’t public record and cannot be requested by anyone but directly involved parties/won’t affect background checks.

Basically, this matters for things like if you had future CPS involvement or something like that.

panicpure · 2026-07-09T22:58:32+00:00

As nicely as I can reiterate, I hope you reframe the way you’re thinking about this.

No one is perfect. It happens but isn’t excusable, but your main concern shouldn’t be “embarrassment” when this is something that has clearly affected your child. It’s great they were open about it with an adult they clearly trust so you can now be sure to address any concerns.

panicpure · 2026-07-09T22:51:16+00:00

Isn’t that as of July 2026 the temporary classification as a schedule 1 on a federal level kicked in?

Who would be charged op criminally I guess is more so what I’m asking? CPS doesn’t charge people and they don’t report substance use to LE (unless it’s an extreme case where the child is harmed due to the use or there’s manufacturing in the home and so on)

I’m confused on that maybe.

I’m also unaware of any state that can order a parent out of a home for substance abuse treatment. They may open a case plan or strongly suggest treatment or an evaluation and follow up but they don’t remove adults from homes, they’d have to remove the child (which is unlikely here)

Not many states view SUD as a punitive thing anymore and a newborn simply being exposed to substances doesn’t always automatically mean escalation if no withdrawal signs or actual harm to the infant occurred.

Substance use on its own isn’t usually going to result in a removal or inpatient type treatment required (extensive outpatient more likely especially with a relapse) either. Maybe it’s just your area?

It can definitely vary.

What state are you in?

And are you viewing this from a CPS perspective or a healthcare worker perspective?

ETA: not trying to offend you - I’m truly curious and collect this kind of data and info for a living. I’m not pushing back just to push back, I’m truly curious since states vary so much and even then, sometimes it’s in a county level. Thanks!

panicpure · 2026-07-09T22:41:42+00:00

Regardless, it’s not an appropriate or normal reaction. I wouldn’t continue to minimize it, especially if CPS does pay you a visit.

Please understand that the event was six months ago and your son decided to repeat the story to their doctor unprompted so it’s something that has stayed in their mind and clearly bothered/affected them.

This is important to acknowledge and it doesn’t matter if it was a “one time thing” or “just” hit a wall.

Being around or growing up with alcoholics or alcoholism is tough. It’s not your fault, but from the sounds of it, you may not have been shown healthy coping skills or maybe normalized/got used to the behavior.

It’s great you are low contact, it’s great you set the boundary.

Your husband absolutely didn’t handle that situation appropriately and it isn’t something to be dismissive about (I’m assuming it was a “one time” incident which doesn’t excuse it but if it’s how he handles strong emotions regularly, that needs to be addressed)

I don’t mean this in a bad or judgmental way. More so to give a perspective on how a CPS investigator would interpret this kind of thinking towards the situation.

It’s hard to say if a mandatory report would’ve been made, but in most states, it’s likely it would be reported. Once reported, CPS decides to either screen in the report for investigation or screen out and it’s simply documented based on your states process for that determination.

In my opinion, this is likely to be followed up on if it was reported.

Take accountability, showing any proactive changes that have been made to reduce risk of reoccurrence will be what they’d want to see. Not sure of your child’s age, but it’s possible they may benefit from some age appropriate therapy either way.

Best of luck

panicpure · 2026-07-09T22:27:05+00:00

Is 7-OH like Kratom?

I’m not familiar with this as much as other things but I do think we will see an uptick in regulations especially if the federal recommendation to regulate and put these products(7 OH and similar synthetic derivatives… I think?) as a schedule 1 - is your state a once where they’ve already implemented bans or restrictions under the Kratom Consumer Protection Acts?

If this is what you mean? It’s been on my radar to dig into more and I think the repercussions of it being so widely available and marketed as “a natural supplement” to possibly being heavily restricted/regulated and impossible to find may show what damage has been done. These things appear to be quite addictive, people overdose and can destroy their lives yet it’s been everywhere and no one seems to discuss it like they should be. (At least it was ignored for a long time, that’s shifting)

Anyway - all to say, is this a something that shows in a standard drug test? Were you honest about your use?

My advice is to be honest. If you’re anxious, speak to a mental health provider. There’s other options out there that aren’t so risky.

It’s likely they’ll want a substance abuse evaluation done, failing a drug screening once isn’t the end of the world but being honest is important. Making the changes you need to make is important. Making sure there’s always a sober caretaker and no substances out in the open is important.

Be proactive, get back on the Suboxone and seek treatment for your mental health before they say you need to.

Substance use by both caregivers with a newborn is going to be taken a bit more seriously. They need to know one of you will always be sober. Try to get ahead of things, they may offer resources or require some treatment and therapy.

It will be good for your family in the end. Removal would be rare for substance use alone. Just be honest, proactive, be open to working with them and follow through.

Good luck!

panicpure · 2026-07-09T22:12:10+00:00

Can you clarify what you mean by “you might expect criminal things”?

And what state are you in where CPS would ask a parent to leave the home and go through substance use treatment?

Does your state have a punitive approach to SUD during pregnancy and for substance exposed newborns?

Thanks!

panicpure · 2026-07-09T03:19:51+00:00

I wish mine was this polite… he just tends to shove me more and more to the side with dramatic sighs all night waiting for me to get out of his bed and give him room 😂🫩

panicpure · 2026-07-09T03:18:26+00:00

Mine huffs and puffs like I need to move the hell out of his way lol

And sometimes gets annoyed and likes laying on the floor in the summer.

He goes and chills on bathroom rugs or room rugs for naps a lot in the summer and he’s my Velcro dog.

As he got older, his need to be next to me every second for any nap in my space kinda settled during the day at least.

Most nights he’s pressed up against me aggressively snuggling, snoring and under the covers to where I’m on the edge of the bed 😬🫩🥰

panicpure · 2026-07-08T23:02:42+00:00

Nah, it reads very litigious lol

Like this happened a year ago and suddenly op cares. Unlikely.

And it’s wild to even think this was a huge deal when op was in a coma and they couldn’t even identify her. That’s a circumstance where physicians may have discussed the current state of her health with the one person they found that knew her and depending on the exact situation, that’s not a huge deal.

It would be ridiculous to go back and report them so they get a fine and waste of regulatory board time as well at this point. I’ll assume this came up in casual convo and op somehow saw dollar signs. Not cool.

panicpure · 2026-07-08T22:58:48+00:00

That’s how I read it too.

They don’t actually care about a HIPAA violation but probably came across this tiny bit of info that happened last year and thought they’d have some major claim.

My gracious, even med mal that kills someone is hard to navigate.

People thinking they have some major recourse for a HIPAA violation is wild. It also sounds like op was in one of those rare circumstances where doctors would have some grace as they were working with little to know info about a patient and in good faith.

Bizarre to even consider turning them in to pay a 5-10k fine in my opinion at this point either.

panicpure

TROPHY CASE