 |
Now it turns out that even as the governor was bragging that since the imposition of her decree no child has died, one child already was dead. And confiscation-at-birth might have been part of the reason why.
Even before the official confiscation-at-birth edict, New Mexico’s family police agency, the Children Youth and Families Department, was glad to confiscate children at birth in these situations. That’s what happened to Skylar Magana when she was born in August of 2024. In May 2025 – just before the governor issued her edict, as it happens -- Skylar died, allegedly at the hands of her foster mother. The foster mother has been charged with intentional child abuse resulting in death.
But her death has gotten almost no attention from New Mexico news media. Indeed, this story last week that touches on it – but de-emphasizes the circumstances – is only the second I can find in any mainstream New Mexico news outlet. The first, and a commendable exception, is this story from KOB-TV.
Perhaps because the death of Skylar Magana calls into question the “master narrative”* of many New Mexico news organizations.
Some news organizations practically swooned over the confiscation-at-birth directive. And some of them looooved it when the state’s foremost proponent of tearing apart families declared that “there is no other metric that matters.”
One of the organizations that appears most keen on the confiscation-at-birth approach and on tearing apart more families in general is the Santa Fe New Mexican. Their reporter on this beat has managed to churn out scores of stories about child welfare without, as far as I can tell, even once including a comment from a birth parent. (I concede I might have missed one or two, so I emailed him yesterday morning (Oct. 19) to find out. So far, I have received no response.)
In other words, a reading of his stories suggests that he views birth parents as so subhuman they can’t possibly have a perspective readers should know, and of course their children will be better off rushed into the arms of strangers, so let’s be sure readers never hear otherwise.
That may explain why, in his story for the New Mexican, this reporter downplays the underlying facts in Skylar’s death. Instead, the story focuses on CYFD’s refusing to turn over records to the lawyer representing Skylar’s estate in a wrongful death suit. Reporters love that issue since it touches on their own vested interests.
Yes, the open records issue is in the public interest as well, and, when it comes to family policing, it’s especially in children’s interest. That’s why NCCPR has long favored a strong rebuttable presumption that almost all such records are open in all cases, not just fatalities or near fatalities.
But it’s also in children’s interests not to effectively promote
bad public policy that falsely equates child removal with child safety,
allowing only occasional token dissent. And it’s journalistic malpractice when
your biases are so blatant that you systematically shut out the perspective of
parents who know how much their children are suffering when they are taken away
when there are better, safer options.
*-The phrase “master narrative” was coined by the late William Woo, when he was editor of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. It is not something handed down from above. It's not some kind of media conspiracy. (As a former editor of mine liked to say, "There are no media conspiracies; we're not that well organized.") Rather, the master narrative is simply the preconceived notions reporters bring with them to a story. The best reporters seek out a wide variety of sources, including those who might challenge their master narrative. With some notable exceptions, most New Mexico reporters covering child welfare have not done that.
