Child named Adolf Hitler (and siblings) removed from parents

**buttmunch** · January 14th, 2009, 03:10 AM

A young boy named Adolf Hitler, who attracted national attention when a local supermarket refused to make a birthday cake with his name on it, has been taken away from his parents by authorities, according to a local website.

LehighValleyLive.com reports that Adolf and his sisters, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation, 1, and 8-month-old Honszlynn Himler Jeannie, were removed from their home by New Jersey's Division of Youth and Family Services.

No reason was given for why the children were removed, however, and Holland Township police chief David Van Gilson told the site they had not received any reports of abuse or negligence.

Back in December, the boy's parents, Heath and Deborah, were outraged when a local ShopRite declined to provide them with cake for Adolf's birthday.

"They're just names, you know," Heath Campbell told the Easton Express-Times in December. "Yeah, they (the Nazis) were bad people back then. But my kids are little. They're not going to grow up like that."

However, Heath reportedly denies the Holocaust and their home is decorated with swastikas.

The parents were to attend a hearing regarding their children on Tuesday, but it was apparently postponed.Report: Child named Adolf Hitler removed from home in New Jersey

Lovely people. Who could take those little angels from such wonderful parents? It's a travesty.

**NicoleWasHere** · January 14th, 2009, 04:18 AM

Good. Maybe now, they'll get their names changed to something NORMAL, and will have a real chance at life.

**Sarzy** · January 14th, 2009, 04:20 AM

Hmm. Bet they wished they never asked for that cake! But yeah, charming people!

**Aella** · January 14th, 2009, 04:21 AM

Good. Those nutters had no business raising kids.

**Honey** · January 14th, 2009, 07:32 AM

Good news

**Chalet** · January 14th, 2009, 08:36 AM

I want to know the exact reason as to why they were removed.

**Sweetie** · January 14th, 2009, 08:46 AM

^ Yeah, I do too.
I don't think they deserve to have their children ripped from them, nor do the children deserve to go through that, just because they have f*cked up names.

I have seen a lot of names that were ridiculous. Hell if they are going to start taking kids over this, Hollywood better watch out.

**Glitter** · January 14th, 2009, 08:48 AM

Well, I do hope they actually did something to warrant having their children removed but judging from their sick, twisted minds I would bet they did.

*DIVA! · January 14th, 2009, 08:53 AM

^^That child's name isn't any regular fucked up name. They named him after the man who started the Holocaust which is abuse. That means his parents aren't capable of making sound, adult decisions!!

Originally Posted by Sarzy

Hmm. Bet they wished they never asked for that cake! But yeah, charming people!

Or sought out attention and sympathy via the media and the 'public.'

**Sweetie** · January 14th, 2009, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by SSDiva

^^That child's name isn't any regular fucked up name. They named him after the man who started the Holocaust which is abuse. That means his parents aren't capable of making sound, adult decisions!!

Or sought out attention and sympathy via the media and the 'public.'

I have to disagree with you on that one. Naming a child isn't abuse. It's wrong no doubt, but I save the term 'abuse' for the children that have really been abused...mentally or physically.

**Aella** · January 14th, 2009, 09:06 AM

^I agree that the name itself is not sufficient grounds to remove the kids, but taking into account the little trivia about their swastastic home décor, I'm guessing there's more fucked up shit going on.

**GawsipRawksz** · January 14th, 2009, 09:11 AM

if the only reason they took the kids away is because of their dumb names, then there is quite a bit of irony in this.

**Shinola** · January 14th, 2009, 10:35 AM

I think naming a child Adolf Hitler is abusive, but not abusive enough to warrant removing a kid from his parents.

I also want to know what reasons were given for removing the children.

**Grimmlok** · January 14th, 2009, 10:42 AM

word of the day: swastastic

**greysfang** · January 14th, 2009, 10:49 AM

I hardly think their names constitute abuse. Stupid, short-sighted, self-indulgent maybe, but hardly abuse. If that's the case all the Sharmaynes and Dymonds and Shaniquas need to be taken away too.