Australia Abortion Practitioner Has Infected 40 Women With Hepatitis C Virus
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
May 31, 2010
Melbourne, Australia (LifeNews.com) -- An Australia abortion facility worker is facing more accusations that he infected dozens of women with hepatitis C during abortions. The heath chief of the Australian state of Victoria released the accusations against the abortion practitioner in April.
Since then, the number of potential victims has jumped form 12 to 44 as the outbreak at the Croydon Day Surgery abortion business appears worse than earlier reports as the probe continues.
The Herald Sun newspaper indicates the health department investigation into the abortion operation where James Latham Peters was the anesthesiologist will expand -- potentially to as many as 3,600 women who had abortions at his center since 2006.
The newspaper indicates the Victorian Police and the Medical Practitioners Board of Victoria has revealed the patients' infections are an identical genetic match to his own hepatitis C strain in 22 of the confirmed 44 cases.
"It is difficult to know exactly what went on in that clinic, but we are diligently providing full support to Victoria Police, to the Medical Practitioners Board, but most importantly to those women," Health Minister Daniel Andrews said, according to the Herald. "This is not about system failure, this is about the appalling, totally inappropriate behavior of one particular person."
Chief health officer John Carnie indicated investigations showed the women were deliberately infected and that a probe into the abortion center may reveal more, but it will takes weeks to contact them.
Peters could face criminal charges for infecting the women.
The Medical Board of Victoria has investigated the allegations and suspended Peters on February 15 two months after the health department became aware of the allegations when three women contacted the agency after infection.
The newspaper indicates Peters has past drug convictions and was sentenced this year for having pornographic pictures of children. In 1996, he was convicted of forging more than 100 prescriptions for pethidine.
The Age newspaper reported that the Croydon Day Surgery abortion business knew of the convictions but hired Peters anyway.
http://www.lifenews.com/int1560.html
Isabella Brooke Knightly and Austin Gamez-Knightly
In Memory of my Loving Husband, William F. Knightly Jr. Murdered by ILLEGAL Palliative Care at a Nashua, NH Hospital
Monday, May 31, 2010
Practitioner Faces Revised Lawsuit For Forcing Michigan Woman to Have Abortion
Practitioner Faces Revised Lawsuit For Forcing Michigan Woman to Have Abortion
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
May 31, 2010
Flint, MI (LifeNews.com) -- A Michigan abortion practitioner faces a revised civil lawsuit from a patient who says she was forced to have an abortion even after she changed her mind on the operating table immediately before the abortion was about to begin. Caitlin Bruce, 20, had the abortion at the Feminine Health Care Clinic run by Albert Hodari.
Bruce filed a lawsuit previously, but her attorney submitted new paperwork last week at the Genesee County Circuit Court, according to ConnectMidMichigan.
She said, “He was inserting the speculum, and I told him I'm nervous. I just told him stop please. I'm really nervous and I don't want to do this anymore.”
Hodari reportedly had a nurse hold Bruce down so he could finish the abortion of her child.
Hodari responded to the news service, saying “When she said stop, it was too late… I told her I would stop, but when I take my instrument there was blood and tissue on it from pregnancy, so I couldn't stop.”
However, obstetrician and gynecologist Dr. Mona Hardas told the Michigan news outlet that Hodari handled the situation poorly. She said Hodari could have taken Bruce to a local hospital for a second opinion rather than forcing her to have the abortion.
“Even if someone has signed a consent form, if someone wants you to stop you have to stop. I am shocked. I can't believe this is still happening in this day and age," she said.
Hodari responded to those comments, defending his record as an abortion practitioner.
“I am there because I want to help woman have safe abortions. Look at my records. I have done more abortions and longer than any doctor in Michigan," he said.
However, Hodari has also killed women in failed abortions and, last June, he was fined $10,000 by a state board in connection with a woman's botched abortion death.
One of Hodari's staff did an abortion on Regina Johnson who, afterwards, suffered respiratory and cardiac arrest.
Staff at Hodari's abortion center allegedly failed to help her or call for an ambulance and she was deprived of oxygen for an extended time. She died a short time later at Hodari's Womancare clinic in Lathrup Village.
Johnson's death is one of several women to have died over the years under Hodari's care.
The September 17, 2003 abortion saw Milton Nathanson, then employed by Hodari, do an abortion on Johnson. She died the next day from "anoxic encephalopahy due to cardiac arrest" resulting from the abortion, according to official reports.
In addition to Hodari and Nathanson, anesthesiologist Barry Thompson and the abortion clinic's nurse, Cathy Litchig were also implicated in Johnson's death.
The Michigan Attorney General imposed the fine on Hodari on March 4, 2009.
Hodari also faces another lawsuit related to a woman who suffered a botched abortion at one of his Detroit-area abortion centers. The suit says he subjected a woman to an unnecessary abortion procedure after failing to diagnose an ectopic pregnancy.
According to information Operation Rescue provided to LifeNews.com, Marcia Lanqua, 33, went to Hodari’s Womancare of Southfield abortion clinic on May 6, 2009, for an abortion.
She had been refused an abortion by another clinic in Deerfield because an ultrasound performed on her did not reveal an intrauterine pregnancy, which is an indication of the possibility of an ectopic pregnancy.
The pro-life group says Lanqua’s lawsuit indicates that Hodari lacked the skill to diagnose the ectopic pregnancy and instead he negligently did an unnecessary uterine abortion on her.
"Lanqua was admitted to a hospital nine days later where her fallopian tube was removed. Lanqua asserts that she may not have lost her fallopian tube if Hodari had properly identified and treated her ectopic pregnancy," the group said about the lawsuit.
“Operation Rescue is working publicly and behind the scenes to make sure that Hodari is properly brought to justice. We will make sure that the appropriate authorities overseeing Hodari’s license are notified of Mrs. Lanqua’s suit and that it is added to his file,” said OR president Troy Newman.
Also, members of Citizens for a Pro-life Society discovered the remains of aborted babies in Womencare clinic trash dumpsters as well as bio-hazard waste and hundreds of patient records.
Hodari was investigated by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and received a warning from that office.
He was also prosecuted by the Oakland County District Attorney's Office for violating Michigan statutes regarding the improper disposition of patient records. Hodari pled “no contest “ to the first of 12 counts and is currently on probation in that case.
A complaint filed by Miller's group with the Michigan Bureau of Health Professions regarding the patient records issue is currently under review by the Attorney General.
At least two other women have also died from failed abortions at Hodari's abortion centers and many more have been injured.
Tamia Russell was only 15 years old in January of 2004 when her 26-year-old boyfriend paid Hodari $2,000 in cash to abort her baby at over 26 weeks gestation. She died less than 24 hours after obtaining an abortion at Womancare of Southfield/Lathrup Village.
Her guardian was unaware she was pregnant, and had no knowledge of the abortion - until it was too late.
Chivon Williams received a suction abortion by Hodari at an unknown clinic. An hour and forty minutes later, she was discharged even though she was complaining of pain in her stomach and chest. Soon after she arrived at her home, she "became unresponsive." At 5:17, on the same day as the abortion, she was pronounced dead.
http://www.lifenews.com/state5143.html
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
May 31, 2010
Flint, MI (LifeNews.com) -- A Michigan abortion practitioner faces a revised civil lawsuit from a patient who says she was forced to have an abortion even after she changed her mind on the operating table immediately before the abortion was about to begin. Caitlin Bruce, 20, had the abortion at the Feminine Health Care Clinic run by Albert Hodari.
Bruce filed a lawsuit previously, but her attorney submitted new paperwork last week at the Genesee County Circuit Court, according to ConnectMidMichigan.
She said, “He was inserting the speculum, and I told him I'm nervous. I just told him stop please. I'm really nervous and I don't want to do this anymore.”
Hodari reportedly had a nurse hold Bruce down so he could finish the abortion of her child.
Hodari responded to the news service, saying “When she said stop, it was too late… I told her I would stop, but when I take my instrument there was blood and tissue on it from pregnancy, so I couldn't stop.”
However, obstetrician and gynecologist Dr. Mona Hardas told the Michigan news outlet that Hodari handled the situation poorly. She said Hodari could have taken Bruce to a local hospital for a second opinion rather than forcing her to have the abortion.
“Even if someone has signed a consent form, if someone wants you to stop you have to stop. I am shocked. I can't believe this is still happening in this day and age," she said.
Hodari responded to those comments, defending his record as an abortion practitioner.
“I am there because I want to help woman have safe abortions. Look at my records. I have done more abortions and longer than any doctor in Michigan," he said.
However, Hodari has also killed women in failed abortions and, last June, he was fined $10,000 by a state board in connection with a woman's botched abortion death.
One of Hodari's staff did an abortion on Regina Johnson who, afterwards, suffered respiratory and cardiac arrest.
Staff at Hodari's abortion center allegedly failed to help her or call for an ambulance and she was deprived of oxygen for an extended time. She died a short time later at Hodari's Womancare clinic in Lathrup Village.
Johnson's death is one of several women to have died over the years under Hodari's care.
The September 17, 2003 abortion saw Milton Nathanson, then employed by Hodari, do an abortion on Johnson. She died the next day from "anoxic encephalopahy due to cardiac arrest" resulting from the abortion, according to official reports.
In addition to Hodari and Nathanson, anesthesiologist Barry Thompson and the abortion clinic's nurse, Cathy Litchig were also implicated in Johnson's death.
The Michigan Attorney General imposed the fine on Hodari on March 4, 2009.
Hodari also faces another lawsuit related to a woman who suffered a botched abortion at one of his Detroit-area abortion centers. The suit says he subjected a woman to an unnecessary abortion procedure after failing to diagnose an ectopic pregnancy.
According to information Operation Rescue provided to LifeNews.com, Marcia Lanqua, 33, went to Hodari’s Womancare of Southfield abortion clinic on May 6, 2009, for an abortion.
She had been refused an abortion by another clinic in Deerfield because an ultrasound performed on her did not reveal an intrauterine pregnancy, which is an indication of the possibility of an ectopic pregnancy.
The pro-life group says Lanqua’s lawsuit indicates that Hodari lacked the skill to diagnose the ectopic pregnancy and instead he negligently did an unnecessary uterine abortion on her.
"Lanqua was admitted to a hospital nine days later where her fallopian tube was removed. Lanqua asserts that she may not have lost her fallopian tube if Hodari had properly identified and treated her ectopic pregnancy," the group said about the lawsuit.
“Operation Rescue is working publicly and behind the scenes to make sure that Hodari is properly brought to justice. We will make sure that the appropriate authorities overseeing Hodari’s license are notified of Mrs. Lanqua’s suit and that it is added to his file,” said OR president Troy Newman.
Also, members of Citizens for a Pro-life Society discovered the remains of aborted babies in Womencare clinic trash dumpsters as well as bio-hazard waste and hundreds of patient records.
Hodari was investigated by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and received a warning from that office.
He was also prosecuted by the Oakland County District Attorney's Office for violating Michigan statutes regarding the improper disposition of patient records. Hodari pled “no contest “ to the first of 12 counts and is currently on probation in that case.
A complaint filed by Miller's group with the Michigan Bureau of Health Professions regarding the patient records issue is currently under review by the Attorney General.
At least two other women have also died from failed abortions at Hodari's abortion centers and many more have been injured.
Tamia Russell was only 15 years old in January of 2004 when her 26-year-old boyfriend paid Hodari $2,000 in cash to abort her baby at over 26 weeks gestation. She died less than 24 hours after obtaining an abortion at Womancare of Southfield/Lathrup Village.
Her guardian was unaware she was pregnant, and had no knowledge of the abortion - until it was too late.
Chivon Williams received a suction abortion by Hodari at an unknown clinic. An hour and forty minutes later, she was discharged even though she was complaining of pain in her stomach and chest. Soon after she arrived at her home, she "became unresponsive." At 5:17, on the same day as the abortion, she was pronounced dead.
http://www.lifenews.com/state5143.html
Medication Mistake Kills Toddler at Hospital-Ran Care Facility
Medication Mistake Kills Toddler at Hospital-Ran Care Facility
Posted: May 30, 2010 08:59 PM
Updated: May 30, 2010 11:38 PM
Video Gallery <1>
Medication Mistake Kills Toddler at Hospital-Ran Care Facility
2:57
Meghan Youker
OMAHA (KPTM) -- Children's Hospital & Medical Center believes human error led to the accidental death of a 19-month-old girl. Alicia Coleman had a seizure and went into cardiac arrest Saturday morning after medication was improperly routed into her system.
It happened at a respite care facility for children with complex medical needs that is run by the hospital.
"She was like the pure example of perseverance and attitude," said Alicia's mom, Dominique Coleman.
A toddler's room now sits quiet and empty. "I'm upset, but I'm so happy that I got 19 months with her, because through all the struggle, it was so worth it," Dominique said.
Born twelve weeks premature, Alicia battled a gastrointestinal disorder known as NEC, but had been improving. "I knew I had a fragile child, but she fought through 15 surgeries, and almost a year in the hospital, and infections and sickness and pneumonia and liver disease and everything and she's come back from it all," Dominique said.
Saturday morning on her way to work, Dominique dropped her daughter off at Children's Home Healthcare's World, near 78th and Farnam.
Though Alicia was primarily cared for by nurses in her home, she had been there a few times before. "She had a medical profile, she had a chart there," Dominique said.
An hour later, Dominique got a call from a staff member. "I think its complacency. I think its neglect," she said.
Dominique says a nurse mistakenly gave Alicia a drug, designed to slow the absorption of food, via a central line to her heart rather than through Alicia's feeding tube. "For something so stupid and so menial to take her when I put her in what were said to be the best hands, I feel like I let her down," Dominique said.
Dominique says she knows her daughter's death wasn't intentional, but for the sake of other kids and their families, she says she can't move on until she knows that protocol at the facility will always be followed. "I do know that someone has to take responsibility for this, and that something will change there so that this doesn't happen again," she said.
Recently, Alicia was doing so well, her mom says she was starting to try to walk and talk and a doctor decided just Tuesday her medications could be cut in half.
Attempts to resuscitate Alicia went on for more than an hour Saturday at both the child care facility and Children's Hospital. Dominique says doctors even called both poison control and the drug's manufacturer to try to help her daughter.
Children's Hospital isn't saying if the employee involved could face disciplinary action. Instead, the hospital released a statement. It reads:
A multidisciplinary team met Sunday morning at Children's Hospital & Medical Center and believes human error led to Saturday's accidental death of a 19-month-old child at Children's Home Healthcare's World, a respite care facility for children with complex medical needs operated by the hospital. Medication was improperly routed into the child's system causing a seizure. Attempts to resuscitate the child at Children's Home Healthcare's World and in the Children's Emergency Department were not successful.
Children's Hospital & Medical Center and Children's Home Healthcare's World share deepest condolences with the child's family. Words fail us at a time like this. Nothing can adequately express the sadness surrounding the loss of a child.
-- Children's Hospital & Medical Center
http://www.kptm.com/Global/story.asp?S=12568500
Posted: May 30, 2010 08:59 PM
Updated: May 30, 2010 11:38 PM
Video Gallery <1>
Medication Mistake Kills Toddler at Hospital-Ran Care Facility
2:57
Meghan Youker
OMAHA (KPTM) -- Children's Hospital & Medical Center believes human error led to the accidental death of a 19-month-old girl. Alicia Coleman had a seizure and went into cardiac arrest Saturday morning after medication was improperly routed into her system.
It happened at a respite care facility for children with complex medical needs that is run by the hospital.
"She was like the pure example of perseverance and attitude," said Alicia's mom, Dominique Coleman.
A toddler's room now sits quiet and empty. "I'm upset, but I'm so happy that I got 19 months with her, because through all the struggle, it was so worth it," Dominique said.
Born twelve weeks premature, Alicia battled a gastrointestinal disorder known as NEC, but had been improving. "I knew I had a fragile child, but she fought through 15 surgeries, and almost a year in the hospital, and infections and sickness and pneumonia and liver disease and everything and she's come back from it all," Dominique said.
Saturday morning on her way to work, Dominique dropped her daughter off at Children's Home Healthcare's World, near 78th and Farnam.
Though Alicia was primarily cared for by nurses in her home, she had been there a few times before. "She had a medical profile, she had a chart there," Dominique said.
An hour later, Dominique got a call from a staff member. "I think its complacency. I think its neglect," she said.
Dominique says a nurse mistakenly gave Alicia a drug, designed to slow the absorption of food, via a central line to her heart rather than through Alicia's feeding tube. "For something so stupid and so menial to take her when I put her in what were said to be the best hands, I feel like I let her down," Dominique said.
Dominique says she knows her daughter's death wasn't intentional, but for the sake of other kids and their families, she says she can't move on until she knows that protocol at the facility will always be followed. "I do know that someone has to take responsibility for this, and that something will change there so that this doesn't happen again," she said.
Recently, Alicia was doing so well, her mom says she was starting to try to walk and talk and a doctor decided just Tuesday her medications could be cut in half.
Attempts to resuscitate Alicia went on for more than an hour Saturday at both the child care facility and Children's Hospital. Dominique says doctors even called both poison control and the drug's manufacturer to try to help her daughter.
Children's Hospital isn't saying if the employee involved could face disciplinary action. Instead, the hospital released a statement. It reads:
A multidisciplinary team met Sunday morning at Children's Hospital & Medical Center and believes human error led to Saturday's accidental death of a 19-month-old child at Children's Home Healthcare's World, a respite care facility for children with complex medical needs operated by the hospital. Medication was improperly routed into the child's system causing a seizure. Attempts to resuscitate the child at Children's Home Healthcare's World and in the Children's Emergency Department were not successful.
Children's Hospital & Medical Center and Children's Home Healthcare's World share deepest condolences with the child's family. Words fail us at a time like this. Nothing can adequately express the sadness surrounding the loss of a child.
-- Children's Hospital & Medical Center
http://www.kptm.com/Global/story.asp?S=12568500
Morinville foster mother charged with second-degree murder 21-month-old girl died after two days in coma
Morinville foster mother charged with second-degree murder
21-month-old girl died after two days in coma
BY BEN GELINAS AND PAULA SIMONS, EDMONTONJOURNAL.COM MAY 31, 2010 4:06 PM
Pallbearers bring out the casket after the funeral mass at Edmonton's Sacred Heart Church of the First Peoples of a 21 month old girl, who died in foster care.
Photograph by: John Lucas, edmontonjournal.com
EDMONTON — A Morinville foster mother has been charged with the murder of a toddler in her care.
Christine Laverdiere, 34, appeared briefly in an Edmonton courtroom Monday, charged by RCMP with one count of second-degree murder in the killing of a 21-month-old girl who cannot be named under the province’s Child, Youth, and Family Enhancement Act.
The little girl’s biological family told The Journal she was taken from her mentally-ill mother and placed in foster care toward the end of January. Laverdiere was her primary foster parent when the girl was admitted to the Stollery on March 1 with unknown injuries. She died two days later.
Trevor Coulombe, who speaks Alberta’s department of children and youth services, says the woman, who appeared briefly in an Edmonton docket court Monday morning, was the girl’s primary foster mother.
But Coulombe declined to say how long the child had been living with the foster family, how long the family had been fostering, or whether there were other children living in the home.
“I can’t speak to case specifics,” Coulombe said.
Under the terms of the province’s Child, Youth, and Family Enhancement Act, the media is prevented from releasing details that could serve to identify a child in the care of Children and Youth Services.
Sources said at the time that the girl had been shuttled between her regular foster home and a second “respite” home in the days before she was hospitalized, meaning she was in the care of three different sets of adults right before she died.
Laverdiere, who is currently being held in custody without bail, will have her next court appearance in Morinville.
bgelinas@thejournal.canwest.com
psimons@thejournal.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Alberta+foster+mother+charged+with+second+degree+murder/3092489/story.html#ixzz0pYJojmn3
21-month-old girl died after two days in coma
BY BEN GELINAS AND PAULA SIMONS, EDMONTONJOURNAL.COM MAY 31, 2010 4:06 PM
Pallbearers bring out the casket after the funeral mass at Edmonton's Sacred Heart Church of the First Peoples of a 21 month old girl, who died in foster care.
Photograph by: John Lucas, edmontonjournal.com
EDMONTON — A Morinville foster mother has been charged with the murder of a toddler in her care.
Christine Laverdiere, 34, appeared briefly in an Edmonton courtroom Monday, charged by RCMP with one count of second-degree murder in the killing of a 21-month-old girl who cannot be named under the province’s Child, Youth, and Family Enhancement Act.
The little girl’s biological family told The Journal she was taken from her mentally-ill mother and placed in foster care toward the end of January. Laverdiere was her primary foster parent when the girl was admitted to the Stollery on March 1 with unknown injuries. She died two days later.
Trevor Coulombe, who speaks Alberta’s department of children and youth services, says the woman, who appeared briefly in an Edmonton docket court Monday morning, was the girl’s primary foster mother.
But Coulombe declined to say how long the child had been living with the foster family, how long the family had been fostering, or whether there were other children living in the home.
“I can’t speak to case specifics,” Coulombe said.
Under the terms of the province’s Child, Youth, and Family Enhancement Act, the media is prevented from releasing details that could serve to identify a child in the care of Children and Youth Services.
Sources said at the time that the girl had been shuttled between her regular foster home and a second “respite” home in the days before she was hospitalized, meaning she was in the care of three different sets of adults right before she died.
Laverdiere, who is currently being held in custody without bail, will have her next court appearance in Morinville.
bgelinas@thejournal.canwest.com
psimons@thejournal.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Alberta+foster+mother+charged+with+second+degree+murder/3092489/story.html#ixzz0pYJojmn3
Nancy Schaefer "The Unlimited Power of Child Protective Services" (Part 2 of 2).flv
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y73nFp0Y19c
Federal class action suit filed against Clark County (Las Vegas) child welfare system
Federal class action suit filed against Clark County (Las Vegas) child welfare system
Posted on April 16, 2010 by prairieguy
By Steve Kanigher Wednesday, April 14, 2010 | 12:03 p.m.
A federal class action lawsuit filed Tuesday night in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas accuses state and Clark County officials of overseeing a child welfare system that violates state and federal law.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of 13 children by the National Center for Youth Law in Oakland, Calif., named as defendants Nevada Department of Health and Human Services Director Michael Willden, Nevada Division of Child and Family Services Administrator Diane Comeaux, Clark County Manager Virginia Valentine and Clark County Department of Family Services Director Tom Morton.
Those officials are accused of showing “deliberate indifference to the health and safety of the children [they are] obligated to protect.” In addition to seeking unspecified damages for the child plaintiffs, the lawsuit demands system improvements for several classes of children in foster care.
Clark County spokesman Erik Pappa said today: “We’re not commenting because we haven’t had a chance to review it.”
Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Ben Kieckhefer likewise said: “We haven’t been served yet and we can’t comment until we’ve had a chance to review it with our attorneys.”
The lawsuit alleges countless instances of blatant disregard of federal and state law, substandard judgment, neglect and active indifference on the part of child welfare officials and caseworkers. Those individuals were accused of perpetuating abuse by routinely denying foster children stability, health care, and, in many cases, even the most minimal level of safety. In fact, many children are taken from their homes only to be subjected to further abuse, including physical, sexual, or psychological abuse, while in the county’s custody, the lawsuit says.
In one cited example, defendants allegedly placed an infant and her older brother in a foster home where the baby was locked in a closet, and her brother was beaten when he tried to help her. Another plaintiff, now 17, has been in foster care for 15 years and has been shuttled through 40 placements.
The youth law center stated that since 2003, more than 10 studies and reports have documented the defendants’ failure to protect the health, safety and well being of child abuse victims and children in foster care.
Other law firms representing the plaintiffs include Morrison & Foerster LLP, an international, 1,000-lawyer firm with offices in 16 cities, including San Francisco, and Wolfenzon Schulman & Ryan, with offices in Las Vegas, Reno and San Diego.
The youth law center previously sued to reform the child welfare system in Nevada on behalf of different plaintiffs and a different class. The last suit, filed in 2006, was dismissed last year after the federal court declined to certify the class, and all the plaintiffs had either aged out of the system or been adopted.
The center is renewing its efforts for current and future foster care children who it says will continue to suffer until state and county child welfare officials make changes to ensure the safety and well-being of children in their custody.
“Our hope is that going forward, the county and state will commit its time and resources to addressing the needs of children in its care,” says youth law center attorney Bryn Martyna.
The law center said that many of the problems cited in its initial lawsuit persist or have worsened. A 2009 review of Nevada’s child welfare system by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services found the state did not meet federal standards for child safety, staff and caregiver training, and children’s physical and mental health, among others.
Among the allegations in the lawsuit:
• Many caseworkers lack even the most rudimentary training, have no supervision, and carry exceedingly high caseloads, resulting in serious injury to children.
• Children are routinely denied mental health, medical, early intervention and special education services.
• Children as young as 7 are prescribed powerful psychotropic drugs, sometimes in combination, without adequate monitoring. Most of the drugs are not approved for use in children. One child named in the suit was twice hospitalized in the ICU for near organ failure due to an overdose of such drugs.
• Caseworkers regularly fail to visit children in their placements.
• Supervisors and caseworkers often “turn a deaf ear” to reports of abuse and neglect in foster care, allowing children to endure further abuse.
• Children sent to out-of-state placements are essentially written off by defendants, who fail to evaluate or monitor such placements, allowing children to suffer further abuse and neglect.
The lawsuit is also demanding that the state and county agencies develop case plans that contain the information foster parents need to properly care for the children in their care, provide representatives for children in court as required under both Nevada and federal law, and provide early intervention services for foster children.
“If defendants’ unconstitutional and unlawful actions and omissions are not halted, many more children will be harmed,” said youth law center attorney Bill Grimm, lead counsel on the case. “And another generation of children will suffer untold misery in the form of abuse, instability and absence of a loving family. Some will suffer irreparable injury or even death, and others will leave the foster care system ill-prepared to live healthy, independent, and productive lives.”
http://prairieguy.wordpress.com/
Posted on April 16, 2010 by prairieguy
By Steve Kanigher Wednesday, April 14, 2010 | 12:03 p.m.
A federal class action lawsuit filed Tuesday night in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas accuses state and Clark County officials of overseeing a child welfare system that violates state and federal law.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of 13 children by the National Center for Youth Law in Oakland, Calif., named as defendants Nevada Department of Health and Human Services Director Michael Willden, Nevada Division of Child and Family Services Administrator Diane Comeaux, Clark County Manager Virginia Valentine and Clark County Department of Family Services Director Tom Morton.
Those officials are accused of showing “deliberate indifference to the health and safety of the children [they are] obligated to protect.” In addition to seeking unspecified damages for the child plaintiffs, the lawsuit demands system improvements for several classes of children in foster care.
Clark County spokesman Erik Pappa said today: “We’re not commenting because we haven’t had a chance to review it.”
Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Ben Kieckhefer likewise said: “We haven’t been served yet and we can’t comment until we’ve had a chance to review it with our attorneys.”
The lawsuit alleges countless instances of blatant disregard of federal and state law, substandard judgment, neglect and active indifference on the part of child welfare officials and caseworkers. Those individuals were accused of perpetuating abuse by routinely denying foster children stability, health care, and, in many cases, even the most minimal level of safety. In fact, many children are taken from their homes only to be subjected to further abuse, including physical, sexual, or psychological abuse, while in the county’s custody, the lawsuit says.
In one cited example, defendants allegedly placed an infant and her older brother in a foster home where the baby was locked in a closet, and her brother was beaten when he tried to help her. Another plaintiff, now 17, has been in foster care for 15 years and has been shuttled through 40 placements.
The youth law center stated that since 2003, more than 10 studies and reports have documented the defendants’ failure to protect the health, safety and well being of child abuse victims and children in foster care.
Other law firms representing the plaintiffs include Morrison & Foerster LLP, an international, 1,000-lawyer firm with offices in 16 cities, including San Francisco, and Wolfenzon Schulman & Ryan, with offices in Las Vegas, Reno and San Diego.
The youth law center previously sued to reform the child welfare system in Nevada on behalf of different plaintiffs and a different class. The last suit, filed in 2006, was dismissed last year after the federal court declined to certify the class, and all the plaintiffs had either aged out of the system or been adopted.
The center is renewing its efforts for current and future foster care children who it says will continue to suffer until state and county child welfare officials make changes to ensure the safety and well-being of children in their custody.
“Our hope is that going forward, the county and state will commit its time and resources to addressing the needs of children in its care,” says youth law center attorney Bryn Martyna.
The law center said that many of the problems cited in its initial lawsuit persist or have worsened. A 2009 review of Nevada’s child welfare system by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services found the state did not meet federal standards for child safety, staff and caregiver training, and children’s physical and mental health, among others.
Among the allegations in the lawsuit:
• Many caseworkers lack even the most rudimentary training, have no supervision, and carry exceedingly high caseloads, resulting in serious injury to children.
• Children are routinely denied mental health, medical, early intervention and special education services.
• Children as young as 7 are prescribed powerful psychotropic drugs, sometimes in combination, without adequate monitoring. Most of the drugs are not approved for use in children. One child named in the suit was twice hospitalized in the ICU for near organ failure due to an overdose of such drugs.
• Caseworkers regularly fail to visit children in their placements.
• Supervisors and caseworkers often “turn a deaf ear” to reports of abuse and neglect in foster care, allowing children to endure further abuse.
• Children sent to out-of-state placements are essentially written off by defendants, who fail to evaluate or monitor such placements, allowing children to suffer further abuse and neglect.
The lawsuit is also demanding that the state and county agencies develop case plans that contain the information foster parents need to properly care for the children in their care, provide representatives for children in court as required under both Nevada and federal law, and provide early intervention services for foster children.
“If defendants’ unconstitutional and unlawful actions and omissions are not halted, many more children will be harmed,” said youth law center attorney Bill Grimm, lead counsel on the case. “And another generation of children will suffer untold misery in the form of abuse, instability and absence of a loving family. Some will suffer irreparable injury or even death, and others will leave the foster care system ill-prepared to live healthy, independent, and productive lives.”
http://prairieguy.wordpress.com/
A Letter to Judge E. Kelly-Nashua, NH District Court
Dear Judge Kelly, I decided to write to you after reading a letter you wrote back to Paula Werme in response to her letter, written to you in regards to an excerpt taken out of the NH DCYF Court and Legal Handbook.
Paula's letter and your response:
September 8, 1999
The Honorable Edwin Kelly
Administrative Office of the Courts
PO Box 389
Concord, NH 03302-0389
Re: RSA 91-A Right to Know Request
Dear Judge Kelly,
I am enclosing for your review a copy of my web page, which quotes DCYF Policy Directive 86-26, and a copy of Rogers Lang's answer to my 1987 Right to Know regarding that policy.
Specifically, I would like to refer you to the last two paragraphs quoted from pp. 9 - 10 of the Court and legal handbook (copies of the actual handbook included for reference). Regarding DCYF's policies on district offices of meeting with judges "to become familiar with each other" and meetings "to discuss mutual concerns or resolve any problems which may arise," please answer the following questions:
Have you personally ever met with people from DCYF privately outside the courtroom for any reason, or to "to discuss mutual concerns or resolve any problems which may arise?"
If the answer to the above question is "yes," please, to the best of your ability, and using any calendars that the Court keeps for your business schedule, list the dates and times of said meetings, the names of the people involved in such meetings, and the subject matter discussed in such meetings.
Have you ever attended a meeting with than one judge (i.e. "as a group") with any DCYF personnel for purposes of advising judges on changes in the law that affect the Division, for statistical review of the Division's manpower and caseload, to discuss various differences between the courts, for purposes of standardizing those differences or to discuss any other issues?
If so, please to the best of your ability, and using any calendars that the Court keeps for your business schedule, list the dates and times of said meetings, the names of the people involved in such meetings, and the subject matter discussed in such meetings.
Do you know of any other judges in the District courts who have had individual meetings with DCYF personnel or supervisors "to discuss mutual concerns" or meetings "as a group" for purposes listed in question #3?
If the answer to question # 3 is "yes," please indicate all of the judges you personally know of who have had these types of meetings with DCYF personnel, the dates of such meetings, the names of the people who attended such meetings, and to the best of your ability and knowledge, the substance of said meetings.
For any meetings previously requested, if an itinerary or notes or minutes of said meetings were kept, please forward those itineraries or notes or minutes to me as well.
I thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Paula J. Werme, Esq.
Cc: File
Ned Gordon, Chair Person
DCYF Field Practices Study Committee
NH Senate Judiciary Committee
I numbered the requests above because that makes it harder for a request to be missed. Nevertheless, the reply I received completely ignores most of the above:
September 16, 1999
Dear Attorney Werme,
I have received your letter dated September 8, 1999.
It is our general policy in the District Court System to encourage judges and clerks to meet regularly with a wide variety of users of the judicial system. Meetings occur with representatives of the Division for Children, Youth, and Families, as well as with the law enforcement community, the defense and civil bar, and others. These meetings are designed to encourage the more effective administration of justice. Topics such as caseflow management and other general administrative issues are routine, while discussions about pending matters are forbidden.
Very truly yours,
Edwin W. Kelly
Administrative Judge
Even though you answered Paula's letter in a round about way, your answer showed that the courts are indeed bias. Judges meet with representatives of DCYF as well as with law enforcement the defense, civil bar and other's. I am quite sure the OTHER's are not parents and relatives of children removed by DCYF. Do you really expect anyone to believe this protocol is fair to parents and relatives? DCYF worker's have stated to me in the past, the Judges only listen to them. Is this because you meet with them on a regular basis? Because you and DCYF discuss these cases beforehand? Are you all that sure that you can trust these people? What about these families that you know nothing about? Why do the Judges only listen to them? Why do parents not even get the chance to speak up in court when they are being downgraded by DCYF? Why are they subjected to a courtroom filled with hateful accuser's,with accusations being thrown at them from every side, with no-one there for moral support? Why are they given court-appointed Lawyer's, who admit the Court is their boss, when the Lawyer is asked why he wouldn't stand by or fight for his client? Does this sound like a fair justice system to you? How would this kind of courtroom antics make you feel if you weren't a Judge? If you had to sit and listen to a courtroom filled with people berating you, with no-one to stand by you to stick up for your rights, with no-one there to tell the TRUTH? Would you stand by and put up with the lies? How would you feel if your child was taken due to Perjury committed by a DCYF Lawyer, without the need to show any proof of the false allegation? Would you care if your family were slandered to make sure they weren't allowed custody of your child? How would you feel if all your records were not received by the court? Records that weren't even court-ordered that prove your innocence? Records that finally turn up, but are still NOT admitted into evidence? Would it matter to you at all if you saw all the lies in your files after your child was stolen, without an investigation? What would you do if this happened to you?
For your information, DCYF does not walk on water and they are no better than the rest of us. In fact, they are worse. They have NO conscience and feel NO compassion or remorse. All they feel is a sense of power, because our government has made them accountable to no-one. Not even Judges. Are you aware that parents are told it's up to them if their child is returned, not the Judge? Are you aware that parent's are told the Judge has no say? That parent's are told their rights WILL be terminated, even at the beginning of a case? That criminal charges are dropped, when the parent has been found to not be at fault, yet the children are still never returned, because the family system shows less regard for the law than the rights afforded a criminal. Criminals have more rights than accused parents.
Are you aware that Nashua caseworker's state TPR's are always lost by parents in NH? Are you also aware that these caseworker's state TPR's are never reversed by the NH Supreme Court? Are you aware that Probate Judges write the opposite of testimony and proof when terminating a parents rights in NH?
Is money all that important? Is it worth causing a child and his falsely accused family, a lifetime full of pain? Is it a good enough reason to make a child try to commit suicide and be put on mind altering drugs?
Judge Kelly, you have the power to change the way DCYF works. You know first hand what they are capable of. Will you ever do anything to stop it?
Please see attached picture of my grandson Austin Knightly-doped up by Nashua DCYF.
Paula's letter and your response:
September 8, 1999
The Honorable Edwin Kelly
Administrative Office of the Courts
PO Box 389
Concord, NH 03302-0389
Re: RSA 91-A Right to Know Request
Dear Judge Kelly,
I am enclosing for your review a copy of my web page, which quotes DCYF Policy Directive 86-26, and a copy of Rogers Lang's answer to my 1987 Right to Know regarding that policy.
Specifically, I would like to refer you to the last two paragraphs quoted from pp. 9 - 10 of the Court and legal handbook (copies of the actual handbook included for reference). Regarding DCYF's policies on district offices of meeting with judges "to become familiar with each other" and meetings "to discuss mutual concerns or resolve any problems which may arise," please answer the following questions:
Have you personally ever met with people from DCYF privately outside the courtroom for any reason, or to "to discuss mutual concerns or resolve any problems which may arise?"
If the answer to the above question is "yes," please, to the best of your ability, and using any calendars that the Court keeps for your business schedule, list the dates and times of said meetings, the names of the people involved in such meetings, and the subject matter discussed in such meetings.
Have you ever attended a meeting with than one judge (i.e. "as a group") with any DCYF personnel for purposes of advising judges on changes in the law that affect the Division, for statistical review of the Division's manpower and caseload, to discuss various differences between the courts, for purposes of standardizing those differences or to discuss any other issues?
If so, please to the best of your ability, and using any calendars that the Court keeps for your business schedule, list the dates and times of said meetings, the names of the people involved in such meetings, and the subject matter discussed in such meetings.
Do you know of any other judges in the District courts who have had individual meetings with DCYF personnel or supervisors "to discuss mutual concerns" or meetings "as a group" for purposes listed in question #3?
If the answer to question # 3 is "yes," please indicate all of the judges you personally know of who have had these types of meetings with DCYF personnel, the dates of such meetings, the names of the people who attended such meetings, and to the best of your ability and knowledge, the substance of said meetings.
For any meetings previously requested, if an itinerary or notes or minutes of said meetings were kept, please forward those itineraries or notes or minutes to me as well.
I thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Paula J. Werme, Esq.
Cc: File
Ned Gordon, Chair Person
DCYF Field Practices Study Committee
NH Senate Judiciary Committee
I numbered the requests above because that makes it harder for a request to be missed. Nevertheless, the reply I received completely ignores most of the above:
September 16, 1999
Dear Attorney Werme,
I have received your letter dated September 8, 1999.
It is our general policy in the District Court System to encourage judges and clerks to meet regularly with a wide variety of users of the judicial system. Meetings occur with representatives of the Division for Children, Youth, and Families, as well as with the law enforcement community, the defense and civil bar, and others. These meetings are designed to encourage the more effective administration of justice. Topics such as caseflow management and other general administrative issues are routine, while discussions about pending matters are forbidden.
Very truly yours,
Edwin W. Kelly
Administrative Judge
Even though you answered Paula's letter in a round about way, your answer showed that the courts are indeed bias. Judges meet with representatives of DCYF as well as with law enforcement the defense, civil bar and other's. I am quite sure the OTHER's are not parents and relatives of children removed by DCYF. Do you really expect anyone to believe this protocol is fair to parents and relatives? DCYF worker's have stated to me in the past, the Judges only listen to them. Is this because you meet with them on a regular basis? Because you and DCYF discuss these cases beforehand? Are you all that sure that you can trust these people? What about these families that you know nothing about? Why do the Judges only listen to them? Why do parents not even get the chance to speak up in court when they are being downgraded by DCYF? Why are they subjected to a courtroom filled with hateful accuser's,with accusations being thrown at them from every side, with no-one there for moral support? Why are they given court-appointed Lawyer's, who admit the Court is their boss, when the Lawyer is asked why he wouldn't stand by or fight for his client? Does this sound like a fair justice system to you? How would this kind of courtroom antics make you feel if you weren't a Judge? If you had to sit and listen to a courtroom filled with people berating you, with no-one to stand by you to stick up for your rights, with no-one there to tell the TRUTH? Would you stand by and put up with the lies? How would you feel if your child was taken due to Perjury committed by a DCYF Lawyer, without the need to show any proof of the false allegation? Would you care if your family were slandered to make sure they weren't allowed custody of your child? How would you feel if all your records were not received by the court? Records that weren't even court-ordered that prove your innocence? Records that finally turn up, but are still NOT admitted into evidence? Would it matter to you at all if you saw all the lies in your files after your child was stolen, without an investigation? What would you do if this happened to you?
For your information, DCYF does not walk on water and they are no better than the rest of us. In fact, they are worse. They have NO conscience and feel NO compassion or remorse. All they feel is a sense of power, because our government has made them accountable to no-one. Not even Judges. Are you aware that parents are told it's up to them if their child is returned, not the Judge? Are you aware that parent's are told the Judge has no say? That parent's are told their rights WILL be terminated, even at the beginning of a case? That criminal charges are dropped, when the parent has been found to not be at fault, yet the children are still never returned, because the family system shows less regard for the law than the rights afforded a criminal. Criminals have more rights than accused parents.
Are you aware that Nashua caseworker's state TPR's are always lost by parents in NH? Are you also aware that these caseworker's state TPR's are never reversed by the NH Supreme Court? Are you aware that Probate Judges write the opposite of testimony and proof when terminating a parents rights in NH?
Is money all that important? Is it worth causing a child and his falsely accused family, a lifetime full of pain? Is it a good enough reason to make a child try to commit suicide and be put on mind altering drugs?
Judge Kelly, you have the power to change the way DCYF works. You know first hand what they are capable of. Will you ever do anything to stop it?
Please see attached picture of my grandson Austin Knightly-doped up by Nashua DCYF.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Regarding Child Protective Services-A Few Tips
SATURDAY, MAY 29, 2010
Parental Rights II Blogspot
Regarding Child Protective Services-A Few Tips
Please think strongly before acting on what I have listed here. Although I have found these to be true in ours and many other family cases, please think carefully about the decisions you make on behalf of your family
Do not allow them into your home. This also pretains to them asking questions about another family, (they will probably be back to visit you!)
Do not, I mean Do Not talk to them at all if you can help it.
That especially means 'answering their questions.' Case Workers and Investigators are trained by "change agents" if necessary, look that up! Watch for open ended questions! Trust me when they interview, every single question is a trick question.
Tell them that you will talk to them only with your attorney present. They will ask why you feel like you need an attorney? It's none of their damn business! Don't talk to them, you can do this at the same time being polite
Any words they hear from you, anything you say will be twisted around and used against you.
They may suggest a voluntary family preservation plan.
Do not do it and do not sign anything! Do not sign a thing!
Continue to tell them that they are making you feel violated! They will and they could care less but stick with it because the Constititution is still in place until or if the UNCRC is ratified!
If you volunteer to attend visits to their service providers then it will look like a sign of guilt. If you are innocent don't do it!
You will very soon learn that these services are not voluntary! Also more cases than none, rhe Judge doesn't even know they are speaking to you or anything about you, YET!
At that time you may be or feel threatened. Then you will understand why you need to take notes, record, video!
Family Preservation is a well planned strategic tactic that they will use to obtain enough information to build a case on you with.
I have known of several incidents where Service providers have told Parents one thing and if CPS wasnt satisfied with their decision, they would place a phone call and the Providers would totally change their opinions.
If you are ever involved with CPS you must fight back with every single thing you have!
No matter what they tell you or no matter what you think, they are not your friends!They are trained ny the "change agents" if you looked this up, also type in the word communism and see what you get or how about brainwashing. Bt the way, our public teacher are trained by change agents. I can get very deep into that subject!
If you can afford an attorney, go out and hire one right away that has and will go up against them and is not afraid to win. Some winning attorneys have been retaliated against by CPS and their own children were taken away! If you don't have the funds for an attorney try the LOCAL LEGAL "SOCIETY",do not allow the court to appoint you a punlic defender. Use your best judgement because the main thing is that you don't want your kids to be under the court or CPS control period.
Instruct your children, depending on age, that they do not have to answer any questions! They will go to your childs chool and speak to your kids!
Find a support network of others who have been there.
There is an incentive behind baby stealing and selling, also called "child trafficking"
Money
The Awesome State Power, as our Juvenile Court Judge calls it.
Accountability.
Your Family Could Be Next!
The NCJFCJ have been fighting for the UNCRC to be Ratified for approx. 10 years.
What will these Judges gain? More power and control over us and our children.
Juvenile and Family Courts collaborate with DFCS.
Never, Ever Trust DFCS!
CPS should have a warrent to come into your home or take your children. If they feel or say the child is in iminent danger they will go ahead and take the child anyway and it's a little hard to say no to two huge police officers.
Children have been taken into CPS custody at school!
LEARN! I cannot stress this enough! Learn their manuels, policies and procedures.
Record!!!! You really don't think that they carry two cell phone do you?
Take notes of every single thing, I don't care if you have to do it right in front of them. I mean get dates, names, exact words, times, emotions you say or felt from them and yourself, get all details.Get a video recorder, turn it on and say,"You don't mind if I record our meeting do you?"
There is a lot more to know that will shock you! They seem smart but apparently they are not that smart. People who feel they are in control, power, greed, competition, strict guidelines to follow, eventually get careless. Sometimes they abuse their power so much that they don't even care if they are careless.
Family team meetings, be on your guard because they have special training by FTM Facilitators and you will be revealing things to them without realizing it. Trickery my friends! That is a real word also!
Attorneys have standards and ethics to follow. When they do not, they may get a slap on the hand or they could be disbared or even face criminal charges. Educate yourself! Be on Guard!
Please feel free to follow Parental Rights II
"Their secrets are being exposed not only in the US but around the world and they all must be held accountable!"
http://parentalrights2.blogspot.com/2010/05/regarding-child-protective-services-few.html
Parental Rights II Blogspot
Regarding Child Protective Services-A Few Tips
Please think strongly before acting on what I have listed here. Although I have found these to be true in ours and many other family cases, please think carefully about the decisions you make on behalf of your family
Do not allow them into your home. This also pretains to them asking questions about another family, (they will probably be back to visit you!)
Do not, I mean Do Not talk to them at all if you can help it.
That especially means 'answering their questions.' Case Workers and Investigators are trained by "change agents" if necessary, look that up! Watch for open ended questions! Trust me when they interview, every single question is a trick question.
Tell them that you will talk to them only with your attorney present. They will ask why you feel like you need an attorney? It's none of their damn business! Don't talk to them, you can do this at the same time being polite
Any words they hear from you, anything you say will be twisted around and used against you.
They may suggest a voluntary family preservation plan.
Do not do it and do not sign anything! Do not sign a thing!
Continue to tell them that they are making you feel violated! They will and they could care less but stick with it because the Constititution is still in place until or if the UNCRC is ratified!
If you volunteer to attend visits to their service providers then it will look like a sign of guilt. If you are innocent don't do it!
You will very soon learn that these services are not voluntary! Also more cases than none, rhe Judge doesn't even know they are speaking to you or anything about you, YET!
At that time you may be or feel threatened. Then you will understand why you need to take notes, record, video!
Family Preservation is a well planned strategic tactic that they will use to obtain enough information to build a case on you with.
I have known of several incidents where Service providers have told Parents one thing and if CPS wasnt satisfied with their decision, they would place a phone call and the Providers would totally change their opinions.
If you are ever involved with CPS you must fight back with every single thing you have!
No matter what they tell you or no matter what you think, they are not your friends!They are trained ny the "change agents" if you looked this up, also type in the word communism and see what you get or how about brainwashing. Bt the way, our public teacher are trained by change agents. I can get very deep into that subject!
If you can afford an attorney, go out and hire one right away that has and will go up against them and is not afraid to win. Some winning attorneys have been retaliated against by CPS and their own children were taken away! If you don't have the funds for an attorney try the LOCAL LEGAL "SOCIETY",do not allow the court to appoint you a punlic defender. Use your best judgement because the main thing is that you don't want your kids to be under the court or CPS control period.
Instruct your children, depending on age, that they do not have to answer any questions! They will go to your childs chool and speak to your kids!
Find a support network of others who have been there.
There is an incentive behind baby stealing and selling, also called "child trafficking"
Money
The Awesome State Power, as our Juvenile Court Judge calls it.
Accountability.
Your Family Could Be Next!
The NCJFCJ have been fighting for the UNCRC to be Ratified for approx. 10 years.
What will these Judges gain? More power and control over us and our children.
Juvenile and Family Courts collaborate with DFCS.
Never, Ever Trust DFCS!
CPS should have a warrent to come into your home or take your children. If they feel or say the child is in iminent danger they will go ahead and take the child anyway and it's a little hard to say no to two huge police officers.
Children have been taken into CPS custody at school!
LEARN! I cannot stress this enough! Learn their manuels, policies and procedures.
Record!!!! You really don't think that they carry two cell phone do you?
Take notes of every single thing, I don't care if you have to do it right in front of them. I mean get dates, names, exact words, times, emotions you say or felt from them and yourself, get all details.Get a video recorder, turn it on and say,"You don't mind if I record our meeting do you?"
There is a lot more to know that will shock you! They seem smart but apparently they are not that smart. People who feel they are in control, power, greed, competition, strict guidelines to follow, eventually get careless. Sometimes they abuse their power so much that they don't even care if they are careless.
Family team meetings, be on your guard because they have special training by FTM Facilitators and you will be revealing things to them without realizing it. Trickery my friends! That is a real word also!
Attorneys have standards and ethics to follow. When they do not, they may get a slap on the hand or they could be disbared or even face criminal charges. Educate yourself! Be on Guard!
Please feel free to follow Parental Rights II
"Their secrets are being exposed not only in the US but around the world and they all must be held accountable!"
http://parentalrights2.blogspot.com/2010/05/regarding-child-protective-services-few.html
The Fight of My LIfe
Parental Rights II Blogspot
Aimea Marie Groce born February 13th, 2009 was taken from her mothers arms two days after birth after the baby allegedly tested positive after birth for drugs. This month [May] Judge Key will decide Aimea and Katie's fate. Please pray for them. ;
UPDATE: Katie told her court appointed attorney to demand a continuance because he was not prepared, so did I. He must have been under the gun somehow because he sreamed in my face, "WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO DO?" That shocked me, I mean it truley frieghtened me, although I tried not to let it show. I said " Don't you yell at me, how dare you?" We went in the courtroom and I could feel it in the air...she's here! I was never allowed in the courtroom before and now that the law states they are to be open unless good reason to close, I walked right in and sat behind my daughter. Her Lawyer soon returned and told Katie that he had spoken with the SAAG and was denied a continuance. Well I know that the SAAG is the Attorney for CPS (DFCS) and I have always been under the impression that a continuance would be something to ask the judge for. That was never brought up. This Attorney helped Katie to lose her parental Rights to Mimi! Part of his duties to his clients is to make sure and leave something on the record so that the ruling might be appealable. Wonder how he could have done it if he wanted to, he didn't know anything about my daughters current situation and obviously any of the past since he was appointed to her in Feb., 2009.
Katie's Rights to Aimea were terminated that day. May 18th, 2010. She is now, forever changed!
Families are being torn apart left and right. My late husband was an attorney who practiced law for almost 30 years. I'm so glad he isn't here today to see how corrupt his collegues have become. Never in a million years would I have ever dreamed things would be like they are. It is a fact though and we can either sit back and allow this to continue or we can band together and demand change! One lawsuit won't do it! One hundred lawsuits won't do it! To bring down this empire of corruption it will take us all pulling together by county, by state! There IS power in numbers.
http://parentalrights2.blogspot.com/2010/05/regarding-child-protective-services-few.html
Aimea Marie Groce born February 13th, 2009 was taken from her mothers arms two days after birth after the baby allegedly tested positive after birth for drugs. This month [May] Judge Key will decide Aimea and Katie's fate. Please pray for them. ;
UPDATE: Katie told her court appointed attorney to demand a continuance because he was not prepared, so did I. He must have been under the gun somehow because he sreamed in my face, "WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO DO?" That shocked me, I mean it truley frieghtened me, although I tried not to let it show. I said " Don't you yell at me, how dare you?" We went in the courtroom and I could feel it in the air...she's here! I was never allowed in the courtroom before and now that the law states they are to be open unless good reason to close, I walked right in and sat behind my daughter. Her Lawyer soon returned and told Katie that he had spoken with the SAAG and was denied a continuance. Well I know that the SAAG is the Attorney for CPS (DFCS) and I have always been under the impression that a continuance would be something to ask the judge for. That was never brought up. This Attorney helped Katie to lose her parental Rights to Mimi! Part of his duties to his clients is to make sure and leave something on the record so that the ruling might be appealable. Wonder how he could have done it if he wanted to, he didn't know anything about my daughters current situation and obviously any of the past since he was appointed to her in Feb., 2009.
Katie's Rights to Aimea were terminated that day. May 18th, 2010. She is now, forever changed!
Families are being torn apart left and right. My late husband was an attorney who practiced law for almost 30 years. I'm so glad he isn't here today to see how corrupt his collegues have become. Never in a million years would I have ever dreamed things would be like they are. It is a fact though and we can either sit back and allow this to continue or we can band together and demand change! One lawsuit won't do it! One hundred lawsuits won't do it! To bring down this empire of corruption it will take us all pulling together by county, by state! There IS power in numbers.
http://parentalrights2.blogspot.com/2010/05/regarding-child-protective-services-few.html
CPS: Protecting Children or Destroying Families?
CPS: Protecting Children or Destroying Families?
Parents organize group in an effort to reform Child Protective Services | open story
Robin Cash is on a mission: to win a battle against the state's Child Protective Services arm of the Department of Protective and Regulatory Services. The department, she charges, is doing more harm than good to Texas families and their children. "Don't get me wrong, we need CPS, there are children who are really abused," she said. "But there are also a lot of abuses in the system that need to be addressed." To Cash, those abuses include under-trained caseworkers, caseworkers lying in court documents, kids being sent to unqualified therapists, and parents who are railroaded into relinquishing their parental rights.
Two months ago Cash placed an ad in the Chronicle. "Do you feel CPS has hurt your family?" it read. "Do you have concerns about your children and the system?" Cash says she was overwhelmed by the response. "I got 1,000 e-mails in the first week." From that one ad arose a new parents advocacy group: Parents Get United, composed of parents who, like Cash, feel the CPS system is in need of reform. Through meeting with other parents, Cash said she has learned that her struggle with CPS is, unfortunately, not that unusual.
Cash's version of her own experience is harrowing. In January 2000, Cash told the Chronicle, she was trying to get herself and her two twin boys out of an abusive home. She asked her pastor to care for her kids while she got a protective order against her common-law husband. But before she could do so, Cash was arrested on charges filed by her husband -- who had gone to the police first, claiming she had hit him. Cash says her husband was already a two-time loser, potentially facing a long stint in jail as a result of their most recent fight. This time Cash had actually fought back. "So, he had to beat me to the paperwork," she said. Cash spent four days in jail, while her sister called CPS to see if there were any services they could provide to help Cash and her children get things together on their own.
According to Cash, instead of offering help, a CPS caseworker came to her pastor's house, told him Cash would be in jail for at least four months (although she was scheduled to be released that day), and took the kids into CPS custody. Cash began a protracted fight to get her kids back, she said, thus far to no avail. Her parental rights have since been taken away, and she hasn't seen her boys in months.
"If you don't think this is ripping my heart out ... I've got to do something," she said. In response to her Chronicle ad, Cash has been contacted by parents, lawyers, an investigator from the human rights commission, even a former CPS caseworker -- all agreeing that CPS needs taming. "This is a wide, sweeping problem across the country, and Texas has its share," said Chuck Ragland, a former CPS caseworker in Van Zandt County. "And we are seeing a groundswell of parents getting upset." Ragland spent eight years as a caseworker and says he saw so many problems with the system that he dedicated his last three years with CPS to "making a concerted effort to try and figure out exactly what is going on." What he saw, he says, was troubling: caseworkers falsifying documents and removing children from families for very little, if any, cause. "They feel like they are above the law because they are doing something noble," he said. "They think, we might make some mistakes, but so what?"
To Aaron Reed, CPS spokesman for the Central Texas region, the allegations are frustrating. "Mostly we get accused of not taking enough action," Reed said, citing two Central Texas child deaths in the past two weeks, in families where CPS had made contact but had not removed the children. Reed says the charges of caseworker misconduct and railroading of families are inaccurate. "There's a law against perjury," he said. "When a caseworker is sworn in [by the court], it is just as any other witness, they are bound by the law." Reed said the agency now uses a more proactive model of trying to assess at-risk families and take action before abuses occur, but he doesn't believe this leads to more mistakes by caseworkers. The agency tries to identify at-risk families by a host of objectives, he said, most notably by reviewing abuse- and neglect-related deaths. "We look at those to see what factors are common between them and identify behaviors that place families at risk," he said. "It's not perfect, but it's a better system and a fairly accurate system. If we err, we would prefer to err on the side of safety."
Reed estimates that in the 30-county Central Texas region, CPS removes from their homes about 100 children per month. During 2000, in Travis County alone, there were 1,653 CPS confirmed cases of child abuse or neglect, and CPS spent $13.8 million on foster care services. Numbers for 2001 will not be ready until next month, but the problem is not disappearing.
To Cash and Ragland, the agency's mistakes have gotten out of control, and they place some of the blame on the agency's "at-risk" focus. "A lot of the caseworkers are trained with the mindset that there are all these problem families, and they are out to get them," Ragland said. While Cash and Ragland agree that CPS serves a vital function, they believe the strong emphasis on at-risk situations -- largely found among low-income and minority families -- puts some healthy families, or families actively trying to better their situations, at an even bigger risk. Ragland adds that since federal grant funding has become increasingly tied to at-risk management in lower-income families, CPS's focus has become more of a funding necessity. "Listen to the storm," he said. "You'll see a pattern. Their responsibilities have become way too broad."
CPS's Reed and spokeswoman Marla Sheeley say the goal of the agency is to protect children and, in every possible situation, keep families together. "The first thing we do," said Sheeley, "is make every reasonable effort to keep children in the home or to return the child to the home."
Cash, Ragland, and the other parents and advocates involved in Parents Get United say they are in the fight for the long haul, and the group has been meeting with a group of state legislators interested in CPS reform. "They want to know what, really, the true issues are as a foundation for their work and what issues need to be added to legislation," said Ragland. "Really, for things to change, and to stop the corruption, the whole system really needs to be turned on its head."
http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/ReaderComments/?ContainerID=84190
Parents organize group in an effort to reform Child Protective Services | open story
Robin Cash is on a mission: to win a battle against the state's Child Protective Services arm of the Department of Protective and Regulatory Services. The department, she charges, is doing more harm than good to Texas families and their children. "Don't get me wrong, we need CPS, there are children who are really abused," she said. "But there are also a lot of abuses in the system that need to be addressed." To Cash, those abuses include under-trained caseworkers, caseworkers lying in court documents, kids being sent to unqualified therapists, and parents who are railroaded into relinquishing their parental rights.
Two months ago Cash placed an ad in the Chronicle. "Do you feel CPS has hurt your family?" it read. "Do you have concerns about your children and the system?" Cash says she was overwhelmed by the response. "I got 1,000 e-mails in the first week." From that one ad arose a new parents advocacy group: Parents Get United, composed of parents who, like Cash, feel the CPS system is in need of reform. Through meeting with other parents, Cash said she has learned that her struggle with CPS is, unfortunately, not that unusual.
Cash's version of her own experience is harrowing. In January 2000, Cash told the Chronicle, she was trying to get herself and her two twin boys out of an abusive home. She asked her pastor to care for her kids while she got a protective order against her common-law husband. But before she could do so, Cash was arrested on charges filed by her husband -- who had gone to the police first, claiming she had hit him. Cash says her husband was already a two-time loser, potentially facing a long stint in jail as a result of their most recent fight. This time Cash had actually fought back. "So, he had to beat me to the paperwork," she said. Cash spent four days in jail, while her sister called CPS to see if there were any services they could provide to help Cash and her children get things together on their own.
According to Cash, instead of offering help, a CPS caseworker came to her pastor's house, told him Cash would be in jail for at least four months (although she was scheduled to be released that day), and took the kids into CPS custody. Cash began a protracted fight to get her kids back, she said, thus far to no avail. Her parental rights have since been taken away, and she hasn't seen her boys in months.
"If you don't think this is ripping my heart out ... I've got to do something," she said. In response to her Chronicle ad, Cash has been contacted by parents, lawyers, an investigator from the human rights commission, even a former CPS caseworker -- all agreeing that CPS needs taming. "This is a wide, sweeping problem across the country, and Texas has its share," said Chuck Ragland, a former CPS caseworker in Van Zandt County. "And we are seeing a groundswell of parents getting upset." Ragland spent eight years as a caseworker and says he saw so many problems with the system that he dedicated his last three years with CPS to "making a concerted effort to try and figure out exactly what is going on." What he saw, he says, was troubling: caseworkers falsifying documents and removing children from families for very little, if any, cause. "They feel like they are above the law because they are doing something noble," he said. "They think, we might make some mistakes, but so what?"
To Aaron Reed, CPS spokesman for the Central Texas region, the allegations are frustrating. "Mostly we get accused of not taking enough action," Reed said, citing two Central Texas child deaths in the past two weeks, in families where CPS had made contact but had not removed the children. Reed says the charges of caseworker misconduct and railroading of families are inaccurate. "There's a law against perjury," he said. "When a caseworker is sworn in [by the court], it is just as any other witness, they are bound by the law." Reed said the agency now uses a more proactive model of trying to assess at-risk families and take action before abuses occur, but he doesn't believe this leads to more mistakes by caseworkers. The agency tries to identify at-risk families by a host of objectives, he said, most notably by reviewing abuse- and neglect-related deaths. "We look at those to see what factors are common between them and identify behaviors that place families at risk," he said. "It's not perfect, but it's a better system and a fairly accurate system. If we err, we would prefer to err on the side of safety."
Reed estimates that in the 30-county Central Texas region, CPS removes from their homes about 100 children per month. During 2000, in Travis County alone, there were 1,653 CPS confirmed cases of child abuse or neglect, and CPS spent $13.8 million on foster care services. Numbers for 2001 will not be ready until next month, but the problem is not disappearing.
To Cash and Ragland, the agency's mistakes have gotten out of control, and they place some of the blame on the agency's "at-risk" focus. "A lot of the caseworkers are trained with the mindset that there are all these problem families, and they are out to get them," Ragland said. While Cash and Ragland agree that CPS serves a vital function, they believe the strong emphasis on at-risk situations -- largely found among low-income and minority families -- puts some healthy families, or families actively trying to better their situations, at an even bigger risk. Ragland adds that since federal grant funding has become increasingly tied to at-risk management in lower-income families, CPS's focus has become more of a funding necessity. "Listen to the storm," he said. "You'll see a pattern. Their responsibilities have become way too broad."
CPS's Reed and spokeswoman Marla Sheeley say the goal of the agency is to protect children and, in every possible situation, keep families together. "The first thing we do," said Sheeley, "is make every reasonable effort to keep children in the home or to return the child to the home."
Cash, Ragland, and the other parents and advocates involved in Parents Get United say they are in the fight for the long haul, and the group has been meeting with a group of state legislators interested in CPS reform. "They want to know what, really, the true issues are as a foundation for their work and what issues need to be added to legislation," said Ragland. "Really, for things to change, and to stop the corruption, the whole system really needs to be turned on its head."
http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/ReaderComments/?ContainerID=84190
Parents sue Wal-Mart & Arizona after CPS takes children because of bathtub photos
Parents sue Wal-Mart & Arizona after CPS takes children because of bathtub photos
September 14, 8:00 AMAlbany CPS and Family Court ExaminerDaniel Weaver
Arizona Government Buildings. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)
Lisa and Anthony Demaree of Maricopa County, Arizona have filed a lawsuit against the State of Arizona, the Arizona Attorney General and the City of Peoria, after their children were taken away by Child Protective Services because of photos the parents took of their children while on vacation in San Diego.
The photos were of their young children at play and in the bathtub. An employee of the Wal-Mart store where the Demarees took the photos to be processed notified authorities of the photos.
The photos, however, were not child porn, but simply the type of photos that most Americans have taken of their children when they were babies or toddlers. The Demarees not only had their children taken, but the children were examined for sexual abuse.
Furthermore, according to the lawsuit, "On September 3, 2008, Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Hunter, acting within the scope of her employment, published defamatory remarks to more than thirty-five family members and friends of plaintiffs, falsely stating that plaintiffs Lisa and A.J. Demaree "sexually abused" their children." The Demarees' eomplaint also alleges that "Peoria Police Detective Krause made false and defamatory statements to agents and employees of the Defendants." Among the statements made by Krause was one "that said parents were engaged in illegal actions by taking bath and play time photos of their children."
No evidence of sexual abuse was found, and the parents were cleared of all charges. However the Demarees, along with Mrs. Demaree's parents who have joined them in the lawsuit, state that the "Defendants intentionally inflicted severe emotional distress on Plaintiffs." The Demarees state that they have also suffered from headaches, nightmares, a general feeling of malaise, shock to their nervous systems, grief and depression.
The Demarees are leaving the amount of damages to a jury. They have also filed a separate lawsuit against Wal-Mart.
Copyright 2009 Daniel Weaver. Permission is granted to republish the first two paragraphs of this article on any website, as long as a link to this page is provided. Republishing or posting this article in its entirety on any website, including blogs, is both illegal and unethical.
For more info: Read more articles by Dan Weaver on child protective services and related topics.
More About: Child Protective Services · CPS Horror Stories · Arizona
http://www.examiner.com/x-14537-Albany-CPS-and-Family-Court-Examiner~y2009m9d14-Parents-sue-WalMart--Arizona-after-CPS-takes-children-because-of-bathtub-photos?cid=examiner-email
September 14, 8:00 AMAlbany CPS and Family Court ExaminerDaniel Weaver
Arizona Government Buildings. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)
Lisa and Anthony Demaree of Maricopa County, Arizona have filed a lawsuit against the State of Arizona, the Arizona Attorney General and the City of Peoria, after their children were taken away by Child Protective Services because of photos the parents took of their children while on vacation in San Diego.
The photos were of their young children at play and in the bathtub. An employee of the Wal-Mart store where the Demarees took the photos to be processed notified authorities of the photos.
The photos, however, were not child porn, but simply the type of photos that most Americans have taken of their children when they were babies or toddlers. The Demarees not only had their children taken, but the children were examined for sexual abuse.
Furthermore, according to the lawsuit, "On September 3, 2008, Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Hunter, acting within the scope of her employment, published defamatory remarks to more than thirty-five family members and friends of plaintiffs, falsely stating that plaintiffs Lisa and A.J. Demaree "sexually abused" their children." The Demarees' eomplaint also alleges that "Peoria Police Detective Krause made false and defamatory statements to agents and employees of the Defendants." Among the statements made by Krause was one "that said parents were engaged in illegal actions by taking bath and play time photos of their children."
No evidence of sexual abuse was found, and the parents were cleared of all charges. However the Demarees, along with Mrs. Demaree's parents who have joined them in the lawsuit, state that the "Defendants intentionally inflicted severe emotional distress on Plaintiffs." The Demarees state that they have also suffered from headaches, nightmares, a general feeling of malaise, shock to their nervous systems, grief and depression.
The Demarees are leaving the amount of damages to a jury. They have also filed a separate lawsuit against Wal-Mart.
Copyright 2009 Daniel Weaver. Permission is granted to republish the first two paragraphs of this article on any website, as long as a link to this page is provided. Republishing or posting this article in its entirety on any website, including blogs, is both illegal and unethical.
For more info: Read more articles by Dan Weaver on child protective services and related topics.
More About: Child Protective Services · CPS Horror Stories · Arizona
http://www.examiner.com/x-14537-Albany-CPS-and-Family-Court-Examiner~y2009m9d14-Parents-sue-WalMart--Arizona-after-CPS-takes-children-because-of-bathtub-photos?cid=examiner-email
Delaware's justice system overlooks the value of family Strong bonds reduce recidivism (NH is no better!)
Delaware's justice system overlooks the value of family
Strong bonds reduce recidivism
unhappygrammy-(NH's Justice system is no better, along with many of the other states. Between the courts and DCYF/CPS, the value of family doesn't mean anything anymore)
Families make up the social fabric of what society is and how society develops. According to the National Resource Center on Children and Families of the Incarcerated, 2.3 million people were held in federal and state prisons and jails in 2007.
Imagine the millions of family members, including children, who are directly affected. Jeremy Travis, president of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, put it well when he said, "Prisons separate prisoners from their families. Every individual sent to prison leaves behind a network of family relationships.
"Prisoners are children, parents, siblings and kin to untold numbers of relatives who are each affected differently by a family member's arrest, incarceration and ultimate homecoming."
Studies show that strong family ties during incarceration have a positive effect on people returning from prison, and those who have access to family support are more successful than those who do not in various re-entry outcomes.
The Family & Corrections Network concurred, issuing the following statement at the First National Leadership Conference on Families of Adult Offenders in 1986: "Strong prisoner-family relationships reduce recidivism, and stronger family ties for offenders mean safer communities."
A number of recommendations were made as a result of this conference. They include training agency staff to value and respect offenders' families; providing family support services throughout the criminal justice process, from arrest through release; providing adequate access to information for families, even orientating them to the criminal justice processes; and providing special training to agency staff regarding treatment of prisoners' children.
It was collectively determined by conference participants, ranging from law and government representatives to local and faith-based practitioners, that it is "in the best interest of the criminal justice system to maintain and strengthen family ties through the adoption of system-wide policies and programs."
Unfortunately, the criminal justice system as a whole lacks adequate support for prisoner-family relationships and, to date, Delaware is no exception. The current I-ADAPT Re-entry Model has no mention of the importance of supporting family relationships among prisoners.
The model, implemented with a back-end emphasis, focuses a large portion of its current application on the need and importance of community organizations providing support to prisoners upon release.
The Delaware Department of Correction's policy regarding offender re-entry names 12 criteria "to be reviewed, addressed or services provided," none of which mention the families of prisoners or supporting family ties during incarceration or beyond. After further investigation, I learned there are no policies, programs or services that exist at all within DOC that support maintaining or strengthening prisoner-family relationships.
As a concerned citizen and advocate, I say this must change. The evidence exists and the data are clear that positive family relationships play a significant role in a prisoner's incarceration, rehabilitation and successful transition and re-entry back to society. Family members of prisoners have been criminalized with their loved ones for merely caring and giving their support.
In reality, family members of prisoners are the underlying allies in cultivating safer prison environments and safer communities.
There are a number of prisoners who do not have any family support or family relationships at all. These are the prisoners who will rely most heavily on the numerous stabilization services our community and faith-based organizations provide in order to successfully reintegrate. However, there are a number of prisoners whose family members are present in our communities and committed to supporting their loved ones.
These families, already in a crisis due to the incarceration, work tirelessly to navigate a system that shamelessly dismisses their worth and value. Family members go on to deal with harsh and insensitive treatment by those employed in criminal justice agencies. This behavior is modeled from the highest leadership down, and this should not be so.
Every autonomous component of our criminal justice system should realize the significance of supporting family-prisoner relationships and its benefits to society.
Will Delaware take seriously the opportunity to do what is not only effective but right when it comes to preserving Delaware families, reducing recidivism and enhancing public safety? Families are counting on it.
Does that mean changing the way some things are done? Absolutely.
Albert Einstein said it best in words of timeless wisdom: "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex. ... It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."
Heather Smith-Chandler, co-founder of Link of Love, a support and resource network
for families with incarcerated loved ones, lives in Dover.
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20100530/OPINION08/5300301/1004/OPINION
Strong bonds reduce recidivism
unhappygrammy-(NH's Justice system is no better, along with many of the other states. Between the courts and DCYF/CPS, the value of family doesn't mean anything anymore)
Families make up the social fabric of what society is and how society develops. According to the National Resource Center on Children and Families of the Incarcerated, 2.3 million people were held in federal and state prisons and jails in 2007.
Imagine the millions of family members, including children, who are directly affected. Jeremy Travis, president of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, put it well when he said, "Prisons separate prisoners from their families. Every individual sent to prison leaves behind a network of family relationships.
"Prisoners are children, parents, siblings and kin to untold numbers of relatives who are each affected differently by a family member's arrest, incarceration and ultimate homecoming."
Studies show that strong family ties during incarceration have a positive effect on people returning from prison, and those who have access to family support are more successful than those who do not in various re-entry outcomes.
The Family & Corrections Network concurred, issuing the following statement at the First National Leadership Conference on Families of Adult Offenders in 1986: "Strong prisoner-family relationships reduce recidivism, and stronger family ties for offenders mean safer communities."
A number of recommendations were made as a result of this conference. They include training agency staff to value and respect offenders' families; providing family support services throughout the criminal justice process, from arrest through release; providing adequate access to information for families, even orientating them to the criminal justice processes; and providing special training to agency staff regarding treatment of prisoners' children.
It was collectively determined by conference participants, ranging from law and government representatives to local and faith-based practitioners, that it is "in the best interest of the criminal justice system to maintain and strengthen family ties through the adoption of system-wide policies and programs."
Unfortunately, the criminal justice system as a whole lacks adequate support for prisoner-family relationships and, to date, Delaware is no exception. The current I-ADAPT Re-entry Model has no mention of the importance of supporting family relationships among prisoners.
The model, implemented with a back-end emphasis, focuses a large portion of its current application on the need and importance of community organizations providing support to prisoners upon release.
The Delaware Department of Correction's policy regarding offender re-entry names 12 criteria "to be reviewed, addressed or services provided," none of which mention the families of prisoners or supporting family ties during incarceration or beyond. After further investigation, I learned there are no policies, programs or services that exist at all within DOC that support maintaining or strengthening prisoner-family relationships.
As a concerned citizen and advocate, I say this must change. The evidence exists and the data are clear that positive family relationships play a significant role in a prisoner's incarceration, rehabilitation and successful transition and re-entry back to society. Family members of prisoners have been criminalized with their loved ones for merely caring and giving their support.
In reality, family members of prisoners are the underlying allies in cultivating safer prison environments and safer communities.
There are a number of prisoners who do not have any family support or family relationships at all. These are the prisoners who will rely most heavily on the numerous stabilization services our community and faith-based organizations provide in order to successfully reintegrate. However, there are a number of prisoners whose family members are present in our communities and committed to supporting their loved ones.
These families, already in a crisis due to the incarceration, work tirelessly to navigate a system that shamelessly dismisses their worth and value. Family members go on to deal with harsh and insensitive treatment by those employed in criminal justice agencies. This behavior is modeled from the highest leadership down, and this should not be so.
Every autonomous component of our criminal justice system should realize the significance of supporting family-prisoner relationships and its benefits to society.
Will Delaware take seriously the opportunity to do what is not only effective but right when it comes to preserving Delaware families, reducing recidivism and enhancing public safety? Families are counting on it.
Does that mean changing the way some things are done? Absolutely.
Albert Einstein said it best in words of timeless wisdom: "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex. ... It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."
Heather Smith-Chandler, co-founder of Link of Love, a support and resource network
for families with incarcerated loved ones, lives in Dover.
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20100530/OPINION08/5300301/1004/OPINION
HSE (CPS/DCYF) plays numbers game on child deaths
HSE plays numbers game on child deaths
30 May 2010
Three years ago, a child ran away from a residential unit managed by a friend of mine. The child was a 16year-old Nigerian girl, and there was a fortnight-long search for her by gardaà and social workers, after which it was felt she had probably been reunited with her family, and left the jurisdiction.
My friend, however, wasn’t satisfied with this explanation, and followed up on the case himself. Six months later, he discovered, after much digging, questioning and persistence, that she was, in fact, dead.
Somehow the girl had made her way to a hostel in the west of the country, and it was there she met her end. The circumstances of her death were never disclosed to him.
He was simply told that she had died and that such things happened from time to time.
‘‘They told me that somewhere in the region of 250 children have died over the past few years while in state care," he said, incredulously when we discussed the story. ‘‘How does that happen?"
In 2010, this figure has been modified to ‘‘approximately 200’’. Brendan Drumm, chief executive of the Health Service Executive (HSE), would have us believe that it is 37.
Although he did concede that the higher figure could apply in relation to all children who were HSE clients.
To understand this, we must first develop an understanding of the care system and how it functions.
Who are the children who find themselves in the care and under the protection of the state? How does a child access that care system and what are the circumstances which may cause the HSE or another agency to intervene with a family, and bring a child into care?
The answers to those questions are far from simple. In more than 15 years working at many levels within the care system, I have encountered children being taken into care for many reasons. Some had been physically or sexually abused, and were in residential or foster care because it was simply unsafe for them to be at home.
Others had been voluntarily placed in care because their parents were ill and could not care for them; more because their carers were in prison, because family members were alcoholics or drug abusers and the home environment was potentially dangerous or neglectful. Some children were orphans.
Inside the system
Once inside the system, children are cared for by professionals: childcare workers, social workers, family support workers and foster parents, to name but a few. The vast majority of them care deeply and unequivocally about the children they work with day-to-day.
Most social care practitioners work long hours for pretty meagre pay, generally getting very little thanks for it. Social care tends to only get into the headlines when something awful happens - when a child has slipped through the cracks, in other words.
How do children go astray like this once they are on the books of the HSE?
The obvious response is that some children are just too damaged when they find their way into the system to be effectively helped. They have often been outrageously hurt by people they trusted and who should have done right by them, and are too frightened and angry to accept friendship and assistance.
They continue to run away from care settings, to engage in self-injurious and risky behaviour, and to push away any and all adults who try to bond with them. Does that mean that the professionals should stop trying?
Should these difficult, hard-to love children be abandoned, thrown on the scrap-heap? Absolutely not.
But there are always those who will not make it. I have worked with children who I ‘lost’, children who just would not take my hand when I reached out to them. I mourn them, to this day, but I also know I did all I could.
The people who deserve the blame for those children’s misery and pain are the ones who abused and neglected them to begin with, not those of us who tried everything in our power to help.
Yet it is also true that the fault sometimes does lie with the care system and the state.
There are children on waiting lists in every HSE region in the country, children the state knows are living in unacceptable situations - in circumstances that are abusive and neglectful - but for whom there are just not any available social workers.
I know of a foster family who have two very challenging disabled children in their care and who have repeatedly requested the support of a therapist. These parents dearly love the children they have taken into their home, but they fear that if this help is not given, the placement may break down. Their cries continue to fall on deaf ears.
There is a widespread acceptance within the institutions of care in Ireland that the system is so direly underresourced, it is simply not sustainable. It comes down, as always, to money.
When the country had a ridiculous amount of it, the government was more interested in pumping it elsewhere. Now there is none, the attitude of those who hold the purse strings is hardly any different. There has never been the political will to plug the gaping holes in our care infrastructure.
Cases are expedited on a ‘greatest need’ criteria, meaning only the very worst are receiving any level of attention, while others are left to stagnate. The public is made aware of the situation when something appalling happens - or when a child dies.
When is a child in the care of the state?
Drumm, in a rather heated exchange earlier this week, asserted that the figure of 200 had been generated by the media in an effort to smear the workings of the HSE (remember the larger figure given to my friend by a HSE official three years previously) and that the only children we should be concerned about are those in residential care.
The others, he said categorically, were not really in the care of the state at all.
This brings up an interesting and, in many ways, crucial point: when exactly is a child in the care of the state? Does a child need to have been, literally, taken into care, and be living in a residential institution?
Are foster children, who are being cared for by parents who receive a token salary from the state for their efforts, in the care of the HSE?
What about those children who are technically in care, but are living in hostels, where they are left to their own devices for much of the day?
Then, of course, there are those children on supervision orders, where the state is required by law to spend a certain number of hours every week with them.
Where do they stand? What about all the children on waiting lists, who have been acknowledged as needing help, but have not been allocated a worker yet - does the state have a responsibility of care to them?
Under the Childcare Act, 1991, the state has a responsibility to seek out children who are at risk, and do their utmost to prevent them from coming to harm.
The kind of ducking and diving, dodging responsibility and passing the buck we are seeing shows just how seriously our crop of leaders take this responsibility.
Which must leave us pondering just how many children have died while in state care. I am simply going to toss aside Drumm’s figure of 23. It is just creative book-keeping.
Three years ago, the figure given to my concerned friend was 250.
Having spoken to a number of child protection workers over the past few days, there seems to be a belief that this is a deeply conservative figure, and that the true tally may be much higher, possibly even double that which has been reported in the press: ie 500 dead. It is a frightening figure. I pray that Drumm’s much lower statistic is accurate. But I am not hopeful.
My friend never found out what exactly happened to that lost girl. He finally became so disenchanted with the system here, he left altogether, and now lives in Australia.
Child protection cannot afford to lose people of his integrity. If the files on these children ever do become available, it will probably prove that in most cases, everything that could have been done was done.
Where that cannot be said, then serious changes need to be made and, where appropriate, people may have to lose their jobs or even face prosecution.
Even 37 dead children is unacceptable. As a community we have a collective responsibility for each and every one of them, and it is not just HSE officials and politicians who should feel guilty. Shane Dunphy is a child protection expert and a lecturer
http://www.sbpost.ie/newsfeatures/hse-plays-numbers-game-on-child-deaths-49562.html
30 May 2010
Three years ago, a child ran away from a residential unit managed by a friend of mine. The child was a 16year-old Nigerian girl, and there was a fortnight-long search for her by gardaà and social workers, after which it was felt she had probably been reunited with her family, and left the jurisdiction.
My friend, however, wasn’t satisfied with this explanation, and followed up on the case himself. Six months later, he discovered, after much digging, questioning and persistence, that she was, in fact, dead.
Somehow the girl had made her way to a hostel in the west of the country, and it was there she met her end. The circumstances of her death were never disclosed to him.
He was simply told that she had died and that such things happened from time to time.
‘‘They told me that somewhere in the region of 250 children have died over the past few years while in state care," he said, incredulously when we discussed the story. ‘‘How does that happen?"
In 2010, this figure has been modified to ‘‘approximately 200’’. Brendan Drumm, chief executive of the Health Service Executive (HSE), would have us believe that it is 37.
Although he did concede that the higher figure could apply in relation to all children who were HSE clients.
To understand this, we must first develop an understanding of the care system and how it functions.
Who are the children who find themselves in the care and under the protection of the state? How does a child access that care system and what are the circumstances which may cause the HSE or another agency to intervene with a family, and bring a child into care?
The answers to those questions are far from simple. In more than 15 years working at many levels within the care system, I have encountered children being taken into care for many reasons. Some had been physically or sexually abused, and were in residential or foster care because it was simply unsafe for them to be at home.
Others had been voluntarily placed in care because their parents were ill and could not care for them; more because their carers were in prison, because family members were alcoholics or drug abusers and the home environment was potentially dangerous or neglectful. Some children were orphans.
Inside the system
Once inside the system, children are cared for by professionals: childcare workers, social workers, family support workers and foster parents, to name but a few. The vast majority of them care deeply and unequivocally about the children they work with day-to-day.
Most social care practitioners work long hours for pretty meagre pay, generally getting very little thanks for it. Social care tends to only get into the headlines when something awful happens - when a child has slipped through the cracks, in other words.
How do children go astray like this once they are on the books of the HSE?
The obvious response is that some children are just too damaged when they find their way into the system to be effectively helped. They have often been outrageously hurt by people they trusted and who should have done right by them, and are too frightened and angry to accept friendship and assistance.
They continue to run away from care settings, to engage in self-injurious and risky behaviour, and to push away any and all adults who try to bond with them. Does that mean that the professionals should stop trying?
Should these difficult, hard-to love children be abandoned, thrown on the scrap-heap? Absolutely not.
But there are always those who will not make it. I have worked with children who I ‘lost’, children who just would not take my hand when I reached out to them. I mourn them, to this day, but I also know I did all I could.
The people who deserve the blame for those children’s misery and pain are the ones who abused and neglected them to begin with, not those of us who tried everything in our power to help.
Yet it is also true that the fault sometimes does lie with the care system and the state.
There are children on waiting lists in every HSE region in the country, children the state knows are living in unacceptable situations - in circumstances that are abusive and neglectful - but for whom there are just not any available social workers.
I know of a foster family who have two very challenging disabled children in their care and who have repeatedly requested the support of a therapist. These parents dearly love the children they have taken into their home, but they fear that if this help is not given, the placement may break down. Their cries continue to fall on deaf ears.
There is a widespread acceptance within the institutions of care in Ireland that the system is so direly underresourced, it is simply not sustainable. It comes down, as always, to money.
When the country had a ridiculous amount of it, the government was more interested in pumping it elsewhere. Now there is none, the attitude of those who hold the purse strings is hardly any different. There has never been the political will to plug the gaping holes in our care infrastructure.
Cases are expedited on a ‘greatest need’ criteria, meaning only the very worst are receiving any level of attention, while others are left to stagnate. The public is made aware of the situation when something appalling happens - or when a child dies.
When is a child in the care of the state?
Drumm, in a rather heated exchange earlier this week, asserted that the figure of 200 had been generated by the media in an effort to smear the workings of the HSE (remember the larger figure given to my friend by a HSE official three years previously) and that the only children we should be concerned about are those in residential care.
The others, he said categorically, were not really in the care of the state at all.
This brings up an interesting and, in many ways, crucial point: when exactly is a child in the care of the state? Does a child need to have been, literally, taken into care, and be living in a residential institution?
Are foster children, who are being cared for by parents who receive a token salary from the state for their efforts, in the care of the HSE?
What about those children who are technically in care, but are living in hostels, where they are left to their own devices for much of the day?
Then, of course, there are those children on supervision orders, where the state is required by law to spend a certain number of hours every week with them.
Where do they stand? What about all the children on waiting lists, who have been acknowledged as needing help, but have not been allocated a worker yet - does the state have a responsibility of care to them?
Under the Childcare Act, 1991, the state has a responsibility to seek out children who are at risk, and do their utmost to prevent them from coming to harm.
The kind of ducking and diving, dodging responsibility and passing the buck we are seeing shows just how seriously our crop of leaders take this responsibility.
Which must leave us pondering just how many children have died while in state care. I am simply going to toss aside Drumm’s figure of 23. It is just creative book-keeping.
Three years ago, the figure given to my concerned friend was 250.
Having spoken to a number of child protection workers over the past few days, there seems to be a belief that this is a deeply conservative figure, and that the true tally may be much higher, possibly even double that which has been reported in the press: ie 500 dead. It is a frightening figure. I pray that Drumm’s much lower statistic is accurate. But I am not hopeful.
My friend never found out what exactly happened to that lost girl. He finally became so disenchanted with the system here, he left altogether, and now lives in Australia.
Child protection cannot afford to lose people of his integrity. If the files on these children ever do become available, it will probably prove that in most cases, everything that could have been done was done.
Where that cannot be said, then serious changes need to be made and, where appropriate, people may have to lose their jobs or even face prosecution.
Even 37 dead children is unacceptable. As a community we have a collective responsibility for each and every one of them, and it is not just HSE officials and politicians who should feel guilty. Shane Dunphy is a child protection expert and a lecturer
http://www.sbpost.ie/newsfeatures/hse-plays-numbers-game-on-child-deaths-49562.html
Military family demanding answers about child who died in foster care
Military family demanding answers about child who died in foster care
BY BRET H. MCCORMICK • BMCCORMICK@THETOWNTALK.COM • MAY 30, 2010
Brittany Compton feels like she's been living a nightmare for the past 12-plus months.
Not only was she accused of being an abusive parent and had her two daughters taken from her, but her youngest, 3-year-old Kennedy Compton, died a month after being put in foster care.
According to the autopsy report, Kennedy's cause of death was blunt force trauma to the chest and, more than a year later, the Alexandria Police Department still is investigating her death as a homicide.
"It's a really tough case because there's just not a lot of evidence," said Sgt. Ronald Besson, APD's public information officer.
"It's taken a lot of my energy," Brittany Compton said. "It's been sleepless nights. There have been a lot of sleepless nights."
While police have not been able to make much progress on criminal charges, the family has decided to pursue civil charges against the Louisiana Office of Community Services and the two people they claim are responsible for Kennedy's death -- Gwendolyn Williams, the foster mom, and O'Neil Wesley, who was watching Kennedy on the day she died.
The family's attorney, Jay Luneau, filed a wrongful death lawsuit on May 6 in 9th Judicial District Court. The lawsuit alleges that the Office of Community Services, Williams and Wesley all are liable and culpable in Kennedy's death.
Kennedy's death, the lawsuit alleges, was caused by negligence of the OCS for removing Kennedy from her mother and placing her in an unequipped foster home, by Williams for failing to supervise Kennedy and leaving her in Wesley's care, and by Wesley for "beating and kicking" Kennedy and then failing to get her proper medical care.
Compton, 23, enlisted in the U.S. Army in April 2008, and after serving several months in Iraq, was stationed at Fort Polk with her husband, Kevin. In February 2009, the couple's two daughters, Kaitlyn and Kennedy, who had been living with Brittany Compton's mother in Memphis, Tenn., also came to Fort Polk to live with their parents.
Two months later, the girls were placed under the protection of the Office of Community Services after Brittany Compton was reported for being abusive, an alleggation she disputes. Instead, she said, she disciplined her children by spanking them while they were acting out at day care.
"Someone in the system overreacted and removed these children from their mother because she spanked them," Luneau said.
Brittany Compton said she remembers April 9, 2009, "vividly, like it was yesterday." That's when she was arrested and her children were placed into protective custody.
Less than a month later, on May 8, 2009, Kennedy was dead. On that day, Williams had taken Kaitlyn to Leesville for the weekly visit with her mother, but Kennedy was left behind because she wasn't feeling well.
"I was like, 'Where is Kennedy? Where is my other child at?'" Brittany Compton said. "(Williams) said, 'I left her with a sitter because yesterday I took her to the doctor and she had an ear infection and throat infection.'"
That afternoon, Wesley called Williams and told him that Kennedy was having trouble breathing. Williams said to call 911, and during the call, Wesley told authorities that the girl had become unresponsive, and she later died.
Emergency responders told police that Kennedy's body had bruises on it, and Williams told authorities that "was because she received Kennedy from an abusive home," according to the police report.
Luneau and the Compton family dispute that claim, and Luneau said there was no mention of bruises during Kennedy's doctor's appointment the day before her death. Instead, the family alleges in their lawsuit that Wesley beat Kennedy to death.
"People who work for OCS have a very difficult job," Luneau. "It's certainly not a job that I could do. But those people who do that job have a serious responsibility, and they have to make sure they don't put those children in harm's way."
Attempts to reach Williams and Wesley for comments were unsuccessful.
Brittany Compton and her family have grown frustrated that more than a year after Kennedy's death, there still is no resolution.
"We just want the person responsible for this (brought to justice)," she said. "If Mrs. Gwen is not the responsible party, she knows what happened. She knows what went on in her home."
"It's just been like it doesn't matter," said Patsy Riddle, Brittany Compton's aunt, of the police investigation into Kennedy's death. Besson disputes that the case isn't important, and he said Alexandria police are actively seeking a resolution.
Luneau said his clients would like to have the case resolved as soon as possible, but he believes the investigators are working hard to solve it.
"I'm a little surprised it has not moved quicker than it has," Luneau said. "Certainly my clients would like to see it move much quicker to get justice and resolution."
Alexandria detectives have settled on Wesley as the prime suspect, Besson said. However, Wesley won't confess to the killing and won't submit to a polygraph test either.
Williams did submit to a polygraph, which was delivered by Besson, and he said that Williams passed and was "telling the truth."
Detectives don't have sufficient evidence to make an arrest and go to trial, Besson said, adding that the case is active.
"Hopefully, we can resolve it," he said.
Until there's a resolution, however, Brittany Compton will continue fighting.
She received an honorable medical discharge from the Army this month -- she's suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder stemming from her daughter's death -- and has moved to Memphis with her family. But she won't give up on finding justice.
"It's worth the trip coming back and forth," Compton said. "That's something I am willing to make. I don't care how long it will take."
"The last thing my client wants to see is her child's killer go free," Luneau said. "It's very important for a person who's a victim to see what happened to their child."
http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20100530/NEWS01/5300334/1002/Military-family-demanding-answers-about-child-who-died-in-foster-care
BY BRET H. MCCORMICK • BMCCORMICK@THETOWNTALK.COM • MAY 30, 2010
Brittany Compton feels like she's been living a nightmare for the past 12-plus months.
Not only was she accused of being an abusive parent and had her two daughters taken from her, but her youngest, 3-year-old Kennedy Compton, died a month after being put in foster care.
According to the autopsy report, Kennedy's cause of death was blunt force trauma to the chest and, more than a year later, the Alexandria Police Department still is investigating her death as a homicide.
"It's a really tough case because there's just not a lot of evidence," said Sgt. Ronald Besson, APD's public information officer.
"It's taken a lot of my energy," Brittany Compton said. "It's been sleepless nights. There have been a lot of sleepless nights."
While police have not been able to make much progress on criminal charges, the family has decided to pursue civil charges against the Louisiana Office of Community Services and the two people they claim are responsible for Kennedy's death -- Gwendolyn Williams, the foster mom, and O'Neil Wesley, who was watching Kennedy on the day she died.
The family's attorney, Jay Luneau, filed a wrongful death lawsuit on May 6 in 9th Judicial District Court. The lawsuit alleges that the Office of Community Services, Williams and Wesley all are liable and culpable in Kennedy's death.
Kennedy's death, the lawsuit alleges, was caused by negligence of the OCS for removing Kennedy from her mother and placing her in an unequipped foster home, by Williams for failing to supervise Kennedy and leaving her in Wesley's care, and by Wesley for "beating and kicking" Kennedy and then failing to get her proper medical care.
Compton, 23, enlisted in the U.S. Army in April 2008, and after serving several months in Iraq, was stationed at Fort Polk with her husband, Kevin. In February 2009, the couple's two daughters, Kaitlyn and Kennedy, who had been living with Brittany Compton's mother in Memphis, Tenn., also came to Fort Polk to live with their parents.
Two months later, the girls were placed under the protection of the Office of Community Services after Brittany Compton was reported for being abusive, an alleggation she disputes. Instead, she said, she disciplined her children by spanking them while they were acting out at day care.
"Someone in the system overreacted and removed these children from their mother because she spanked them," Luneau said.
Brittany Compton said she remembers April 9, 2009, "vividly, like it was yesterday." That's when she was arrested and her children were placed into protective custody.
Less than a month later, on May 8, 2009, Kennedy was dead. On that day, Williams had taken Kaitlyn to Leesville for the weekly visit with her mother, but Kennedy was left behind because she wasn't feeling well.
"I was like, 'Where is Kennedy? Where is my other child at?'" Brittany Compton said. "(Williams) said, 'I left her with a sitter because yesterday I took her to the doctor and she had an ear infection and throat infection.'"
That afternoon, Wesley called Williams and told him that Kennedy was having trouble breathing. Williams said to call 911, and during the call, Wesley told authorities that the girl had become unresponsive, and she later died.
Emergency responders told police that Kennedy's body had bruises on it, and Williams told authorities that "was because she received Kennedy from an abusive home," according to the police report.
Luneau and the Compton family dispute that claim, and Luneau said there was no mention of bruises during Kennedy's doctor's appointment the day before her death. Instead, the family alleges in their lawsuit that Wesley beat Kennedy to death.
"People who work for OCS have a very difficult job," Luneau. "It's certainly not a job that I could do. But those people who do that job have a serious responsibility, and they have to make sure they don't put those children in harm's way."
Attempts to reach Williams and Wesley for comments were unsuccessful.
Brittany Compton and her family have grown frustrated that more than a year after Kennedy's death, there still is no resolution.
"We just want the person responsible for this (brought to justice)," she said. "If Mrs. Gwen is not the responsible party, she knows what happened. She knows what went on in her home."
"It's just been like it doesn't matter," said Patsy Riddle, Brittany Compton's aunt, of the police investigation into Kennedy's death. Besson disputes that the case isn't important, and he said Alexandria police are actively seeking a resolution.
Luneau said his clients would like to have the case resolved as soon as possible, but he believes the investigators are working hard to solve it.
"I'm a little surprised it has not moved quicker than it has," Luneau said. "Certainly my clients would like to see it move much quicker to get justice and resolution."
Alexandria detectives have settled on Wesley as the prime suspect, Besson said. However, Wesley won't confess to the killing and won't submit to a polygraph test either.
Williams did submit to a polygraph, which was delivered by Besson, and he said that Williams passed and was "telling the truth."
Detectives don't have sufficient evidence to make an arrest and go to trial, Besson said, adding that the case is active.
"Hopefully, we can resolve it," he said.
Until there's a resolution, however, Brittany Compton will continue fighting.
She received an honorable medical discharge from the Army this month -- she's suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder stemming from her daughter's death -- and has moved to Memphis with her family. But she won't give up on finding justice.
"It's worth the trip coming back and forth," Compton said. "That's something I am willing to make. I don't care how long it will take."
"The last thing my client wants to see is her child's killer go free," Luneau said. "It's very important for a person who's a victim to see what happened to their child."
http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20100530/NEWS01/5300334/1002/Military-family-demanding-answers-about-child-who-died-in-foster-care
Saturday, May 29, 2010
New Program Helps Foster Care Kids Stay With Family
New Program Helps Foster Care Kids Stay With Family
Posted: May 27, 2010 11:10 PM EDT
Updated: May 28, 2010 10:16 AM EDT
When the Department of Child Protective Services decides its time to take a child out of an unsafe home and often times the child will be placed with a foster family. The state is putting together a plan to try to get those children with family instead of strangers.
Texoma resident Christine Williams said she welcomed her niece with open arms when she was removed from an unstable home.
"If there not suitable parents or can never take that role of being a good parent than we have no problem with her coming in and staying with us," said Williams
Starting September One, Williams could qualify for a new state program in which family members who become foster parents to blood related children will receive monthly financial assistance.
"It's helpful because with daycare, diapers all their needs clothing, that's helpful," said Williams
The money will not come easy. David Byrd-the Foster Adopt Manager of the Department of Child Protective Services -said family members will have to meet requirements to receive the stipend.
"They must pass a criminal history background check and a central registry check for PAST abuse neglect history if those two elements are passed then they will be invited to attend a mini training," said Byrd.
It's all worth it to Williams WHO SAYS her niece is like her daughter.
"She is just a wonderful child and I couldn't manage my life without her," said Williams
The Department of Child Protective Services says between September 2009 and April 2010… 388 children were taken away from their homes because They were considered unsafe. 174 of those children are in the custody of the Department of Child Protective Services.
http://www.newschannel6now.com/global/story.asp?s=12558260
Posted: May 27, 2010 11:10 PM EDT
Updated: May 28, 2010 10:16 AM EDT
When the Department of Child Protective Services decides its time to take a child out of an unsafe home and often times the child will be placed with a foster family. The state is putting together a plan to try to get those children with family instead of strangers.
Texoma resident Christine Williams said she welcomed her niece with open arms when she was removed from an unstable home.
"If there not suitable parents or can never take that role of being a good parent than we have no problem with her coming in and staying with us," said Williams
Starting September One, Williams could qualify for a new state program in which family members who become foster parents to blood related children will receive monthly financial assistance.
"It's helpful because with daycare, diapers all their needs clothing, that's helpful," said Williams
The money will not come easy. David Byrd-the Foster Adopt Manager of the Department of Child Protective Services -said family members will have to meet requirements to receive the stipend.
"They must pass a criminal history background check and a central registry check for PAST abuse neglect history if those two elements are passed then they will be invited to attend a mini training," said Byrd.
It's all worth it to Williams WHO SAYS her niece is like her daughter.
"She is just a wonderful child and I couldn't manage my life without her," said Williams
The Department of Child Protective Services says between September 2009 and April 2010… 388 children were taken away from their homes because They were considered unsafe. 174 of those children are in the custody of the Department of Child Protective Services.
http://www.newschannel6now.com/global/story.asp?s=12558260
The AFCARS Report-Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) FY 2008 data (October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008).
Home > Statistics & Research > AFCARS Report - Preliminary FY 2008 Estimates as of October 2009 (16)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children's Bureau,www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/tar/report16.htm
The AFCARS Report
Preliminary FY 2008 Estimates as of October 2009 (16)
SOURCE: Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) FY 2008 data (October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008).
NOTES: Data from both the regular and revised foster care file submissions received by October 9, 2009, and data from adoption file submissions received by July 1, 2009, are included in the information below. Missing data are not used in the calculation of percentages.
How many children were in foster care on September 30, 2008? 463,000
What were the ages of the children in foster care?
Mean Age
9.7
Median Age
9.8
Less than 1 Year
6%
26,812
1 Year
7%
33,495
2 Years
6%
29,912
3 Years
6%
25,838
4 Years
5%
22,960
5 Years
5%
20,844
6 Years
4%
19,777
7 Years
4%
19,000
8 Years
4%
18,090
9 Years
4%
17,436
10 Years
4%
17,113
11 Years
4%
16,890
12 Years
4%
17,853
13 Years
4%
20,542
14 Years
6%
25,505
15 Years
7%
32,720
16 Years
8%
38,475
17 Years
9%
39,832
18 Years
3%
13,069
19 Years
1%
4,088
20 Years
1%
2,749
What were the lengths of stay of children in foster care?
Mean Months
27.2
Median Months
15.8
Less than 1 Month
5%
20,860
1 – 5 Months
20%
90,295
6 – 11 Months
17%
79,691
12 – 17 Months
13%
61,492
18 – 23 Months
10%
44,672
24 – 29 Months
7%
33,971
30 – 35 Months
5%
24,547
3 – 4 Years
12%
53,709
5 Years or More
12%
53,763
What were the placement settings of children in foster care?
Pre-Adoptive Home
4%
17,485
Foster Family Home (Relative)
24%
112,643
Foster Family Home (Non-Relative)
47%
217,243
Group Home
6%
29,122
Institution
10%
47,165
Supervised Independent Living
1%
5,217
Runaway
2%
9,766
Trial Home Visit
5%
24,358
What were the case goals of the children in foster care?
Reunify with Parent(s) or Principal Caretaker(s)
49%
226,867
Live with Other Relative(s)
4%
16,922
Adoption
24%
111,225
Long Term Foster Care
8%
37,522
Emancipation
6%
29,556
Guardianship
4%
18,266
Case Plan Goal Not Yet Established
5%
22,642
What was the gender of the children in foster care?
Male
53%
243,740
Female
47%
219,260
What was the race/ethnicity of the children in foster care?
Alaska Native/American Indian
2%
8,802
Asian
1%
2,631
Black
31%
142,502
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
877
Hispanic (of any race)
20%
92,464
White
40%
183,149
Unknown/Unable to Determine
2%
10,753
Two or more races
5%
21,822
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How many children entered foster care during FY 2008? 273,000
What were the ages of the children who entered care during FY 2008?
Mean Age
8.0
Median Age
7.3
Less than 1 Year
16%
44,365
1 Year
7%
19,721
2 Years
6%
16,909
3 Years
5%
14,889
4 Years
5%
13,204
5 Years
4%
12,264
6 Years
4%
11,547
7 Years
4%
10,782
8 Years
4%
9,966
9 Years
4%
9,581
10 Years
3%
8,813
11 Years
3%
8,875
12 Years
4%
9,913
13 Years
5%
12,573
14 Years
6%
16,026
15 Years
7%
20,101
16 Years
7%
19,953
17 Years
5%
12,816
18 Years
0%
563
19 Years
0%
95
20 Years
0%
44
What was the race/ethnicity of the children who entered care during FY 2008?
Alaska Native/American Indian
2%
5,646
Asian
1%
2,269
Black
26%
70,378
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
675
Hispanic (of any race)
20%
54,802
White
44%
119,242
Unknown/Unable to Determine
3%
7,431
Two or more races
5%
12,558
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How many children exited foster care during FY 2008? 285,000
What were the ages of the children who exited care during FY 2008?
Mean Age
9.6
Median Age
9.0
Less than 1 Year
5%
13,328
1 Year
8%
21,538
2 Years
7%
21,317
3 Years
6%
18,381
4 Years
6%
16,133
5 Years
5%
14,140
6 Years
5%
13,400
7 Years
4%
12,440
8 Years
4%
11,488
9 Years
4%
10,639
10 Years
3%
9,888
11 Years
3%
9,469
12 Years
3%
9,169
13 Years
3%
9,953
14 Years
4%
11,904
15 Years
5%
14,692
16 Years
6%
17,011
17 Years
8%
22,325
18 Years
8%
22,274
19 Years
1%
3,728
20 Years
1%
1,783
What were the outcomes for the children exiting foster care during FY 2008?
Reunification with Parent(s) or Primary Caretaker(s)
52%
148,340
Living with Other Relative(s)
8%
23,944
Adoption
19%
54,284
Emancipation
10%
29,516
Guardianship
7%
19,941
Transfer to Another Agency
2%
5,195
Runaway
1%
3,324
Death of Child
0%
456
NOTE: Deaths are attributable to a variety of causes including medical conditions, accidents, and homicide.
What were the lengths of stay of the children who exited foster care during FY 2008?
Mean Months
21.8
Median Months
13.3
Less than 1 Month
13%
38,303
1 – 5 Months
15%
42,933
6 – 11 Months
18%
51,025
12 – 17 Months
14%
40,796
18 – 23 Months
10%
28,785
24 – 29 Months
7%
20,428
30 – 35 Months
5%
15,040
3 – 4 Years
10%
27,567
5 Years or More
7%
20,123
What was the race/ethnicity of the children who exited care during FY 2008?
Alaska Native/American Indian
2%
5,605
Asian
1%
2,316
Black
26%
75,441
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
763
Hispanic (of any race)
20%
56,741
White
44%
124,688
Unknown/Unable to Determine
2%
6,577
Two or more races
5%
12,869
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How many children were waiting to be adopted on September 30, 2008? 123,000
NOTES: Waiting children are identified as children who have a goal of adoption and/or whose parents' parental rights have been terminated. Children 16 years old and older whose parental rights have been terminated and who have a goal of emancipation have been excluded from the estimate.
What is the gender distribution of the waiting children?
Male
53%
64,725
Female
47%
58,275
How many months have the waiting children been in continuous foster care?
Mean Months
38.0
Median Months
28.7
Less than 1 Month
0%
586
1 – 5 Months
4%
5,076
6 – 11 Months
8%
9,577
12 – 17 Months
13%
15,884
18 – 23 Months
14%
17,418
24 – 29 Months
13%
15,822
30 – 35 Months
10%
11,939
36 – 59 Months
21%
26,268
60 or more Months
17%
20,430
What is the racial/ethnic distribution of the waiting children?
Alaska Native/American Indian
2%
2,042
Asian
0%
587
Black
30%
36,913
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
251
Hispanic (of any race)
21%
26,223
White
39%
47,392
Unknown/Unable to Determine
2%
2,649
Two or more races
6%
6,943
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How old were the waiting children when they were removed from their parents or caretakers?
Mean Age
4.9
Median Age
4.1
Less than 1 Year
25%
31,199
1 Year
9%
10,734
2 Years
8%
9,567
3 Years
7%
8,655
4 Years
7%
8,258
5 Years
7%
8,034
6 Years
6%
7,779
7 Years
6%
7,093
8 Years
5%
6,578
9 Years
5%
5,830
10 Years
4%
5,072
11 Years
4%
4,323
12 Years
3%
3,514
13 Years
2%
2,757
14 Years
2%
1,904
15 Years
1%
1,084
16 Years
0%
516
17 Years
0%
103
Where were the waiting children living on September 30, 2008?
Pre-Adoptive Home
13%
15,701
Foster Family Home (Relative)
23%
28,346
Foster Family Home (Non-Relative)
53%
65,651
Group Home
4%
4,313
Institution
6%
7,408
Supervised Independent Living
0%
118
Runaway
1%
718
Trial Home Visit
1%
745
How old were the waiting children on September 30, 2008?
Mean Age
8.1
Median Age
7.5
Less than 1 Year
4%
4,628
1 Year
9%
10,636
2 Years
9%
10,852
3 Years
8%
9,336
4 Years
7%
8,327
5 Years
6%
7,516
6 Years
6%
7,067
7 Years
5%
6,664
8 Years
5%
6,466
9 Years
5%
6,251
10 Years
5%
6,019
11 Years
5%
5,725
12 Years
5%
5,643
13 Years
5%
5,771
14 Years
5%
6,040
15 Years
5%
6,350
16 Years
4%
5,388
17 Years
4%
4,320
How many children in foster care had their parental rights terminated for all living parents? 75,000
As of September 30, 2008, how many months had elapsed since the parental rights of these foster children were terminated?
Mean Months
24.7
Median Months
13.0
How many children were adopted with public agency involvement in FY 2008? 55,000
SOURCE: Adoptions can be reported to the AFCARS adoption database at any time after the adoption has been finalized. This report includes adoptions finalized in FY 2008 reported in regular and revised submissions by July of 2009.
NOTES: The number of adoptions reported here do not equal the number of adoption discharges reported under foster care exits because the adoptions reported here include adoptions of some children who were not in foster care but received other support from the public agency. Missing data are not used in the calculation of the percentages.
What is the gender distribution of the children adopted from the public foster care system?
Male
50%
27,718
Female
50%
27,282
How old were the children when they were adopted from the public foster care system?
Mean Age
6.4
Median Age
5.2
Less than 1 Year
2%
1,098
1 Year
12%
6,333
2 Years
14%
7,932
3 Years
11%
6,225
4 Years
9%
5,065
5 Years
8%
4,170
6 Years
7%
3,801
7 Years
6%
3,254
8 Years
5%
2,947
9 Years
5%
2,480
10 Years
4%
2,271
11 Years
4%
2,050
12 Years
3%
1,673
13 Years
3%
1,458
14 Years
2%
1,308
15 Years
2%
1,102
16 Years
2%
934
17 Years
1%
704
18 Years
0%
164
19 Years
0%
20
20 Years
0%
12
What percentage of the children adopted receive an adoption subsidy?
Yes
89%
49,032
No
11%
5,968
What is the racial/ethnic distribution of the children adopted from the public foster care system?
Alaska Native/American Indian
1%
793
Asian
1%
303
Black
25%
13,687
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
111
Hispanic (of any race)
21%
11,441
White
44%
24,377
Unknown/Unable to Determine
2%
1,045
Two or more races
6%
3,242
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How many months did it take after termination of parental rights for the children to be adopted?
Mean Months
14.1
Median Months
10.3
Less than 1 Month
2%
1,318
1 – 5 Months
23%
12,721
6 – 11 Months
32%
17,743
12 – 17 Months
19%
10,309
18 – 23 Months
10%
5,434
24 – 29 Months
5%
2,836
30 – 35 Months
3%
1,490
3 – 4 Years
4%
2,168
5 Years or More
2%
981
What is the family structure of the child's adoptive family?
Married Couple
68%
37,164
Unmarried Couple
2%
1,280
Single Female
28%
15,165
Single Male
3%
1,392
What was the relationship of the adoptive parents to the child prior to the adoption?
Non-Relative
16%
8,597
Foster Parent
54%
29,610
Stepparent
0%
44
Other Relative
30%
16,749
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children's Bureau,www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb
Preliminary Estimates for FY 2008 as of October 2009 (16).
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/tar/report16.htm
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children's Bureau,www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/tar/report16.htm
The AFCARS Report
Preliminary FY 2008 Estimates as of October 2009 (16)
SOURCE: Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) FY 2008 data (October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008).
NOTES: Data from both the regular and revised foster care file submissions received by October 9, 2009, and data from adoption file submissions received by July 1, 2009, are included in the information below. Missing data are not used in the calculation of percentages.
How many children were in foster care on September 30, 2008? 463,000
What were the ages of the children in foster care?
Mean Age
9.7
Median Age
9.8
Less than 1 Year
6%
26,812
1 Year
7%
33,495
2 Years
6%
29,912
3 Years
6%
25,838
4 Years
5%
22,960
5 Years
5%
20,844
6 Years
4%
19,777
7 Years
4%
19,000
8 Years
4%
18,090
9 Years
4%
17,436
10 Years
4%
17,113
11 Years
4%
16,890
12 Years
4%
17,853
13 Years
4%
20,542
14 Years
6%
25,505
15 Years
7%
32,720
16 Years
8%
38,475
17 Years
9%
39,832
18 Years
3%
13,069
19 Years
1%
4,088
20 Years
1%
2,749
What were the lengths of stay of children in foster care?
Mean Months
27.2
Median Months
15.8
Less than 1 Month
5%
20,860
1 – 5 Months
20%
90,295
6 – 11 Months
17%
79,691
12 – 17 Months
13%
61,492
18 – 23 Months
10%
44,672
24 – 29 Months
7%
33,971
30 – 35 Months
5%
24,547
3 – 4 Years
12%
53,709
5 Years or More
12%
53,763
What were the placement settings of children in foster care?
Pre-Adoptive Home
4%
17,485
Foster Family Home (Relative)
24%
112,643
Foster Family Home (Non-Relative)
47%
217,243
Group Home
6%
29,122
Institution
10%
47,165
Supervised Independent Living
1%
5,217
Runaway
2%
9,766
Trial Home Visit
5%
24,358
What were the case goals of the children in foster care?
Reunify with Parent(s) or Principal Caretaker(s)
49%
226,867
Live with Other Relative(s)
4%
16,922
Adoption
24%
111,225
Long Term Foster Care
8%
37,522
Emancipation
6%
29,556
Guardianship
4%
18,266
Case Plan Goal Not Yet Established
5%
22,642
What was the gender of the children in foster care?
Male
53%
243,740
Female
47%
219,260
What was the race/ethnicity of the children in foster care?
Alaska Native/American Indian
2%
8,802
Asian
1%
2,631
Black
31%
142,502
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
877
Hispanic (of any race)
20%
92,464
White
40%
183,149
Unknown/Unable to Determine
2%
10,753
Two or more races
5%
21,822
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How many children entered foster care during FY 2008? 273,000
What were the ages of the children who entered care during FY 2008?
Mean Age
8.0
Median Age
7.3
Less than 1 Year
16%
44,365
1 Year
7%
19,721
2 Years
6%
16,909
3 Years
5%
14,889
4 Years
5%
13,204
5 Years
4%
12,264
6 Years
4%
11,547
7 Years
4%
10,782
8 Years
4%
9,966
9 Years
4%
9,581
10 Years
3%
8,813
11 Years
3%
8,875
12 Years
4%
9,913
13 Years
5%
12,573
14 Years
6%
16,026
15 Years
7%
20,101
16 Years
7%
19,953
17 Years
5%
12,816
18 Years
0%
563
19 Years
0%
95
20 Years
0%
44
What was the race/ethnicity of the children who entered care during FY 2008?
Alaska Native/American Indian
2%
5,646
Asian
1%
2,269
Black
26%
70,378
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
675
Hispanic (of any race)
20%
54,802
White
44%
119,242
Unknown/Unable to Determine
3%
7,431
Two or more races
5%
12,558
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How many children exited foster care during FY 2008? 285,000
What were the ages of the children who exited care during FY 2008?
Mean Age
9.6
Median Age
9.0
Less than 1 Year
5%
13,328
1 Year
8%
21,538
2 Years
7%
21,317
3 Years
6%
18,381
4 Years
6%
16,133
5 Years
5%
14,140
6 Years
5%
13,400
7 Years
4%
12,440
8 Years
4%
11,488
9 Years
4%
10,639
10 Years
3%
9,888
11 Years
3%
9,469
12 Years
3%
9,169
13 Years
3%
9,953
14 Years
4%
11,904
15 Years
5%
14,692
16 Years
6%
17,011
17 Years
8%
22,325
18 Years
8%
22,274
19 Years
1%
3,728
20 Years
1%
1,783
What were the outcomes for the children exiting foster care during FY 2008?
Reunification with Parent(s) or Primary Caretaker(s)
52%
148,340
Living with Other Relative(s)
8%
23,944
Adoption
19%
54,284
Emancipation
10%
29,516
Guardianship
7%
19,941
Transfer to Another Agency
2%
5,195
Runaway
1%
3,324
Death of Child
0%
456
NOTE: Deaths are attributable to a variety of causes including medical conditions, accidents, and homicide.
What were the lengths of stay of the children who exited foster care during FY 2008?
Mean Months
21.8
Median Months
13.3
Less than 1 Month
13%
38,303
1 – 5 Months
15%
42,933
6 – 11 Months
18%
51,025
12 – 17 Months
14%
40,796
18 – 23 Months
10%
28,785
24 – 29 Months
7%
20,428
30 – 35 Months
5%
15,040
3 – 4 Years
10%
27,567
5 Years or More
7%
20,123
What was the race/ethnicity of the children who exited care during FY 2008?
Alaska Native/American Indian
2%
5,605
Asian
1%
2,316
Black
26%
75,441
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
763
Hispanic (of any race)
20%
56,741
White
44%
124,688
Unknown/Unable to Determine
2%
6,577
Two or more races
5%
12,869
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How many children were waiting to be adopted on September 30, 2008? 123,000
NOTES: Waiting children are identified as children who have a goal of adoption and/or whose parents' parental rights have been terminated. Children 16 years old and older whose parental rights have been terminated and who have a goal of emancipation have been excluded from the estimate.
What is the gender distribution of the waiting children?
Male
53%
64,725
Female
47%
58,275
How many months have the waiting children been in continuous foster care?
Mean Months
38.0
Median Months
28.7
Less than 1 Month
0%
586
1 – 5 Months
4%
5,076
6 – 11 Months
8%
9,577
12 – 17 Months
13%
15,884
18 – 23 Months
14%
17,418
24 – 29 Months
13%
15,822
30 – 35 Months
10%
11,939
36 – 59 Months
21%
26,268
60 or more Months
17%
20,430
What is the racial/ethnic distribution of the waiting children?
Alaska Native/American Indian
2%
2,042
Asian
0%
587
Black
30%
36,913
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
251
Hispanic (of any race)
21%
26,223
White
39%
47,392
Unknown/Unable to Determine
2%
2,649
Two or more races
6%
6,943
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How old were the waiting children when they were removed from their parents or caretakers?
Mean Age
4.9
Median Age
4.1
Less than 1 Year
25%
31,199
1 Year
9%
10,734
2 Years
8%
9,567
3 Years
7%
8,655
4 Years
7%
8,258
5 Years
7%
8,034
6 Years
6%
7,779
7 Years
6%
7,093
8 Years
5%
6,578
9 Years
5%
5,830
10 Years
4%
5,072
11 Years
4%
4,323
12 Years
3%
3,514
13 Years
2%
2,757
14 Years
2%
1,904
15 Years
1%
1,084
16 Years
0%
516
17 Years
0%
103
Where were the waiting children living on September 30, 2008?
Pre-Adoptive Home
13%
15,701
Foster Family Home (Relative)
23%
28,346
Foster Family Home (Non-Relative)
53%
65,651
Group Home
4%
4,313
Institution
6%
7,408
Supervised Independent Living
0%
118
Runaway
1%
718
Trial Home Visit
1%
745
How old were the waiting children on September 30, 2008?
Mean Age
8.1
Median Age
7.5
Less than 1 Year
4%
4,628
1 Year
9%
10,636
2 Years
9%
10,852
3 Years
8%
9,336
4 Years
7%
8,327
5 Years
6%
7,516
6 Years
6%
7,067
7 Years
5%
6,664
8 Years
5%
6,466
9 Years
5%
6,251
10 Years
5%
6,019
11 Years
5%
5,725
12 Years
5%
5,643
13 Years
5%
5,771
14 Years
5%
6,040
15 Years
5%
6,350
16 Years
4%
5,388
17 Years
4%
4,320
How many children in foster care had their parental rights terminated for all living parents? 75,000
As of September 30, 2008, how many months had elapsed since the parental rights of these foster children were terminated?
Mean Months
24.7
Median Months
13.0
How many children were adopted with public agency involvement in FY 2008? 55,000
SOURCE: Adoptions can be reported to the AFCARS adoption database at any time after the adoption has been finalized. This report includes adoptions finalized in FY 2008 reported in regular and revised submissions by July of 2009.
NOTES: The number of adoptions reported here do not equal the number of adoption discharges reported under foster care exits because the adoptions reported here include adoptions of some children who were not in foster care but received other support from the public agency. Missing data are not used in the calculation of the percentages.
What is the gender distribution of the children adopted from the public foster care system?
Male
50%
27,718
Female
50%
27,282
How old were the children when they were adopted from the public foster care system?
Mean Age
6.4
Median Age
5.2
Less than 1 Year
2%
1,098
1 Year
12%
6,333
2 Years
14%
7,932
3 Years
11%
6,225
4 Years
9%
5,065
5 Years
8%
4,170
6 Years
7%
3,801
7 Years
6%
3,254
8 Years
5%
2,947
9 Years
5%
2,480
10 Years
4%
2,271
11 Years
4%
2,050
12 Years
3%
1,673
13 Years
3%
1,458
14 Years
2%
1,308
15 Years
2%
1,102
16 Years
2%
934
17 Years
1%
704
18 Years
0%
164
19 Years
0%
20
20 Years
0%
12
What percentage of the children adopted receive an adoption subsidy?
Yes
89%
49,032
No
11%
5,968
What is the racial/ethnic distribution of the children adopted from the public foster care system?
Alaska Native/American Indian
1%
793
Asian
1%
303
Black
25%
13,687
Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0%
111
Hispanic (of any race)
21%
11,441
White
44%
24,377
Unknown/Unable to Determine
2%
1,045
Two or more races
6%
3,242
NOTE: Using U.S. Bureau of the Census standards, all races exclude children of Hispanic origin. Beginning in FY 2000, children could be identified with more than one race designation.
How many months did it take after termination of parental rights for the children to be adopted?
Mean Months
14.1
Median Months
10.3
Less than 1 Month
2%
1,318
1 – 5 Months
23%
12,721
6 – 11 Months
32%
17,743
12 – 17 Months
19%
10,309
18 – 23 Months
10%
5,434
24 – 29 Months
5%
2,836
30 – 35 Months
3%
1,490
3 – 4 Years
4%
2,168
5 Years or More
2%
981
What is the family structure of the child's adoptive family?
Married Couple
68%
37,164
Unmarried Couple
2%
1,280
Single Female
28%
15,165
Single Male
3%
1,392
What was the relationship of the adoptive parents to the child prior to the adoption?
Non-Relative
16%
8,597
Foster Parent
54%
29,610
Stepparent
0%
44
Other Relative
30%
16,749
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children's Bureau,www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb
Preliminary Estimates for FY 2008 as of October 2009 (16).
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/tar/report16.htm
Don't let Gabriel Myers' story be repeated-Save Austin Knightly, Doped up by Nashua, NH DCYF!
Don't let Gabriel Myers' story be repeated-Help Stop the Drugging of Our Children By the State
By Brian J. Cabrey
May 29, 2010
Well, it's been more than a year since the suicide death of 7-year-old Gabriel Myers, and what have we learned? What do we know now to prevent this sort of tragedy from ever happening again? Lest we forget, on April 16, 2009, little Gabriel hung himself with a shower hose in the bathroom of his foster home in Margate, Florida.
Gabriel had been the victim of sexual abuse and neglect, which resulted in him being placed in Florida's foster care system. While in foster care, he was regularly "medicated" with multiple psychotropic drugs to deal with his escalating behavioral problems, which were in and of themselves predictable if anyone was paying attention.
In August 2009, the Gabriel Myers Work Group, appointed by DCF Secretary George Sheldon, issued its first report, confirming what most children's advocates had known and decried for years, that the state routinely used mind altering psychotropic drugs, most not tested or approved by the FDA for pediatric use, to control and manage unruly foster kids rather than treat their underlying problems. While it was good for some light to finally be shed on that abhorrent practice, it only exposed half of the problem.
That is until last Friday, when the Gabriel Myers Work Group issued its second report, confirming another longtime complaint of children's advocates. The task force found that the state failed to provide adequate treatment to little Gabriel for the sexual abuse he had suffered and failed to prevent him from acting out sexually against other children, something it is common for child victims of sexual abuse to do.
Sadly, little Gabriel was not alone as all too often the child welfare/foster care system fails to provide child victims of physical and sexual abuse with adequate treatment, if any at all. If they did, not only might the victim children recover as fully as possible to become productive members of society, and other children be spared the same victimization, but in Gabriel's case, he very likely would still be alive.
The question for us now is what is the state of Florida going to do about it? Now that the task force has confirmed what many of us have long complained about and we know what went wrong, what will DCF do to change its practices so that we don't have catastrophic failures like this in the future?
Kudos to Secretary Sheldon for appointing the Work Group, and kudos to the Work Group for exposing the real problems that led little Gabriel to take his own life at just 7 years old. Darts to lawmakers for not following and implementing the Work Group's recommendations, and for not passing the proposed Florida Children's Legal Representation Act endorsed by the Florida Bar.
Sadly, the Florida Legislature has not yet learned the lessons from Gabriel's death, which means this tragedy will surely repeat itself. Unacceptable! Florida's foster children deserve better, and as Floridians we should be demanding better of our elected and public officials. One child lost is one too many.
Brian J. Cabrey is vice president of Florida's Children First, a statewide child advocacy group
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/commentary/fl-gabriel-myers-forum-20100529,0,2638756.story
By Brian J. Cabrey
May 29, 2010
Well, it's been more than a year since the suicide death of 7-year-old Gabriel Myers, and what have we learned? What do we know now to prevent this sort of tragedy from ever happening again? Lest we forget, on April 16, 2009, little Gabriel hung himself with a shower hose in the bathroom of his foster home in Margate, Florida.
Gabriel had been the victim of sexual abuse and neglect, which resulted in him being placed in Florida's foster care system. While in foster care, he was regularly "medicated" with multiple psychotropic drugs to deal with his escalating behavioral problems, which were in and of themselves predictable if anyone was paying attention.
In August 2009, the Gabriel Myers Work Group, appointed by DCF Secretary George Sheldon, issued its first report, confirming what most children's advocates had known and decried for years, that the state routinely used mind altering psychotropic drugs, most not tested or approved by the FDA for pediatric use, to control and manage unruly foster kids rather than treat their underlying problems. While it was good for some light to finally be shed on that abhorrent practice, it only exposed half of the problem.
That is until last Friday, when the Gabriel Myers Work Group issued its second report, confirming another longtime complaint of children's advocates. The task force found that the state failed to provide adequate treatment to little Gabriel for the sexual abuse he had suffered and failed to prevent him from acting out sexually against other children, something it is common for child victims of sexual abuse to do.
Sadly, little Gabriel was not alone as all too often the child welfare/foster care system fails to provide child victims of physical and sexual abuse with adequate treatment, if any at all. If they did, not only might the victim children recover as fully as possible to become productive members of society, and other children be spared the same victimization, but in Gabriel's case, he very likely would still be alive.
The question for us now is what is the state of Florida going to do about it? Now that the task force has confirmed what many of us have long complained about and we know what went wrong, what will DCF do to change its practices so that we don't have catastrophic failures like this in the future?
Kudos to Secretary Sheldon for appointing the Work Group, and kudos to the Work Group for exposing the real problems that led little Gabriel to take his own life at just 7 years old. Darts to lawmakers for not following and implementing the Work Group's recommendations, and for not passing the proposed Florida Children's Legal Representation Act endorsed by the Florida Bar.
Sadly, the Florida Legislature has not yet learned the lessons from Gabriel's death, which means this tragedy will surely repeat itself. Unacceptable! Florida's foster children deserve better, and as Floridians we should be demanding better of our elected and public officials. One child lost is one too many.
Brian J. Cabrey is vice president of Florida's Children First, a statewide child advocacy group
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/commentary/fl-gabriel-myers-forum-20100529,0,2638756.story
Mother sues over foster home death
Mother sues over foster home death
By: Tamara Lindstrom
A baby was killed in foster care and now his mother is asking the county to pay. Our Tamara Lindstrom tells us why the mother of Adrian Hines is suing Tompkins County and the Department of Social Services and what the county had to say.
TOMPKINS COUNTY, N.Y. -- It is every mother's worst nightmare.
"You can imagine any parent, or any person, just having your child plucked from your arms and taken away and that child not just dying, but being killed in foster care," said Edward Kopko, attorney for the child's mother.
In July 2008, 13-month-old Adrian Hines was removed from his mother's home by the Department of Social Services, who Kopko says claimed the mother failed to provide a safe and sanitary home. Three months later, he was dead.
"She had a very brief opportunity to hold her child before the child passed away. She actually had to make the decision to withdraw life support systems from the child," Kopko said.
An autopsy revealed blunt trauma to the infant's head and bleeding in his brain. Adrian's death was ruled a homicide and that he was a victim of shaken baby syndrome.
A year and a half later, no one has been charged with a crime. District Attorney Gwen Wilkinson reports they have exhausted all leads and were unable to gather enough evidence to bring the case before a grand jury.
Now Adrian's mother, Kristine Freda, has filed a lawsuit against Tompkins County and the Department of Social Services.
"We contend that there was a gross deviation in proper standards here that led immediately and directly to the death of this child," Kopko said.
The lawsuit states that there was no basis for removing Adrian from his home in the first place, that DSS failed to explore leaving the child with a family member and failed to ensure the baby was properly cared for.
Freda is seeking damages for Adrian's medical bills and funeral costs and for pain and suffering.
"She has had her own immense suffering as a result of not only the death of her child, but the circumstances of the death of her child," Kopko said.
"The county has yet to answer the lawsuit. We're reviewing the allegations. But primarily we'll deny them," said County Attorney Jonathan Wood.
Due to the pending lawsuit, DSS and the county are unable to comment on the investigations.
"What I can say is, based on what I've reviewed, I don't have any reason to believe that the department didn't do everything it was supposed to do," Wood said.
"That is a bizarre comment," Kopko said. "Children of this age don't just die. This child died from a blunt trauma to its head. The coroner has determined that it was a homicide. Those are not ordinary common circumstances. There's a global universal issue here about how is could possibly happen that an infant is killed in foster care."
The D.A. said that while the case is cold, there is no statute of limitations on this type of homicide, so there is still a chance that whoever killed baby Adrian could be brought to justice.
The lawsuit is now in the discovery stage. Freda and her attorney are asking to see the results of the county's investigation into the homicide and records from the Department of Social Services.
http://centralny.ynn.com/content/top_stories/506049/mother-sues-over-foster-home-death/
By: Tamara Lindstrom
A baby was killed in foster care and now his mother is asking the county to pay. Our Tamara Lindstrom tells us why the mother of Adrian Hines is suing Tompkins County and the Department of Social Services and what the county had to say.
TOMPKINS COUNTY, N.Y. -- It is every mother's worst nightmare.
"You can imagine any parent, or any person, just having your child plucked from your arms and taken away and that child not just dying, but being killed in foster care," said Edward Kopko, attorney for the child's mother.
In July 2008, 13-month-old Adrian Hines was removed from his mother's home by the Department of Social Services, who Kopko says claimed the mother failed to provide a safe and sanitary home. Three months later, he was dead.
"She had a very brief opportunity to hold her child before the child passed away. She actually had to make the decision to withdraw life support systems from the child," Kopko said.
An autopsy revealed blunt trauma to the infant's head and bleeding in his brain. Adrian's death was ruled a homicide and that he was a victim of shaken baby syndrome.
A year and a half later, no one has been charged with a crime. District Attorney Gwen Wilkinson reports they have exhausted all leads and were unable to gather enough evidence to bring the case before a grand jury.
Now Adrian's mother, Kristine Freda, has filed a lawsuit against Tompkins County and the Department of Social Services.
"We contend that there was a gross deviation in proper standards here that led immediately and directly to the death of this child," Kopko said.
The lawsuit states that there was no basis for removing Adrian from his home in the first place, that DSS failed to explore leaving the child with a family member and failed to ensure the baby was properly cared for.
Freda is seeking damages for Adrian's medical bills and funeral costs and for pain and suffering.
"She has had her own immense suffering as a result of not only the death of her child, but the circumstances of the death of her child," Kopko said.
"The county has yet to answer the lawsuit. We're reviewing the allegations. But primarily we'll deny them," said County Attorney Jonathan Wood.
Due to the pending lawsuit, DSS and the county are unable to comment on the investigations.
"What I can say is, based on what I've reviewed, I don't have any reason to believe that the department didn't do everything it was supposed to do," Wood said.
"That is a bizarre comment," Kopko said. "Children of this age don't just die. This child died from a blunt trauma to its head. The coroner has determined that it was a homicide. Those are not ordinary common circumstances. There's a global universal issue here about how is could possibly happen that an infant is killed in foster care."
The D.A. said that while the case is cold, there is no statute of limitations on this type of homicide, so there is still a chance that whoever killed baby Adrian could be brought to justice.
The lawsuit is now in the discovery stage. Freda and her attorney are asking to see the results of the county's investigation into the homicide and records from the Department of Social Services.
http://centralny.ynn.com/content/top_stories/506049/mother-sues-over-foster-home-death/
Mom finds kidnapped daughter on Facebook
VideoPhoto
Mom finds kidnapped daughter on Facebook
Updated: Friday, 28 May 2010, 10:48 PM EDT
Published : Friday, 28 May 2010, 9:57 PM EDT
By Tracy Jacim
FOX 35 News
A father is behind bars, arrested for allegedly kidnapped his own children from California 14 years ago, and bringing them to Central Florida to live.
For years, investigators have been searching for him, but it was the social networking website Facebook that delivered the break it took more than a decade to get.
Faustino Utrera is now charged with two counts of kidnapping, and two counts of violating child custody orders.
According to the Osceola County Sheriff's Office, Utrera was at a bus stop on Wednesday at about 2:30 in the afternoon, waiting to pick up his 16-year-old son from school, when he was taken into custody.
Faustino's 16-year-old son and 17-year-old daughter had been attending celebration high school. Investigators said the family of three had actually been living in the palm key mobile home park in Polk County.
Investigators said that in 1995, Utrera took his two kids from the family's San Bernardino, California home and disappeared.
Then just last march, investigators said the mother of the children was on Facebook and found her daughter. When she began conversing online, her very own daughter, who hadn't seen her since she was 3 years old, told her mom she wanted nothing to do with her and deleted her Facebook page.
San Bernardino authorities issued an out-of-state arrest warrant, and this past Wednesday, Osceola County deputies caught up with Utrera.
“I saw cop cars of all sorts,” said neighbor Joe Austin.
Austin said Utrera and the two kids lived right across the street from him for about five months. Austin never talked to Utrera, but he did see the two kids. He said they seemed happy then, and they seemed happy on Friday, when children and family services brought them back to their home to pick up some clothing.
"The little boy didn't seem upset. I couldn't see him real well, but I assume he wasn't, because the girl wasn't. She was skipping."
We know Faustino's daughter is about to turn 18, and she officially graduated from celebration high school on Thursday night. For now, both children are in the custody of the State of Florida.
The mother of the children could not be reached for comment on Friday.
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/osceola_news/052810mom-finds-kidnapped-daughter-on-facebook
Mom finds kidnapped daughter on Facebook
Updated: Friday, 28 May 2010, 10:48 PM EDT
Published : Friday, 28 May 2010, 9:57 PM EDT
By Tracy Jacim
FOX 35 News
A father is behind bars, arrested for allegedly kidnapped his own children from California 14 years ago, and bringing them to Central Florida to live.
For years, investigators have been searching for him, but it was the social networking website Facebook that delivered the break it took more than a decade to get.
Faustino Utrera is now charged with two counts of kidnapping, and two counts of violating child custody orders.
According to the Osceola County Sheriff's Office, Utrera was at a bus stop on Wednesday at about 2:30 in the afternoon, waiting to pick up his 16-year-old son from school, when he was taken into custody.
Faustino's 16-year-old son and 17-year-old daughter had been attending celebration high school. Investigators said the family of three had actually been living in the palm key mobile home park in Polk County.
Investigators said that in 1995, Utrera took his two kids from the family's San Bernardino, California home and disappeared.
Then just last march, investigators said the mother of the children was on Facebook and found her daughter. When she began conversing online, her very own daughter, who hadn't seen her since she was 3 years old, told her mom she wanted nothing to do with her and deleted her Facebook page.
San Bernardino authorities issued an out-of-state arrest warrant, and this past Wednesday, Osceola County deputies caught up with Utrera.
“I saw cop cars of all sorts,” said neighbor Joe Austin.
Austin said Utrera and the two kids lived right across the street from him for about five months. Austin never talked to Utrera, but he did see the two kids. He said they seemed happy then, and they seemed happy on Friday, when children and family services brought them back to their home to pick up some clothing.
"The little boy didn't seem upset. I couldn't see him real well, but I assume he wasn't, because the girl wasn't. She was skipping."
We know Faustino's daughter is about to turn 18, and she officially graduated from celebration high school on Thursday night. For now, both children are in the custody of the State of Florida.
The mother of the children could not be reached for comment on Friday.
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/osceola_news/052810mom-finds-kidnapped-daughter-on-facebook
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)