This law is an outrage. The States are selling our children for $4,000.00 per child who is in foster care. They are forcing the parents to sign over their children to adoptive parents in order to get the money. This is an outrage, and a crime. This must be stopped. They remove children for little or no reason then put them up for bid to the highest bidder. Right your congressman and let them know this must be stopped. It provides incentives alright- it is baby selling at it finest.
Detailed Summary of the
The Adoption and Safe Families Act
Stresses Child’s Safety in all Placement Decisions,
and Provides Incentives for Adoptions
Document Author: Carmela Welte, Deputy Director, National CASA Association
Posted: 12/97
Emphasizes the Safety of the Child – in home and in foster care
First the law clarifies the intent of the “reasonable efforts” requirement which appears in the Family Preservation and Support Services Act (P.L. 96-272). The 1984 law states that the state must make reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need for removing a child from his home, or if the child has been removed, then the state must make reasonable efforts to reunify the child with his family in a timely manner. The new statute now stresses that the child’s health and safety shall be the paramount concern in determining what is reasonable, and consistent with the plan for timely, permanent placement of a child. The “reasonable efforts” requirement can be waived entirely in certain circumstances, such as if the parent had committed a felony assault causing serious bodily injury to the child or sibling; committed or attempted murder or voluntary manslaughter of a sibling; aggravated circumstances including abandonment, torture, chronic abuse or sexual abuse; or if the parental rights to a sibling had been terminated involuntarily.
The law also emphasizes that the safety of children in foster care must be considered in case plans and case reviews. Dual planning is allowed. That is, reasonable efforts may be made to reunify the child with his family concurrently with efforts to place a child in an adoptive family or with a legal guardian.
Criminal records checks must be conducted for prospective foster and adoptive parents before they are approved for placement of a child who qualifies them to receive maintenance or adoption assistance payments. Prospective caretakers are disqualified if their record check reveals a felony conviction of child abuse or neglect, spousal abuse, or violent crime at any time, or a conviction of physical assault, battery or drug-related offense within the last 5 years. States are able to override the requirement for criminal records checks by passing state legislation or providing written notification by the governor to the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Shortens Time Frame for Permanent Placement
Services to reunify families funded under Title IV-B should not extend beyond 15 months. These services include counseling, substance abuse treatment services, domestic violence services, temporary child care and related services.
A petition to terminate parental rights shall be filed for parents whose child has been in foster care for 15 of the last 22 months; if a court has determined a child is an abandoned infant; or in the circumstances described under “reasonable efforts” above. The state may proceed to recruit and process a qualified family for adoption when the petition is filed. The law allows for exceptions, such as if the child is being cared for by a relative; the case plan documents a compelling reason that termination would not be in the best interests of the child; or if the state did not make reasonable efforts or provide services to the family within the time period of the case plan.
The beginning of foster care is determined as either the date of the first judicial finding that a child has been abused or neglected; or 60 days after the child is removed from home, whichever is earlier. The new time frame in which to terminate parental rights is effective immediately for all children entering foster care after November 19, 1997, the date of enactment. In the cases of children already in foster care before the law was enacted, there is a formula by which states can transition into compliance. The formula allows the states a total of 18 months after the end of the first state legislative session to fully comply. For each six month period after the close of the state legislative session, states shall select 1/3 of the children who have been in foster care prior to 11/19/97, giving priority to children in foster care the greatest length of time and for whom adoption is the permanency plan.
The role of the CASA or guardian ad litem becomes even more critical with the shorter time frame that a child can remain in foster care. The courts and child welfare agencies will still be dealing with overwhelming caseloads, yet have less time to devote to an individual child’s’ case. CASA’s can be an assurance that the child has an advocate that will take the time to thoroughly research the child’s situation, and important facts are not overlooked.
The new law allows foster parents, relative caregivers or preadoptive parents to receive notice of, and the opportunity to be heard at, any review or hearing concerning the child. The provision does not intend that these individuals should be made parties to the review or hearing.
Incentives for Adoptions or Other Permanency Placements
The new law provides states with cash incentives to find permanent homes for children in foster care. A state will receive $4,000 in federal funds for each foster child adoption which exceeds a base number of foster care adoptions in a fiscal year, and an additional $2,000 for special needs adoptions. In fiscal 1998, the base number will be the average of adoptions in the previous 3 fiscal years. In succeeding years, through 2002, the base is the number of adoptions of the preceding fiscal year. States are to use the federal funds to provide post-adoption services to children and families.
Permanency planning hearings must be held within 12 months of a child’s placement, rather than 18-month “dispositional hearing” as currently required under federal law. At the hearing, a determination shall be made on a permanency plan. That is, whether and when to reunify the child with his family; place the child in adoption, legal guardianship, or other permanent living arrangement; or to petition for termination of parental rights. When reasonable efforts are not required to unify a child with his parents, a permanency planning hearing must be held within 30 days of such determination.
For children whose permanency plan is adoption or placement in another permanent home, the child welfare agency must document the steps it has taken to locate a permanent home for the child, whether that be with an adoptive family, relative, legal guardian or other permanent living arrangement. At a minimum, the state the should conduct child-specific recruitment efforts such as the use of state, regional and national adoption exchanges.
HHS will provide technical assistance, directly or through grants, to states and local communities to reach their targets for increased adoptions or alternative permanent placements for children in foster care. At least of 50% of the funds available for technical assistance will be targeted to help courts. Priorities for technical assistance will be to: 1) develop best practice guidelines to expedite termination of parental rights; 2) models to encourage dual planning; 3) develop specialized units and expertise in moving children toward adoption as a permanency goal; 4) develop risk assessment tools for early identification of children at risk of harm if returned home; 5) models to encourage fast tracking of children under age 1 into pre-adoptive homes; and 6) develop programs which place children into pre-adoptive families without waiting for termination of parental rights.
Addresses Geographic Barriers to Adoptions
In order to facilitate timely adoptions for waiting children across state and county jurisdictions, states are required to develop plans to utilize cross-jurisdictional resources. Title IV-E Foster Care and Adoption Assistance payments to the state are also predicated upon a state’s cooperation in processing a child’s adoptive placement if an approved family is available outside of the jurisdiction. In addition, the Office of the Comptroller General has been instructed to study cross-jurisdictional adoption issues, and consider procedures and policies to facilitate timely and permanent adoptions. Recommendations to improve cross-jurisdictional placements must be reported to Congress by November, 1998.
Outcome Measures to Assess State Performance
The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), in consultation with public officials and child advocates, will develop outcome measures, and rating system, to assess states’ performance in child protection and child welfare programs. Measures should include length of stay in foster care, the number of placements and number of adoptions, and to the extent possible, utilize data available from the established Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS). States will report their performance on each outcome measure, and the Secretary of HHS will provide an annual report to Congress beginning on May 1, 1999.
Congress is also requesting a recommendation for a performance-based incentive system from the Secretary of HHS, again in consultation with public officials and child advocates. The incentive system could provide Title IV-B and IV-E payments to states based upon their outcome performance.
The law also expands to 10 the number of states which may receive child welfare waivers to demonstrate new approaches to child welfare reform. Consideration will be given to state applications which: identify and address barriers to adoptions; parental substance abuse problems which endanger children and result in the placement of children in foster care; or kinship care. The states must provide health insurance to adopted children with special needs.
Continues Court Improvement and Family Preservation Programs
The Family Preservation and Support Services Act is reauthorized in the law through the year 2001, and now renamed as “Promoting Safe and Stable Families.” Funding is increased by approximately $20 million each year, which can be utilized by states for programs to prevent child abuse and neglect, assist families in crisis, and is now expanded to include reunification services and adoption promotion and support services. Federal support for the State Court Improvement Program is also authorized through the year 2001.
Expands Health Coverage for Special Needs Children and Independent Living Services
States must provide health insurance coverage for any child with special needs for whom the state determines cannot be placed without assistance to provide for the child’s medical, mental health or rehabilitative care and there is an adoption assistance agreement with an adoptive parent. States can provide health coverage, including mental health, through the Medicaid option or another program which is at least equivalent to Medicaid. Children who were eligible for Title IV-E will also have their payments reinstated if their adoption was dissolved, or their adoptive parents died.
Independent Living Services are extended to young people whose assets do not exceed $5,000, rather than the current $1,000 cap. Services are designed to assist young people prepare for living independently when they leave foster care.
Kinship Care, Substance Abuse Subjects for Future Study
A national Advisory Panel on Kinship Care will be convened by the Secretary of HHS, which will report to Congress by June, 1999, the extent to which children in foster care are placed in the care of a relative. The report should include information on state policies regarding kinship care; demographics of relative caregivers; costs and funding; services provided to the kinship caregiver; and the circumstances under which children enter kinship care.
The extent of substance abuse as a factor in child welfare families will be a reviewed by Congress in 1998. The Secretary of HHS will submit a report describing the scope of the problem, services provided to families, and the outcomes of such services. The Secretary may also submit legislative recommendations to improve coordination of substance abuse and child protective services.
Legal and Standby Guardianship
The term “legal guardian” is defined in the statute as a permanent relationship between child and caretaker and transfers parental rights to the caretaker for the child’s protection, education, care, custody and decision-making.
The new law urges states to adopt laws and procedures to allow parents who are chronically ill or near death to designate a standby guardian for their children, without surrendering their parental rights.
Published on October 30, 2009 at 1:55 am
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://avoiceforthevictims.wordpress.com/about/this-is-an-outrage-the-states-are-selling-our-children/trackback/
Please check this out and comment
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
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Kidnapping for Profit-by Child Protective Services
Kidnapping for Profit- Child Protective Services
Posted By: kbcjedi
Date: Friday, 24-Jun-2005 12:21:03 Call a Spade a Spade. Here is a dynamite article on the usurpation of the rights of parents.
The wisdom, and the understanding of human nature evidenced by our Founding Fathers in their statement in the Declaration of Independence: “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed” continues to shine forth.
I receive requests from all over the country asking what to do about various problems. The most common request concerns the Child Protective Services, (CPS) or as Utah calls it, the Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS).
Federal Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer ordered the Illinois Department of Family Services to redesign their entire program because their investigations of child abuse and neglect had too many false accusations. She judged the system to be unconstitutional because they threatened people with removal of their children unless the parents cooperate with every whim issued by DCFS. Judge Pallmeyer said this tactic was extortion, which is a felony. Utah uses exactly the same tactics. This is no different that Al Capone’s protection racket of the 1920’s – do what I want or I will destroy your business.
The favorite malady that DCFS uses to take away children is called Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy, It is interesting to note that the Irish Examiner, in a story on Wednesday, January 21, 2004, titled, “Theory puts ‘5,000’ in care,” had this to say about Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy and Professor Meadow who created the Syndrome.
“It is estimated that 5,000 British children may have been taken into care over the past 15 years as a result of Professor Meadow’s theory of Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy. The theory that some mothers harm their children to draw attention to themselves has been largely discredited as a result of a series of high-profile court cases.
Prof Meadow’s theory has been discredited as a result of three cases in which he gave evidence of women who were wrongly accused of killing their children.
Prof Meadow is now facing an inquiry by the General Medical Council into allegations of serious professional misconduct.
The attorney general Lord Goldsmith is now examining a further 250 criminal cases involving Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy to see if more mothers may have been wrongly convicted.”
The purported mental “disease” does not exist and the Doctor that created the problem is losing his license. But DCFS doesn’t care, because it’s not about the children, it’s about money.
That’s right, the Money.
According to an article in the Charlotte World by Angie Vineyard, the DCFS receives $4,000 for every child they place in their system. They get even more money if the child can be shown to be Special Needs. Ruling the child to have “Attention Deficit” qualifies the state for an increase in funding.
An investigation by The LA Daily News found that up to half of the 75,000 children in the California system and adoptive homes were needlessly placed in a system that is often more dangerous than their own homes because of financial incentives in state and federal laws. These laws, according to state documents, encourage counties and their private contractors to earn money by placing and keeping children in foster care. The county receives $30,000 to $150,000 in state and federal revenues annually for each child placed.
DCFS has a long history of judgment lapses and scandal. According to Angie Vineyard in the Charlotte World, the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services has placed so many children for adoption that the US Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson gave them an award for “collaborating with the court system, mental health providers, the General Assembly, churches, business and private citizens and for doubling the number of special needs children adopted from the foster care system in just six years.” This all adds up to more money.
Troy Anderson of the LA Daily News reports Anthony Cavuoti, a DCFS social worker for 14 years, said the department does a poor job of protecting children.
“The nominal goal is to protect children, but the real goal is to make money,” he said. “A caseworker used to have 80 to 100 cases. If the workers put kids before paperwork and administration, they are going to be forced out or harassed. With such a mentality, children are always in danger.”
In Massachusetts, Anderson Consulting and Public Consulting Groups have been hired to “maximize federal revenue”. The companies have brought the state an additional 90 million a year. That’s 90 million tax dollars awarded for pulling children out of one home and placing them with another.
The problem is much deeper than that.
EVERY CHILD WHO HAS EVER BEEN REMOVED FROM THE HOME OF ITS PARENTS HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED UNDER THE COLOR OF LAW.
As proof of that statement I offer the following:
There is no person anywhere on earth that has the inherent right to take a child away from its parents. I can’t do it. You can’t do it. And neither can your neighbors or friends.
If nobody has that power and authority, and, if We, the People, are the ones who give the government its power and authority, then –
WHERE DOES THE GOVERNMENT THINK IT GETS THE POWER AND THE RIGHT TO TAKE KIDS AWAY FROM THEIR PARENTS?
The government knows it does not have the power and the authority. The many well educated lawyers are not dumb about the Constitution – they don’t care, because of the money that can be made. To heck with the kids, the parents, and the Constitution.
This situation is a ticking time bomb.
Eventually the people will reach the point our Founders Fathers described and demand redress for the unconstitutional actions that have been perpetrated against them by the government.
There isn’t enough money in the world to pay for the pain and suffering. And, it’s not just the parents and the kids who have suffered, it’s the grandparents, the aunts, the uncles, and the cousins.
Most of the children may be just returned to their parents, but what about the thousands who have been killed by abusive foster parents? What about the unlawful adoptions? The adoptive parents will now want redress, along with all of their extended families.
Who knows where this will go, or where it might end up.
Jim Barrus
CEO
Constitutional Concepts Foundation
Posted By: kbcjedi
Date: Friday, 24-Jun-2005 12:21:03 Call a Spade a Spade. Here is a dynamite article on the usurpation of the rights of parents.
The wisdom, and the understanding of human nature evidenced by our Founding Fathers in their statement in the Declaration of Independence: “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed” continues to shine forth.
I receive requests from all over the country asking what to do about various problems. The most common request concerns the Child Protective Services, (CPS) or as Utah calls it, the Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS).
Federal Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer ordered the Illinois Department of Family Services to redesign their entire program because their investigations of child abuse and neglect had too many false accusations. She judged the system to be unconstitutional because they threatened people with removal of their children unless the parents cooperate with every whim issued by DCFS. Judge Pallmeyer said this tactic was extortion, which is a felony. Utah uses exactly the same tactics. This is no different that Al Capone’s protection racket of the 1920’s – do what I want or I will destroy your business.
The favorite malady that DCFS uses to take away children is called Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy, It is interesting to note that the Irish Examiner, in a story on Wednesday, January 21, 2004, titled, “Theory puts ‘5,000’ in care,” had this to say about Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy and Professor Meadow who created the Syndrome.
“It is estimated that 5,000 British children may have been taken into care over the past 15 years as a result of Professor Meadow’s theory of Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy. The theory that some mothers harm their children to draw attention to themselves has been largely discredited as a result of a series of high-profile court cases.
Prof Meadow’s theory has been discredited as a result of three cases in which he gave evidence of women who were wrongly accused of killing their children.
Prof Meadow is now facing an inquiry by the General Medical Council into allegations of serious professional misconduct.
The attorney general Lord Goldsmith is now examining a further 250 criminal cases involving Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy to see if more mothers may have been wrongly convicted.”
The purported mental “disease” does not exist and the Doctor that created the problem is losing his license. But DCFS doesn’t care, because it’s not about the children, it’s about money.
That’s right, the Money.
According to an article in the Charlotte World by Angie Vineyard, the DCFS receives $4,000 for every child they place in their system. They get even more money if the child can be shown to be Special Needs. Ruling the child to have “Attention Deficit” qualifies the state for an increase in funding.
An investigation by The LA Daily News found that up to half of the 75,000 children in the California system and adoptive homes were needlessly placed in a system that is often more dangerous than their own homes because of financial incentives in state and federal laws. These laws, according to state documents, encourage counties and their private contractors to earn money by placing and keeping children in foster care. The county receives $30,000 to $150,000 in state and federal revenues annually for each child placed.
DCFS has a long history of judgment lapses and scandal. According to Angie Vineyard in the Charlotte World, the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services has placed so many children for adoption that the US Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson gave them an award for “collaborating with the court system, mental health providers, the General Assembly, churches, business and private citizens and for doubling the number of special needs children adopted from the foster care system in just six years.” This all adds up to more money.
Troy Anderson of the LA Daily News reports Anthony Cavuoti, a DCFS social worker for 14 years, said the department does a poor job of protecting children.
“The nominal goal is to protect children, but the real goal is to make money,” he said. “A caseworker used to have 80 to 100 cases. If the workers put kids before paperwork and administration, they are going to be forced out or harassed. With such a mentality, children are always in danger.”
In Massachusetts, Anderson Consulting and Public Consulting Groups have been hired to “maximize federal revenue”. The companies have brought the state an additional 90 million a year. That’s 90 million tax dollars awarded for pulling children out of one home and placing them with another.
The problem is much deeper than that.
EVERY CHILD WHO HAS EVER BEEN REMOVED FROM THE HOME OF ITS PARENTS HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED UNDER THE COLOR OF LAW.
As proof of that statement I offer the following:
There is no person anywhere on earth that has the inherent right to take a child away from its parents. I can’t do it. You can’t do it. And neither can your neighbors or friends.
If nobody has that power and authority, and, if We, the People, are the ones who give the government its power and authority, then –
WHERE DOES THE GOVERNMENT THINK IT GETS THE POWER AND THE RIGHT TO TAKE KIDS AWAY FROM THEIR PARENTS?
The government knows it does not have the power and the authority. The many well educated lawyers are not dumb about the Constitution – they don’t care, because of the money that can be made. To heck with the kids, the parents, and the Constitution.
This situation is a ticking time bomb.
Eventually the people will reach the point our Founders Fathers described and demand redress for the unconstitutional actions that have been perpetrated against them by the government.
There isn’t enough money in the world to pay for the pain and suffering. And, it’s not just the parents and the kids who have suffered, it’s the grandparents, the aunts, the uncles, and the cousins.
Most of the children may be just returned to their parents, but what about the thousands who have been killed by abusive foster parents? What about the unlawful adoptions? The adoptive parents will now want redress, along with all of their extended families.
Who knows where this will go, or where it might end up.
Jim Barrus
CEO
Constitutional Concepts Foundation
How Child Protective Services Works-Leonard Henderson-Manchester Examiner Article
"Most of the time, I was taking their kids away for no good reason" --A New York City CPS worker.
All it takes to begin the potential destruction of a family is a call to one of the child protective "hotlines" in every state. The call can be made anonymously, making the hotlines potent tools for harassment. More often, however, false allegations are well-meaning mistakes made by people who have taken the advice of the child savers.
Though state laws generally encourage -- or require -- reports if you have "reasonable cause to suspect" maltreatment, child savers urge us to call in our slightest suspicions about almost any parental behavior. (And that sort of advice is not limited to adults. One group has published a comic book effectively telling children to turn in their parents to "other grown-up friends" if they get a spanking). The hotlines then forward the calls to Child Protective Services (CPS) agencies who send workers to investigate. These workers can go to a child's school or day care center and interrogate them without warning. Such an interrogation can undercut the bonds of trust essential for healthy parent-child relationships and traumatize children for whom the only harm is the harm of the investigation itself.
Workers can search homes and strip-search children without a warrant. Child savers insist such searches are rare. But in the course of defending against a lawsuit, the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services acknowledged how common they really are. In its legal papers, the department said that any effort to restrict strip-searching "would immediately bring the child abuse hotline investigations to a halt."Such a statement can be true only if strip-searching is routine.
Then it is up to the worker to decide if the case will be "substantiated" and the accused will be listed in a state "central register" of suspected child abusers. Workers make these decisions on their own. There is no hearing beforehand, no way for the accused to defend themselves. (In some states, they can try and fight their way out of the register after the fact).
No proof is required to "substantiate" a case. In most states, "substantiated" means only that there is "some credible evidence" of maltreatment, even if there is more evidence of innocence.
And what if parents object to all this? What if they want to defend their children against a strip-search, for example? Technically, in some circumstances, they can say no to a CPS worker (though the worker doesn't have to tell them this -- there is no equivalent of a "Miranda warning"). But if they do say no, the worker can wield the most feared power of all -- the power to remove a child from the home on the spot.
Workers have that power in 29 of America's 55 states and territories. In all but four of the rest, they need merely call the police to do it for them. Parents then must go to court to try and get their children back. In most states, there is supposed to be a hearing in a matter of days, but often it takes far longer before that child's parents get their day in court.
And it is a very short day. Such hearings tend to be five-minute assembly line procedures with a CPS lawyer who does this for a living on one side, and a bewildered, impoverished parent who just met her lawyer five minutes before -- if she has a lawyer at all -- on the other. Children are almost never returned at these hearings. If the children are lucky, they may get to go home after the next hearing in 30 or 90 days. Or maybe they will never go home at all.
And who are the CPS workers who wield this enormous power? In most states, a bachelor's degree in anything and a quickie training course devoted largely to how to fill out forms are the only requirements for the job. Turnover is enormous and caseloads are crushing. And the worker will find little guidance in the law, which is so broad that almost anything can be deemed abuse or, especially, neglect (See Family Preservation Issue Paper 5, Child Abuse and Poverty). Given all that, it's easy to see why so many children are needlessly removed from their homes.
But that is not the only tragedy. Enormous caseloads dominated by false and trivial cases steal workers' time from children in real danger. That's the real reason children sometimes are left in unsafe homes
There is a CPS worker who allegedly told several parents "I have the power of God." Even more frightening than the thought of a worker saying such a thing is the fact that it's true. CPS workers do have the power of God. And rarely is the power of God accompanied by the wisdom of Solomon.
ShareThis
All it takes to begin the potential destruction of a family is a call to one of the child protective "hotlines" in every state. The call can be made anonymously, making the hotlines potent tools for harassment. More often, however, false allegations are well-meaning mistakes made by people who have taken the advice of the child savers.
Though state laws generally encourage -- or require -- reports if you have "reasonable cause to suspect" maltreatment, child savers urge us to call in our slightest suspicions about almost any parental behavior. (And that sort of advice is not limited to adults. One group has published a comic book effectively telling children to turn in their parents to "other grown-up friends" if they get a spanking). The hotlines then forward the calls to Child Protective Services (CPS) agencies who send workers to investigate. These workers can go to a child's school or day care center and interrogate them without warning. Such an interrogation can undercut the bonds of trust essential for healthy parent-child relationships and traumatize children for whom the only harm is the harm of the investigation itself.
Workers can search homes and strip-search children without a warrant. Child savers insist such searches are rare. But in the course of defending against a lawsuit, the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services acknowledged how common they really are. In its legal papers, the department said that any effort to restrict strip-searching "would immediately bring the child abuse hotline investigations to a halt."Such a statement can be true only if strip-searching is routine.
Then it is up to the worker to decide if the case will be "substantiated" and the accused will be listed in a state "central register" of suspected child abusers. Workers make these decisions on their own. There is no hearing beforehand, no way for the accused to defend themselves. (In some states, they can try and fight their way out of the register after the fact).
No proof is required to "substantiate" a case. In most states, "substantiated" means only that there is "some credible evidence" of maltreatment, even if there is more evidence of innocence.
And what if parents object to all this? What if they want to defend their children against a strip-search, for example? Technically, in some circumstances, they can say no to a CPS worker (though the worker doesn't have to tell them this -- there is no equivalent of a "Miranda warning"). But if they do say no, the worker can wield the most feared power of all -- the power to remove a child from the home on the spot.
Workers have that power in 29 of America's 55 states and territories. In all but four of the rest, they need merely call the police to do it for them. Parents then must go to court to try and get their children back. In most states, there is supposed to be a hearing in a matter of days, but often it takes far longer before that child's parents get their day in court.
And it is a very short day. Such hearings tend to be five-minute assembly line procedures with a CPS lawyer who does this for a living on one side, and a bewildered, impoverished parent who just met her lawyer five minutes before -- if she has a lawyer at all -- on the other. Children are almost never returned at these hearings. If the children are lucky, they may get to go home after the next hearing in 30 or 90 days. Or maybe they will never go home at all.
And who are the CPS workers who wield this enormous power? In most states, a bachelor's degree in anything and a quickie training course devoted largely to how to fill out forms are the only requirements for the job. Turnover is enormous and caseloads are crushing. And the worker will find little guidance in the law, which is so broad that almost anything can be deemed abuse or, especially, neglect (See Family Preservation Issue Paper 5, Child Abuse and Poverty). Given all that, it's easy to see why so many children are needlessly removed from their homes.
But that is not the only tragedy. Enormous caseloads dominated by false and trivial cases steal workers' time from children in real danger. That's the real reason children sometimes are left in unsafe homes
There is a CPS worker who allegedly told several parents "I have the power of God." Even more frightening than the thought of a worker saying such a thing is the fact that it's true. CPS workers do have the power of God. And rarely is the power of God accompanied by the wisdom of Solomon.
ShareThis
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Filing Complaints Against Bad Judges-Manchester Examiner Article
By Leonard Henderson
Family Court needs to be Equal and Just for all families.
Donald Tenn of Fathers 4 Justice is on the right track filing complaints against judges who are failing to fairly uphold the law.
In a previous article we urged people to write to Chief Justice Ron George on demanding judicial accountability. He responded back that he appreciates our initiative and he to desires to expose these bad judges that are giving all judges a bad name.
However, Chief Justice George can’t do it without your help. He says, people talk about how bad their family court judge was, but written complaints are rarely submitted. “We need all complaints made against a judge or court to be in writing. All complaints are confidential and the complainant will not be revealed to the judge unless you consent further down in the investigation” says George. Many bad judges go on for years because the public fails to complain thinking there will be retaliation. This is a wrong misconception or fear George would like to dispel. He says “many judges simply need to be corrected and reminded and it is the public’s responsibility to identity these judges so his office can take remedial or recommend removal of a judge.” Judges sometimes forget they are elected officials and they are being paid $200,000 per year to fairly uphold all laws of the state and be unbiased to both parties. It takes a complaint to remind the judge that the public has to power to remove him or her if they fail to uphold the law.
Your complaint, no matter how trivial, can help keep our judicial system in check and remind judges they are your public servant to serve you and not you serve them.
HERE IS HOW YOU FILE A COMPLAINT:
The compliant form is a simple, straight-forward, and a one-page form. Fill out the form and state why you believe this judge should be investigated for misconduct and attach any supporting documentation. Quickly mail or fax to the address below on the form and keep a copy for your records. If there are other similiar complaints an investigator may contact you for additional information if needed.
If you want to positively make sure that your complaint is acted upon. You can go further to investigate a judge and request a copy of his “oath of office.” In many cases this form is not properly filed or missing. If it is, the judge is not sworn and judgments can be voided. Many scrupleless judges will not sign the “oath of office” as a “get out of jail card” if they are caught doing something illegal or unethical down the road. The “oath of office” is on file at the clerk of the court records office and is open for public inspection. If you discover the judge does not have this document on file, you can get this judge removed from office and he might be subject to re-paying back his salary. Contacting the office of the presiding judge will point you in the right direction of obtaining this very important document that gives the judge his authority.
Another form you should look up is the Statement of Financial Interest. This form is on file at the clerk’s office and is subject to public inspection. If a judge made a decision on your case and referred you to an outside firm that he has a financial interest, he is violating his judicial canons and should be reported as unethical. This is filed annually and must be on file since the judge is an elected official, they can not use their office for personal or financial gain.
Now, you have learned to file a compliant against a judge. Please do this for you and your family so that we have better family court that truly serves the people. Remember nothing gets done unless you take action today. Also please consider making a generous donation to CRISPE so that we can continue the fight for children’s right to share both parents EQUALLY.
Filing Complaints Against Judges in California
Posted by: “donaldtenn” donaldtenn@yahoo.com donaldtenn
Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:52 am (PST)
All,
I have posted a new file for filing complaints against your judges. I am personally filing complaints against each and every judge I have been before in the Sacramento County ANTI-family courts, I urge you to do the same.
This will be phase 1 of my personal project to IMPEACH Judge Thomas Cecil for his crimes against my daughter Madison Nicole Tenn and society as a whole. I have obtained a copy of his Oath of Office as well as that of most other Judges in Sacramento County as well as the State of Illinois. Contrary to what they want you to believe, these judges are NOT above the law and they will be held accountable for their crimes.
I trust you will join me in this effort, UNITED, we can and will make the changes necessary within our judiciary. I will NEVER quit fighting for my daughters right to share equally in her daddy’s life and I trust that you will do the same for your children and/or grandchildren as the case may be.
It is time for a change!
Donald Tenn
Fathers-4-Justice
Frequently Asked Questions About Filing a Complaint Against a Judge
http://crispe.org/uploads/cjp_Frequently_Asked_Questions.doc
Complaint Form
http://crispe.org/uploads/Complaint_form.pdf
Sample Complaint Against Judge
http://crispe.org/uploads/McWeeny_Complaint_Judicial_Inquiry_Commission.doc
Rules of the Commission
http://crispe.org/uploads/CJP_Rules.pdf
Statement of Economic Interest Judges are elected officials and income is open for public inspection
http://www.fppc.ca.gov/forms/700-07-08/Form700-07-08.pdf
Proposed Act to Limit Power of Judges
http://crispe.org/uploads/Constitution_Restoration_Act_of_2004.doc
Judicial Accountability Act Law Initiative
http://crispe.org/uploads/Judicial_Accountability_Initiative_Law.doc
People’s Grievance Against Judges
http://crispe.org/uploads/The_Peoples_Statement_and_Petiton_of_Grievance.doc
Frequently Asked Questions
What Is the Commission on Judicial Performance?
The Commission on Judicial Performance is the independent state agency that handles complaints about California’s judicial officers for judicial misconduct.
Over Whom Does the Commission Have Authority?
The Commission has authority over all active California state court judges and over former judges for conduct while they were active judges. The Commission also has authority over court commissioners and referees as explained in Question 10. In addition, the Director-Chief Counsel of the Commission is designated as the Supreme Court’s investigator for complaints involving State Bar Court judges.
Who Can File a Complaint?
Any individual or group may file a complaint. The Commission has received complaints from litigants, attorneys, jurors, court-watchers, court personnel, prisoners, court administrators, members of the public, judges, legislators, and others. Anyone who has knowledge of possible judicial misconduct may file a complaint. The Commission also considers complaints made anonymously and matters it learns of in other ways, such as from news articles or from information received in the course of a Commission investigation.
What Is Judicial Misconduct?
Judicial misconduct usually involves conduct in conflict with the standards set forth in the Code of Judicial Ethics. Some examples of judicial misconduct are rude or abusive demeanor, conflict of interest, abuse of the contempt power, communicating improperly with only one side to a proceeding, delay in decision-making, and commenting on a pending case.
What Can the Commission Do?
The Commission investigates complaints of judicial misconduct and, when warranted, imposes discipline. The Commission can issue confidential advisory letters, private admonishments, public admonishments and public censures. In the most serious cases, the Commission can order that a judge be removed or retired from office, bar a former judge from receiving judicial appointments or assignments, or find that a court commissioner or referee is ineligible to serve as a subordinate judicial officer.
Can the Commission Change a Legal Ruling?
No. The Commission does not have authority to direct a judge to take legal action or to reverse a judge’s decision or ruling for judicial error, mistake or other legal grounds. These functions are for the state’s appellate courts. Allegations stemming from a judge’s rulings or exercise of discretion ordinarily do not provide a basis for Commission action, and personal dissatisfaction with a legal ruling is not grounds for investigation of a judge.
Can the Commission Help Me with My Case?
No. The Commission cannot provide legal assistance or advice to individuals or intervene in litigation on behalf of a party. If you need advice or assistance about what to do next concerning your case or if you seek to change the outcome of the case, you should consult a lawyer immediately.
How Do I File a Complaint?
Complaints must be submitted in writing. See How to File a Complaint for further information.
Are Complaints Treated Confidentially?
Under the California Constitution and the rules governing the Commission, complaints to the Commission and Commission investigations are confidential. The Commission ordinarily cannot confirm or deny that a complaint has been received or that an investigation is under way. If formal charges are filed, the case becomes public.
Can the Commission Handle Complaints About Court Commissioners or Referees?
Yes. The Commission shares authority with the superior courts to investigate and discipline subordinate judicial officers. Complaints about court commissioners or referees must first be directed to the presiding judge of the court in which the matter was heard. If you want the Commission to review the local court’s final action on your complaint against a court commissioner or referee, you must file a written request with the Commission within 30 days after the date the notice of the local court’s action on the matter was mailed.
Does the Commission Handle Complaints About Attorneys?
No. Complaints about attorneys should be directed to the State Bar of California.
Does the Commission Have Jurisdiction over Temporary Judges?
No. Judges pro tem are attorneys temporarily serving as judicial officers. The State Bar of California has jurisdiction over attorneys. Although temporary judges are not employed by the courts, you may wish to bring a complaint about a judge pro tem to the attention of the presiding judge for consideration in making future appointments.
Can the Commission Consider Complaints About Private Judges?
No. The Commission has no authority over former judges serving as private judges. The Commission’s jurisdiction over former judges is limited to their conduct before retirement.
Family Court needs to be Equal and Just for all families.
Donald Tenn of Fathers 4 Justice is on the right track filing complaints against judges who are failing to fairly uphold the law.
In a previous article we urged people to write to Chief Justice Ron George on demanding judicial accountability. He responded back that he appreciates our initiative and he to desires to expose these bad judges that are giving all judges a bad name.
However, Chief Justice George can’t do it without your help. He says, people talk about how bad their family court judge was, but written complaints are rarely submitted. “We need all complaints made against a judge or court to be in writing. All complaints are confidential and the complainant will not be revealed to the judge unless you consent further down in the investigation” says George. Many bad judges go on for years because the public fails to complain thinking there will be retaliation. This is a wrong misconception or fear George would like to dispel. He says “many judges simply need to be corrected and reminded and it is the public’s responsibility to identity these judges so his office can take remedial or recommend removal of a judge.” Judges sometimes forget they are elected officials and they are being paid $200,000 per year to fairly uphold all laws of the state and be unbiased to both parties. It takes a complaint to remind the judge that the public has to power to remove him or her if they fail to uphold the law.
Your complaint, no matter how trivial, can help keep our judicial system in check and remind judges they are your public servant to serve you and not you serve them.
HERE IS HOW YOU FILE A COMPLAINT:
The compliant form is a simple, straight-forward, and a one-page form. Fill out the form and state why you believe this judge should be investigated for misconduct and attach any supporting documentation. Quickly mail or fax to the address below on the form and keep a copy for your records. If there are other similiar complaints an investigator may contact you for additional information if needed.
If you want to positively make sure that your complaint is acted upon. You can go further to investigate a judge and request a copy of his “oath of office.” In many cases this form is not properly filed or missing. If it is, the judge is not sworn and judgments can be voided. Many scrupleless judges will not sign the “oath of office” as a “get out of jail card” if they are caught doing something illegal or unethical down the road. The “oath of office” is on file at the clerk of the court records office and is open for public inspection. If you discover the judge does not have this document on file, you can get this judge removed from office and he might be subject to re-paying back his salary. Contacting the office of the presiding judge will point you in the right direction of obtaining this very important document that gives the judge his authority.
Another form you should look up is the Statement of Financial Interest. This form is on file at the clerk’s office and is subject to public inspection. If a judge made a decision on your case and referred you to an outside firm that he has a financial interest, he is violating his judicial canons and should be reported as unethical. This is filed annually and must be on file since the judge is an elected official, they can not use their office for personal or financial gain.
Now, you have learned to file a compliant against a judge. Please do this for you and your family so that we have better family court that truly serves the people. Remember nothing gets done unless you take action today. Also please consider making a generous donation to CRISPE so that we can continue the fight for children’s right to share both parents EQUALLY.
Filing Complaints Against Judges in California
Posted by: “donaldtenn” donaldtenn@yahoo.com donaldtenn
Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:52 am (PST)
All,
I have posted a new file for filing complaints against your judges. I am personally filing complaints against each and every judge I have been before in the Sacramento County ANTI-family courts, I urge you to do the same.
This will be phase 1 of my personal project to IMPEACH Judge Thomas Cecil for his crimes against my daughter Madison Nicole Tenn and society as a whole. I have obtained a copy of his Oath of Office as well as that of most other Judges in Sacramento County as well as the State of Illinois. Contrary to what they want you to believe, these judges are NOT above the law and they will be held accountable for their crimes.
I trust you will join me in this effort, UNITED, we can and will make the changes necessary within our judiciary. I will NEVER quit fighting for my daughters right to share equally in her daddy’s life and I trust that you will do the same for your children and/or grandchildren as the case may be.
It is time for a change!
Donald Tenn
Fathers-4-Justice
Frequently Asked Questions About Filing a Complaint Against a Judge
http://crispe.org/uploads/cjp_Frequently_Asked_Questions.doc
Complaint Form
http://crispe.org/uploads/Complaint_form.pdf
Sample Complaint Against Judge
http://crispe.org/uploads/McWeeny_Complaint_Judicial_Inquiry_Commission.doc
Rules of the Commission
http://crispe.org/uploads/CJP_Rules.pdf
Statement of Economic Interest Judges are elected officials and income is open for public inspection
http://www.fppc.ca.gov/forms/700-07-08/Form700-07-08.pdf
Proposed Act to Limit Power of Judges
http://crispe.org/uploads/Constitution_Restoration_Act_of_2004.doc
Judicial Accountability Act Law Initiative
http://crispe.org/uploads/Judicial_Accountability_Initiative_Law.doc
People’s Grievance Against Judges
http://crispe.org/uploads/The_Peoples_Statement_and_Petiton_of_Grievance.doc
Frequently Asked Questions
What Is the Commission on Judicial Performance?
The Commission on Judicial Performance is the independent state agency that handles complaints about California’s judicial officers for judicial misconduct.
Over Whom Does the Commission Have Authority?
The Commission has authority over all active California state court judges and over former judges for conduct while they were active judges. The Commission also has authority over court commissioners and referees as explained in Question 10. In addition, the Director-Chief Counsel of the Commission is designated as the Supreme Court’s investigator for complaints involving State Bar Court judges.
Who Can File a Complaint?
Any individual or group may file a complaint. The Commission has received complaints from litigants, attorneys, jurors, court-watchers, court personnel, prisoners, court administrators, members of the public, judges, legislators, and others. Anyone who has knowledge of possible judicial misconduct may file a complaint. The Commission also considers complaints made anonymously and matters it learns of in other ways, such as from news articles or from information received in the course of a Commission investigation.
What Is Judicial Misconduct?
Judicial misconduct usually involves conduct in conflict with the standards set forth in the Code of Judicial Ethics. Some examples of judicial misconduct are rude or abusive demeanor, conflict of interest, abuse of the contempt power, communicating improperly with only one side to a proceeding, delay in decision-making, and commenting on a pending case.
What Can the Commission Do?
The Commission investigates complaints of judicial misconduct and, when warranted, imposes discipline. The Commission can issue confidential advisory letters, private admonishments, public admonishments and public censures. In the most serious cases, the Commission can order that a judge be removed or retired from office, bar a former judge from receiving judicial appointments or assignments, or find that a court commissioner or referee is ineligible to serve as a subordinate judicial officer.
Can the Commission Change a Legal Ruling?
No. The Commission does not have authority to direct a judge to take legal action or to reverse a judge’s decision or ruling for judicial error, mistake or other legal grounds. These functions are for the state’s appellate courts. Allegations stemming from a judge’s rulings or exercise of discretion ordinarily do not provide a basis for Commission action, and personal dissatisfaction with a legal ruling is not grounds for investigation of a judge.
Can the Commission Help Me with My Case?
No. The Commission cannot provide legal assistance or advice to individuals or intervene in litigation on behalf of a party. If you need advice or assistance about what to do next concerning your case or if you seek to change the outcome of the case, you should consult a lawyer immediately.
How Do I File a Complaint?
Complaints must be submitted in writing. See How to File a Complaint for further information.
Are Complaints Treated Confidentially?
Under the California Constitution and the rules governing the Commission, complaints to the Commission and Commission investigations are confidential. The Commission ordinarily cannot confirm or deny that a complaint has been received or that an investigation is under way. If formal charges are filed, the case becomes public.
Can the Commission Handle Complaints About Court Commissioners or Referees?
Yes. The Commission shares authority with the superior courts to investigate and discipline subordinate judicial officers. Complaints about court commissioners or referees must first be directed to the presiding judge of the court in which the matter was heard. If you want the Commission to review the local court’s final action on your complaint against a court commissioner or referee, you must file a written request with the Commission within 30 days after the date the notice of the local court’s action on the matter was mailed.
Does the Commission Handle Complaints About Attorneys?
No. Complaints about attorneys should be directed to the State Bar of California.
Does the Commission Have Jurisdiction over Temporary Judges?
No. Judges pro tem are attorneys temporarily serving as judicial officers. The State Bar of California has jurisdiction over attorneys. Although temporary judges are not employed by the courts, you may wish to bring a complaint about a judge pro tem to the attention of the presiding judge for consideration in making future appointments.
Can the Commission Consider Complaints About Private Judges?
No. The Commission has no authority over former judges serving as private judges. The Commission’s jurisdiction over former judges is limited to their conduct before retirement.
Friday, October 30, 2009
MDS-Maternal Deprivation Syndrome
There have been numerous studies regarding Maternal Deprivation, with a large source of information coming from Bowlby, based on Spitz and Goldfarb, and also from unethical animal experimentation.
Overwhelmingly, research shows that severing this natural bond between a mother and child causes severe emotional and behavioral problems, such as depression and psychosis.
The phrase maternal deprivation is the terminology used in the early work of psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, John Bowlby on the effects of separating infants and young children from their mother. Some of the research was previously used to discourage mothers from working or using childcare, but it seems important to revive these studies as children are being deprived of their mothers intentionally by the family courts.
(MDS), has been identified as occurring with great frequency in legal proceedings, with specific unethical lawyers, psychologists, and judges perpetrating the the same scam on mother after mother with similar horrific results for the children. There has been death by suicide, suicide attempts, depression, academic distress, retaliation by a child against a PAS claiming father, and untold misery for the victimized children and mothers.
Based on Bolwby’s theories, Maternally Deprivation affects children as follows:
•Complete or almost complete deprivation could “entirely cripple the capacity to make relationships.”
•Partial deprivation could result in acute anxiety, depression, neediness and powerful emotions which the child could not regulate.
•The end product of such psychic disturbance could be neurosis and instability of character.(Bowlby J. (1951) pps. 11–12).
Overwhelmingly, research shows that severing this natural bond between a mother and child causes severe emotional and behavioral problems, such as depression and psychosis.
The phrase maternal deprivation is the terminology used in the early work of psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, John Bowlby on the effects of separating infants and young children from their mother. Some of the research was previously used to discourage mothers from working or using childcare, but it seems important to revive these studies as children are being deprived of their mothers intentionally by the family courts.
(MDS), has been identified as occurring with great frequency in legal proceedings, with specific unethical lawyers, psychologists, and judges perpetrating the the same scam on mother after mother with similar horrific results for the children. There has been death by suicide, suicide attempts, depression, academic distress, retaliation by a child against a PAS claiming father, and untold misery for the victimized children and mothers.
Based on Bolwby’s theories, Maternally Deprivation affects children as follows:
•Complete or almost complete deprivation could “entirely cripple the capacity to make relationships.”
•Partial deprivation could result in acute anxiety, depression, neediness and powerful emotions which the child could not regulate.
•The end product of such psychic disturbance could be neurosis and instability of character.(Bowlby J. (1951) pps. 11–12).
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Be Afraid, be very afraid Examiner article on CPS by Leonard Henderson
Be afraid. Very afraid.
October 28, 2:43 AM
There is an evil in the land beyond the wildest imagination of the average American citizen. Beyond the cruelest theories of anthropologists and archeologists about ancient pagan civilizations. A plague of Biblical proportions.
Almost as cruel as anything Dr Mengele did.
This unspeakable terror walks among us, usurping unimaginable power, operating far outside of the LAWS, and endowed with unearned respect and honor.
Many of them are respectable-looking, well-dressed women. Some are just kids, stupid, dangerous spoiled rotten brats themselves.
Some of them consider themselves as "public servants", as if they have any concept of what the words mean. Most of them consider themselves "children's advocates". Many bring prejudices from their own perceived "bad childhood".
Some of them get into it idealistically, believing they could "make a difference". They don't last long. The "turn over rate" is 50% a year. The ones with any real morals or ethics can't stand the job once they find out what the job REALLY is. FULL STORY
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-26520-Family-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d28-Be-afraid-Very-afraid
See all of Leonard's Family Rights Examiner stories
http://www.examiner.com/x-26520-Family-Rights-Examiner
October 28, 2:43 AM
There is an evil in the land beyond the wildest imagination of the average American citizen. Beyond the cruelest theories of anthropologists and archeologists about ancient pagan civilizations. A plague of Biblical proportions.
Almost as cruel as anything Dr Mengele did.
This unspeakable terror walks among us, usurping unimaginable power, operating far outside of the LAWS, and endowed with unearned respect and honor.
Many of them are respectable-looking, well-dressed women. Some are just kids, stupid, dangerous spoiled rotten brats themselves.
Some of them consider themselves as "public servants", as if they have any concept of what the words mean. Most of them consider themselves "children's advocates". Many bring prejudices from their own perceived "bad childhood".
Some of them get into it idealistically, believing they could "make a difference". They don't last long. The "turn over rate" is 50% a year. The ones with any real morals or ethics can't stand the job once they find out what the job REALLY is. FULL STORY
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-26520-Family-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d28-Be-afraid-Very-afraid
See all of Leonard's Family Rights Examiner stories
http://www.examiner.com/x-26520-Family-Rights-Examiner
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
If you are ever approached by CPS
Examiner Bio If you are ever approached by CPS
October 12, 11:47 PMFamily Rights ExaminerLeonard Henderson
How are you going to answer the absurd allegations she brings to
YOUR front door?It is vitally important for families to understand their Constitutional Rights are real, not just something you hear on TV shows.
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, guarantees that-
''The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
If you are ever approached by anyone from Childrens Protective Services (hereafter called CPS), keep in mind that regardless of what they say, they are not there to "help" you. They may appear "nice" but never lose sight of the fact that CPS workers "believe" the allegations reported against your family. Otherwise, they wouldn't be at your front door.
If a CPS worker arrives at your home to "investigate", ask to see the search warrant and court order. Call your attorney immediately and read the order to him/her. If you are unable to reach your attorney, or you don't have one, keep the order, or ask for a copy and politely tell the CPS worker that you will not talk to them without a lawyer being present.
They will lie to you about having a warrant or a court order, so don't take their word for it. Demand to see it. Especially observe if it is signed by a judge. A rubber stamp signature is unacceptable.
If they don't have a search warrant or court order, politely tell them "good bye".
Never invite a CPS worker into your home.
If they have gained entrance before you learn why they are there, ask them to leave. If they do not leave, call the police and request that they be removed for trespassing.
The CPS worker or the (sometimes) accompanying law enforcement officer (in the vernacular, a "LEO") may threaten you with arrest for "obstruction of investigation" or something like that, or they may claim the state has passed a "law" requiring you to let them in.
That would be a bald-faced LIE.
In the unlikely case that there is such a new "law" in your state, that law would be repugnant to the Fourth Amendment, and violation by the agency or the police (if present) would be the basis of a Title 42 USC Section 1983 action, for which they would NOT enjoy "immunity" according to CALABRETTA v FLOYD.
The only exception is when there are "exigent circumstances". Of course there seldom really is any "emergency", and their saying so doesn't make it so- nor excuse the violation of your Constitutional Rights.
They DO have to get a VALID search warrant-
See Walsh vs. Erie County Department of Job and Family Services, Case No.3:01CV7588
In a forceful opinion, US District Judge James G. Carr wrote:
"Despite the Defendants' exaggerated view of their powers, the Fourth Amendment applies to them, as it does to all other officers and agents of the state whose requests to enter, however benign or well-intentioned, are met by a closed door.
There is...no social worker exception to the strictures of the Fourth Amendment.
...Any agency that expects to send its employees routinely into private homes has a fundamental obligation to ensure that those employees understand the constitutional limits on their authority."
The caseworkers in the Walsh case admitted they had never been taught anything about the Fourth Amendment or search warrants. They still aren't.
We have heard of people trying to stand up for their Rights and being told by the LEO "Oh those are just for TV. This is the REAL world we're in now". I once asked a particularly vapid policeman if he took the OATH to "uphold, support, and defend the Constitution of the United States. He said he had. Then I asked him if he believed his oath, or if those were just some words he had to say to get the job.
Shut up, shut up, shut up.
The recent U.S. v. Craighead case in the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT held that interrogations occurring inside the home are custodial, requiring Miranda advisements under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
You are not required by law to talk to any of these people, so don't.
You are an American. It's not your job to prove that you "have nothing to hide". This is not the time to present your defense. Every word you say WILL be used against you.
Defending your Constitutional Rights falls on you. Use them or lose them.
NOTICE:: I am not a lawyer and I do not pretend to give legal advice. If you need legal advice, see AFRA's Lawyer Friends who certainly are not pretenders. I merely relate the things I learned in the past that seemed to work in my own case or things that others have related to me that worked in their cases. I provide information for free and do not expect to receive any form of payment or reward on this side of heaven. Therefore, DO NOT rely on this information as legal advice. Real Legal advice would come from a real lawyer who hates CPS and prepares a VIGOROUS DEFENSE against a negative (proving nothing happened) instead an ATTORNEY talking you into a plea bargain.
For more info: American Family Rights Association
"Better be wise by the misfortunes of others than by your own." --Aesop (c. 550 B.C.
October 12, 11:47 PMFamily Rights ExaminerLeonard Henderson
How are you going to answer the absurd allegations she brings to
YOUR front door?It is vitally important for families to understand their Constitutional Rights are real, not just something you hear on TV shows.
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, guarantees that-
''The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
If you are ever approached by anyone from Childrens Protective Services (hereafter called CPS), keep in mind that regardless of what they say, they are not there to "help" you. They may appear "nice" but never lose sight of the fact that CPS workers "believe" the allegations reported against your family. Otherwise, they wouldn't be at your front door.
If a CPS worker arrives at your home to "investigate", ask to see the search warrant and court order. Call your attorney immediately and read the order to him/her. If you are unable to reach your attorney, or you don't have one, keep the order, or ask for a copy and politely tell the CPS worker that you will not talk to them without a lawyer being present.
They will lie to you about having a warrant or a court order, so don't take their word for it. Demand to see it. Especially observe if it is signed by a judge. A rubber stamp signature is unacceptable.
If they don't have a search warrant or court order, politely tell them "good bye".
Never invite a CPS worker into your home.
If they have gained entrance before you learn why they are there, ask them to leave. If they do not leave, call the police and request that they be removed for trespassing.
The CPS worker or the (sometimes) accompanying law enforcement officer (in the vernacular, a "LEO") may threaten you with arrest for "obstruction of investigation" or something like that, or they may claim the state has passed a "law" requiring you to let them in.
That would be a bald-faced LIE.
In the unlikely case that there is such a new "law" in your state, that law would be repugnant to the Fourth Amendment, and violation by the agency or the police (if present) would be the basis of a Title 42 USC Section 1983 action, for which they would NOT enjoy "immunity" according to CALABRETTA v FLOYD.
The only exception is when there are "exigent circumstances". Of course there seldom really is any "emergency", and their saying so doesn't make it so- nor excuse the violation of your Constitutional Rights.
They DO have to get a VALID search warrant-
See Walsh vs. Erie County Department of Job and Family Services, Case No.3:01CV7588
In a forceful opinion, US District Judge James G. Carr wrote:
"Despite the Defendants' exaggerated view of their powers, the Fourth Amendment applies to them, as it does to all other officers and agents of the state whose requests to enter, however benign or well-intentioned, are met by a closed door.
There is...no social worker exception to the strictures of the Fourth Amendment.
...Any agency that expects to send its employees routinely into private homes has a fundamental obligation to ensure that those employees understand the constitutional limits on their authority."
The caseworkers in the Walsh case admitted they had never been taught anything about the Fourth Amendment or search warrants. They still aren't.
We have heard of people trying to stand up for their Rights and being told by the LEO "Oh those are just for TV. This is the REAL world we're in now". I once asked a particularly vapid policeman if he took the OATH to "uphold, support, and defend the Constitution of the United States. He said he had. Then I asked him if he believed his oath, or if those were just some words he had to say to get the job.
Shut up, shut up, shut up.
The recent U.S. v. Craighead case in the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT held that interrogations occurring inside the home are custodial, requiring Miranda advisements under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
You are not required by law to talk to any of these people, so don't.
You are an American. It's not your job to prove that you "have nothing to hide". This is not the time to present your defense. Every word you say WILL be used against you.
Defending your Constitutional Rights falls on you. Use them or lose them.
NOTICE:: I am not a lawyer and I do not pretend to give legal advice. If you need legal advice, see AFRA's Lawyer Friends who certainly are not pretenders. I merely relate the things I learned in the past that seemed to work in my own case or things that others have related to me that worked in their cases. I provide information for free and do not expect to receive any form of payment or reward on this side of heaven. Therefore, DO NOT rely on this information as legal advice. Real Legal advice would come from a real lawyer who hates CPS and prepares a VIGOROUS DEFENSE against a negative (proving nothing happened) instead an ATTORNEY talking you into a plea bargain.
For more info: American Family Rights Association
"Better be wise by the misfortunes of others than by your own." --Aesop (c. 550 B.C.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)