Washington State Extended Families

Where lineage still has empowerment and love

Working for family preservation

In a world determined to take families apart

The Holocaust is not history;

It is present day action targeting the poor and vulnerable

Parens Patriae (the state and country self proclaimed parent) is using

foster children for government medical experiments.

ACS is involved.

REVELATIONS 18:23 “In the last days sorcery (pharmakeia/drugs) will be used to deceive the nations.”

Never before in our world’s history has the use of drugs so affected the human race. Every country, community and family is challenged by the use of mind altering substances and the effects. Pharmaceutical companies driven by greed readily bribe elected officials and educators who support their agenda. They are the ultimate drug dealers. All cartels combined pale in comparison. The medical profession has a long history of unethical acts and travesty against vulnerable populations to advance science. While the Holocaust brought these issues to light, medical acts against humanity continue all over the world and in the United States.

“A DHHS official recently stated that "current regulations are adequate to ensure that foster children enlisted in federal medical experiments are protected" (Washington Post).” http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/healthlawprof_blog/2005/05/federal_medical.html

Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., said prisoners are guaranteed more protections under the guidelines concerning clinical trials than foster children. Prisoners must have an advocate expressly appointed to represent their interests on local institutional review boards. Foster children don't have such an advocate appointed to look out for them, he said.

http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-MexicanFood&tid=2882

Human medical experimentation on children: The exploitation of poor children by Big Pharma (part two)
http://www.naturalnews.com/019192.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of HIV+ Foster Children in NYC Subjected to Experimental Drug Trials
New York City’s child welfare department opens an investigation into whether they forced HIV positive children in foster care to submit to experimental AIDS drug trials.
http://www.democracynow.org/2005/5/2/hundreds_of_hiv_foster_children_in
---------------------------------------------------------------, September28, 2008
Harvard Psychiatric Researcher Dr. Biederman Performed Medical Experiments on Children - Violations of Federal Law
http://aconstantineblacklist.blogspot.com/2008/09/harvard-psychiatric-researcher-dr.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vaccines and Medical Experiments on Children, Minorities, Woman and Inmates (1845 - 2007)
http://www.naturalnews.com/022383.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical experiments in Israel on vulnerable populations. Jewish therapists started the anti-family movement here in the US.

http://xiaodongpeople.blogspot.com/2005/05/unethical-medical-experiments-in.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doctors making big money off of pharmaceutical companies. Texas foster kids’ doctors have ties to drug firms
http://tmap.wordpress.com/2008/08/17/texas-foster-kids-doctors-have-ties-to-drug-firms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Texas refused to include parental consent into this bill.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/brave_new_world/new_freedom_paul_amendment.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing archives for the House Ways and Means Committee on HIV experiments

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearings.asp?formmode=view&id=3042
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big pharma and psychiatry are quite an evil due...

“That's why many of these medications have now been banned in the U.K. for use on children. But here in the good ol' USA, the FDA keeps 'em legal for use on anyone, including 3-year-old toddlers who are now being diagnosed by ignorant doctors as "suffering from depression" or "exhibiting attention deficit disorders." Absurd? Yes. But darn profitable for drug companies, which care nothing about toddlers, or teens, or anybody as long as they just keep popping those expensive pills.”
http://psychdata.blogspot.com/2006/10/big-pharma-and-psychiatry-are-quite.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I included this article because it shows that doctors need monitoring in prescribing psychotropics

Best Practices: Using Best Practices to Manage Psychiatric Medications Under Medicaid

http://psychservices.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/55/11/1227
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antipsychotics Killed at least 45 Children_FDA Not Concerned --USA Today

http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/158/31/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excellent article: Mental Health Care: What is the alternative to psychiatric drugs
http://www.cchr.org/media/pdfs/What_is_the_Alternative_to_Psychotropic_Drugs_White_Paper

[AKidsRight.Org] Murtari arrested for writing "HELP FAMILY RIGHTS" on Courthouse wall

[AKidsRight.Org] Murtari arrested for writing "HELP FAMILY RIGHTS" on Courthouse wall
InboxX
Reply |John Murtari to newsletter
show details 6:13 PM (1 hour ago)

AKidsRight.Org - All the information in our messages if FREE for reuse as you desire. Subscribe/unsubscribe info at end of this message.
=========================================
Good People & People of Faith,
[ NOTE: please send any message replies to this monitored addr:
]
I wanted to send out a brief message on my arrest today in Lyons, NY.
In the last few weeks I've used kid's chalk to write on the sidewalk
outside the Courthouse. It became clear officials weren't going to
take action even though I was threatened with arrest initially. You
can see pictures of the earlier activity at:
http://www.AKidsRight.Org/parental_notification

It was also clear there were no other parents yet ready to join in
this NonViolent Action. A Mom & Dad willing to accept arrest & jail
as a way to peacefully demonstrate the depth of their beliefs.

What Happened Today
-------------------
At 2 PM, I wrote the same "HELP FAMILY RIGHTS" message on the outside
wall of the building. Still using kid's chalk, still very easy to
remove -- but harder for officials to ignore.

I just wrote it once and then went inside the building and told
security I'd left a message on the wall. They took a look and in
about 30 minutes the local police showed up and I was taken into
custody. I was charged with a misdemeanor, in violation of Section
145.60(2) of the New York Penal Law: "No person shall make graffiti of
any type on any building, public or private....."

I was released with an appearance ticket for the local Village Court
on Nov. 25th (I'll have copies of the tickets, etc.. at the website by
tomorrow morning).

The Important Stuff - Going back tomorrow!
------------------------------------------
I'm planning to return tomorrow and repeat the same activity. Why?
I had an interesting conversation with one of the officers:

"Do you want to get arrested? Want to go to jail?"

"No, not at all. My goal is to show how important Family Rights
are. I've been trying to get other parents to join me in writing
on the sidewalk -- it could have been a good news story, but you
know how it is -- a lot of people complain....It's hard to get
people to actually do something....

So... I have to do a little more to increase the 'drama' of the
event -- but I'm always peaceful & courteous...."

He seemed to understand that. I DON'T WANT TO GO BACK THERE ALONE
TOMORROW! There will be another arrest and most likely jail.

The Alternative - Group Action
------------------------------
I would much prefer to find a Mom & Dad willing to join me next week
in more chalk writing on the sidewalk outside the building. With
three people we could turn it into a media event -- and that would
help all of us! But there's always a risk.

They allowed me to fill the sidewalk with writing, but if more people
show up they may threaten arrest again -- we must have the quiet
courage of our convictions and Faith in the power of the love we have
for our kids. http://www.AKidsRight.Org/civil.htm

This is not about winning or what other's may do in response. Actions
such as these first convince "us" that what we want is worth the
potential sacrifice.

Folks, don't get me wrong. I understand when people can't join the
effort. We all have a lot of personal issues to deal with. I have
failed to respond to other requests for help because I was too busy.
But I'm also confident that with time -- parents will start to come
forward. All I can do is ask...

I just got a notice there will be a County Board of Supervisors meeting
next Tuesday at 9AM in the old Courthouse building (right next to the
new one). Media usually attends and we could get some easy attention
by messages on the sidewalk.

If you think you are interested, email me: jmurtari@AKidsRight.Org and
leave me a phone number & good time to call. Maybe I won't need to go
back tomorrow...

The Declaration of Family Rights
--------------------------------
On Monday & Tuesday of this week I had also taped sheets of paper with
a Declaration of Family Rights on the outside wall & windows of the
County Courthouse.
http://www.AKidsRight.Org/parental_notification/family-rights-poster.pdf

Declaration of Family Rights - in just a few words.
--------------------------------------------------
Here are a few paragraphs which may capture the essence of what we are
looking for. Fundamental principles which, if recognized and
protected, would have prevented many of our family disasters.

When a child is born, both biological parents have a RIGHT to
know. A child has a RIGHT to both parents in their lives. Fit
parents decide what is in the 'best interests' of their
children. Good, average, & poor parents are Fit & Equal parents.

You and your spouse have a RIGHT to be presumed Fit & Equal parents
(equal in terms of both physical and legal custody).

If anyone (a spouse, relative, social services) wishes to challenge
these rights, you have:

1) The RIGHT to counsel.

2) The RIGHT to be presumed a fit parent, innocent, and deserving
of an equal relationship with your kids.

3) The RIGHT to protection of a criminal jury. The "state" needs to
prove you were a demonstrated serious and intentional threat to
your child's safety and that you acted with mal-intent towards your
children.

PDF: http://www.AKidsRight.Org/parental_notification/family-rights-poster.pdf

What do you think? Your FEEDBACK & PARTICIPATION is welcome!

John Murtari
____________________________________________________________________
Coordinator AKidsRight.Org
jmurtari@AKidsRight.Org A Kid's Right to BOTH parents"
(315) 944-0999(x-211) http://www.AKidsRight.Org/

=========================================
http://www.AKidsRight.Org/
A Kid's Right to Both Parents!
---
Newsletter mailing list
Newsletter@kids-right.org
http://kids-right.org/mailman/listinfo/newsletter

Kinship Care More Benefit than Foster Care, Study finds

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080602112351.htm

ScienceDaily (June 4, 2008) — Children removed from their homes after reports of maltreatment have significantly fewer behavior problems three years after placement with relatives than if they are put into foster care, according to new research at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also:
Health & Medicine
•Children's Health
•Infant's Health
•Attention Deficit Disorder
Mind & Brain
•Child Psychology
•Child Development
•ADD and ADHD
Reference
•Pediatrics
•Child abuse
•Therapy dog
•Palliative care
The study, which looked at a national sample of 1,309 U.S. children removed from their home between October 1999 and December 2000 following reports of maltreatment, is published in the June issue of the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. The results of the study provide compelling evidence to support efforts in recent years to identify what is sometimes referred to as "kinship care" as an alternative for placing children into non-relative foster care and to maximize the supports and services that will help children achieve permanency in these settings.

"For a long time people have debated the value of kin in providing both stability and permanency to children in foster care," said David M. Rubin, M.D., M.S.C.E., a pediatric researcher at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and lead author of the study. "Our results suggest for the first time, in a national population group, that family care may offer protective value in terms of well-being and stability for children in out-of-home care."

"In the past, what has been difficult to reconcile is whether the benefit of a connection to family exceeds potential risks that children may face because kin caregivers tend to be single, older, of poorer health, of lower economic status, or--some may argue--more likely to share the same issues as those of the birth parents that may have harmed the children," said Rubin. "This debate often has stalled important benefits that would insure prompt access of family caregivers to children, as well as provide the guardianship benefits to help successfully transition them from the child welfare system."

Researchers analyzed data collected from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being study mandated by Congress in 1996. Interviews for this study were conducted with children, caregivers, birth parents, child welfare workers, and teachers at the time the child was removed from the home, and at 18 months and 36 months after enrollment. The interviewers measured behavioral well-being with a standardized survey tool, the Child Behavior Checklist.

Three years after placement, nearly two-thirds of the children in kinship care were in long-lasting settings with family that were established quickly after they entered care, compared with only a third of children in foster care who achieved similar stability. , The researchers also found that even after controlling for the children's baseline problems and the extra stability in kinship settings three years after placement, those children placed in early kinship care had only a 32 percent risk of behavioral problems, compared to a risk of 46 percent in children assigned to foster care. Many of these problems were disruptive behaviors and oppositional defiance, in addition to anxiety or depression.

The authors caution that while children cared for by family members fared better than those in foster care, the entire group of children removed from their home showed higher rates of behavioral problems than the general population. The number of children living with relative caregivers has also been increasing in recent years, and so the needs in this population may be growing. More than 2.5 million children lived with family members other than a birth parent in 2005, a 55 percent increase from 1990, according to U.S. Census data.

The study findings could strengthen the policy rationale for pending federal legislation that supports expanded assistance and guardianship benefits for family members within or outside of the child welfare system. Although more than 90% of children raised by relatives outside the supervision of the child welfare system, their relationship to the system may be fluid, particularly if services are not provided to support permanent guardianship, and if additional assistance is not provided for the behavioral health needs of these children.

The authors also caution that kinship care is not always a realistic option for children removed from the home because of the lack of extended family options that would provide safe alternatives to foster care. For these children, the study demonstrated that preventing placement changes improved behavioral outcomes regardless of the caregiver's relationship to the child. The authors suggest that directing children toward appropriate kinship settings can only alleviate a shortage of quality foster care families best able to provide such stability to those children without viable kinship alternatives.

"There is something innate about the family that provides some sense of stability to the child," said Rubin, adding that the magnitude of the effect should be reassuring to child welfare specialists aware of the growing trend toward kinship placements in recent years. "We understand it is not a simple fix and that's why we need to support these families as much as we would a foster care family. The data speaks to the value of kin in providing permanent homes for children; such value needs to be nurtured by our public programs."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Journal reference:

1.David M. Rubin, MD, MSCE; Kevin J. Downes, MD; Amanda L. R. O'Reilly, MPH; Robin Mekonnen, MSW; Xianqun Luan, MS; Russell Localio, PhD. Impact of Kinship Care on Behavioral Well-being for Children in Out-of-Home Care. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, 2008;162(6) DOI: 10.1001/archpedi.162.6.550
Adapted from materials provided by Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Bill's Filed to Remove Judge, Marital Master in NH

Nashua Telegraph Letter to the Editor-November 6,2009

Recently, two bills of address to remove a judge and a marital master were introduced to the House of Representatives.

Several citizens brought complaints to the redress of grievance caucus at the Statehouse. The violations were so egregious and numerous that the representatives involved were left with no choice but to submit bills to get them off the bench.

There is very strong and abundant evidence that the chief justice and administrative director of the Family Division need to be taken out of position as well. Their abuses are impressive and intolerable.

The Judicial Conduct Committee has proven to be a mirage. It is a division of the Judicial Branch, which is why members don’t punish themselves for their own wrongdoing. The redress caucus enables a mechanism to make those who wrong us to be accountable to the people.

The court corruption harms Democrats and Republicans. No one is safe from this, especially not our children.

The chairman of the redress of grievance caucus is Rep. Paul Ingbretson, R-Pike.

David Johnson

Derry

DCYF strikes again!-SJC says newborn removed too fast

SJC says newborn removed too fast
Seeks to clarify emergency cases involving custody
By John R. Ellement
Globe Staff / November 5, 2009
In a sharply worded rebuke, the state’s high court yesterday said that a judge and the state Department of Children and Families moved too fast to remove a newborn from a Western Massachusetts mother who had already lost custody of two older children because they were not being properly cared for.

In a unanimous ruling written by Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall, the Supreme Judicial Court said that judges handling emergency custody cases must wipe from their minds any information gleaned from other cases involving the same mother or family.

The baby was identified only as Zita.

“It may be impossible to erase a judge’s memory of the prior case,’’ Marshall wrote. “But each party is entitled to an impartial magistrate and a decision based on the evidence presented in her case . . . Zita’s removal by the Commonwealth from her custodial parent implicates constitutional rights of the highest order.’’

The high court ruled that a new custody hearing that could lead to the mother regaining custody of the girl must be held “forthwith.’’

The SJC said it took on the case because it wanted to clearly spell out the rules that judges must follow.

Marylou Sudders, president of the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, said she feared that the decision may lead judges to completely ignore the history of a mother or a family.

“Parental history is a factor in child abuse and neglect cases,’’ Sudders said. “It doesn’t predict the future, but it is obviously an issue.’’

The Department of Children and Families, she said, “first and foremost has to be a child protection agency.’’

She added: “It is concerning, if, over time, courts do not take into account prior history that is properly introduced in court hearings. Without appreciation for the history, I think that will not be in a child’s best interest.’’

The attorney for the mother, whose name was not released, said she could not discuss specifics because she had not been given permission by her client.

Speaking generally, attorney Dorothy Meyer Storrow said the SJC was right to force judges to rule only on evidence presented in individual cases and to require the Department of Children and Families to meet basic legal rules, especially since the agency has the information at its fingertips.

“There are issues that are specific to one child that aren’t specific to another,’’ said Meyer Storrow, of Greenfield. “If you don’t know what the judge is relying on, she may be relying on something that is inaccurate and you have no way to fix that.’’

She added: “When you are dealing with constitutional rights, we want to make sure that it’s done in a fair way. Sometimes, the fact that a parent can’t meet the needs of one child is actually not relevant to whether she can meet the needs of a different child with different needs.’’

Alison Goodwin, a spokeswoman for the Department of Children and Families, said the SJC ruling does not limit the agency’s efforts to protect children.

“We have an obligation to evaluate each individual situation on its own merits at that time,’’ Goodwin said in an e-mail. “However, there is nothing in this ruling that prevents the department or the courts from considering a past history on fitness nor is the department or the courts required to wait until a child is harmed before custody is granted.’’

In its ruling, the SJC gave an outline of the woman’s history that led the department to decide three months before the child was born that it needed to take emergency action to protect the newborn.

The court said the woman had two children who were removed from her care on May 23, 2008. Two days after the child was born on Dec. 18, 2008, the DCF took emergency custody of the child and prepared to justify its actions at a hearing required by law to be held no more than 72 hours later.

The high court said the most powerful evidence the department provided at the hearing was an unsworn letter from a department social worker that discussed the woman’s prior failures as a mother. The hearing was held before Hampshire-Franklin Juvenile Court Judge Lillian Miranda, who had ordered the older children taken from the home, according to court records.

Miranda granted temporary custody of Zita to the department, a decision the SJC reversed yesterday.

“The judge erred, and therefore violated Zita’s substantive rights, in both respects: her reliance on the petition that was not in evidence, and her reliance on her recollection of the facts of the earlier proceedings involving the other children,’’ Marshall wrote.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SJC rebukes state agency and judge for emergency removal of newborn

November 4, 2009 12:07 PM
By John R. Ellement, Globe Staff

In a sharply worded rebuke, the state’s high court today said that a judge and the Department of Children and Families moved too fast to remove a newborn from a Western Massachusetts mother – who had already lost custody of two older children because they were not being properly cared for.

In a unanimous ruling written by Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall, the Supreme Judicial Court said that judges handling emergency custody cases must wipe from their minds any information gleaned from other cases involving the same mother or family. The girl was identified only as Zita.

“It may be impossible to erase a judge's memory of the prior case,’’ Marshall wrote. “But each party is entitled to an impartial magistrate and a decision based on the evidence presented in her case… Zita's removal by the Commonwealth from her custodial parent implicates constitutional rights of the highest order.’’

Marshall added, “the availability of emergency hearings is not an invitation to the department or a judge to ignore the rules of evidence or overlook the burdens of proof to meet the statutory grounds for temporary removal of a child from her parent.’’

The SJC said it took on this particular case because it wanted to clearly spell out the rules that judges must follow in the courtroom.

The mother’s name and that of her children are not publicly available because the case files were impounded. But the SJC gave an outline of the woman’s history that led the DCF to decide three months before the child was born that they needed to take emergency action to protect the newborn.

The court said the woman had two children – a 9-year-old boy and a 7-year-old girl – who were removed from her care on May 23, 2008

Two days after the child was born on Dec. 18, 2008, the DCF took emergency custody of the child and prepared to justify its actions at a hearing which is required by law to happen no more than 72 hours later.

At that hearing, the SJC said the most powerful evidence the DCF provided was an unsworn letter from a DCF social worker that discussed the woman’s prior failures as a mother. The hearing was held before Hampshire-Franklin Juvenile Court Judge Lillian Miranda, who had ordered the older children taken from the home, according to court records.

Miranda granted temporary custody of Zita to the DCF, a decision the SJC has now reversed.

“The judge erred, and therefore violated Zita's substantive rights, in both respects: her reliance on the petition that was not in evidence, and her reliance on her recollection of the facts of the earlier proceedings involving the other children,’’ Marshall wrote. “It was an unsworn petition filed by a social worker that commenced Zita's care and protection proceedings. The judge should not have relied on its contents.’’

In a footnote, the SJC said that despite problems with the older children, during the pregnancy of her third child the mother kept her medical appointments and that no traces of illegal substances were found in the infant or the mother following birth.

“Much time has passed since Zita was taken from her mother, time that is formative in the life of an infant,’’ Marshall wrote as the court ruled that a new custody hearing that could lead to the mother regaining custody of her third child must be held “forthwith.’’

The Central Registry of Welfare Fraud

Please register your agency today. They want to put parents on a register. Now it's their turn! Let the world see the fraud against parents, children and families!
http://sites.google.com/site/cpsfilessite/