Cut the Power of the Family Courts
by Phyllis Schlafly December 25, 2009
Do you think judges should have the power to decide what religion your children must belong to and which churches they may be prohibited from attending? We have long suspected that family courts are the most dictatorial and biased of all U.S. courts, routinely depriving divorced fathers of due process rights and authority over their own children, but this December a Chicago judge went beyond the pale.
Cook County Circuit Judge Edward Jordan issued a restraining order to prohibit Joseph Reyes from taking his three-year-old daughter to any non-Jewish religious activities because the ex-wife argued that would contribute to "the emotional detriment of the child." Mrs. Rebecca Reyes wants to raise her daughter in the Jewish religion, and the judge sided with the mother.
As Joseph Reyes' divorce attorney, Joel Brodsky, said when he saw the judge's restraining order, "I almost fell off my chair. I thought maybe we were in Afghanistan and this was the Taliban." The lawyer is appealing.
Doesn't the First Amendment extend to fathers? Apparently not if they are divorced. This case sounds extreme, but it is a good illustration of how family courts, the lowest in the judicial hierarchy, have become the most dictatorial of all courts because of the tremendous number of families and amounts of private money they control and the lack of accountability for their decisions.
In another divorce case this year, a family court in New Hampshire (where the state motto is "Live Free or Die") ordered ten-year-old Amanda Kurowski to quit being homeschooled by her mother and instead to attend fifth grade in the local public school. Judge Lucinda V. Sadler approved the court-appointed expert's view that Amanda "appeared to reflect her mother's rigidity on questions of faith" and that Amanda "would be best served by exposure to multiple points of view."
Where did family court judges get the power to decide what church and what school the children of divorced parents must attend? Family court judges have amassed this extraordinary power by co-opting and changing the definition of a time-honored concept: "the best interest of the child."
This rule originally came from English common law as compiled by William Blackstone in 1765, and meant that parents are presumed to act in their own children's best interest. For centuries, English and American courts honored parents' rights by recognizing the legal presumption that the best interest of a child is whatever a fit parent says it is, and should not be second-guessed by a judge.
When states revised their family-law statutes in the 1970s, the "best interest of the child" became disconnected from parents' decisions, and family courts assumed the discretion to decide the best interest of children of divorced and unmarried parents.
The notion that persons other than parents should decide what is in a child's best interest is illustrated by the slogan "it takes a village to raise a child." Those who use that slogan understand "village" to mean government courts, government schools, or government social workers.
The trouble with the best-interest rule is that it is totally subjective; it's a matter of individual opinion. Parents make hundreds of different decisions, and should have the right to make their decisions even if they contravene the self-appointed experts.
Whether the decision is big (such as where to go to church or school), or small (such as playing baseball or soccer) there is no objective way to say which is "best."
Since judges are supposed to base their decisions on evidence presented in open court, and there is no objective basis for deciding thousands of questions involved in raising a child, judges call on the testimony of expert witnesses. A big industry has grown up of psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, custody evaluators, and counselors who are eager to collect fees for giving their opinions.
Having opinions produced by persons with academic degrees is a way to make subjective and arbitrary judgments appear objective. With the volume of cases coming through family courts, judges can evade responsibility for controversial decisions by rubber-stamping opinions of these court-appointed experts.
Scientific American Mind published a scholarly paper in October 2005 by three noted psychologists who explained that the practice of allowing courts to be de facto decision makers "is legally, morally and scientifically wrong. . . . Parents should determine their children's lives after separation, just as when they are married. . . . Parents, not judges or mental health professionals, are the best experts on their own children."
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2009/dec09/09-12-25.html
Isabella Brooke Knightly and Austin Gamez-Knightly
In Memory of my Loving Husband, William F. Knightly Jr. Murdered by ILLEGAL Palliative Care at a Nashua, NH Hospital
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Saturday, December 26, 2009
DHS balks at disclosing more records (What aboud court recordings proving perjury by DCYF Lawyer's?)
Saturday, December 26, 2009
DHS balks at disclosing more records
The plaintiffs say the records might show improper practices in the placing of children.
By DAVID HARPER World Staff Writer
Published: 12/25/2009 2:21 AM
Last Modified: 12/25/2009 4:29 AM
The plaintiffs' attorneys in a lawsuit that seeks top-to-bottom reform in the state's child-welfare system say the disclosure of additional records is needed to "ascertain the full extent of the deficiencies" at the Oklahoma Department of Human Services.
However, lawyers for the state counter that the plaintiffs' attorneys are trying to engage in a "fishing expedition" for information, even after they have already received about 600,000 pages of materials related to the case from the defense.
It's the latest dispute in a lawsuit that was filed in February 2008 in federal court in Tulsa. The lawsuit named various DHS officials as defendants and alleged that the agency routinely places children who are in state custody in unsafe situations in which many suffer further abuse and even death.
The original plaintiffs were nine children — who ranged in age from 4 months to 16 years when the complaint was filed — whom the lawsuit alleges suffered in DHS placements.
In May, U.S. District Judge Gregory Frizzell granted the plaintiffs' request to make the lawsuit a class-action case, which expanded the number of potential plaintiffs to about 10,000 children.
Frizzell's ruling was appealed by the defendants to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is considering the issue after hearing oral arguments in Denver last month.
On July 8, Frizzell ended classwide pretrial "discovery" — or exchange of evidence between the parties — while the appeal of his ruling
was pending.
The move allowed disclosure of relevant information concerning the original plaintiffs.
The defense claimed in a recent filing that on July 15, "as a gesture of good faith," it produced hundreds of thousands of pages of documents it had "tediously collected and reviewed."
However, the plaintiffs claimed in a Nov. 11 motion that the defense has "refused to provide discovery concerning the improper practices and deficiencies to which the named plaintiffs have been subjected."
Accompanying the plaintiffs' motion were two expert reports. Included in those filings were reports of children in the custody of the Oklahoma Department of Human Services who reportedly were scalded in bath water, sexually molested, beaten with tree switches and belts, and hit in the mouth.
In its response, the defense claims that the November filings by the plaintiffs had "nothing to do with the production of documents and everything to do with creating a media blitz."
The defense claims that the inclusion of the expert reports, which reinforce some of the broader claims in the lawsuit, was a "charade" meant to confuse the court and that the motion itself was an attempt to prematurely begin expensive class-wide discovery at state expense.
The DHS defendants claimed in their response that "the discovery material plaintiffs seek through their motion to compel has already been provided to them."
The plaintiffs countered in their recent reply that what they seek now is relevant to the scope of the danger that the plaintiffs are now facing and also to the issue of whether the defendants are acting with deliberate indifference to that alleged peril.
"It is precisely because additional records are required to make these determinations that the named plaintiffs seek, and are entitled to, the records in question," the plaintiffs' reply claims.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Harper 581-8359
david.harper@tulsaworld.com By DAVID HARPER World Staff Writer
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20091225_11_A13_Thepla330141
DHS balks at disclosing more records
The plaintiffs say the records might show improper practices in the placing of children.
By DAVID HARPER World Staff Writer
Published: 12/25/2009 2:21 AM
Last Modified: 12/25/2009 4:29 AM
The plaintiffs' attorneys in a lawsuit that seeks top-to-bottom reform in the state's child-welfare system say the disclosure of additional records is needed to "ascertain the full extent of the deficiencies" at the Oklahoma Department of Human Services.
However, lawyers for the state counter that the plaintiffs' attorneys are trying to engage in a "fishing expedition" for information, even after they have already received about 600,000 pages of materials related to the case from the defense.
It's the latest dispute in a lawsuit that was filed in February 2008 in federal court in Tulsa. The lawsuit named various DHS officials as defendants and alleged that the agency routinely places children who are in state custody in unsafe situations in which many suffer further abuse and even death.
The original plaintiffs were nine children — who ranged in age from 4 months to 16 years when the complaint was filed — whom the lawsuit alleges suffered in DHS placements.
In May, U.S. District Judge Gregory Frizzell granted the plaintiffs' request to make the lawsuit a class-action case, which expanded the number of potential plaintiffs to about 10,000 children.
Frizzell's ruling was appealed by the defendants to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is considering the issue after hearing oral arguments in Denver last month.
On July 8, Frizzell ended classwide pretrial "discovery" — or exchange of evidence between the parties — while the appeal of his ruling
was pending.
The move allowed disclosure of relevant information concerning the original plaintiffs.
The defense claimed in a recent filing that on July 15, "as a gesture of good faith," it produced hundreds of thousands of pages of documents it had "tediously collected and reviewed."
However, the plaintiffs claimed in a Nov. 11 motion that the defense has "refused to provide discovery concerning the improper practices and deficiencies to which the named plaintiffs have been subjected."
Accompanying the plaintiffs' motion were two expert reports. Included in those filings were reports of children in the custody of the Oklahoma Department of Human Services who reportedly were scalded in bath water, sexually molested, beaten with tree switches and belts, and hit in the mouth.
In its response, the defense claims that the November filings by the plaintiffs had "nothing to do with the production of documents and everything to do with creating a media blitz."
The defense claims that the inclusion of the expert reports, which reinforce some of the broader claims in the lawsuit, was a "charade" meant to confuse the court and that the motion itself was an attempt to prematurely begin expensive class-wide discovery at state expense.
The DHS defendants claimed in their response that "the discovery material plaintiffs seek through their motion to compel has already been provided to them."
The plaintiffs countered in their recent reply that what they seek now is relevant to the scope of the danger that the plaintiffs are now facing and also to the issue of whether the defendants are acting with deliberate indifference to that alleged peril.
"It is precisely because additional records are required to make these determinations that the named plaintiffs seek, and are entitled to, the records in question," the plaintiffs' reply claims.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Harper 581-8359
david.harper@tulsaworld.com By DAVID HARPER World Staff Writer
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20091225_11_A13_Thepla330141
Fictitious Mens Rights Terminated in N.H.
This is a follow-up to the article I posted concerning the illegal adoption of children without the consent of their father's.
My grandson, Austin's father's rigths were illegally terminated by the Nashua Probate Court Judge. Austin's father was out of the country and knew nothing pertaining to the State of NH taking custody of his son. Nashua DCYF was given his father's name, address, phone number, date of birth and social security number.The state found a man in Nashua, with the same name and twenty years younger and terminated his rights instead of Austin's father's. When we read the court paperwork showing the date of birth for the man, we immediately told the caseworker they had the wrong man. She was told this was not the man on Austin's birth certificate.The caseworker's response,"No big deal. It doesn't matter." It most certainly does matter. How many more father's have to suffer this abuse by the state? Home many more families have to suffer? Austin is now up for adoption or may have already been adopted as his adoption was planned for this month. His adoption WILL be illegal!
The father of my granddaughter Isabella's rights were terminated illegally also. His name was given to Nashua DCYF, yet the caseworker gave a fictitious name to the court.If anyone had bothered to look through my daughter's medical file, they would have seen his name there also. But they couldn't have, or they did and just didn't care.
I tried to find Isabella's father myself. I contacted his relatives and friends to let him know Isabella was indeed his daughter and that the state put her in fostercare. Nobody knew where he was.
By the time I finally found him, a fictitious mans rights had been terminated, even after my daughter submitted a signed affidavit to the court giving his name as the father of her daughter. Isabella was illegally adopted, but it was not yet final. Her father filed a motion with the court for custody and a paternity test and was denied. The Judge's response stated Isabella's father's rights were terminated and a notice had been published in the Nashua Telegraph with the date published. I obtained a copy of the the publication and saw it was the wrong man's name. The Judge also stated the court never received my daughter's signed affidavit, yet a copy of the affidavit was in an objection from the AG's office to a Supreme Court appeal I filed month's earlier. Therefore the Judge knew all along and granted the adoption of Isabella illegally, knowing Isabella's father's rights were NOT terminated.
Isabella's father filed a motion to reconsider and was again denied. No surprise!
Father's as well as mother's and grandparents are being screwed over by DCYF and the Court's. When will this corruption end? By rights, neither of these children were freed for adoption, but finding anyone to hold these people accountable is another story in itself. But the fight goes on. More people are speaking up and fighting back. This is a fight to the finish!
My grandson, Austin's father's rigths were illegally terminated by the Nashua Probate Court Judge. Austin's father was out of the country and knew nothing pertaining to the State of NH taking custody of his son. Nashua DCYF was given his father's name, address, phone number, date of birth and social security number.The state found a man in Nashua, with the same name and twenty years younger and terminated his rights instead of Austin's father's. When we read the court paperwork showing the date of birth for the man, we immediately told the caseworker they had the wrong man. She was told this was not the man on Austin's birth certificate.The caseworker's response,"No big deal. It doesn't matter." It most certainly does matter. How many more father's have to suffer this abuse by the state? Home many more families have to suffer? Austin is now up for adoption or may have already been adopted as his adoption was planned for this month. His adoption WILL be illegal!
The father of my granddaughter Isabella's rights were terminated illegally also. His name was given to Nashua DCYF, yet the caseworker gave a fictitious name to the court.If anyone had bothered to look through my daughter's medical file, they would have seen his name there also. But they couldn't have, or they did and just didn't care.
I tried to find Isabella's father myself. I contacted his relatives and friends to let him know Isabella was indeed his daughter and that the state put her in fostercare. Nobody knew where he was.
By the time I finally found him, a fictitious mans rights had been terminated, even after my daughter submitted a signed affidavit to the court giving his name as the father of her daughter. Isabella was illegally adopted, but it was not yet final. Her father filed a motion with the court for custody and a paternity test and was denied. The Judge's response stated Isabella's father's rights were terminated and a notice had been published in the Nashua Telegraph with the date published. I obtained a copy of the the publication and saw it was the wrong man's name. The Judge also stated the court never received my daughter's signed affidavit, yet a copy of the affidavit was in an objection from the AG's office to a Supreme Court appeal I filed month's earlier. Therefore the Judge knew all along and granted the adoption of Isabella illegally, knowing Isabella's father's rights were NOT terminated.
Isabella's father filed a motion to reconsider and was again denied. No surprise!
Father's as well as mother's and grandparents are being screwed over by DCYF and the Court's. When will this corruption end? By rights, neither of these children were freed for adoption, but finding anyone to hold these people accountable is another story in itself. But the fight goes on. More people are speaking up and fighting back. This is a fight to the finish!
Peyton's Story Adoption Without The Father’s Consent
Peyton's Story
A father's quest to re-unite with his daughter.HomeWhat Is Peyton’s StoryAdoption Without The Father’s Consent
December 26th, 2009
Never in my wildest nightmares did I ever think that something like this would happen to me. I didn’t think that it really happened to any father who wanted to raise their child. When my daughter Peyton was adopted without my consent I went through a roller coaster ride of emotions and still do to this day. I felt hopeless, helpless, and still have a lot of hatred towards her mother for doing this.
Lawyers that I’ve spoken to haven’t been able to offer much guidance and don’t seem to know just how to handle this situation any more than I do. Not that I have the resources to hire an attorney for a lengthy legal battle, but I’d at least like to know what possible options that I do have, and how to proceed from here. I’ve thought that maybe I could do some of the work myself, but still don’t quite know what to do or who to talk to.
One of the things that has been the most surprising to me is how common this exact scenario is. After doing some research online I discovered that there are many other men out there that have lost all rights to their child unwillingly and with no consent given. The road to reunification seems nearly impossible without truckloads of money for legal fees. I even read about a man who took his custody case the whole way to the supreme court and lost. What the HELL? I have yet to read about a man who’s child has been placed for adoption without his consent and has re-gained custody.
So I decided to start this thread to gain your experience. What’s your story? How have you been affected? What did you do?
http://peytons-story.com/
A father's quest to re-unite with his daughter.HomeWhat Is Peyton’s StoryAdoption Without The Father’s Consent
December 26th, 2009
Never in my wildest nightmares did I ever think that something like this would happen to me. I didn’t think that it really happened to any father who wanted to raise their child. When my daughter Peyton was adopted without my consent I went through a roller coaster ride of emotions and still do to this day. I felt hopeless, helpless, and still have a lot of hatred towards her mother for doing this.
Lawyers that I’ve spoken to haven’t been able to offer much guidance and don’t seem to know just how to handle this situation any more than I do. Not that I have the resources to hire an attorney for a lengthy legal battle, but I’d at least like to know what possible options that I do have, and how to proceed from here. I’ve thought that maybe I could do some of the work myself, but still don’t quite know what to do or who to talk to.
One of the things that has been the most surprising to me is how common this exact scenario is. After doing some research online I discovered that there are many other men out there that have lost all rights to their child unwillingly and with no consent given. The road to reunification seems nearly impossible without truckloads of money for legal fees. I even read about a man who took his custody case the whole way to the supreme court and lost. What the HELL? I have yet to read about a man who’s child has been placed for adoption without his consent and has re-gained custody.
So I decided to start this thread to gain your experience. What’s your story? How have you been affected? What did you do?
http://peytons-story.com/
RE:Can Unwed Fathers Block Adoptions? Reply from a Screwed Over Father
I am posting a message I received from a father in New Jersey, who's baby was adopted out by his ex-girlfriend without his consent. This is happening in all states, not just New Jersy. I am also posting my own story about my two grandchildrens father's, who's rights were terminated illegally. Actually, two fictitious mans rights were terminated by the state of NH.
RE:Can Unwed Fathers Block Adoptions? (What about a fictitious Mans Rights Being terminated?)
Reply |Anthony Jack to me
show details 9:56 PM (10 hours ago)
Ho Joanna, I enjoyed your post. I tried to comment but my comment was to long! could you please post my comment on your blog and check out my blog at the bottom.
I'm trying to reunite with my daughter.
Hi Joanna, thank you for this post. My name is Anthony. I see in your profile that it says that you're a fighter. I too have begun a fight of my own. I stumbled across this article while doing research for my own custody case involving my daughter Peyton. She was put up for adoption by her birth mother without my consent on January 13th 2009, the day that she was born.
I knew that she was conceived and had contact with her mother up until the last two months of the pregnancy when she disappeared. Her mother and I had lived together for about a year but I decided to move out because we both had problems with substance abuse. I decided that I wanted more out of life and got help for my issues.
Within about a week of moving out Inderia informed me that she thought that she was pregnant. I immediately went to the house armed with two pregnancy tests and both came up positive. At this point I had hoped that maybe she would decide to clean up her act but this was not the case. She kept insisting that I move back in with her so that we could raise the baby together. I knew that it wasn't a good idea to move back because then I'd be using again.
Since I didn't want to move back in she tried to talk me into paying for an abortion which I was very strongly opposed to in the begining. As a couple of months passed by I started to think that maybe it would be best to help her pay for an abortion considering that she was using heavily. I was very worried that the baby might be born severely disabled both physically and mentally.
However, she never followed through with the abortion because any money that she got went into her pipe instead. Part of me was relieved because I really wanted a child, but the other part of me was still very nervous about the baby's health.
I had contacted some agencies here in PA to see if I could have her committed on the grounds that she was hurting our unborn child, but was told that unborn children have no rights in PA. So I tried as best as I could to be there for her during the pregnancy and tried to encourage her to seek help without putting myself in harms way for fear of relapsing.
Around Mid November of 2008 I stopped hearing from Inderia, she was not at home and didn't call me at all. I had no idea where she was. Then in late December I ran into her sister. Her sister informed me that Inderia had "hooked up with an adoption agency that "helps" the mother out through the pregnancy, and for a year after". I could only assume that this meant that she was basically selling our baby. I was furious, depressed, a whole range of emotions.
Unfortunately I had no clue what I could do about it.
Then in mid February 2009 Inderia finally contacted me to let me know that our daughter Peyton was born on January 13th and that she'd been placed for adoption. It took everything in me to keep myself from killing her at this point.
She called because she said that she had some pictures that I could see. I refrained from erupting on her over the phone so that I could at least get some pictures and try to find out some mor einfo on the adoption.
When I met up with her she explained to me that it was an open adoption and that she could re-gain custody of Peyton. However she would only do that if I agreed to get back together with her. I have never hated someone so much in my life but contained myself and went along with it so that I could hopefully see my daughter.
This little charade continued for about three months. During this time she had told me on several occasions that she would be having a visit with peyton on this date or that date. Inevitably every time one of those dates came around she would disappear. I knew that I was being played but continued to put up with it for the occasional pictures that the adoptive couple would send and the hope of some more information that would help me down the road.
As my anger towards Inderia grew, I knew that it was time to end this little game. I let her know exactly what I think of her and haven't contacted her since. To this day she still prank calls me, but I haven't talked to her.
The good news is that the misery I went through with her for those few months actually paid off. I was able to learn the first names of the two men that adopted Peyton as well as the state that they live in. I also obtained seven pictures of her. The adoptive couple are pictured in two of them.
I tried talking to many legal services and never got anywhere with it. I started to get so upset about the whole situation that i tried to forget about it. It was just to painful. I felt totally helpless and hopeless.
One morning in November 2009 I woke up even more depressed than usuall. I started talking to my roomate about it and she had asked if Inderia had a Facebook account. I didn't see how thsi would help but it sparked the idea to try and search for the couple online. I had tried before without success.
Today was different. After being glued to the computer for about nine hours I found one of their Myspace Profiles!!! This told me the exact town that they live in.
With this information I was able to find everything out about them including last names, address, telephone number. I even found more pictures of Peyton. I was so excited that I burst into tears. I literally couldn't sleep for three days. I kept imagining what it would be like to have her back.
I was afraid of contacting them online because I didn't want to scare them off and have them disappear. So I started talking to lawyers, and I figured that since I had done all of the "impossible" work that I'd be able to find someone to help me gain custody. This has not been the case.
Everyday I look at their profile pics and I want to message them so badly but I'm afraid to chase them off and lose my opportunity forever. The thought of seeing her oneday is what keeps me going.
Not knowing what else to do I started a blog to accomplish a few things.
1.) Write letters to my daughter, hopefully she'll find them someday.
2.) Provide a place for others affected by adoption to post their stories.
3.) Hopefully find the help that i so desperately need in getting Peyton back.
Thank you for reading my comment.
Please visit Peyton's Story
http://www.peytons-story.com
RE:Can Unwed Fathers Block Adoptions? (What about a fictitious Mans Rights Being terminated?)
Reply |Anthony Jack to me
show details 9:56 PM (10 hours ago)
Ho Joanna, I enjoyed your post. I tried to comment but my comment was to long! could you please post my comment on your blog and check out my blog at the bottom.
I'm trying to reunite with my daughter.
Hi Joanna, thank you for this post. My name is Anthony. I see in your profile that it says that you're a fighter. I too have begun a fight of my own. I stumbled across this article while doing research for my own custody case involving my daughter Peyton. She was put up for adoption by her birth mother without my consent on January 13th 2009, the day that she was born.
I knew that she was conceived and had contact with her mother up until the last two months of the pregnancy when she disappeared. Her mother and I had lived together for about a year but I decided to move out because we both had problems with substance abuse. I decided that I wanted more out of life and got help for my issues.
Within about a week of moving out Inderia informed me that she thought that she was pregnant. I immediately went to the house armed with two pregnancy tests and both came up positive. At this point I had hoped that maybe she would decide to clean up her act but this was not the case. She kept insisting that I move back in with her so that we could raise the baby together. I knew that it wasn't a good idea to move back because then I'd be using again.
Since I didn't want to move back in she tried to talk me into paying for an abortion which I was very strongly opposed to in the begining. As a couple of months passed by I started to think that maybe it would be best to help her pay for an abortion considering that she was using heavily. I was very worried that the baby might be born severely disabled both physically and mentally.
However, she never followed through with the abortion because any money that she got went into her pipe instead. Part of me was relieved because I really wanted a child, but the other part of me was still very nervous about the baby's health.
I had contacted some agencies here in PA to see if I could have her committed on the grounds that she was hurting our unborn child, but was told that unborn children have no rights in PA. So I tried as best as I could to be there for her during the pregnancy and tried to encourage her to seek help without putting myself in harms way for fear of relapsing.
Around Mid November of 2008 I stopped hearing from Inderia, she was not at home and didn't call me at all. I had no idea where she was. Then in late December I ran into her sister. Her sister informed me that Inderia had "hooked up with an adoption agency that "helps" the mother out through the pregnancy, and for a year after". I could only assume that this meant that she was basically selling our baby. I was furious, depressed, a whole range of emotions.
Unfortunately I had no clue what I could do about it.
Then in mid February 2009 Inderia finally contacted me to let me know that our daughter Peyton was born on January 13th and that she'd been placed for adoption. It took everything in me to keep myself from killing her at this point.
She called because she said that she had some pictures that I could see. I refrained from erupting on her over the phone so that I could at least get some pictures and try to find out some mor einfo on the adoption.
When I met up with her she explained to me that it was an open adoption and that she could re-gain custody of Peyton. However she would only do that if I agreed to get back together with her. I have never hated someone so much in my life but contained myself and went along with it so that I could hopefully see my daughter.
This little charade continued for about three months. During this time she had told me on several occasions that she would be having a visit with peyton on this date or that date. Inevitably every time one of those dates came around she would disappear. I knew that I was being played but continued to put up with it for the occasional pictures that the adoptive couple would send and the hope of some more information that would help me down the road.
As my anger towards Inderia grew, I knew that it was time to end this little game. I let her know exactly what I think of her and haven't contacted her since. To this day she still prank calls me, but I haven't talked to her.
The good news is that the misery I went through with her for those few months actually paid off. I was able to learn the first names of the two men that adopted Peyton as well as the state that they live in. I also obtained seven pictures of her. The adoptive couple are pictured in two of them.
I tried talking to many legal services and never got anywhere with it. I started to get so upset about the whole situation that i tried to forget about it. It was just to painful. I felt totally helpless and hopeless.
One morning in November 2009 I woke up even more depressed than usuall. I started talking to my roomate about it and she had asked if Inderia had a Facebook account. I didn't see how thsi would help but it sparked the idea to try and search for the couple online. I had tried before without success.
Today was different. After being glued to the computer for about nine hours I found one of their Myspace Profiles!!! This told me the exact town that they live in.
With this information I was able to find everything out about them including last names, address, telephone number. I even found more pictures of Peyton. I was so excited that I burst into tears. I literally couldn't sleep for three days. I kept imagining what it would be like to have her back.
I was afraid of contacting them online because I didn't want to scare them off and have them disappear. So I started talking to lawyers, and I figured that since I had done all of the "impossible" work that I'd be able to find someone to help me gain custody. This has not been the case.
Everyday I look at their profile pics and I want to message them so badly but I'm afraid to chase them off and lose my opportunity forever. The thought of seeing her oneday is what keeps me going.
Not knowing what else to do I started a blog to accomplish a few things.
1.) Write letters to my daughter, hopefully she'll find them someday.
2.) Provide a place for others affected by adoption to post their stories.
3.) Hopefully find the help that i so desperately need in getting Peyton back.
Thank you for reading my comment.
Please visit Peyton's Story
http://www.peytons-story.com
Friday, December 25, 2009
Doctor alleges second person also changed patients' records in WDH privacy breach-NH
Doctor alleges second person also changed patients' records in WDH privacy breach
By Adam D. Krauss
akrauss@fosters.com
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
DOVER — A doctor impacted by the privacy breach at Wentworth-Douglass Hospital says a second employee improperly accessed and changed patients' records but never lost her job. (If they look a little deeper, I'm sure they'll find this isn't the only hospital in NH where patients records have been accessed and changed.)
"There was another woman that's still working at the hospital," said Dr. Cheryl Moore, whose Piscataqua Pathology Associates group was contracted to run pathology lab at WDH. "She did the same thing as the first lady, but to a lesser degree."
Unlike the woman who lost her job, this employee escaped punishment because Gint Taoras, the lab director and a WDH employee, and Dalma Winkler, the hospital's privacy officer, halted a full audit of what she had done, Moore claims.
"They reviewed a few cases just to see they were ... looking at similar records," Moore said Tuesday, but the hospital didn't review more cases "because they didn't want to know that they had more trouble."
Moore and her partner, Dr. Glenn Littell, have said WDH administration resisted investigating the breach and retaliated against them by not renewing their contract after they pushed for disclosure — allegations rebuffed by WDH CEO and President Gregory Walker.
Moore's comments came after Foster's Daily Democrat received a community commentary written by her husband, Dr. Thomas Moore, a surgeon with courtesy privileges at WDH.
In the commentary, published in today's edition, he says "had the Hospital's administrators had their way, an investigation into this breach would never have taken place. This is highlighted by the fact that the person who committed this heinous act had an accomplice who was never investigated and never fired. This was a determination made by the Hospital."
WDH spokeswoman Noreen Biehl confirmed Tuesday only one person lost their job as a result of the breach but didn't immediately respond to the allegation of an "accomplice" or whether another employee was involved in some way.
The doctors have said the ex-employee altered records of some 1,100 patients after being transferred out of the lab, where she had worked for many years, after she was cited for poor performance. This second employee, Cheryl Moore said, "was friends with" the ex-employee "and she got transferred out around the same time."
In another development, a state investigator says he's reviewing information he didn't have when he determined Wentworth-Douglass Hospital didn't have to notify patients whose records were improperly viewed or altered in a 13-month privacy breach, which involved about 1,800 unauthorized patient record views from May 2006 to June 2007.
James Boffetti, who leads the Office of the Attorney General's consumer protection and antitrust bureau, said he's received images of computer screens that were viewed by the rogue employee — images an attorney for Moore and Littell says shows patients' Social Security numbers and sensitive insurance policy data were compromised.
"I will certainly review everything," said Boffetti, stressing that doesn't mean he's necessarily reopening his case file. "I want to have a chance to look at it more carefully."
Boffetti would not say if he would have liked to have the images at the time of his initial review.
Late last week, Charles Grau, a Concord attorney representing Moore and Littell, said the images could "significantly change" Boffetti's view of whether the breach impacted patients' personal information as defined by RSA 359-C: 19.
Boffetti had determined the breach did not meet the law and therefore the hospital did not need to notify the state or patients.
Boffetti said he never sought the images and he's "not alleging" the hospital withheld information. "The hospital has been cooperative," he said.
Biehl questioned why the pathologists didn't provide the state with the images when they reported the matter to several agencies.
"We were never interviewed," Grau said, noting he provided the information to Boffetti upon learning a decision was made after reading about in Foster's Daily Democrat.
Boffetti relied on an audit summary that was completed in May in carrying out his initial review. From that he knew patients' first names were changed, something state law says constitutes personal information. He would not explain Tuesday how such a change didn't fit the law's requirement.
Biehl said she is still waiting for a report from state health investigators who reviewed hospital and pathology lab operations at the direction of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The College of American Pathologists is also investigating.
Moore and Littell, whose group is running the lab until March, also brought the case to the Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which enforces privacy laws, and DHHS' Office of Inspector General.
The Joint Commission, which accredits health care organizations, has determined the hospital satisfactorily addressed the situation.
http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091223/GJNEWS_01/712239922/-1/rss3&source=RSS
By Adam D. Krauss
akrauss@fosters.com
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
DOVER — A doctor impacted by the privacy breach at Wentworth-Douglass Hospital says a second employee improperly accessed and changed patients' records but never lost her job. (If they look a little deeper, I'm sure they'll find this isn't the only hospital in NH where patients records have been accessed and changed.)
"There was another woman that's still working at the hospital," said Dr. Cheryl Moore, whose Piscataqua Pathology Associates group was contracted to run pathology lab at WDH. "She did the same thing as the first lady, but to a lesser degree."
Unlike the woman who lost her job, this employee escaped punishment because Gint Taoras, the lab director and a WDH employee, and Dalma Winkler, the hospital's privacy officer, halted a full audit of what she had done, Moore claims.
"They reviewed a few cases just to see they were ... looking at similar records," Moore said Tuesday, but the hospital didn't review more cases "because they didn't want to know that they had more trouble."
Moore and her partner, Dr. Glenn Littell, have said WDH administration resisted investigating the breach and retaliated against them by not renewing their contract after they pushed for disclosure — allegations rebuffed by WDH CEO and President Gregory Walker.
Moore's comments came after Foster's Daily Democrat received a community commentary written by her husband, Dr. Thomas Moore, a surgeon with courtesy privileges at WDH.
In the commentary, published in today's edition, he says "had the Hospital's administrators had their way, an investigation into this breach would never have taken place. This is highlighted by the fact that the person who committed this heinous act had an accomplice who was never investigated and never fired. This was a determination made by the Hospital."
WDH spokeswoman Noreen Biehl confirmed Tuesday only one person lost their job as a result of the breach but didn't immediately respond to the allegation of an "accomplice" or whether another employee was involved in some way.
The doctors have said the ex-employee altered records of some 1,100 patients after being transferred out of the lab, where she had worked for many years, after she was cited for poor performance. This second employee, Cheryl Moore said, "was friends with" the ex-employee "and she got transferred out around the same time."
In another development, a state investigator says he's reviewing information he didn't have when he determined Wentworth-Douglass Hospital didn't have to notify patients whose records were improperly viewed or altered in a 13-month privacy breach, which involved about 1,800 unauthorized patient record views from May 2006 to June 2007.
James Boffetti, who leads the Office of the Attorney General's consumer protection and antitrust bureau, said he's received images of computer screens that were viewed by the rogue employee — images an attorney for Moore and Littell says shows patients' Social Security numbers and sensitive insurance policy data were compromised.
"I will certainly review everything," said Boffetti, stressing that doesn't mean he's necessarily reopening his case file. "I want to have a chance to look at it more carefully."
Boffetti would not say if he would have liked to have the images at the time of his initial review.
Late last week, Charles Grau, a Concord attorney representing Moore and Littell, said the images could "significantly change" Boffetti's view of whether the breach impacted patients' personal information as defined by RSA 359-C: 19.
Boffetti had determined the breach did not meet the law and therefore the hospital did not need to notify the state or patients.
Boffetti said he never sought the images and he's "not alleging" the hospital withheld information. "The hospital has been cooperative," he said.
Biehl questioned why the pathologists didn't provide the state with the images when they reported the matter to several agencies.
"We were never interviewed," Grau said, noting he provided the information to Boffetti upon learning a decision was made after reading about in Foster's Daily Democrat.
Boffetti relied on an audit summary that was completed in May in carrying out his initial review. From that he knew patients' first names were changed, something state law says constitutes personal information. He would not explain Tuesday how such a change didn't fit the law's requirement.
Biehl said she is still waiting for a report from state health investigators who reviewed hospital and pathology lab operations at the direction of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The College of American Pathologists is also investigating.
Moore and Littell, whose group is running the lab until March, also brought the case to the Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which enforces privacy laws, and DHHS' Office of Inspector General.
The Joint Commission, which accredits health care organizations, has determined the hospital satisfactorily addressed the situation.
http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091223/GJNEWS_01/712239922/-1/rss3&source=RSS
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Foster mother accused of beating child during potty training
Foster mother accused of beating child during potty training
Charmaine McCutchen, 44, is accused of striking her 4-year-old foster child in the abdomen
By Doug Page and Lucas Sullivan
Staff Writers
Updated 4:09 PM Wednesday, December 23, 2009
DAYTON — A Trotwood mother accused of severely beating her foster child while trying to potty train him was indicted and arrested Tuesday, Dec. 22, on a felony child endangering charge.
Charmaine McCutchen, 44, is accused of striking her 4-year-old foster child in the abdomen.
If convicted, McCutchen faces between two and eight years in prison.
The toddler, born with fetal alcohol syndrome and who has “developmental delays,” was taken to Dayton Children’s Medical Center on July 9 with severe abdominal pain and vomiting, Trotwood police said.
Emergency room doctors informed officers they suspected he might have been abused, authorities said.
The boy had emergency surgery the next day and spent two months in the hospital, Trotwood Detective Natalie Watson said.
The alleged assault occurred during toilet training, Watson said.
Police said the toddler initially indicated he had been hurt by “his mommy. He had two people he called his mommy so it was unclear what had happened,” Watson said.
The boy’s biological mother has supervised visitation rights, police said. McCutchen has two other biological sons of her own.
In later interviews, the child said, “Mommy with the two boys hurt me” and “Charmaine hit my tummy,” police said.
When police attempted several times to interview McCutchen, including a voice-stress test, “She backed out,” Detective Steve Derringer said.
Prosecutors approved the charge in October and sent it to a grand jury, which handed up the indictment Dec. 8.
It took authorities six months to get the indictment because of medical records and forensic evidence needed to secure charges, said Greg Flannagan, the county prosecutor’s office spokesman.
The boy had been in McCutchen’s care for almost two years, Watson said.
He has since been placed in a different foster home.
“He’s doing much better, putting on weight and thriving,” Watson said. “He’s a different kid.”
Montgomery County Children’s Services spokesman Tim Harshaw said McCutchen was contracted with another agency to house foster children.
The agency has no prior cases involving McCutchen’s biological children, but Harshaw said officials will do an assessment of her home in response to her arrest.
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/crime/foster-mother-accused-of-beating-child-during-potty-training-462430.html?imw=Y
Charmaine McCutchen, 44, is accused of striking her 4-year-old foster child in the abdomen
By Doug Page and Lucas Sullivan
Staff Writers
Updated 4:09 PM Wednesday, December 23, 2009
DAYTON — A Trotwood mother accused of severely beating her foster child while trying to potty train him was indicted and arrested Tuesday, Dec. 22, on a felony child endangering charge.
Charmaine McCutchen, 44, is accused of striking her 4-year-old foster child in the abdomen.
If convicted, McCutchen faces between two and eight years in prison.
The toddler, born with fetal alcohol syndrome and who has “developmental delays,” was taken to Dayton Children’s Medical Center on July 9 with severe abdominal pain and vomiting, Trotwood police said.
Emergency room doctors informed officers they suspected he might have been abused, authorities said.
The boy had emergency surgery the next day and spent two months in the hospital, Trotwood Detective Natalie Watson said.
The alleged assault occurred during toilet training, Watson said.
Police said the toddler initially indicated he had been hurt by “his mommy. He had two people he called his mommy so it was unclear what had happened,” Watson said.
The boy’s biological mother has supervised visitation rights, police said. McCutchen has two other biological sons of her own.
In later interviews, the child said, “Mommy with the two boys hurt me” and “Charmaine hit my tummy,” police said.
When police attempted several times to interview McCutchen, including a voice-stress test, “She backed out,” Detective Steve Derringer said.
Prosecutors approved the charge in October and sent it to a grand jury, which handed up the indictment Dec. 8.
It took authorities six months to get the indictment because of medical records and forensic evidence needed to secure charges, said Greg Flannagan, the county prosecutor’s office spokesman.
The boy had been in McCutchen’s care for almost two years, Watson said.
He has since been placed in a different foster home.
“He’s doing much better, putting on weight and thriving,” Watson said. “He’s a different kid.”
Montgomery County Children’s Services spokesman Tim Harshaw said McCutchen was contracted with another agency to house foster children.
The agency has no prior cases involving McCutchen’s biological children, but Harshaw said officials will do an assessment of her home in response to her arrest.
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/crime/foster-mother-accused-of-beating-child-during-potty-training-462430.html?imw=Y
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)