Foster teens ready to tell city council how to fix system
By Petula Dvorak
Friday, January 22, 2010
The room the other night was full of teenagers and their teenage habits. There was the eye-roller, the wise-cracker, the slouch-in-the-seater.
They had colorful markers and a dry-erase board for the meeting, and they talked about college applications and jobs and dorms.
And they also talked about the friend who killed someone in self-defense in a group home. And what it's like to pass by your mom on the street when she's homeless and barely recognizes you. And to wonder about your brothers and sisters and whether they even know about you. And how, if you have extra-curricular activities or an after-school job, chances are the kitchen is locked up when you get home late and there is no food for you. The teens are foster kids. Their parents are basically the District's taxpayers.
Most of them grew up in "the system" as they call it, and any hope for adoption or a long-term foster home or reunification with their families is minuscule, so they wait until they age out.
Finding permanent solutions for foster kids has long been difficult across the country and particularly in the District, where 47 percent of the kids in foster care are between 15 and 21 years old.
Many bounce from foster home to foster home, awkward, combative or withdrawn. And often, by the time they are 13, they get put into a group home run by the government.
Between 150 to 200 kids age out of foster care in the District every year. According to a 2008 study. by Child and Family Services, only 14 percent have the resources to support themselves, about 66 percent suffer from mental illness or substance abuse, 34 percent are pregnant or parents, 40 percent have a high school diploma and about 10 percent are enrolled in college.
Nadia Gold-Moritz, executive director of the Young Women's Project, which is working with foster teens, said too many of these youths end up homeless, in jail, hurt or dead.
Trey Jones, who lives in a District group home, doesn't want to be one of them. "I've been in the system since I was 5," the 19-year-old told me. "And I've got family everywhere, in New Jersey, Atlanta, Colorado. I never understood why nobody worked harder to get me with my family."
Trey, who wears a tie, an argyle sweater and a shirt with cuff links, plans on starting classes this fall for computer science. He will get some help from the government because the District is one of the nation's pioneers in changing the age for leaving the system from 18 to 21. It means that Trey will get financial help after high school with housing and tuition.
He and a few other foster teens are planning for a D.C. Council hearing Friday on what they've gone through and how they think the foster-care system can be fixed.
They have been practicing their testimonies at night at the Young Women's Project. With their highlighters and charts, they are breaking down the problems they've experienced and the solutions they propose.
In a rare twist, the kids and advocates don't want more money. The programs for older foster kids are well-funded, they say. But they think the money can be spent better. Life skills training should begin at 15 for these kids, not 20.
Trey's got his cuff links and his composure. He's got descriptions of long court battles and lawyers in his case, and his legal quest to meet the little brother who doesn't know he exists. He is totally together.
It's going to be a little harder for Derek Reid, who's on his third social worker. "When I need a permission slip signed for school or something, I'm calling and calling, and my social worker doesn't answer," he said. "It's like she's supposed to be my mom, she's my guardian, and how you supposed to feel with the one adult who takes care of you never answers the phone?"
Derek, 18, hears from friends about his mentally ill mom, who is haunting their old neighborhood in her dirty robes. He saw her last month just as he was getting on the bus. He tried to tell her that he got a $50,000 scholarship to go to art school. She looked right past him.
He wonders what he's going to do after he graduates. He wants a job in graphic arts, but he knows it's going to tough to be independent once he turns 21.
"I just want to be with someone I trust," he said. Who does he trust? A high school counselor who took an interest in him and helped him get that scholarship.
"There's no one in your life you trust besides a counselor at school?" I asked him.
"Not really," he tells me.
Princess Clayborne interrupts, as she does many times. She is 17, and a strong, confident, smart young woman who was adopted when she was 5 years old. She recently learned about the status of her little brother because he was featured as a child of the week on television. Occasionally, people who look like her stop her on the street and introduce themselves. They are cousins she had never met.
"These are not sob stories. This is real life. We're not crying about it, and we're not asking you to cry about it," she said. "We just want people to know what we're going through."
E-mail me at dvorakp@washpost.com.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/21/AR2010012104508.html?hpid=news-col-blog
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
Friday, January 22, 2010
Picketers ask for child-protective services to be investigated
Picketers ask for child-protective services to be investigated
Times Herald • January 19, 2010
Nearly 20 people are picketing in front of the St. Clair County Courthouse in Port Huron, asking that Child Protective Services be investigated in the Friday death of a 3-year-old Kimball Township girl.
Members of the group are carrying signs, at least one that reads “CPS accessory to murder,” and are handing out pink ribbons with the dates of Prhaze’s birth and death — Feb. 15, 2006 and Jan. 15. 2010.
Former state Rep. Lauren Hager was supporting Prhaze’s family and friends this morning. Hager of Port Huron Township said he has filed a request that the case being investigated by the state Office of Children’s Ombudsman.
Hager's signature piece of legislation as a state representative was Ariana’s Law, which aimed to improve the state's child-protection system.
He introduced the bill after 2-year-old Ariana Swinson of Port Huron Township was beaten and drowned by her parents in January 2000. She was killed after she was removed from her foster family and returned to her biological parents.
“There needs to be an investigation to see if there were any holes in the safety net,” he said regarding Prhaze’s death.
A Kimball Township couple — Joe Galvan, 26, and Jennifer Galvan, 29 — were arraigned Monday on open murder charges stemming from the girl’s death.
A Sunday autopsy showed she died from blunt-force trauma. Officials have said Child Protective Services had been involved with the family, and that there had been a pattern of child abuse with Prhaze.
Joe Galvan is Prhaze’s father and Jennifer Galvan is her stepmother.
Prhaze’s mother, Cassandra Ross, is in jail on a probation violation.
http://www.thetimesherald.com/article/20100119/NEWS05/100119007/1002/NEWS01/Picketers+ask+for+child-protective+services+to+be+investigated
Times Herald • January 19, 2010
Nearly 20 people are picketing in front of the St. Clair County Courthouse in Port Huron, asking that Child Protective Services be investigated in the Friday death of a 3-year-old Kimball Township girl.
Members of the group are carrying signs, at least one that reads “CPS accessory to murder,” and are handing out pink ribbons with the dates of Prhaze’s birth and death — Feb. 15, 2006 and Jan. 15. 2010.
Former state Rep. Lauren Hager was supporting Prhaze’s family and friends this morning. Hager of Port Huron Township said he has filed a request that the case being investigated by the state Office of Children’s Ombudsman.
Hager's signature piece of legislation as a state representative was Ariana’s Law, which aimed to improve the state's child-protection system.
He introduced the bill after 2-year-old Ariana Swinson of Port Huron Township was beaten and drowned by her parents in January 2000. She was killed after she was removed from her foster family and returned to her biological parents.
“There needs to be an investigation to see if there were any holes in the safety net,” he said regarding Prhaze’s death.
A Kimball Township couple — Joe Galvan, 26, and Jennifer Galvan, 29 — were arraigned Monday on open murder charges stemming from the girl’s death.
A Sunday autopsy showed she died from blunt-force trauma. Officials have said Child Protective Services had been involved with the family, and that there had been a pattern of child abuse with Prhaze.
Joe Galvan is Prhaze’s father and Jennifer Galvan is her stepmother.
Prhaze’s mother, Cassandra Ross, is in jail on a probation violation.
http://www.thetimesherald.com/article/20100119/NEWS05/100119007/1002/NEWS01/Picketers+ask+for+child-protective+services+to+be+investigated
Senate bill would give relatives more rights in child welfare cases
Senate bill would give relatives more rights in child welfare cases by SUSANNAH FRAME / KING 5 News Posted on January 21, 2010 at 10:59 PM Updated yesterday at 11:00 PM ****** OLYMPIA, Wash. - A series of stories by the KING 5 Investigators is leading to potential changes in state law, giving relatives more rights in child welfare cases. The "Alexis Stuth Bill" was heard before a senate sub-committee in Olympia Thursday. It stems from a three-year battle between the state and an Enumclaw couple over their granddaughter. "I think it's huge," said AnneMarie Stuth as she and husband Doug walked into the state Capitol with little Alexis in tow. It was a family nearly broken apart forever by the system. "We were going to lose her forever, never see her again. It was the end of the line," said Doug. The bill would give relatives who care for a child the right to be heard in court with an attorney if the state takes the child away from them in favor of foster care -- exactly what happened in the Stuths' case. "Family is all you have. That is the one thing that's a constant. It never changes. You always love them and they're always there and I don't think somebody should have the right to take that from anybody, especially a little one," said AnneMarie. When Alexis was a toddler and a judge was deciding where she should live, the Stuths were criticized in court by state workers. They were accused of lying, making trouble and being unfit to take care of the grandchild they'd raised since birth. They had to sit there and take it. Relatives have no legal standing to speak up and defend themselves. "It was two years of sitting up at night. A lot of money. Tens of thousands of dollars. Not being able to be heard in a court. Made out to look like the worst people in the world," said Doug. The KING 5 Investigators first exposed the Stuths' case in 2008. Alexis had been taken away and in foster care for nearly two years. They were hopeless and beaten down. We continued to show how the state and a judge didn't follow the law by giving priority to relatives. Then, in a sudden shift, the family was re-united one year ago. The Stuths formally adopted Alexis last summer. The Stuths are hoping this landmark legislation will make a lasting change for children like Alexis in Washington state. "I'm really optimistic. I'm really glad it's up in front of the Senate and I pray that it passes so people in the future won't have to go through what we have," said Doug. At the end of the hearing, the committee chairman had encouraging words for the Stuths. He said, so far, there was no official opposition to the proposal and that he didn't see any roadblocks to moving the Alexis Stuth Bill a step closer to becoming law.
http://www.king5.com/news/investigators/Investigators-Senate-bill-would-give-relatives-more-rights-in-child-welfare-cases-82338752.html
http://www.king5.com/news/investigators/Investigators-Senate-bill-would-give-relatives-more-rights-in-child-welfare-cases-82338752.html
Press warned over family courts
Press warned over family courts
(UKPA) – 12 hours ago
Children may be less willing to discuss sensitive issues during family court proceedings if journalists are given greater access to hearings, research has claimed.
Legislative proposals included in the Children, Schools and Families Bill would allow the press greater access to family court cases.
But according to the report published by the Children's Commissioner for England, Sir Al Aynsley-Green, most children involved in family court cases would be unwilling to disclose maltreatment by a parent or other problems if a journalist was present.
This could affect a judge's ability to make difficult decisions in the youngsters' best interests, the investigation warned.
Youngsters involved in the University of Oxford research said they were worried that media reports about their families could lead to embarrassment and bullying.
Sue Berelowitz, deputy Children's Commissioner for England said: "We support the principle of openness but our overriding consideration is to protect the welfare of children.
"If these children and young people's concerns fail to be addressed in the Bill, we could be faced with a situation where they are unwilling to speak out during family court proceedings and this could result in their best interests not being met."
The evidence gained so far by the Children's Commissioner also says children were sceptical at the power of the law to protect their privacy.
The report also urges judges and magistrates to seek children's views before deciding whether to admit the media to a hearing.
The Children's Commissioner's final report will be published in the spring
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5imRFUixJxiQTsy-Rm_BupNcLGlLA
(UKPA) – 12 hours ago
Children may be less willing to discuss sensitive issues during family court proceedings if journalists are given greater access to hearings, research has claimed.
Legislative proposals included in the Children, Schools and Families Bill would allow the press greater access to family court cases.
But according to the report published by the Children's Commissioner for England, Sir Al Aynsley-Green, most children involved in family court cases would be unwilling to disclose maltreatment by a parent or other problems if a journalist was present.
This could affect a judge's ability to make difficult decisions in the youngsters' best interests, the investigation warned.
Youngsters involved in the University of Oxford research said they were worried that media reports about their families could lead to embarrassment and bullying.
Sue Berelowitz, deputy Children's Commissioner for England said: "We support the principle of openness but our overriding consideration is to protect the welfare of children.
"If these children and young people's concerns fail to be addressed in the Bill, we could be faced with a situation where they are unwilling to speak out during family court proceedings and this could result in their best interests not being met."
The evidence gained so far by the Children's Commissioner also says children were sceptical at the power of the law to protect their privacy.
The report also urges judges and magistrates to seek children's views before deciding whether to admit the media to a hearing.
The Children's Commissioner's final report will be published in the spring
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5imRFUixJxiQTsy-Rm_BupNcLGlLA
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Sen. Roach’s 'Alexis Stuth Act' receives public hearing today
Sen. Roach’s 'Alexis Stuth Act' receives public hearing today
Today, 10:51 AM
Sen. Pam Roach, R-rural Auburn, has introduced two pieces of legislation regarding child welfare and the Child Protective Services.
Both bills will receive a public hearing at 3:30 p.m. today in the Human Services and Corrections Committee in Senate Hearing Room 1 at Olympia.
SB 6416, the Alexis Stuth Act, would give certain grandparents and relatives legal standing in child welfare cases where a parent has been declared unfit to parent the child.
SB 6417 would create a legal presumption that placement with relatives, in dependency cases, is in the best interests of the child.
The legislation was introduced in response to the Stuth case, which received statewide media attention. Doug and Anne Marie Stuth from Enumclaw had essentially raised their granddaughter Alexis until she was taken out of their care and put into foster care by DSHS. The Stuths did not have legal standing to defend themselves or their granddaughter. After months of heartache, Alexis was finally placed back with the Stuths and they have since adopted her.
"The Stuth case shows how crucial this legislation is,” said Roach. “We must place children with caring relatives first and we must give relatives who have been caring for a child that is stuck in the system a say in any placement decisions.”
For more information contact Senator Pam Roach at 360-786-7660 or via e-mail at Roach.pam@leg.wa.gov
http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/south_king/aub/news/82271357.html
Today, 10:51 AM
Sen. Pam Roach, R-rural Auburn, has introduced two pieces of legislation regarding child welfare and the Child Protective Services.
Both bills will receive a public hearing at 3:30 p.m. today in the Human Services and Corrections Committee in Senate Hearing Room 1 at Olympia.
SB 6416, the Alexis Stuth Act, would give certain grandparents and relatives legal standing in child welfare cases where a parent has been declared unfit to parent the child.
SB 6417 would create a legal presumption that placement with relatives, in dependency cases, is in the best interests of the child.
The legislation was introduced in response to the Stuth case, which received statewide media attention. Doug and Anne Marie Stuth from Enumclaw had essentially raised their granddaughter Alexis until she was taken out of their care and put into foster care by DSHS. The Stuths did not have legal standing to defend themselves or their granddaughter. After months of heartache, Alexis was finally placed back with the Stuths and they have since adopted her.
"The Stuth case shows how crucial this legislation is,” said Roach. “We must place children with caring relatives first and we must give relatives who have been caring for a child that is stuck in the system a say in any placement decisions.”
For more information contact Senator Pam Roach at 360-786-7660 or via e-mail at Roach.pam@leg.wa.gov
http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/south_king/aub/news/82271357.html
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
How CPS Victimizes Families
How CPS Victimizes Families
January 20, 2010 yvonnemason
Thus C.P.S victimizes those families that have no means available, to properly investigate C.P.S corrupt activities directed at their family. Since Federal and state matching funds generate the budget for C.P.S, the single means utilized to elevate the budget is to increase foster care and adoption caseloads. Bonus incentives for adoptions are currently $8,000 per child. $4,000 is given to the foster parents and another $4,000 is placed in a general fund, to reward workers for completing their job duties. Workers in this county, state that they do not personally financially benefit from this fund. Thus it leads us to believe, that other neighboring agencies are benefiting form this fund, in return for deceptive practices that support C.P.S decisions.
BABY TRAFFICKING False Allegations of drug abuse have been logged against mothers and their newborn infants as a means to place these infants into protective custody. The hospital staff has allowed C.P.S to remove infants (a hospital violation) prior to verification of blood and urine drug screen tests. C.P.S is mandated to secure verification of drug allegations via blood and urine results, prior to removing the newborn infant from the hospital. All cases known to us resulted negative for the mother and the newborn, but these infants were never returned, and were adopted outside of kinship. In the past year, the FBI has arrested and imprisoned C.P.S workers who were actively involved in baby trafficking for profit. These C.P.S workers knowingly abducted infants from the hospital where they in turn networked them into legal adoption agencies.
Augustus Fennerty, FBI director for Crimes against Children (Washington D.C) can verify this information. (202) 324-3000 CHILD SEX TRADE INDUSTRY Southern California FBI District has videotape recorded CPS workers placing foster care children onto planes via LAX, destination Europe for child sex trade industry. This can be verified through Ted Gunderson, (retired) FBI Director Southern California (310) 477-6565. SEXUAL VICTIMIZATION IN FOSTER CARE For the families in relation to our group in San BernardinoCounty, it has come to our attention while comparing similarities, that approximately half the children in foster care have been molested. These children were not sexually abused by their parents, but by the foster fathers or others in the foster home. It was also noted that these foster homes are still operating in the same capacity prior to complaints, without any investigation into these allegations. C.P.S officials were made aware of these accusations by the children, but failed to follow through with a criminal investigation. In conclusion, Child Protective Service is nothing more than an “oasis’’ for child molesters, to make a profit, while at the same time committing a crime, only to be protected by a malignant system that delivers a never ending supply of victims .
SYSTEMATIC FRAUDULENT MANEUVERS UTILIZED TO ENHANCE C.P.S BUDGET C.P.S manufactures multiple nonexistent /fictitious abuse case scenarios to offset true statistical abuse case information. C.P.S concurrently processes these children from foster care to adoption, in order to obtain perverse monetary incentives in the form of bonuses. C.P.S provides a market to neighboring agencies and the courts ( commissioners, psychologists, monitors, court mandated behavioral class instructors, court appointed legal counsel), in order for them to financially benefit from the foster care/adoption system. C.P.S victimizes innocent impoverished families, draws them into a corrupt system to utilize their children as pawns for commerce.
MALICIOUS OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES C.P.S is utilized by family court officials, as an adverse tool to extricate children from one parent to the other, with reference to “parent alienation syndromeâ€. Where, in truth, caseworkers are never allowed to testify in family court under the cloak of C.P.S authority, due to possible misuse or conflict of interest related to the right to privacy laws. C.P.S utilizes coercive measures to persuade parents to submit to statements of prior alleged abuse, when these actions were nonexistent. In other words, forcing desperate parents to “plea bargain†to a C.P.S fabricated crime, for the return of their children from foster care. C.P.S fabricates portions of investigations, where such duties have never been physically performed, to purposely mislead or direct a case. C.P.S knowingly abandons children into foster care, conscious of the fact that some foster care parents and or individuals in the home physically and sexually abuse the children in their protective custody. C.P.S intentionally fails to prosecute parents accused of child abuse, since in the majority of cases, no initial crime has been committed. C.P.S represents themselves in positive personas, by omitting, altering, and falsifying documents, so as to mislead the public and or government of their true actions as listed above. Thereby publicly grandstanding, displaying an inaccurate social martyrdom for the well being of children. C.P.S ignores crimes committed in foster care, such as the atrocious acts of unexplained deaths. C.P.S fails to question these individuals for their abusive conduct, whereby, if itwere not a foster care parent, these individuals would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
SHOULD CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE BE RESTRUCTURED? The police should determine if a child has a true need for protection from his parents, since child abuse is a criminal offence. Thus, C.P.S should be incorporated with Crimes against Children Units that are currently located within police, sheriffs and FBI agencies. The merging of the two would reduce the amount of false allegations reported, since complaints made to a police unit is a criminal offence. Also, the police have the training and resources needed to conduct a thorough investigation. This allows them to determine that if a crime has been committed that warrants the need for foster care. A parent/guardian under the suspicion of the crime “Child Abuse†would meet the criteria for removal. This would activate the foster care system. Only then would the foster care system be utilized as a response to a possible or suspected crime. Thus in turn, this would eliminate the unnecessary utilization of the foster care system that has been grossly misused in the past. Unwarranted victimization of children and their families would be greatly reduced and soaring costs would be contained. This would minimize the number of future cases that fall through the cracks and get lost in the system.
WHAT ROLE SHOULD THE SOCIAL WORKERS PLAY IN THE NEW CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE? All caseworkers must have a bachelor’s degree in social work from an accredited college. All states must create bachelor level licensing for social workers. All workers must have a current license to work within any state or county in the United States with reciprocity. All social workers must have a preceptor for at least three months prior to individual casework. WHO SHOULD BE A MEMBER OF THE CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE TEAM WITHIN THE CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN UNITS? Other members from various agencies should be inclusive to this unit, since they bring their specific expertise to complete a proper investigation. It is our opinion that the following individuals who should comprise this team are as stated: Registered Nurse, School Principal, Detective, and Social Worker..
SHOULD AN OUTSIDE AGENCY SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEW THE CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE TEAM’S PERFORMANCE? All agencies must have an outside quality control board that monitors case investigations on a random basis and when requested by the public. This Board must include members similar to the Child Protective Service team, with the addition of an individual from the public. No member may be employed more than three years, to maintain the integrity of the boards’ unbiased decisions. SHOULD WE MAINTAIN A CHILD ABUSE INDEX LIST? The child abuse index list shall be maintained only when an individual has been prosecuted and convicted by a court of law for a crime against a child. Today’s said list shall be destroyed, so as to prevent harm to those currently listed who have been accused of a crime against a child, but that have never been prosecuted or convicted. And, children should never be placed on any list that would categorize them in an adverse manner, such as this. SHOULD THERE BE NEW RULES AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO FOSTER CARE? There should be a limited number of children allowed to be placed in any single home under foster care, including adoption. No single family shall be allowed to adopt or provide foster care to more than two children at any time. The only exception shall be when siblings number more than two and are placed in the same single dwelling. This will eliminate the financial incentive for monetary gain related to housing foster children and adoptions.
——————————————————————————– Redlands, California 92373 Yucaipa, California 92399 July 12, 2004 U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515-0542 To our Honorable U.S. House of Representatives, It is unfortunate that Child Protective Service officials have mislead the government into believing, that increased funding is necessary to solve the multitude of problems that encompass C.P.S. This agency is utilizing the funding issue as the scapegoat for their problems, when in actuality the workers themselves, the lack of their personal accountability, are the source of the problem. Further funding will not solve C.P.S’S current crisis, only the restructuring of this agency will provide a solution. Sincerely, Cynthia Huckelberry Sushanna Khamis
http://protectingourchildrenfrombeingsold.wordpress.com/
January 20, 2010 yvonnemason
Thus C.P.S victimizes those families that have no means available, to properly investigate C.P.S corrupt activities directed at their family. Since Federal and state matching funds generate the budget for C.P.S, the single means utilized to elevate the budget is to increase foster care and adoption caseloads. Bonus incentives for adoptions are currently $8,000 per child. $4,000 is given to the foster parents and another $4,000 is placed in a general fund, to reward workers for completing their job duties. Workers in this county, state that they do not personally financially benefit from this fund. Thus it leads us to believe, that other neighboring agencies are benefiting form this fund, in return for deceptive practices that support C.P.S decisions.
BABY TRAFFICKING False Allegations of drug abuse have been logged against mothers and their newborn infants as a means to place these infants into protective custody. The hospital staff has allowed C.P.S to remove infants (a hospital violation) prior to verification of blood and urine drug screen tests. C.P.S is mandated to secure verification of drug allegations via blood and urine results, prior to removing the newborn infant from the hospital. All cases known to us resulted negative for the mother and the newborn, but these infants were never returned, and were adopted outside of kinship. In the past year, the FBI has arrested and imprisoned C.P.S workers who were actively involved in baby trafficking for profit. These C.P.S workers knowingly abducted infants from the hospital where they in turn networked them into legal adoption agencies.
Augustus Fennerty, FBI director for Crimes against Children (Washington D.C) can verify this information. (202) 324-3000 CHILD SEX TRADE INDUSTRY Southern California FBI District has videotape recorded CPS workers placing foster care children onto planes via LAX, destination Europe for child sex trade industry. This can be verified through Ted Gunderson, (retired) FBI Director Southern California (310) 477-6565. SEXUAL VICTIMIZATION IN FOSTER CARE For the families in relation to our group in San BernardinoCounty, it has come to our attention while comparing similarities, that approximately half the children in foster care have been molested. These children were not sexually abused by their parents, but by the foster fathers or others in the foster home. It was also noted that these foster homes are still operating in the same capacity prior to complaints, without any investigation into these allegations. C.P.S officials were made aware of these accusations by the children, but failed to follow through with a criminal investigation. In conclusion, Child Protective Service is nothing more than an “oasis’’ for child molesters, to make a profit, while at the same time committing a crime, only to be protected by a malignant system that delivers a never ending supply of victims .
SYSTEMATIC FRAUDULENT MANEUVERS UTILIZED TO ENHANCE C.P.S BUDGET C.P.S manufactures multiple nonexistent /fictitious abuse case scenarios to offset true statistical abuse case information. C.P.S concurrently processes these children from foster care to adoption, in order to obtain perverse monetary incentives in the form of bonuses. C.P.S provides a market to neighboring agencies and the courts ( commissioners, psychologists, monitors, court mandated behavioral class instructors, court appointed legal counsel), in order for them to financially benefit from the foster care/adoption system. C.P.S victimizes innocent impoverished families, draws them into a corrupt system to utilize their children as pawns for commerce.
MALICIOUS OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES C.P.S is utilized by family court officials, as an adverse tool to extricate children from one parent to the other, with reference to “parent alienation syndromeâ€. Where, in truth, caseworkers are never allowed to testify in family court under the cloak of C.P.S authority, due to possible misuse or conflict of interest related to the right to privacy laws. C.P.S utilizes coercive measures to persuade parents to submit to statements of prior alleged abuse, when these actions were nonexistent. In other words, forcing desperate parents to “plea bargain†to a C.P.S fabricated crime, for the return of their children from foster care. C.P.S fabricates portions of investigations, where such duties have never been physically performed, to purposely mislead or direct a case. C.P.S knowingly abandons children into foster care, conscious of the fact that some foster care parents and or individuals in the home physically and sexually abuse the children in their protective custody. C.P.S intentionally fails to prosecute parents accused of child abuse, since in the majority of cases, no initial crime has been committed. C.P.S represents themselves in positive personas, by omitting, altering, and falsifying documents, so as to mislead the public and or government of their true actions as listed above. Thereby publicly grandstanding, displaying an inaccurate social martyrdom for the well being of children. C.P.S ignores crimes committed in foster care, such as the atrocious acts of unexplained deaths. C.P.S fails to question these individuals for their abusive conduct, whereby, if itwere not a foster care parent, these individuals would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
SHOULD CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE BE RESTRUCTURED? The police should determine if a child has a true need for protection from his parents, since child abuse is a criminal offence. Thus, C.P.S should be incorporated with Crimes against Children Units that are currently located within police, sheriffs and FBI agencies. The merging of the two would reduce the amount of false allegations reported, since complaints made to a police unit is a criminal offence. Also, the police have the training and resources needed to conduct a thorough investigation. This allows them to determine that if a crime has been committed that warrants the need for foster care. A parent/guardian under the suspicion of the crime “Child Abuse†would meet the criteria for removal. This would activate the foster care system. Only then would the foster care system be utilized as a response to a possible or suspected crime. Thus in turn, this would eliminate the unnecessary utilization of the foster care system that has been grossly misused in the past. Unwarranted victimization of children and their families would be greatly reduced and soaring costs would be contained. This would minimize the number of future cases that fall through the cracks and get lost in the system.
WHAT ROLE SHOULD THE SOCIAL WORKERS PLAY IN THE NEW CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE? All caseworkers must have a bachelor’s degree in social work from an accredited college. All states must create bachelor level licensing for social workers. All workers must have a current license to work within any state or county in the United States with reciprocity. All social workers must have a preceptor for at least three months prior to individual casework. WHO SHOULD BE A MEMBER OF THE CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE TEAM WITHIN THE CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN UNITS? Other members from various agencies should be inclusive to this unit, since they bring their specific expertise to complete a proper investigation. It is our opinion that the following individuals who should comprise this team are as stated: Registered Nurse, School Principal, Detective, and Social Worker..
SHOULD AN OUTSIDE AGENCY SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEW THE CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE TEAM’S PERFORMANCE? All agencies must have an outside quality control board that monitors case investigations on a random basis and when requested by the public. This Board must include members similar to the Child Protective Service team, with the addition of an individual from the public. No member may be employed more than three years, to maintain the integrity of the boards’ unbiased decisions. SHOULD WE MAINTAIN A CHILD ABUSE INDEX LIST? The child abuse index list shall be maintained only when an individual has been prosecuted and convicted by a court of law for a crime against a child. Today’s said list shall be destroyed, so as to prevent harm to those currently listed who have been accused of a crime against a child, but that have never been prosecuted or convicted. And, children should never be placed on any list that would categorize them in an adverse manner, such as this. SHOULD THERE BE NEW RULES AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO FOSTER CARE? There should be a limited number of children allowed to be placed in any single home under foster care, including adoption. No single family shall be allowed to adopt or provide foster care to more than two children at any time. The only exception shall be when siblings number more than two and are placed in the same single dwelling. This will eliminate the financial incentive for monetary gain related to housing foster children and adoptions.
——————————————————————————– Redlands, California 92373 Yucaipa, California 92399 July 12, 2004 U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515-0542 To our Honorable U.S. House of Representatives, It is unfortunate that Child Protective Service officials have mislead the government into believing, that increased funding is necessary to solve the multitude of problems that encompass C.P.S. This agency is utilizing the funding issue as the scapegoat for their problems, when in actuality the workers themselves, the lack of their personal accountability, are the source of the problem. Further funding will not solve C.P.S’S current crisis, only the restructuring of this agency will provide a solution. Sincerely, Cynthia Huckelberry Sushanna Khamis
http://protectingourchildrenfrombeingsold.wordpress.com/
Child abuse: when family courts get it wrong
Child abuse: when family courts get it wrong
States must reform a system that too often awards custody to the abusive parent.
by Kathleen Russell
San Rafael, Calif - When a parent harms his or her own child, family courts are supposed to step in and safeguard the victim.
Can you imagine what a tragedy it would be if courts awarded custody to the wrong parent – the abuser?
Actually, according to one conservative estimate, more than 58,000 children per year are ordered by family courts into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the United States.
The fact that this type of scandal is taking place in the American justice system defies the imagination. Not since the Roman Catholic Church pedophile scandal has the US seen this level of institutional harm inflicted on innocent children.
Consider the case of Jonea Rogers, a hairstylist from Marin County, Calif. During her costly divorce, she sought help from numerous law enforcement, child protection, and family court authorities to protect her daughter from what medical evidence and reports by the child and her baby sitter suggested could be ongoing neglect or sexual abuse or both by the girl's father or grandfather.
None of the authorities she approached would effectively intervene to protect her daughter. So in 2000, Ms. Rogers eventually felt that she had no choice but to flee with her child to protect her.
More than three years later, this protective mother was caught and jailed for five months, while her daughter was immediately handed over to her alleged abusers. Rogers faced criminal charges for violating a court order by fleeing with her child. After considering the evidence in her case, a jury of her peers completely exonerated her of all wrongdoing.
The very same evidence that exonerated her in the criminal court had been called "frivolous" by the family court judge and disregarded. Despite her acquittal, Rogers was never granted custody of her daughter, who lives with her alleged abusers to this day. She is now forced to pay a fee to visit with her daughter a few times a month in a supervised visitation facility.
As we see in many cases across the country, even when physical or sexual abuse of children is alleged during a divorce, American family courts routinely award custody to the parent with an established record of domestic violence restraining orders, child abuse, neglect, alcoholism, addiction, dangerous mental illness, or a combination.
Meanwhile, the child's other parent, commonly referred to as the "protective parent," is typically demonized by court professionals as an "alienator" for bringing evidence of child abuse to the court's attention.
This happens because the reigning paradigm in family courts across the country is an unscientific, discredited theory known as "Parental Alienation Syndrome," or PAS.
PAS and its many derivatives suggest that the parent who asks the court to protect his or her child by limiting the alleged abuser's access to that child is "alienating" the child from the other parent.
The theory suggests that a parent "coaches" a son or daughter to fabricate false abuse allegations, and the court's attention immediately shifts away from investigating an alleged crime and instead focuses on the "uncooperative parent" who refuses to share custody of the child with the alleged abuser or molester.
PAS is tricky for the courts because parents in heated custody battles often badmouth each other and sometimes exaggerate claims of neglect, and children overhear their parents complaints about each other. Though rare, false allegations of abuse do occur. Research on child sexual abuse indicates that close to 98 percent of children who claim sexual abuse in the context of a high conflict divorce are telling the truth, yet family courts routinely proceed as if the opposite were true.
Protective parents not only lose custody of the children they are trying to protect, but they lose their life savings, too. Many cannot even afford a lawyer to represent their interests, but are saddled with hefty supervised visitation fees and often threatened with a loss of custody if they object to paying the bevy of court-appointed experts that the judge assigns to their case.
Fees quickly add up to tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. Many such parents go bankrupt, making court appeals impossible. The family law "machine" operates as Big Business, and a sophisticated cottage industry has sprung up that appears to be preying on desperate parents and children who are trying to escape family violence.
Four factors conspire against protective parents:
1.Family law judges are granted broad discretion in their decision-making;
2.Juries are nonexistent in most family law courtrooms;
3.Costly appeals are out of reach for most litigants; and
4.Children are not afforded a voice in these important proceedings that determine their future. As a result, nothing short of a major overhaul of the family court system will suffice.
Here in California, home to some of the most egregious cases, the Center for Judicial Excellence and its partner organizations in the Safe Child Coalition recently worked with State Sen. Mark Leno (D) of San Francisco to unanimously pass an audit request through the California legislature to address this growing problem.
The request asks the state auditor to investigate the procedures used by family courts to appoint, train, evaluate, and discipline the plethora of professionals they use in cases in Marin and Sacramento counties.
The legislature should also pass two sensible bills in 2010. Assemblyman Jim Beall (D) of San Jose has proposed a bill that would outlaw PAS in state family courts, and a bill by Assemblywoman Fiona Ma (D) of San Francisco would allow children to have a voice in family court proceedings.
Other states must open their eyes to this problem. Family courts are being manipulated in ways that tragically undermine their mission.
We must ensure access to justice for all who find themselves in our nation's family courts. There are at least 58,000 reasons to get serious about reform today.
Kathleen Russell is a cofounder and staff consultant to the Center for Judicial Excellence in Marin County, Calif.
http://www.stopfamilyviolence.org/info/custody-abuse/custody-news/child-abuse-when-family-courts-get-it-wrong
States must reform a system that too often awards custody to the abusive parent.
by Kathleen Russell
San Rafael, Calif - When a parent harms his or her own child, family courts are supposed to step in and safeguard the victim.
Can you imagine what a tragedy it would be if courts awarded custody to the wrong parent – the abuser?
Actually, according to one conservative estimate, more than 58,000 children per year are ordered by family courts into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the United States.
The fact that this type of scandal is taking place in the American justice system defies the imagination. Not since the Roman Catholic Church pedophile scandal has the US seen this level of institutional harm inflicted on innocent children.
Consider the case of Jonea Rogers, a hairstylist from Marin County, Calif. During her costly divorce, she sought help from numerous law enforcement, child protection, and family court authorities to protect her daughter from what medical evidence and reports by the child and her baby sitter suggested could be ongoing neglect or sexual abuse or both by the girl's father or grandfather.
None of the authorities she approached would effectively intervene to protect her daughter. So in 2000, Ms. Rogers eventually felt that she had no choice but to flee with her child to protect her.
More than three years later, this protective mother was caught and jailed for five months, while her daughter was immediately handed over to her alleged abusers. Rogers faced criminal charges for violating a court order by fleeing with her child. After considering the evidence in her case, a jury of her peers completely exonerated her of all wrongdoing.
The very same evidence that exonerated her in the criminal court had been called "frivolous" by the family court judge and disregarded. Despite her acquittal, Rogers was never granted custody of her daughter, who lives with her alleged abusers to this day. She is now forced to pay a fee to visit with her daughter a few times a month in a supervised visitation facility.
As we see in many cases across the country, even when physical or sexual abuse of children is alleged during a divorce, American family courts routinely award custody to the parent with an established record of domestic violence restraining orders, child abuse, neglect, alcoholism, addiction, dangerous mental illness, or a combination.
Meanwhile, the child's other parent, commonly referred to as the "protective parent," is typically demonized by court professionals as an "alienator" for bringing evidence of child abuse to the court's attention.
This happens because the reigning paradigm in family courts across the country is an unscientific, discredited theory known as "Parental Alienation Syndrome," or PAS.
PAS and its many derivatives suggest that the parent who asks the court to protect his or her child by limiting the alleged abuser's access to that child is "alienating" the child from the other parent.
The theory suggests that a parent "coaches" a son or daughter to fabricate false abuse allegations, and the court's attention immediately shifts away from investigating an alleged crime and instead focuses on the "uncooperative parent" who refuses to share custody of the child with the alleged abuser or molester.
PAS is tricky for the courts because parents in heated custody battles often badmouth each other and sometimes exaggerate claims of neglect, and children overhear their parents complaints about each other. Though rare, false allegations of abuse do occur. Research on child sexual abuse indicates that close to 98 percent of children who claim sexual abuse in the context of a high conflict divorce are telling the truth, yet family courts routinely proceed as if the opposite were true.
Protective parents not only lose custody of the children they are trying to protect, but they lose their life savings, too. Many cannot even afford a lawyer to represent their interests, but are saddled with hefty supervised visitation fees and often threatened with a loss of custody if they object to paying the bevy of court-appointed experts that the judge assigns to their case.
Fees quickly add up to tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. Many such parents go bankrupt, making court appeals impossible. The family law "machine" operates as Big Business, and a sophisticated cottage industry has sprung up that appears to be preying on desperate parents and children who are trying to escape family violence.
Four factors conspire against protective parents:
1.Family law judges are granted broad discretion in their decision-making;
2.Juries are nonexistent in most family law courtrooms;
3.Costly appeals are out of reach for most litigants; and
4.Children are not afforded a voice in these important proceedings that determine their future. As a result, nothing short of a major overhaul of the family court system will suffice.
Here in California, home to some of the most egregious cases, the Center for Judicial Excellence and its partner organizations in the Safe Child Coalition recently worked with State Sen. Mark Leno (D) of San Francisco to unanimously pass an audit request through the California legislature to address this growing problem.
The request asks the state auditor to investigate the procedures used by family courts to appoint, train, evaluate, and discipline the plethora of professionals they use in cases in Marin and Sacramento counties.
The legislature should also pass two sensible bills in 2010. Assemblyman Jim Beall (D) of San Jose has proposed a bill that would outlaw PAS in state family courts, and a bill by Assemblywoman Fiona Ma (D) of San Francisco would allow children to have a voice in family court proceedings.
Other states must open their eyes to this problem. Family courts are being manipulated in ways that tragically undermine their mission.
We must ensure access to justice for all who find themselves in our nation's family courts. There are at least 58,000 reasons to get serious about reform today.
Kathleen Russell is a cofounder and staff consultant to the Center for Judicial Excellence in Marin County, Calif.
http://www.stopfamilyviolence.org/info/custody-abuse/custody-news/child-abuse-when-family-courts-get-it-wrong
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)