State House Memo
GOP 'cuts' cost more in long run
Family resource centers save money
By Rep. BARBARA FRENCH For the Monitor
February 17, 2010 - 12:00 am
I'm tired of being called an irresponsible tax-and-spender by the Republicans, especially after what happened Feb. 3.
The House passed a bill that would return additional rooms and meals tax revenue to the cities and towns against the recommendation of the Finance Committee. Republican Rep. David Hess told us that it was a longstanding promise to our constituents and that our cities and towns need the money.
It is a fair assumption that cities and towns need more money, but the real question - "Where is the money going to come from?" (in this instance, $5 million of general funding) - was never asked or answered.
At the same time, a Republican bill, HB 1664, calls for a series of cuts to the state's operating budget for fiscal year 2011. Many of the agencies affected have already been hit hard. And some of the "cuts" would end up costing the state dramatically more money in the long run.
Numerous services and programs would be affected: Concord fire and municipal services, state arts development, LCHIP, the civil legal services fund, the Small Business Development Center, the Department of Health and Human Services, juvenile justice services, the Division for Children, Youth and Families, family resource centers, foster homes, the Division of Parks and Recreation, Resource Protection and Development, adult in-home care, catastrophic health care, the developmental services wait list, brain disorder services, dropout prevention, and adequate education grants.
I am very familiar with one of the targeted programs: family resource centers. It was my legislation that first proposed establishing these centers in 1993; it took five years to pass and another five years to get some funding. There are 12 centers, each of which receives $10,000 a year. This is not a lot of money, but it means a lot to the centers as they are continually challenged in seeking stable and sustainable sources of money for the important work that they do. The centers make a significant contribution to the lives of their constituents and to communities.
Family resource centers provide child-abuse prevention and family strengthening supports and services that work to keep children safe at home with their family in their home community.
In 2006, 684 potentially "high-risk" children completed the program, 92 percent of whom were not in need of more costly services provided by the Division for Children, Youth and Families for three years. In 2007, of the 1,186 children who completed the programs, 92 percent continued to avoid DCYF services.
Services provided by DCYF include extensive home and community-based counseling and, when necessary, out-of-home placement in foster care or perhaps a more intensive residential setting.
The cost for one youth to spend one year at the Sununu Youth Services Center far exceeds the state's contribution toward supporting the statewide network of 12 family resource centers at a cost of $120,000 per year. Foster-care placement for one child for one year is $10,800, approximately the same amount that could be provided to a community-based family resource center to provide valuable services to upward of 100 families.
The cost savings from family resource centers are significant, in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. If the Republican cuts were adopted, there would be more children needing out-of-home placement - yet at the same time, another of the Republican budget proposals is to cut the funding for out-of-home placements. Where are these children supposed to go? This is a double whammy!
This would ultimately mean downshifting to our communities, which would mean increasing property taxes, since our children and their families would have to have somewhere to go for help. It seems to me to be more important to help our families and keep them together. Not only do these services benefit children at home with their families, but the lessons learned also carry on into the school setting, helping them to achieve greater success as students.
I'm happy to say that the state budget for this cycle has continued to provide partial funding for the statewide network of family resource centers. It would be extremely shortsighted and irresponsible to turn our backs on these valuable and effective services when an increasing number of children and families are challenged more than ever. Family resource centers provide documented positive outcomes for children and their families, leading to documented cost-savings for our state and local communities. I will continue to advocate for our ongoing support of these important community-based centers.
(State Rep. Barbara French is a Democrat from Henniker.)
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100217/OPINION/2170324#comment-111513
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
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Child Protection Investigator Accused of Falsifying Documents
Tampa, Florida – Child Protection Investigator Accused of Falsifying Documents
The Hillsborough County, Florida Sheriff’s Office will be changing how it handles child abuse cases. The changes are due to the recent resignation of Heather Stokes, a child protection investigator who has been charged with falsifying documents.
An internal affairs investigation revealed that Ms. Stokes allegedly falsified and / or fabricated twenty five investigations. Ms. Stokes has said that she did so because she was overwhelmed by the number of cases she had to deal with. She resigned shortly after the results of the probe were brought to her attention. She is the second investigator from her office to resign after being charged with falsifying documents. According to the Tampa Tribune, no children or families were harmed by the falsifications.
Investigators will now be required to photograph every child at their home, and place the photo in the case file to prove that they visited the child when they said they did. Supervisors will randomly review cases and make up to thirty quality assurance checks every month.
Statewide, more than seventy Florida child welfare workers have been caught lying about their activities in the last two years. When caught, workers almost always point to work overload to excuse their behavior.
Ms. Stokes has avoided criminal prosecution by performing more than two hundred hours of community service.
Read more about the falsification of child protection documents in Florida at Falsifications bring change in child abuse cases.
Posted by David A. Wolf
http://www.floridachildinjurylawyer.com/2010/02/tampa_florida_child_protection_investigator_accused_of_falsifying_documents.html
The Hillsborough County, Florida Sheriff’s Office will be changing how it handles child abuse cases. The changes are due to the recent resignation of Heather Stokes, a child protection investigator who has been charged with falsifying documents.
An internal affairs investigation revealed that Ms. Stokes allegedly falsified and / or fabricated twenty five investigations. Ms. Stokes has said that she did so because she was overwhelmed by the number of cases she had to deal with. She resigned shortly after the results of the probe were brought to her attention. She is the second investigator from her office to resign after being charged with falsifying documents. According to the Tampa Tribune, no children or families were harmed by the falsifications.
Investigators will now be required to photograph every child at their home, and place the photo in the case file to prove that they visited the child when they said they did. Supervisors will randomly review cases and make up to thirty quality assurance checks every month.
Statewide, more than seventy Florida child welfare workers have been caught lying about their activities in the last two years. When caught, workers almost always point to work overload to excuse their behavior.
Ms. Stokes has avoided criminal prosecution by performing more than two hundred hours of community service.
Read more about the falsification of child protection documents in Florida at Falsifications bring change in child abuse cases.
Posted by David A. Wolf
http://www.floridachildinjurylawyer.com/2010/02/tampa_florida_child_protection_investigator_accused_of_falsifying_documents.html
Testimonies: Losing your children to foster care
Testimonies: Losing your children to foster care
by Frances Gordon
While I am firmly against child abuse, molestation, and neglect. I have seen and been subjected to the cruelties, and ridiculous standards most foster care systems hold to the birth parents, but not hold those same standards to the very homes they send our children too. While they do classes, and go through all the rigorous training of being a foster parent, it's not near what they require of the birth parent. In many cases, Families are ripped apart by a simple phone call, and Social Services finding what they consider neglect or abuse. If you don't have enough food in the cupboards, If you don't have proper shelter, If there's even a hint that you have abused, neglected, or threatened their lives, in anyway, even if it's simply been an allegation, not even proved. Every State is different, some are better than others in different ways. But no matter what state, many times, they tend to pick on the ones in poverty. And the Social Services have full and complete jurisdiction as to where your kids are, whether you get to keep them, or they choose to take them away, there have even been times when they have gone into a home, and fabricated some things, so that they can take the kids. This isn't just hard on the parents, this is devastating to the children. And then when the children are having emotional difficulties in their foster homes, I wonder why? They are ripped away from what they know to be their home, their shelter, the place that they are loved and belong. I could go on and on, but I will only do it in segments. Helium is trying to help me develop better writing skills, which is great, but I just don't feel that you can edit the heart. The Truth is the Truth, and despite the confusion, or sloppy the writing, I am not alone, and that is what tragedy does to you. You are enveloped in so many emotions, and thoughts, that this is how it feels, and this is what happens. The more honest we are, and willing to take a stand and say, this is what is happening to me, the more we can overcome and take steps into a better direction. When you lose your kids to child care, it's worse than death. You don't know if they are hurt, or scared, or cold. And you have no way of comforting them and telling them it's going to be all right. You have no ability what so ever of keeping them safe from harm, and making sure that they get what they need. And that is the worst of all. Many of us, fear, what if they get hurt, or worse, die, and we weren't there to prevent it. Oh, our heart breaks are many. I've watched horrible people do horrible things to their children, and get away with it because they knew the art of deception and manipulation. And I've watched mother's cry themselves all night and all day, with their stomach turned inside out for their child, just because the system is severely flawed. You can Reject this one too, if it's not good enough for you. But this is from the heart, that is who I am, and that's what I do. Raw, straight from the heart. There are people out there that need to know, they are not alone. Furthermore, the people need to know, what's really going on.
http://www.helium.com/items/191529-testimonies-losing-your-children-to-foster-care
by Frances Gordon
While I am firmly against child abuse, molestation, and neglect. I have seen and been subjected to the cruelties, and ridiculous standards most foster care systems hold to the birth parents, but not hold those same standards to the very homes they send our children too. While they do classes, and go through all the rigorous training of being a foster parent, it's not near what they require of the birth parent. In many cases, Families are ripped apart by a simple phone call, and Social Services finding what they consider neglect or abuse. If you don't have enough food in the cupboards, If you don't have proper shelter, If there's even a hint that you have abused, neglected, or threatened their lives, in anyway, even if it's simply been an allegation, not even proved. Every State is different, some are better than others in different ways. But no matter what state, many times, they tend to pick on the ones in poverty. And the Social Services have full and complete jurisdiction as to where your kids are, whether you get to keep them, or they choose to take them away, there have even been times when they have gone into a home, and fabricated some things, so that they can take the kids. This isn't just hard on the parents, this is devastating to the children. And then when the children are having emotional difficulties in their foster homes, I wonder why? They are ripped away from what they know to be their home, their shelter, the place that they are loved and belong. I could go on and on, but I will only do it in segments. Helium is trying to help me develop better writing skills, which is great, but I just don't feel that you can edit the heart. The Truth is the Truth, and despite the confusion, or sloppy the writing, I am not alone, and that is what tragedy does to you. You are enveloped in so many emotions, and thoughts, that this is how it feels, and this is what happens. The more honest we are, and willing to take a stand and say, this is what is happening to me, the more we can overcome and take steps into a better direction. When you lose your kids to child care, it's worse than death. You don't know if they are hurt, or scared, or cold. And you have no way of comforting them and telling them it's going to be all right. You have no ability what so ever of keeping them safe from harm, and making sure that they get what they need. And that is the worst of all. Many of us, fear, what if they get hurt, or worse, die, and we weren't there to prevent it. Oh, our heart breaks are many. I've watched horrible people do horrible things to their children, and get away with it because they knew the art of deception and manipulation. And I've watched mother's cry themselves all night and all day, with their stomach turned inside out for their child, just because the system is severely flawed. You can Reject this one too, if it's not good enough for you. But this is from the heart, that is who I am, and that's what I do. Raw, straight from the heart. There are people out there that need to know, they are not alone. Furthermore, the people need to know, what's really going on.
http://www.helium.com/items/191529-testimonies-losing-your-children-to-foster-care
Abuse in foster homes
Abuse in foster homes
by Brenda Cruz
Tracy Klentworth couldn’t believe she was going to have a little one in the house again after all these years. She wondered for a moment if she had the patience to do this and then quickly chased the thought away.
Instead she filled her mind with the extensive plans she had for the new family member. Here we go again, thought Tracy with a smile. Afternoons at the park, visits to McDonalds, bedtime stories, positive praise and hugs and kisses all day long, a new reason to drive an SUV again – a new reason to live.
Knowing Harvey has had such a hard life thus far, what with all the abuse and neglect he’s endured, Tracy was bent and determined to make his experience in her Pleasanton, California home as pleasant and loving as possible for whatever period of time that may be. And who knows, thought Tracy – maybe it can turn out to be permanent.
Jerry Klentworth, Tracy’s husband of twenty plus years, spat and sputtered up to the curb in his rickety old Volvo with the new little visitor in the passenger seat. Harvey spotted Tracy in the driveway and pushed his nose against the window to get a closer look. The three of them had spent quite a bit of time together before this arrangement was planned. Most people could tell right away they were all familiar and seemed to like each other a lot.
When Jerry opened the passenger door, Harvey ran to Tracy, jumped up on her and planted a saliva-dripping wet one on her cheek with his slice of bologna-sized tongue.
"Harvey – you’re home," cheered Tracy, hugging her new four-legged hound dog house guest as he hopped up and down on his hind legs.
The celebration lasted a good few minutes before the new family made their way into the house to begin the adjustment process.
Harvey, a one-year-old bloodhound, had been at the Fairmont County Animal Shelter for three weeks before the Klentworth’s came to visit and offered to foster him. According to the shelter, many people come with incredibly large hearts to rescue pets from their previously abusive or neglectful lives and when they do get placed with a loving family, they often have elaborate welcoming parties.
Children in the foster care system should be so lucky, some would say.
Humans care a lot about the welfare of animals, most would agree. Few things seem to rile people up more than when the rights of animals are violated…or when animals are mistreated, abused or neglected, pulling at the heart strings of humans in a profound way. Possibly more profound than for abused or neglected children? Some would answer yes.
In California, there are 100,000 children currently in foster care. The system was designed to provide safe and nurturing havens for abused or neglected children who have been removed from their homes for their safety. Yet more often, in foster care, they are put in even more dangerous and compromising situations when they are thrust into a system that is flawed.. According to the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, children are twice as likely to die in a foster home than the general population. That is only the beginning of a long list of what many would agree to be sobering statistics regarding foster care abuse.
Hank Orenstein, director of the Child Welfare Project within the Office of Public Advocate, speaks loudly about the system’s flaws, particularly in the key areas of the screening process. He says many foster parents who end up not having the children’s best interest at heart could possibly be in it for the money. He adds that foster parenting is very stressful and yet people are not required to be psychologically tested to ascertain what pushes their buttons. He also points out that harmful family members are not always screened and this could be a potential danger to the child.
"But the screening process is only as good as its screener," Orenstein says. "In areas where caseloads are heaviest like New York or California, the quality of the screening process diminishes, often at the expense of the children’s safety."
Paige Bennett is the director of pet placement at the Fairmont Animal Shelter in San Leandro, CA. She talks about the fostering process, which she oversees and just how particular she is in choosing her families. Individuals must fill out an application, have a background check against possible former animal abuse and must endure Paige’s scrutinizing visit to their home to ascertain if it is the proper environment for a particular animal.
"I don’t just throw any dog into any situation," Bennett said. "I go to someone’s home looking for the environment that a certain breed or dog of a certain personality will need. Small dogs shouldn’t be with other dogs, for the most part, large dogs need large spaces, nervous dogs need active people, stuff like that. When the fit is right, I’ll know it. I ask a ton of questions. You have to. The dog’s life is at stake."
And perhaps some could conclude that is what’s missing in the foster care system for children. Paige’s. People who take a personal interest in and genuinely care about those children who need fostering. People willing to go the extra mile in a careful placement process and the critical regular follow-up necessary to ensure ongoing safety of the children.
Bennett’s work at the shelter, by the way, is volunteer.
There are other problems in the foster care system for children. Just ask Regina Louise, foster care system survivor, children’s advocate and author of the book, "Somebody’s Someone." In her book, she chronicles her life in the foster care system, which began when she was a toddler and lasted all the way through to her 18th birthday.
During that time, she experienced a great deal of abuse and neglect at the hands of foster parents. But perhaps most harmful to her, she feels, was the fact that she was placed into 30 different homes while in the system. She so wanted someone to claim her as their own but in all those years, it never happened. She never felt like she belonged anywhere and developed grave distrust and cynicism.
"With every home I entered, I felt less and less like it was going to work," Louise said. "It just wasn’t ever going to work."
The Fairmont Animal Shelter has a goal of each animal experiencing only two homes tops, before adoption - no hopping from foster home to foster home.
"Most of these animals have been abused or neglected and they really have some trust issues," Bennett explains. "Spreading them around to a new caretaker every couple of weeks could be really harmful as they never really feel like they belong somewhere. That’s why the placement process is so intense because we want to have a good chance of the relationship working out for as long-term as need be, and maybe even hopefully see a successful adoption."
Sounds like child protection agencies could learn a lot from animal protection agencies. The foster child system certainly has the right idea – they might just need a little more passion and compassion behind it. Perhaps soliciting volunteers in that overworked system wouldn’t be a bad idea as they would more likely be in it for the heart, not the paycheck.
It’s been six months since Harvey crossed the welcoming threshold of the Klentworths. The smiling family pulls up into their driveway in the fairly new Jeep Liberty this warm, beaming afternoon. One might expect to see Harvey hanging out the window catching a breeze, but instead you see Tracy carefully opening the backseat door and unstrapping Harvey from his doggie car seat.
Harvey lops down from the vehicle, looking longingly at his master - or is he looking longingly at the fast food bag she’s carrying? Oh right, it’s Friday – dog park at 3:00, McDonalds dinner at 5:00, play date with the perky poodle down the street at 6:30.
The cover on the spare tire on the back of the Jeep reads, "Life is Good." Harvey would likely second that, only he might add, "when you have a family who loves you."
Children in the foster care system should be so lucky, some would say.
http://www.helium.com/items/1726794-foster-care-abuse
by Brenda Cruz
Tracy Klentworth couldn’t believe she was going to have a little one in the house again after all these years. She wondered for a moment if she had the patience to do this and then quickly chased the thought away.
Instead she filled her mind with the extensive plans she had for the new family member. Here we go again, thought Tracy with a smile. Afternoons at the park, visits to McDonalds, bedtime stories, positive praise and hugs and kisses all day long, a new reason to drive an SUV again – a new reason to live.
Knowing Harvey has had such a hard life thus far, what with all the abuse and neglect he’s endured, Tracy was bent and determined to make his experience in her Pleasanton, California home as pleasant and loving as possible for whatever period of time that may be. And who knows, thought Tracy – maybe it can turn out to be permanent.
Jerry Klentworth, Tracy’s husband of twenty plus years, spat and sputtered up to the curb in his rickety old Volvo with the new little visitor in the passenger seat. Harvey spotted Tracy in the driveway and pushed his nose against the window to get a closer look. The three of them had spent quite a bit of time together before this arrangement was planned. Most people could tell right away they were all familiar and seemed to like each other a lot.
When Jerry opened the passenger door, Harvey ran to Tracy, jumped up on her and planted a saliva-dripping wet one on her cheek with his slice of bologna-sized tongue.
"Harvey – you’re home," cheered Tracy, hugging her new four-legged hound dog house guest as he hopped up and down on his hind legs.
The celebration lasted a good few minutes before the new family made their way into the house to begin the adjustment process.
Harvey, a one-year-old bloodhound, had been at the Fairmont County Animal Shelter for three weeks before the Klentworth’s came to visit and offered to foster him. According to the shelter, many people come with incredibly large hearts to rescue pets from their previously abusive or neglectful lives and when they do get placed with a loving family, they often have elaborate welcoming parties.
Children in the foster care system should be so lucky, some would say.
Humans care a lot about the welfare of animals, most would agree. Few things seem to rile people up more than when the rights of animals are violated…or when animals are mistreated, abused or neglected, pulling at the heart strings of humans in a profound way. Possibly more profound than for abused or neglected children? Some would answer yes.
In California, there are 100,000 children currently in foster care. The system was designed to provide safe and nurturing havens for abused or neglected children who have been removed from their homes for their safety. Yet more often, in foster care, they are put in even more dangerous and compromising situations when they are thrust into a system that is flawed.. According to the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, children are twice as likely to die in a foster home than the general population. That is only the beginning of a long list of what many would agree to be sobering statistics regarding foster care abuse.
Hank Orenstein, director of the Child Welfare Project within the Office of Public Advocate, speaks loudly about the system’s flaws, particularly in the key areas of the screening process. He says many foster parents who end up not having the children’s best interest at heart could possibly be in it for the money. He adds that foster parenting is very stressful and yet people are not required to be psychologically tested to ascertain what pushes their buttons. He also points out that harmful family members are not always screened and this could be a potential danger to the child.
"But the screening process is only as good as its screener," Orenstein says. "In areas where caseloads are heaviest like New York or California, the quality of the screening process diminishes, often at the expense of the children’s safety."
Paige Bennett is the director of pet placement at the Fairmont Animal Shelter in San Leandro, CA. She talks about the fostering process, which she oversees and just how particular she is in choosing her families. Individuals must fill out an application, have a background check against possible former animal abuse and must endure Paige’s scrutinizing visit to their home to ascertain if it is the proper environment for a particular animal.
"I don’t just throw any dog into any situation," Bennett said. "I go to someone’s home looking for the environment that a certain breed or dog of a certain personality will need. Small dogs shouldn’t be with other dogs, for the most part, large dogs need large spaces, nervous dogs need active people, stuff like that. When the fit is right, I’ll know it. I ask a ton of questions. You have to. The dog’s life is at stake."
And perhaps some could conclude that is what’s missing in the foster care system for children. Paige’s. People who take a personal interest in and genuinely care about those children who need fostering. People willing to go the extra mile in a careful placement process and the critical regular follow-up necessary to ensure ongoing safety of the children.
Bennett’s work at the shelter, by the way, is volunteer.
There are other problems in the foster care system for children. Just ask Regina Louise, foster care system survivor, children’s advocate and author of the book, "Somebody’s Someone." In her book, she chronicles her life in the foster care system, which began when she was a toddler and lasted all the way through to her 18th birthday.
During that time, she experienced a great deal of abuse and neglect at the hands of foster parents. But perhaps most harmful to her, she feels, was the fact that she was placed into 30 different homes while in the system. She so wanted someone to claim her as their own but in all those years, it never happened. She never felt like she belonged anywhere and developed grave distrust and cynicism.
"With every home I entered, I felt less and less like it was going to work," Louise said. "It just wasn’t ever going to work."
The Fairmont Animal Shelter has a goal of each animal experiencing only two homes tops, before adoption - no hopping from foster home to foster home.
"Most of these animals have been abused or neglected and they really have some trust issues," Bennett explains. "Spreading them around to a new caretaker every couple of weeks could be really harmful as they never really feel like they belong somewhere. That’s why the placement process is so intense because we want to have a good chance of the relationship working out for as long-term as need be, and maybe even hopefully see a successful adoption."
Sounds like child protection agencies could learn a lot from animal protection agencies. The foster child system certainly has the right idea – they might just need a little more passion and compassion behind it. Perhaps soliciting volunteers in that overworked system wouldn’t be a bad idea as they would more likely be in it for the heart, not the paycheck.
It’s been six months since Harvey crossed the welcoming threshold of the Klentworths. The smiling family pulls up into their driveway in the fairly new Jeep Liberty this warm, beaming afternoon. One might expect to see Harvey hanging out the window catching a breeze, but instead you see Tracy carefully opening the backseat door and unstrapping Harvey from his doggie car seat.
Harvey lops down from the vehicle, looking longingly at his master - or is he looking longingly at the fast food bag she’s carrying? Oh right, it’s Friday – dog park at 3:00, McDonalds dinner at 5:00, play date with the perky poodle down the street at 6:30.
The cover on the spare tire on the back of the Jeep reads, "Life is Good." Harvey would likely second that, only he might add, "when you have a family who loves you."
Children in the foster care system should be so lucky, some would say.
http://www.helium.com/items/1726794-foster-care-abuse
Persuasive caselaw for parents in all 50 states-DCF not being able to terminate rights because someone doesn't jump through all of their hoops
Note from unhappygrammy- This case pertains to all of our states. Not just Florida. By the time my daughter's TPR hearing came about, she had jumped through all the hoops DCYF set her up with. She had done everything they told her to do. But they still terminated her rights of her son Austin, telling her she had twelve months to complete everything she was told to do. Because she wasn't finished before the permanency hearing, it was too late.
Why is it NH keeps getting away with all these illegalities?
Persuasive caselaw for any parent in all 50 states....
DCF not being able to terminate rights just because someone doesn't jump through all of their hoops. (Then why does the state of NH get away with it?)
http://www.4dca. org/opinions/ Feb%202010/ 02-17-2010/ 4D09-3578. op.pdf
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
January Term 2010
C.A., the mother,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES,
Appellee.
No. 4D09-3578
[ February 17, 2010 ]
TAYLOR, J.
The mother, C.A., appeals a trial court order placing her thirteenyear-
old daughter in a permanent guardianship with the maternal
grandparents and denying the mother’s motion for reunification. The
Department of Children & Families concedes error as to the trial court’s
failure to make specific written findings explaining why reunification was
not possible. We accept this concession of error as proper because
written findings are required by section 39.6221(2)(a) , Florida Statutes
(2009). Moreover, because we find that the record is devoid of competent
substantial evidence to support the permanent guardianship
determination, we reverse and remand for reunification of the child with
the mother under the Department’s supervision.
The record reveals that the trial court based its decision to place the
child in permanent guardianship with the grandparents solely on the
mother’s failure to complete her case plan to the Department’s
satisfaction. However, as we stated in an earlier appeal in this case, a
parent’s non-compliance with a case plan is not a statutory ground for
placement of a child in a permanent guardianship, although it is a factor
that may be “relevant to the trial court’s inquiry regarding the parent’s
fitness to care for the child and whether reunification is possible.” See
C.A. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 988 So. 2d 1247, 1249 (Fla. 4th DCA
2008). Here, the evidence and findings do not show that the mother’s
failure to complete her few remaining tasks has any bearing upon her
fitness to care for the child or whether reunification would be detrimental
to the child’s physical, mental, or emotional health.
2
The main concern that led to the child’s dependency adjudication and
placement in her maternal grandparents’ home in January 2007 was the
mother’s dependency on prescription medication for pain management.
The mother entered into a case plan requiring her to perform numerous
tasks: obtaining individual a n d family counseling; undergoing
psychological, substance abuse, and psychiatric evaluations; attending
parenting classes; obtaining stable housing and income; and completing
a comprehensive medical evaluation to evaluate non-narcotic
alternatives. The trial court found that the mother completed all of her
case plan tasks, except individual and family counseling. Further, the
trial court found she had not sufficiently complied with an additional
requirement to produce a prescription log.
When this case was last before us, we remanded it to give the mother
additional time to comply with her case plan, specifically to complete the
“most important remaining task” — a medical evaluation at the
University of Miami to explore non-narcotic alternatives for her pain
management. C.A., 988 So. 2d at 1248. The mother has since completed
the medical evaluation. The independent evaluator, Dr. Campillo at the
University of Miami, concluded that the mother’s pain medication
regimen is appropriate to her condition and recommended that she
continue with her medication management. The guardian ad litem in
this case recommended reunification, pointing out that the mother had
raised the daughter for twelve years without any problems. The trial
court acknowledged that the child is bonded to the mother.
It is well-settled that the Department has the burden of proving that
reunification with the parent would endanger the child. See In re A.M., 5
So. 3d 809,809 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (reversing permanent guardianship
and ordering reunification where there was no competent substantial
evidence in the record to support a determination that, at the time of the
permanency hearing, reunification would have endangered the child’s
safety, well-being, and health); C.D. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 974
So. 2d 495, 501 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (reversing permanent guardianship
and remanding for reunification under DCF supervision) ; G.V. v. Dep’t of
Children & Families, 985 So. 2d 1243, 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
(ordering reunification where DCF’s only witnesses did not base their
opinions opposing reunification on the statutory ground of endangerment
to the children’s “safety, well-being, and physical, mental and emotional
health”). See also In the Matter of Metz, 27 P.3d 156 (Or. Ct. App. 2001)
(reversing termination of parental rights where evidence failed to support
finding that mother’s prescription medications for her chronic pain made
her unable to meet children’s needs).
3
Here, the trial court made no findings, either orally or in writing, that
reunification would endanger the child’s safety, well-being, and physical,
mental, and emotional health, and there is no competent substantial
evidence in the record to support such a determination. Given the
protracted proceedings in this matter, including a prior reversal on
appeal, we see no justification for remanding this matter solely to allow
the Department another chance to retry the case and further delay the
statutory goal of permanency of the child. Accordingly, we reverse the
order placing the child in a permanent guardianship and remand for
reunification of the child with the mother under th e Department’s
supervision.
Reversed and Remanded with instructions that the motion for
reunification be granted and DCF’s supervision reinstated.
GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
* * *
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,
Broward County; Lisa M. Porter, Judge; L.T. Case No. 07-276 CJDP.
Lori D. Shelby, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Thomas B. Arden,
Assistant Attorney General, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Why is it NH keeps getting away with all these illegalities?
Persuasive caselaw for any parent in all 50 states....
DCF not being able to terminate rights just because someone doesn't jump through all of their hoops. (Then why does the state of NH get away with it?)
http://www.4dca. org/opinions/ Feb%202010/ 02-17-2010/ 4D09-3578. op.pdf
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
January Term 2010
C.A., the mother,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES,
Appellee.
No. 4D09-3578
[ February 17, 2010 ]
TAYLOR, J.
The mother, C.A., appeals a trial court order placing her thirteenyear-
old daughter in a permanent guardianship with the maternal
grandparents and denying the mother’s motion for reunification. The
Department of Children & Families concedes error as to the trial court’s
failure to make specific written findings explaining why reunification was
not possible. We accept this concession of error as proper because
written findings are required by section 39.6221(2)(a) , Florida Statutes
(2009). Moreover, because we find that the record is devoid of competent
substantial evidence to support the permanent guardianship
determination, we reverse and remand for reunification of the child with
the mother under the Department’s supervision.
The record reveals that the trial court based its decision to place the
child in permanent guardianship with the grandparents solely on the
mother’s failure to complete her case plan to the Department’s
satisfaction. However, as we stated in an earlier appeal in this case, a
parent’s non-compliance with a case plan is not a statutory ground for
placement of a child in a permanent guardianship, although it is a factor
that may be “relevant to the trial court’s inquiry regarding the parent’s
fitness to care for the child and whether reunification is possible.” See
C.A. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 988 So. 2d 1247, 1249 (Fla. 4th DCA
2008). Here, the evidence and findings do not show that the mother’s
failure to complete her few remaining tasks has any bearing upon her
fitness to care for the child or whether reunification would be detrimental
to the child’s physical, mental, or emotional health.
2
The main concern that led to the child’s dependency adjudication and
placement in her maternal grandparents’ home in January 2007 was the
mother’s dependency on prescription medication for pain management.
The mother entered into a case plan requiring her to perform numerous
tasks: obtaining individual a n d family counseling; undergoing
psychological, substance abuse, and psychiatric evaluations; attending
parenting classes; obtaining stable housing and income; and completing
a comprehensive medical evaluation to evaluate non-narcotic
alternatives. The trial court found that the mother completed all of her
case plan tasks, except individual and family counseling. Further, the
trial court found she had not sufficiently complied with an additional
requirement to produce a prescription log.
When this case was last before us, we remanded it to give the mother
additional time to comply with her case plan, specifically to complete the
“most important remaining task” — a medical evaluation at the
University of Miami to explore non-narcotic alternatives for her pain
management. C.A., 988 So. 2d at 1248. The mother has since completed
the medical evaluation. The independent evaluator, Dr. Campillo at the
University of Miami, concluded that the mother’s pain medication
regimen is appropriate to her condition and recommended that she
continue with her medication management. The guardian ad litem in
this case recommended reunification, pointing out that the mother had
raised the daughter for twelve years without any problems. The trial
court acknowledged that the child is bonded to the mother.
It is well-settled that the Department has the burden of proving that
reunification with the parent would endanger the child. See In re A.M., 5
So. 3d 809,809 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (reversing permanent guardianship
and ordering reunification where there was no competent substantial
evidence in the record to support a determination that, at the time of the
permanency hearing, reunification would have endangered the child’s
safety, well-being, and health); C.D. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 974
So. 2d 495, 501 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (reversing permanent guardianship
and remanding for reunification under DCF supervision) ; G.V. v. Dep’t of
Children & Families, 985 So. 2d 1243, 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
(ordering reunification where DCF’s only witnesses did not base their
opinions opposing reunification on the statutory ground of endangerment
to the children’s “safety, well-being, and physical, mental and emotional
health”). See also In the Matter of Metz, 27 P.3d 156 (Or. Ct. App. 2001)
(reversing termination of parental rights where evidence failed to support
finding that mother’s prescription medications for her chronic pain made
her unable to meet children’s needs).
3
Here, the trial court made no findings, either orally or in writing, that
reunification would endanger the child’s safety, well-being, and physical,
mental, and emotional health, and there is no competent substantial
evidence in the record to support such a determination. Given the
protracted proceedings in this matter, including a prior reversal on
appeal, we see no justification for remanding this matter solely to allow
the Department another chance to retry the case and further delay the
statutory goal of permanency of the child. Accordingly, we reverse the
order placing the child in a permanent guardianship and remand for
reunification of the child with the mother under th e Department’s
supervision.
Reversed and Remanded with instructions that the motion for
reunification be granted and DCF’s supervision reinstated.
GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
* * *
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,
Broward County; Lisa M. Porter, Judge; L.T. Case No. 07-276 CJDP.
Lori D. Shelby, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Thomas B. Arden,
Assistant Attorney General, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Alexis Stuth Bill Passes Senate... 48-0 SB 6416 Concerning relatives in dependency proceedings
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Alexis Stuth Bill Passes Senate... 48-0
SB 6416 Concerning relatives in dependency proceedings
The Alexis Stuth Bill passed out 48-0 (with one excused) and has been transmitted to the House of Representatives.
The bill needs to pass out of the House and be delivered to governor. Your support will be needed again. This time in the House hearing. Thank you to everyone in getting it this far. Of note, Denise Revels-Robinson testified in favor of the bill. And, Alexis became one of Washington's youngest to be addressed by the chair, Senator Jim Hargrove (second on the bill).
If passed into law a relative will be able to file a petition to be heard on the issue of removal of a dependent child from their care. The relative has ten business days from the date of removal, or when the relative learns of the removal, whichever is later, to file the petition. The relative may call and cross examine witnesses at the hearing on the petition. The relatives ability to file a petition to be heard does not grant them party status in the underlying dependency. When a parent requests that his or her child be placed with a relative, there is a presumption that such placement is in the child's best interest. (The best interest placement was SB 6417 which was amended into SB 6416.)
Posted by State Senator Pam Roach at 4:12 PM
http://pamroachreport.blogspot.com/2010/02/alexis-stuth-bill-passes-senate-48-0.html
Alexis Stuth Bill Passes Senate... 48-0
SB 6416 Concerning relatives in dependency proceedings
The Alexis Stuth Bill passed out 48-0 (with one excused) and has been transmitted to the House of Representatives.
The bill needs to pass out of the House and be delivered to governor. Your support will be needed again. This time in the House hearing. Thank you to everyone in getting it this far. Of note, Denise Revels-Robinson testified in favor of the bill. And, Alexis became one of Washington's youngest to be addressed by the chair, Senator Jim Hargrove (second on the bill).
If passed into law a relative will be able to file a petition to be heard on the issue of removal of a dependent child from their care. The relative has ten business days from the date of removal, or when the relative learns of the removal, whichever is later, to file the petition. The relative may call and cross examine witnesses at the hearing on the petition. The relatives ability to file a petition to be heard does not grant them party status in the underlying dependency. When a parent requests that his or her child be placed with a relative, there is a presumption that such placement is in the child's best interest. (The best interest placement was SB 6417 which was amended into SB 6416.)
Posted by State Senator Pam Roach at 4:12 PM
http://pamroachreport.blogspot.com/2010/02/alexis-stuth-bill-passes-senate-48-0.html
Mom sees social services win as help for others
Published: May 21, 2007 3:00 a.m.
Mom sees social services win as help for others
By PEGGY LOWE
The Orange County RegisterStory Highlights
Seal Beach mother wins case against county, hopes to help families in system.
The threat came first: "If you don't submit to me, you'll never see your kids again."
Then the Orange County social worker produced a document, telling her she must sign it.
VICTORIOUS MOM: Deanna Fogarty recently won a $4.9 million judgement against the County of Orange after social workers wrongfully took her children away from her.
Suddenly, Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick was faced with the social services version of a Solomonic choice: Sign a paper that says you're a bad parent, or lose your children. Fogarty-Hardwick refused to sign it that day in 2000 and the very worst happened: Her two daughters, then ages 6 and 9, were placed in the Orangewood Children's home and then in foster care.
"That's when I thought, 'OK, this is a nightmare,'" Fogarty-Hardwick said. "This is America."
But last week, after a painful seven-year battle with the Orange County Social Services Department, the Seal Beach mother won a second major victory, coming after a record-setting $4.9 million jury verdict against the county.
Superior Court Judge Ronald Bauer handed down a permanent injunction against the agency, ruling that it must have "articulable evidence" to suspect that a child has been abused or neglected by a parent before making any allegations in court.
And in what many parental advocates say is even more significant, Bauer also ordered the social services department to stop requiring a parent to sign what's called an "agency-parent temporary agreement" unless the agency has some reasonable evidence to suggest the parents are hurting their children.
Those rulings won't help Fogarty-Hardwick, who had been wrongfully accused of telling her daughters that their father was trying to take them away from her. She already feels vindicated by the jury's ruling that her parental rights had been violated by the county. But she hopes it will do something to protect other parents she heard from during her trial.
"This is an abuse-of-power case, when someone has incredible power and they exercise it over you," Fogarty-Hardwick said. "If they become part of the problem, how can they help? And if no one is there to hold them accountable, how will anyone know there's a problem?"
The outcome of Fogarty-Hardwick's case shocked lawyers who specialize in these lawsuits, and it set the parental-rights community buzzing. Parents rarely bring cases against social services departments, because of protracted legal battles and governmental immunity laws. The cases also are hard to prove because most of the agencies' decisions are made in secret as a result of confidentiality laws.
Jan Saalfield, a Marin County lawyer who has specialized in child dependency appeals for 16 years, said she has never seen a ruling like the one Bauer made last week.
"This gives the appearance that the court is quite concerned that this is not just a singular event and says it won't be repeated in the future," Saalfield said. "The court is showing substantial concern that this could happen again."
Michael Riley, chief deputy director of the Social Services Agency, disagreed, saying the judge's ruling simply orders the department do to what it has always done, "which is follow the law."
"The whole idea of the premise made by the plaintiff that we remove children in a cavalier fashion is completely unfounded," Riley said.
Citing confidentiality laws, Riley said he couldn't comment on specifics of the case. But he denied that his social workers did anything wrong. The agency always has evidence before making an allegation, and Orange County has one of the lowest removal rates in the state, he said. Of the 34,293 child abuse reports the department received in 2006, only 1,900 children were removed from their homes, he said.
The county is appealing the jury's decision, including the additional $6,000 in punitive damages against the two social workers on Fogarty-Hardwick's case.
During the 16-day trial earlier this year, the county's lawyers told the jury that Fogarty-Hardwick was a former Miss California and called her the "Nordstrom mom" in an attempt to turn the jury against her. That didn't work, as jury members later told Fogarty-Hardwick's lawyers. The county also allowed the social worker that threatened her to testify, and the jury came to believe, as Fogarty-Hardwick's lawsuit claimed, that she and a supervisor had "intentionally misinformed" a judge who then handed down the order to take the children.
After her daughters were put in foster care in 2000, Fogarty-Hardwick decided to give her ex-husband full custody, hoping to protect her daughters. She was then allowed two monitored visits per month for two years, but finally won 50-50 custody in 2006.
Today, Fogarty-Hardwick isn't bitter, nor is she anti-social services. She says with a laugh that she knew the social worker in question was so bad because her first one had been so good.
But she admits that this "unfortunate adventure" has been devastating to her, her parents and their extended family. Her only hope now is that the appeal also goes her way - a process that will take several years - and that other parents won't have to experience what she endured.
"You just try to find good out of something horrible," she said. "We have a wonderful decision that could help a lot of people and must be preserved."
Contact the writer: 714-285-2862 or plowe@ocregister.com
http://www.ocregister.com/news/social-173157-fogarty-hardwick.html
Mom sees social services win as help for others
By PEGGY LOWE
The Orange County RegisterStory Highlights
Seal Beach mother wins case against county, hopes to help families in system.
The threat came first: "If you don't submit to me, you'll never see your kids again."
Then the Orange County social worker produced a document, telling her she must sign it.
VICTORIOUS MOM: Deanna Fogarty recently won a $4.9 million judgement against the County of Orange after social workers wrongfully took her children away from her.
Suddenly, Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick was faced with the social services version of a Solomonic choice: Sign a paper that says you're a bad parent, or lose your children. Fogarty-Hardwick refused to sign it that day in 2000 and the very worst happened: Her two daughters, then ages 6 and 9, were placed in the Orangewood Children's home and then in foster care.
"That's when I thought, 'OK, this is a nightmare,'" Fogarty-Hardwick said. "This is America."
But last week, after a painful seven-year battle with the Orange County Social Services Department, the Seal Beach mother won a second major victory, coming after a record-setting $4.9 million jury verdict against the county.
Superior Court Judge Ronald Bauer handed down a permanent injunction against the agency, ruling that it must have "articulable evidence" to suspect that a child has been abused or neglected by a parent before making any allegations in court.
And in what many parental advocates say is even more significant, Bauer also ordered the social services department to stop requiring a parent to sign what's called an "agency-parent temporary agreement" unless the agency has some reasonable evidence to suggest the parents are hurting their children.
Those rulings won't help Fogarty-Hardwick, who had been wrongfully accused of telling her daughters that their father was trying to take them away from her. She already feels vindicated by the jury's ruling that her parental rights had been violated by the county. But she hopes it will do something to protect other parents she heard from during her trial.
"This is an abuse-of-power case, when someone has incredible power and they exercise it over you," Fogarty-Hardwick said. "If they become part of the problem, how can they help? And if no one is there to hold them accountable, how will anyone know there's a problem?"
The outcome of Fogarty-Hardwick's case shocked lawyers who specialize in these lawsuits, and it set the parental-rights community buzzing. Parents rarely bring cases against social services departments, because of protracted legal battles and governmental immunity laws. The cases also are hard to prove because most of the agencies' decisions are made in secret as a result of confidentiality laws.
Jan Saalfield, a Marin County lawyer who has specialized in child dependency appeals for 16 years, said she has never seen a ruling like the one Bauer made last week.
"This gives the appearance that the court is quite concerned that this is not just a singular event and says it won't be repeated in the future," Saalfield said. "The court is showing substantial concern that this could happen again."
Michael Riley, chief deputy director of the Social Services Agency, disagreed, saying the judge's ruling simply orders the department do to what it has always done, "which is follow the law."
"The whole idea of the premise made by the plaintiff that we remove children in a cavalier fashion is completely unfounded," Riley said.
Citing confidentiality laws, Riley said he couldn't comment on specifics of the case. But he denied that his social workers did anything wrong. The agency always has evidence before making an allegation, and Orange County has one of the lowest removal rates in the state, he said. Of the 34,293 child abuse reports the department received in 2006, only 1,900 children were removed from their homes, he said.
The county is appealing the jury's decision, including the additional $6,000 in punitive damages against the two social workers on Fogarty-Hardwick's case.
During the 16-day trial earlier this year, the county's lawyers told the jury that Fogarty-Hardwick was a former Miss California and called her the "Nordstrom mom" in an attempt to turn the jury against her. That didn't work, as jury members later told Fogarty-Hardwick's lawyers. The county also allowed the social worker that threatened her to testify, and the jury came to believe, as Fogarty-Hardwick's lawsuit claimed, that she and a supervisor had "intentionally misinformed" a judge who then handed down the order to take the children.
After her daughters were put in foster care in 2000, Fogarty-Hardwick decided to give her ex-husband full custody, hoping to protect her daughters. She was then allowed two monitored visits per month for two years, but finally won 50-50 custody in 2006.
Today, Fogarty-Hardwick isn't bitter, nor is she anti-social services. She says with a laugh that she knew the social worker in question was so bad because her first one had been so good.
But she admits that this "unfortunate adventure" has been devastating to her, her parents and their extended family. Her only hope now is that the appeal also goes her way - a process that will take several years - and that other parents won't have to experience what she endured.
"You just try to find good out of something horrible," she said. "We have a wonderful decision that could help a lot of people and must be preserved."
Contact the writer: 714-285-2862 or plowe@ocregister.com
http://www.ocregister.com/news/social-173157-fogarty-hardwick.html
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)