Man jailed seven years for getting foster child pregnant
Man shows 'disturbing lack of insight' into his crimes, judge says
Posted By Bob Vaillancourt/The Sudbury Star
Updated 20 hours ago
A young teen who became a mother at the age of 14 because of sex assaults by her foster father wept and hugged her sister and other supporters Wednesday after he was sent to prison for seven years for sexual exploitation.
On the other side of the courtroom, the foster father, Douglas Klasges, 65, showed no reaction to the sentence delivered by Superior Court Justice Patricia Hennessy.
The judge said Klasges has displayed "a surprising and disturbing lack of insight" into what he did.
She described a pre-sentence report on Klasges as "a portrait of a man in complete denial with not a hint of remorse."
Klasges, said the judge, "does not recall having sex," with the victim even after a paternity test.
The victim was formally placed by the Children's Aid Society with Klasges and his wife at the age of 11.
In a statement to police, the victim said the assaults began almost immediately, with hugging and kissing. That led to kissing on the lips, then to sex acts. Soon, he was having intercourse with the girl.
The victim said the assaults were as frequent as three times a week.
By the spring of 2007, she had become pregnant. She gave birth the following February at the age of 14.
Read more in Thursday's Star.
http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2615821
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, June 10, 2010
Austin Knightly Tried to Commit Suicide After Being Stolen From His Grandparents and Placed With Foster Strangers
Picture's of Austin and his Aunt, his protector. The Aunt that DCYF didn't want him to have contact with. The Aunt that Maggie Bishop told me I should have left to die. The Aunt that Maggie Bishop asked, "Why isn't Candy dead?"
A few posts back,I posted an article about a 10 year old boy who tried to commit suicide after being taken from his grandparents and placed in foster care. This article really hit home, as my own grandson Austin tried to commit suicide, by hanging, after being taken from mine and my husbands home at age six.
How many more children will try to commit suicide due to the loss of their families they long to be with? How many more children will succeed at committing suicide before our government finally get's it right? Do I have to keep watching the Obituaries every day, praying that Austin's name won't be on the list? Has he attempted suicide more than the one time that we know about? Were there more attempt's kept secret, like all the other practices of DCYF?
Austin was never a violent little boy. He was alway's happy and helpful. He didn't have a mean bone in his body. That was until Nashua DCYF with four police officers dragged him out of my house kicking and screaming as the neighborhood looked on in disbelief.
He had been placed with my husband and I and his Aunt by the Police, after his mother made the mistake of trusting someone to watch him that shouldn't have.
The Judge at the preliminary hearing for Austin's mother agreed to leave Austin in our care, which really pissed off the DCYF Lawyer. She argued Austin's Aunt was living in my home. That she had neglect charges against her for anticipated "Neglect in the Future." The Judge denied her argument and stated as long as Austin's Aunt didn't babysit he would stay with us. Well that didn't go over well with the Lawyer. She somehow got the same Judge to sign a motion for modification, which stated they didn't want Austin's Aunt to have contact with him. Then DCYF and four police officers showed up at my house to take Austin. We were told they had a court order and a warrant. They refused to show either. We recently found out they had neither a court order or a warrant.
Austin loved his Aunt as much as he loved us. From the day he was born, she rocked him every night when he wouldn't sleep. She was alway's there for him, taking him for walks and babysitting and just showing him so much love, he responded with calling her by name. Her name was his first word. He really loved her and she really loved him. She was his protector. If anyone laid a hand on him, she went after them. The day of his fifth birthday party, after we had gone home and a few guest's were left, he was told by someone to go to his room. His mother had gone to the store. He cried. He wanted to stay up. Because he cried, he was chased into the room by the person who ordered him to go. His Aunt heard him screaming and ran to the room to see what was going on. She witnessed Austin being beaten with a belt. In the face, across the legs and his back. Austin's Aunt was pregnant at the time, but that didn't stop her. She tried pulling the person off Austin and was thrown against the wall, not caring about herself, only Austin. She managed to stop the beating.
After Austin was stolen by DCYF, we found out what happened that night. Everyone knew that if we had been told, there would have been a war and we would have taken Austin to live with us, where he would alway's be safe and loved.The Police would have been called and Austin's abuser would have been arrested.The abuser would never have had the chance to lay a hand on him again. DCYF was told, but of course did nothing. The caseworker said it was too late to do anything. I'm guessing she never told anyone else, or if she did,they didn't care. They were familiar with the abuser and liked him.
We finally got to visit Austin,in Rochester NH at the children's home once a month, about a year after he was stolen from us, thank's to his mother's new caseworker. She was assigned to her case after going without a caseworker for four month's and no services, due to Anna the Homewreckers pregnancy. Each time we visited Austin, he was extremely happy to see us. He told everyone the only thing that would make him happy, was to live with us. He cried for Grampie all the time. That didn't matter to DCYF or the court. Austin was worth more money to them in non-relative foster care than placed with his grandparents, especially since they put him on psycho-tropic drugs for his new found violent behavior, which they now call ADHD, which now makes him a special needs child.
At one of the visit's he was looking at pictures of our family we brought for him. He came across a picture of his Aunt. The Aunt he loved so much. The Aunt that protected him. He asked who she was. We were in shock. He was so doped up and completely brainwashed he had no memories of his Aunt. The Aunt he spent so much time with and called her by name at such a young age. This is what our government is doing to our children!
The last visit we had with Austin, he acted like a zombie. The aide brought up his mother's name. Something we were told was NOT allowed. He told us he was told she was no longer his mother. I told him, "Yes she is your mother and alway's will be no matter what." Her rights hadn't even been terminated at the time!
We went outside to play ball. The aide gave Austin too many instruction's at once. He stood there dumb-founded. He had no clue of what he was being told to do. So the aide yelled at home. That made him even more upset and confused. Then she went back inside with him to get the ball.
When they came back out, as usual, I was interrogated by the aide. I was there to visit Austin, not to answer her questions about his mother, which of course he overheard and of course I was accused of telling him what I had just told the aide. What was I supposed to do, act rudely and not answer her questions?
Before we left, we set up another appointment for our monthly visit. We weren't told we wouldn't be seeing our grandson again. Austin walked with us down the driveway. We hugged and gave him a kiss good-bye and told him we would be back to see him. The last question he asked us was if he would ever see his dog Belle again. The dog we got him a few months before he was stolen by DCYF. I answered with, "I hope so!"
Austin stood at the end of the driveway. He looked so sad with those sad puppy dog eyes,as he held back his tears. We knew he wanted to jump in the van with us and come home. He just stood there and watched as we drove away and was still there as we drove down the street. I'm sure he was hoping we would turn the van around and go back for him. It was so, so sad. That was the last time we saw him. I can just imagine the pain he's going through. If we were such BAD people, wouldn't we have put him in the van and taken off? We follow the law, unlike DCYF!
A few weeks later we were e-mailed by the caseworker telling us our visit's were canceled and not to worry, we would see Austin again when he's eighteen.
A few month's later, we were told an adoptive home fell through for Austin and we were now being allowed a home study. It was an incomplete home study and signed off by Tracy Gubbins. After reading over all the lies, I knew she was the one responsible for writing them. I was even told by a former CPSW that Tracy knew that I knew it was her. That she was the one keeping Austin from us. Three caseworker's told us Austin was being placed with us. Tracy Gubbins falsified the report and signed it. There were no background check's, financial checks and no home inspection. From what we've been told Austin was adopted in December 2009, by the same stranger's where he was placed when he was stolen. Back with the people who starved him and where he tried to hang himself! When will our government WAKE UP?
Preliminary List of DCS Violations to Create Fabricated, Misleading, or Manufactured State Funded Family Crisesed
Below is a preliminary list of violations DCS commits to create fabricated, misleading or manufactured state funded family crises.
By Fredsmother
Failing to: 1) swear in, question or cross-examine witnesses, 2) mark, properly admit or review documentary evidence, 3) conducting proceedings like an informal chat rather than a court hearing, 4) permitting attorneys to make material factual representations that were then accepted by the court in lieu of sworn testimony of witnesses, 5) permitting litigants and other individuals with an interest in the case to casually address the court on material issues of fact without being sworn as witnesses or subjected to cross-examination, 6) skipping critical elements, such as a fact-finding hearing, of the abuse and neglect process, 7) making judicial findings based on unspecified allegations, hearsay statements, unidentified documents and unsworn colloquy from attorneys and other participants, 8) failing to determine whether reasonable efforts were required to avoid placement, 9) using hired guns to manufacture and/or bolster DCS allegations, 10) failing to inform the court of services parent(s) completed, 11) failing to produce discovery.
By Fredsmother
Failing to: 1) swear in, question or cross-examine witnesses, 2) mark, properly admit or review documentary evidence, 3) conducting proceedings like an informal chat rather than a court hearing, 4) permitting attorneys to make material factual representations that were then accepted by the court in lieu of sworn testimony of witnesses, 5) permitting litigants and other individuals with an interest in the case to casually address the court on material issues of fact without being sworn as witnesses or subjected to cross-examination, 6) skipping critical elements, such as a fact-finding hearing, of the abuse and neglect process, 7) making judicial findings based on unspecified allegations, hearsay statements, unidentified documents and unsworn colloquy from attorneys and other participants, 8) failing to determine whether reasonable efforts were required to avoid placement, 9) using hired guns to manufacture and/or bolster DCS allegations, 10) failing to inform the court of services parent(s) completed, 11) failing to produce discovery.
OFFICIAL COMPLAINT AGAINST Johnson County DCS, and numerous other individuals
:OFFICIAL COMPLAINT AGAINST Johnson County DCS, and numerous other individuals including Staff at Governor Mitch Daniels' Office, Judges, Prosecutors, Policy Directors, Regional Managers and all others listed below;
FCM Erin Henderson (Marion Co)
FCM Teddi Adams
FCM Joe Erickson
FCM (Stupidvisor) Gayle Green
Regional Director Laura Gentry
Receptionist Mike at DCS Office
Judge K. Mark LLoyd, Johnson County Circuit Court
Clerk of Johnson Co. Circuit Court, Maureen Bray
Attorney Carrie Miles
Attorney Elizabeth Gamboa
Attorney Michael T. Bohn
Attorney Dan Vandiver
Attorney Anne K. McGuinness
CASA/GAL Tammi Fearin-Hickman
Foster Monster Jodi (Marijo) Checkeye and her husband Gary and their Sons
Mental Health Counselling Agency Adult and Child, Amanda (Deffner) Stropes
Judge Cynthia Emkes, Johnson County Superior Court (Abuse Of Judicial Discretion/Power)
Johnson County Prosecutor's Office
Family Interventions Counsellor Jennifer Hammons
Governor Mitch Daniels and his office staff, Kristen Caine (sp),
Senior Policy Director For DCS Lawren MIlls, and her assistant Stephanie
Stephanie Gengrich, Governor Daniels' Office
Deputy Chief of Staff for Lt. Governor Skillman, Danielle Krissler (?)
Jamie McNichols, Constituent Services
Kim Koomler, Liaison for DCS/Governor Daniels' Office
Melissa Norman, DCS Executive Director
Angel Owens, Admin Assistant to James Payne
Anne Houseworth, DCS Executive Offices
Susan Hoppe, Ombudsman
LaVenia Haskett, Indiana State Personnel
Paula Wright, DCS Main office
Leslie Rogers-Dunn, CASA/GAL office
Katherine Dolan, CASA/GAL Office
We (as consumers) have a responsibility to name names, Judges, Attorneys, Prosecutors, CASA - these humans are performing a SERVICE for the STATE. They are paid by the STATE.
IF they are not performing their jobs for the clients they are paid to serve - i.e:
fairness, judgment, integrity, ethics, honesty, wisdom, free from prejudice and greed, or influences from outside interests and parties, ITIS OUR DUTY to expose them for investigation and correction, or termination. They must be responsive to those individuals/groups that they are paid (in good faith) to
represent; WHICH Is US.
Since they have been caught, using state resources for their own benefit - they must be outed. IT is our duty to our STATE and to each other.
For too long this country, as well as the State of Indiana, we have turned a blind eye and been Bamboozled by the Child Protection Agencies into believing that it is an agency that protects children from harm.
The reality is "NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH"!!
Thousands upon thousands of documented cases prove that time and time again, children suffer at the hands of despicably unfit foster parents, and when said abuse is reported to DCS or any other child protection agency, nothing is done. Furthermore, on numerous occasions when reporting known abuse, the children are left with their abusive parents, with horrific consequences. Very often children die in state custody, while DCS and every other child protection agency plays the role of innocence, as though ignoring policies, procedures and protocol is the order of the day, as it has been for more than 30 years.
The Indiana Department of Child services commits abuse on children when it needlessly and unnecessarily removes them from their parents on flimsy allegations and very often on personal bias against the parent. Not only is this unconstitutional, it is against Indiana Law, and the Department's own policies and procedures. But just TRY bringing this to the attention of ANY Senator, Congressman, or Governor, and you will be ignored, laughed at or even possibly thrown in jail for having the unmitigated gall to speak out against this child-abusing agency.
They then continue this emotional abuse of children by keeping them separated from their parents for extended periods of time, placing the children on numerous drugs due to the emotional issues they are suffering as a direct result of DCS treating parents like garbage!!
The Indiana Department of Child Services only focuses on the child, and ignores the parents. NO SERVICES ARE EVER Genuinely or legitimately put into place to assist families to be re-unified, to get Mom off crack or to get Dad clean and sober!! That would mean that they actually CARE ABOUT FAMILIES!! It is clearly obvious from abundant evidence THAT THEY DO NOT!! The ONLY thing DCS or any other child welfare agency cares about IS THE MONEY it receives from taking children from parents, PERIOD!!
My name is Sherri D and this is what happened;
The information above outlines alot of things that happened in the case of my son, T.F.D.
He was taken from his very loving mother who ended up in a mess for a minute, needed help and instead, became victimized by DCS. The Judge, K. Mark Lloyd automatically GRANTED their every motion, while court-appointed counsel stood there at the bench as though he had just woken up, and never discussed my case with me or ways i could effectively get my son returned to me. DCS played on this lack of knowledge TO THE SERIOUS DETRIMENT of the well-being of my son, while i was mercilessly thrown in jail by the foster mother who was also greedily seeking the $95./day she was receiving to keep a child away from a mother, during which time he suffered break down after break down, being put in mental hospitals for his serious emotional issues that DCS refused to attribute to the fact that were directly related to his forced separation from his mother and the intentional refusal of ALL PARTIES involved in this ABUSE OF PROCESS, at the expense of the well-being of a child!! The point is is that MY SON HAS RIGHTS, AND DCS doesn't seem to care that he has the RIGHT TO BE FREE From abuse and cruelty, which is EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS!! My son has the RIGHT to have a relationship with a mother who loves him very much,
DCS stupid visors, Judges, Attorneys, prosecutors, foster parents, CASA,
Mental health counselling places and all others listed above were committing
FLAGRANT ACTS Of ;
Violation of Indiana Law
Violation of Indiana parenting time guidelines
IGNORING DCS policies and procedures, with direct connection to Indiana
law that REQUIRES THEM to do certain things, that they intentionally DID
NOT Do;
Instructing service providers to with hold services
Ineffective assistance of counsel, deliberate and intentional
Fraud ; Fraud upon the court by OFFICERS of the court;
Tampering with and withholding evidence;
OBSTRUCTION Of justice
Perjury, and suborning Perjury
FAilure to State a claim or PROVE a case existed in the first place!!
Intentional infliction of emotional distress upon a minor child;
Judicial misconduct
Official Misconduct by agency case wreckers and stupid visors;
Malicious Prosecution
Abuse of Process
Kangaroo Courts, with CAPTAIN KANGAROO, Mickey Mouse, Goofy, bozo the
clown; Daffy Duck and various other cartoon characters, along with a
plethora of other issues that could go on for DAYS!!
STOP!!
If you think this is the ranting of someone who is just upset over the fact that the agency took a child from his mother, THINK AGAIN!!
There exist ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY NO Charges of child abuse or neglect against me, NOR am i strung out on drugs or alcohol or seeking revenge against the Department. What the purpose of this is is to EXPOSE THE FACT that i, along with countless other individuals are mercilessly victimized by this Department, with NO COMPASSION to the effect that this may be having on both mother and son, FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING BONUS MONIES AND FEDERAL GRANTS. "Best interest of the Child" is nothing more than a Marketing phrase, and one person had the insight to ask "if this is in the "Best interest" of the child, then why are there such large financial incentives?"
My Case plans ALWAYS called for reunification, but were intentionally fraught with services that required attending things that directly interfered with my ability to earn a living. I have since learned that this is par for the course. Reunification plans are SET UP TO FAIL!! This is nothing short of disgusting!!
I was NEVER GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY to participate in the creation of the 'Case Plan" because case wrecker Erin Henderson WOULD NOT EVEN TALK TO ME, and then repeatedly told me to "Call me if you have any quuestions"!! HOW IDIOTIC IS THIS STRATEGY, that has done nothing but inflict emotional abuse upon a minor child who was experincing TERRIBLE AND TREMENDOUS EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS as a direct result of not being able to have any kind of meaningful relationship with his LOVING AND FIT MOTHER????
This is called Parental alienation and IS A REAL FORM OF CHILD ABUSE!!
And then, they have the UNMITIGATED GALL To "Terminate" my parental rights?? THIS IS NOTHING SHORT OF DISGUSTING, Because a child has the RIGHT TO be FREE from this kind of emotional cruelty and MY SON is NO exception to this right!! :
FCM Erin Henderson (Marion Co)
FCM Teddi Adams
FCM Joe Erickson
FCM (Stupidvisor) Gayle Green
Regional Director Laura Gentry
Receptionist Mike at DCS Office
Judge K. Mark LLoyd, Johnson County Circuit Court
Clerk of Johnson Co. Circuit Court, Maureen Bray
Attorney Carrie Miles
Attorney Elizabeth Gamboa
Attorney Michael T. Bohn
Attorney Dan Vandiver
Attorney Anne K. McGuinness
CASA/GAL Tammi Fearin-Hickman
Foster Monster Jodi (Marijo) Checkeye and her husband Gary and their Sons
Mental Health Counselling Agency Adult and Child, Amanda (Deffner) Stropes
Judge Cynthia Emkes, Johnson County Superior Court (Abuse Of Judicial Discretion/Power)
Johnson County Prosecutor's Office
Family Interventions Counsellor Jennifer Hammons
Governor Mitch Daniels and his office staff, Kristen Caine (sp),
Senior Policy Director For DCS Lawren MIlls, and her assistant Stephanie
Stephanie Gengrich, Governor Daniels' Office
Deputy Chief of Staff for Lt. Governor Skillman, Danielle Krissler (?)
Jamie McNichols, Constituent Services
Kim Koomler, Liaison for DCS/Governor Daniels' Office
Melissa Norman, DCS Executive Director
Angel Owens, Admin Assistant to James Payne
Anne Houseworth, DCS Executive Offices
Susan Hoppe, Ombudsman
LaVenia Haskett, Indiana State Personnel
Paula Wright, DCS Main office
Leslie Rogers-Dunn, CASA/GAL office
Katherine Dolan, CASA/GAL Office
We (as consumers) have a responsibility to name names, Judges, Attorneys, Prosecutors, CASA - these humans are performing a SERVICE for the STATE. They are paid by the STATE.
IF they are not performing their jobs for the clients they are paid to serve - i.e:
fairness, judgment, integrity, ethics, honesty, wisdom, free from prejudice and greed, or influences from outside interests and parties, ITIS OUR DUTY to expose them for investigation and correction, or termination. They must be responsive to those individuals/groups that they are paid (in good faith) to
represent; WHICH Is US.
Since they have been caught, using state resources for their own benefit - they must be outed. IT is our duty to our STATE and to each other.
For too long this country, as well as the State of Indiana, we have turned a blind eye and been Bamboozled by the Child Protection Agencies into believing that it is an agency that protects children from harm.
The reality is "NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH"!!
Thousands upon thousands of documented cases prove that time and time again, children suffer at the hands of despicably unfit foster parents, and when said abuse is reported to DCS or any other child protection agency, nothing is done. Furthermore, on numerous occasions when reporting known abuse, the children are left with their abusive parents, with horrific consequences. Very often children die in state custody, while DCS and every other child protection agency plays the role of innocence, as though ignoring policies, procedures and protocol is the order of the day, as it has been for more than 30 years.
The Indiana Department of Child services commits abuse on children when it needlessly and unnecessarily removes them from their parents on flimsy allegations and very often on personal bias against the parent. Not only is this unconstitutional, it is against Indiana Law, and the Department's own policies and procedures. But just TRY bringing this to the attention of ANY Senator, Congressman, or Governor, and you will be ignored, laughed at or even possibly thrown in jail for having the unmitigated gall to speak out against this child-abusing agency.
They then continue this emotional abuse of children by keeping them separated from their parents for extended periods of time, placing the children on numerous drugs due to the emotional issues they are suffering as a direct result of DCS treating parents like garbage!!
The Indiana Department of Child Services only focuses on the child, and ignores the parents. NO SERVICES ARE EVER Genuinely or legitimately put into place to assist families to be re-unified, to get Mom off crack or to get Dad clean and sober!! That would mean that they actually CARE ABOUT FAMILIES!! It is clearly obvious from abundant evidence THAT THEY DO NOT!! The ONLY thing DCS or any other child welfare agency cares about IS THE MONEY it receives from taking children from parents, PERIOD!!
My name is Sherri D and this is what happened;
The information above outlines alot of things that happened in the case of my son, T.F.D.
He was taken from his very loving mother who ended up in a mess for a minute, needed help and instead, became victimized by DCS. The Judge, K. Mark Lloyd automatically GRANTED their every motion, while court-appointed counsel stood there at the bench as though he had just woken up, and never discussed my case with me or ways i could effectively get my son returned to me. DCS played on this lack of knowledge TO THE SERIOUS DETRIMENT of the well-being of my son, while i was mercilessly thrown in jail by the foster mother who was also greedily seeking the $95./day she was receiving to keep a child away from a mother, during which time he suffered break down after break down, being put in mental hospitals for his serious emotional issues that DCS refused to attribute to the fact that were directly related to his forced separation from his mother and the intentional refusal of ALL PARTIES involved in this ABUSE OF PROCESS, at the expense of the well-being of a child!! The point is is that MY SON HAS RIGHTS, AND DCS doesn't seem to care that he has the RIGHT TO BE FREE From abuse and cruelty, which is EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS!! My son has the RIGHT to have a relationship with a mother who loves him very much,
DCS stupid visors, Judges, Attorneys, prosecutors, foster parents, CASA,
Mental health counselling places and all others listed above were committing
FLAGRANT ACTS Of ;
Violation of Indiana Law
Violation of Indiana parenting time guidelines
IGNORING DCS policies and procedures, with direct connection to Indiana
law that REQUIRES THEM to do certain things, that they intentionally DID
NOT Do;
Instructing service providers to with hold services
Ineffective assistance of counsel, deliberate and intentional
Fraud ; Fraud upon the court by OFFICERS of the court;
Tampering with and withholding evidence;
OBSTRUCTION Of justice
Perjury, and suborning Perjury
FAilure to State a claim or PROVE a case existed in the first place!!
Intentional infliction of emotional distress upon a minor child;
Judicial misconduct
Official Misconduct by agency case wreckers and stupid visors;
Malicious Prosecution
Abuse of Process
Kangaroo Courts, with CAPTAIN KANGAROO, Mickey Mouse, Goofy, bozo the
clown; Daffy Duck and various other cartoon characters, along with a
plethora of other issues that could go on for DAYS!!
STOP!!
If you think this is the ranting of someone who is just upset over the fact that the agency took a child from his mother, THINK AGAIN!!
There exist ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY NO Charges of child abuse or neglect against me, NOR am i strung out on drugs or alcohol or seeking revenge against the Department. What the purpose of this is is to EXPOSE THE FACT that i, along with countless other individuals are mercilessly victimized by this Department, with NO COMPASSION to the effect that this may be having on both mother and son, FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING BONUS MONIES AND FEDERAL GRANTS. "Best interest of the Child" is nothing more than a Marketing phrase, and one person had the insight to ask "if this is in the "Best interest" of the child, then why are there such large financial incentives?"
My Case plans ALWAYS called for reunification, but were intentionally fraught with services that required attending things that directly interfered with my ability to earn a living. I have since learned that this is par for the course. Reunification plans are SET UP TO FAIL!! This is nothing short of disgusting!!
I was NEVER GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY to participate in the creation of the 'Case Plan" because case wrecker Erin Henderson WOULD NOT EVEN TALK TO ME, and then repeatedly told me to "Call me if you have any quuestions"!! HOW IDIOTIC IS THIS STRATEGY, that has done nothing but inflict emotional abuse upon a minor child who was experincing TERRIBLE AND TREMENDOUS EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS as a direct result of not being able to have any kind of meaningful relationship with his LOVING AND FIT MOTHER????
This is called Parental alienation and IS A REAL FORM OF CHILD ABUSE!!
And then, they have the UNMITIGATED GALL To "Terminate" my parental rights?? THIS IS NOTHING SHORT OF DISGUSTING, Because a child has the RIGHT TO be FREE from this kind of emotional cruelty and MY SON is NO exception to this right!! :
More Hoosier kids put in foster care State bucks national trend geared toward helping keep more families together
More Hoosier kids put in foster care
State bucks national trend geared toward helping keep more families together
By Tim Evans
Posted: June 9, 2010
It is among the most devastating and gut-wrenching decisions government can make: taking a child away from his or her parents.
As child welfare experts understand more about the lasting effects of such a decision, social workers have sought new ways to support troubled families and keep children in their homes.
That is one of the likely explanations for the most recent federal data that reveals a 7 percent drop in the number of U.S. children removed from their homes -- the most significant one-year decline in a decade.
But that's not the case in Indiana.
According to that same data, the number of Hoosier children removed and placed in foster care has climbed to an all-time high, 9,375 -- a 22 percent jump in removals from 2007 to 2008. That means the Indiana Department of Child Services is removing, on average, about 180 children per week.
During the same period, only Illinois had a higher one-year increase -- and Illinois, despite its larger population, removes significantly fewer children than Indiana.
And the trend in Indiana does not appear to be waning: Preliminary data indicates DCS removed about 5 percent more children in 2009 than it did in 2008.
Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, calls the Indiana data a "dismal" sign that reforms launched in 2005 have not improved the state's troubled child welfare system.
Wexler's organization, which advocates for stronger efforts to keep families together whenever possible, compiles an annual review of removal data as part of its work monitoring the performance of child welfare systems.
"No state moved backwards farther and faster than Indiana," Wexler said of the removal data. "This means the big accomplishment of the whole Indiana reform effort in recent years has been to give Indiana the same lousy system -- only bigger."
Ann Houseworth, DCS spokeswoman, said in a written response to questions from The Indianapolis Star that several factors contribute to the situation in Indiana. They include an increase in the number of caseworkers in the field, a growing number of reports of abuse and neglect, and economic factors that place stress on families.
(2 of 5)
She also said that DCS is continuing efforts to develop community partners who can assist struggling families, and working to place more children in the care of relatives.
But state data show that back in 2004 -- before Indiana's reforms started -- DCS left 28 percent of children in their own homes. In 2008, it dropped to 26 percent. And while relative placement increased from 14 percent to 16 percent during that time, foster placements also grew -- from 40 percent in 2004 to 43 percent in 2008.
Child welfare experts, including Wexler, agree it is necessary to remove some children to protect them from serious neglect or abuse. But the large and growing number of removals in Indiana worries Wexler. Separation can be extremely traumatic to children -- worse, some research has shown, than the effects of neglect, which is the source of 83 percent of the Indiana removals.
What's more, Indiana continues to fare poorly in what is considered one of the most important indicators of how well a child welfare system is performing: children who suffer repeat maltreatment within six months after a state intervention.
The Indiana repeat maltreatment rate for 2008 is basically the same as it was in 2004, before the reform project was launched, and remains worse than the national standard set by the federal government. In 2008, that translated to 506 repeat victims -- almost 10 children every week.
Removing children also is costly. Indiana spends more than $70 million a year to house the children who will, on average, remain in the state's care for about 600 days.
Poverty as a problem
Since 1999, the number of Hoosier children removed from their families has increased every year except for 2001 and 2006, and the number taken in 2008 is nearly double the number removed in 1999, according to the data.
Based on Indiana's child population, DCS removes children at a rate of 5.9 per 1,000, which is the 10th highest rate in the U.S. and 59 percent higher than the national average.
More than 80 percent of removals in 2008 were in cases involving neglect, which Wexler and other experts say often is rooted in poverty.
(3 of 5)
Cari DeSantis, interim executive director at the American Public Human Services Association, said many states have found that a large number of neglect cases "can be addressed without removing the children."
DeSantis, who formerly served as cabinet secretary for the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Their Families, said the national drop in foster care placements reflects that trend.
"In those jurisdictions where the numbers are not coming down," she said, "it often has to do with a lack of capacity to provide support in a family setting."
To address that shortage in Delaware, she said the state shifted funding from foster care to support services.
Wexler thinks DCS workers too often follow what he believes is a misguided mentality that it is better to "err on the side of the child" -- even when there is not a serious threat. He said that approach protects the agency and individual workers from negative publicity that can crop up when DCS fails to intervene and a child is injured or dies.
"That 'better safe than sorry' mentality leaves children unsafe," Wexler said, "and can really harm them because it underestimates the emotional devastation of being ripped from your family and stuck in the home of a stranger."
It also clogs the system with children that Wexler said shouldn't be there. That limits workers' ability to properly investigate reports and help families work through their troubles.
"When you look at states known for keeping children safe," he said, "they take children at rates much lower than in Indiana.
"A child in Indiana is nearly three times as likely to be taken from her or his parents as a child in Illinois. Does anyone seriously believe Indiana children are three times 'safer' than those in Illinois?"
Wexler said the situation can't be explained solely by the state's new reforms or its doubling of caseworkers.
In Utah, which served as a model for the Indiana reforms, removals fell from 2007 to 2008 and the rate of removal is 2.3 per 1,000 children, compared with Indiana's rate of 5.9.
(4 of 5)
Unpleasant experience
Indianapolis parents Malcolm and Alethia Watson have been fighting for two years to clear their names -- and reclaim their family -- after DCS alleged they neglected one of their children. Their children were returned in May, and the case is set to be closed Thursday -- but not without a lot of residual damage.
While the children were in the state's care, one was abused in a foster home. The incident prompted DCS to revoke the foster parent's license.
"I just pray to God I never have to deal with DCS again," Malcolm Watson said. "They come into people's lives and literally destroy them. This whole thing could have been addressed without taking our kids."
Watson said their problems started when his wife took one of their sons to the hospital in 2008 because he wasn't gaining weight and seemed to be sick all the time. Someone at the hospital reported the family to DCS for possible neglect.
Despite their efforts to seek medical treatment for the boy, Watson said, DCS decided they were neglecting the child. So they took the boy and his brother. And, since DCS had removed the two children, when Alethia Watson gave birth to a daughter last June, DCS took her, too, directly from the hospital.
The agency's apparent concern, Watson said, was that his wife was unfit to care for the children. That determination was made primarily on the fact she has difficulty following written instructions, such as recipes.
During the course of their two-year ordeal, Watson said he and his wife underwent psychological evaluations and completed parenting classes.
"We complied with everything they put down in front of us," he said, "but they always had something else for us to do."
What the family really needed, though, was a little help specifically addressing their limited -- and easily correctable -- needs.
And they finally got it. But not from DCS.
Help came from the family rights group, Honk For Kids, and a pair of nurses from the Marion County Health Department who had already been working with the Watsons. They pushed to find alternate methods for teaching Alethia Watson key information about caring for her children and pulled together a network of volunteers to help with child care.
(5 of 5)
Dawn Robertson, spokeswoman for Honk For Kids, said the Watsons are like many families the group encounters: caught up in a system that appears more intent on punishing parents, rather than helping them.
Making changes
Houseworth said the number of removals in Indiana is "higher than desirable" but defended the work of DCS.
"If any child cannot safely remain in his or her home," Houseworth said, "it is our legal duty to place that child in a safe, stable environment."
As part of the continuing reform effort, Houseworth said officials are implementing a management by data approach "so we can better understand our challenges." The agency also has recently established a centralized reporting hotline that officials hope will ensure a more consistent review and response to reports of abuse and neglect. Previously, calls were routed to individual county offices, where responses often varied widely.
And, she said, when DCS does need to remove children the agency is placing more children with relatives.
"DCS recognizes the need to keep children in familiar surroundings and now utilizes relative placements as the first option," she said. "The DCS involvement, once intruding, is less intrusive."
She also said that DCS is continuing efforts to develop community partners who can assist struggling families, and working to place more children in the care of relatives.
But state data show that back in 2004 -- before Indiana's reforms started -- DCS left 28 percent of children in their own homes. In 2008, it dropped to 26 percent. And while relative placement increased from 14 percent to 16 percent during that time, foster placements also grew -- from 40 percent in 2004 to 43 percent in 2008.
Child welfare experts, including Wexler, agree it is necessary to remove some children to protect them from serious neglect or abuse. But the large and growing number of removals in Indiana worries Wexler. Separation can be extremely traumatic to children -- worse, some research has shown, than the effects of neglect, which is the source of 83 percent of the Indiana removals.
What's more, Indiana continues to fare poorly in what is considered one of the most important indicators of how well a child welfare system is performing: children who suffer repeat maltreatment within six months after a state intervention.
The Indiana repeat maltreatment rate for 2008 is basically the same as it was in 2004, before the reform project was launched, and remains worse than the national standard set by the federal government. In 2008, that translated to 506 repeat victims -- almost 10 children every week.
Removing children also is costly. Indiana spends more than $70 million a year to house the children who will, on average, remain in the state's care for about 600 days.
Poverty as a problem
Since 1999, the number of Hoosier children removed from their families has increased every year except for 2001 and 2006, and the number taken in 2008 is nearly double the number removed in 1999, according to the data.
Based on Indiana's child population, DCS removes children at a rate of 5.9 per 1,000, which is the 10th highest rate in the U.S. and 59 percent higher than the national average.
More than 80 percent of removals in 2008 were in cases involving neglect, which Wexler and other experts say often is rooted in poverty.
(3 of 5)
Cari DeSantis, interim executive director at the American Public Human Services Association, said many states have found that a large number of neglect cases "can be addressed without removing the children."
DeSantis, who formerly served as cabinet secretary for the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Their Families, said the national drop in foster care placements reflects that trend.
"In those jurisdictions where the numbers are not coming down," she said, "it often has to do with a lack of capacity to provide support in a family setting."
To address that shortage in Delaware, she said the state shifted funding from foster care to support services.
Wexler thinks DCS workers too often follow what he believes is a misguided mentality that it is better to "err on the side of the child" -- even when there is not a serious threat. He said that approach protects the agency and individual workers from negative publicity that can crop up when DCS fails to intervene and a child is injured or dies.
"That 'better safe than sorry' mentality leaves children unsafe," Wexler said, "and can really harm them because it underestimates the emotional devastation of being ripped from your family and stuck in the home of a stranger."
It also clogs the system with children that Wexler said shouldn't be there. That limits workers' ability to properly investigate reports and help families work through their troubles.
"When you look at states known for keeping children safe," he said, "they take children at rates much lower than in Indiana.
"A child in Indiana is nearly three times as likely to be taken from her or his parents as a child in Illinois. Does anyone seriously believe Indiana children are three times 'safer' than those in Illinois?"
Wexler said the situation can't be explained solely by the state's new reforms or its doubling of caseworkers.
In Utah, which served as a model for the Indiana reforms, removals fell from 2007 to 2008 and the rate of removal is 2.3 per 1,000 children, compared with Indiana's rate of 5.9.
Unpleasant experience
Indianapolis parents Malcolm and Alethia Watson have been fighting for two years to clear their names -- and reclaim their family -- after DCS alleged they neglected one of their children. Their children were returned in May, and the case is set to be closed Thursday -- but not without a lot of residual damage.
While the children were in the state's care, one was abused in a foster home. The incident prompted DCS to revoke the foster parent's license.
"I just pray to God I never have to deal with DCS again," Malcolm Watson said. "They come into people's lives and literally destroy them. This whole thing could have been addressed without taking our kids."
Watson said their problems started when his wife took one of their sons to the hospital in 2008 because he wasn't gaining weight and seemed to be sick all the time. Someone at the hospital reported the family to DCS for possible neglect.
Despite their efforts to seek medical treatment for the boy, Watson said, DCS decided they were neglecting the child. So they took the boy and his brother. And, since DCS had removed the two children, when Alethia Watson gave birth to a daughter last June, DCS took her, too, directly from the hospital.
The agency's apparent concern, Watson said, was that his wife was unfit to care for the children. That determination was made primarily on the fact she has difficulty following written instructions, such as recipes.
During the course of their two-year ordeal, Watson said he and his wife underwent psychological evaluations and completed parenting classes.
"We complied with everything they put down in front of us," he said, "but they always had something else for us to do."
What the family really needed, though, was a little help specifically addressing their limited -- and easily correctable -- needs.
And they finally got it. But not from DCS.
Help came from the family rights group, Honk For Kids, and a pair of nurses from the Marion County Health Department who had already been working with the Watsons. They pushed to find alternate methods for teaching Alethia Watson key information about caring for her children and pulled together a network of volunteers to help with child care.
(5 of 5)
Dawn Robertson, spokeswoman for Honk For Kids, said the Watsons are like many families the group encounters: caught up in a system that appears more intent on punishing parents, rather than helping them.
Making changes
Houseworth said the number of removals in Indiana is "higher than desirable" but defended the work of DCS.
"If any child cannot safely remain in his or her home," Houseworth said, "it is our legal duty to place that child in a safe, stable environment."
As part of the continuing reform effort, Houseworth said officials are implementing a management by data approach "so we can better understand our challenges." The agency also has recently established a centralized reporting hotline that officials hope will ensure a more consistent review and response to reports of abuse and neglect. Previously, calls were routed to individual county offices, where responses often varied widely.
And, she said, when DCS does need to remove children the agency is placing more children with relatives.
"DCS recognizes the need to keep children in familiar surroundings and now utilizes relative placements as the first option," she said. "The DCS involvement, once intruding, is less intrusive."
Cari DeSantis, interim executive director at the American Public Human Services Association, said many states have found that a large number of neglect cases "can be addressed without removing the children."
DeSantis, who formerly served as cabinet secretary for the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Their Families, said the national drop in foster care placements reflects that trend.
"In those jurisdictions where the numbers are not coming down," she said, "it often has to do with a lack of capacity to provide support in a family setting."
To address that shortage in Delaware, she said the state shifted funding from foster care to support services.
Wexler thinks DCS workers too often follow what he believes is a misguided mentality that it is better to "err on the side of the child" -- even when there is not a serious threat. He said that approach protects the agency and individual workers from negative publicity that can crop up when DCS fails to intervene and a child is injured or dies.
"That 'better safe than sorry' mentality leaves children unsafe," Wexler said, "and can really harm them because it underestimates the emotional devastation of being ripped from your family and stuck in the home of a stranger."
It also clogs the system with children that Wexler said shouldn't be there. That limits workers' ability to properly investigate reports and help families work through their troubles.
"When you look at states known for keeping children safe," he said, "they take children at rates much lower than in Indiana.
"A child in Indiana is nearly three times as likely to be taken from her or his parents as a child in Illinois. Does anyone seriously believe Indiana children are three times 'safer' than those in Illinois?"
Wexler said the situation can't be explained solely by the state's new reforms or its doubling of caseworkers.
In Utah, which served as a model for the Indiana reforms, removals fell from 2007 to 2008 and the rate of removal is 2.3 per 1,000 children, compared with Indiana's rate of 5.9.
(4 of 5)
Unpleasant experience
Indianapolis parents Malcolm and Alethia Watson have been fighting for two years to clear their names -- and reclaim their family -- after DCS alleged they neglected one of their children. Their children were returned in May, and the case is set to be closed Thursday -- but not without a lot of residual damage.
While the children were in the state's care, one was abused in a foster home. The incident prompted DCS to revoke the foster parent's license.
"I just pray to God I never have to deal with DCS again," Malcolm Watson said. "They come into people's lives and literally destroy them. This whole thing could have been addressed without taking our kids."
Watson said their problems started when his wife took one of their sons to the hospital in 2008 because he wasn't gaining weight and seemed to be sick all the time. Someone at the hospital reported the family to DCS for possible neglect.
Despite their efforts to seek medical treatment for the boy, Watson said, DCS decided they were neglecting the child. So they took the boy and his brother. And, since DCS had removed the two children, when Alethia Watson gave birth to a daughter last June, DCS took her, too, directly from the hospital.
The agency's apparent concern, Watson said, was that his wife was unfit to care for the children. That determination was made primarily on the fact she has difficulty following written instructions, such as recipes.
During the course of their two-year ordeal, Watson said he and his wife underwent psychological evaluations and completed parenting classes.
"We complied with everything they put down in front of us," he said, "but they always had something else for us to do."
What the family really needed, though, was a little help specifically addressing their limited -- and easily correctable -- needs.
And they finally got it. But not from DCS.
Help came from the family rights group, Honk For Kids, and a pair of nurses from the Marion County Health Department who had already been working with the Watsons. They pushed to find alternate methods for teaching Alethia Watson key information about caring for her children and pulled together a network of volunteers to help with child care.
(5 of 5)
Dawn Robertson, spokeswoman for Honk For Kids, said the Watsons are like many families the group encounters: caught up in a system that appears more intent on punishing parents, rather than helping them.
Making changes
Houseworth said the number of removals in Indiana is "higher than desirable" but defended the work of DCS.
"If any child cannot safely remain in his or her home," Houseworth said, "it is our legal duty to place that child in a safe, stable environment."
As part of the continuing reform effort, Houseworth said officials are implementing a management by data approach "so we can better understand our challenges." The agency also has recently established a centralized reporting hotline that officials hope will ensure a more consistent review and response to reports of abuse and neglect. Previously, calls were routed to individual county offices, where responses often varied widely.
And, she said, when DCS does need to remove children the agency is placing more children with relatives.
"DCS recognizes the need to keep children in familiar surroundings and now utilizes relative placements as the first option," she said. "The DCS involvement, once intruding, is less intrusive."
Unpleasant experience
Indianapolis parents Malcolm and Alethia Watson have been fighting for two years to clear their names -- and reclaim their family -- after DCS alleged they neglected one of their children. Their children were returned in May, and the case is set to be closed Thursday -- but not without a lot of residual damage.
While the children were in the state's care, one was abused in a foster home. The incident prompted DCS to revoke the foster parent's license.
"I just pray to God I never have to deal with DCS again," Malcolm Watson said. "They come into people's lives and literally destroy them. This whole thing could have been addressed without taking our kids."
Watson said their problems started when his wife took one of their sons to the hospital in 2008 because he wasn't gaining weight and seemed to be sick all the time. Someone at the hospital reported the family to DCS for possible neglect.
Despite their efforts to seek medical treatment for the boy, Watson said, DCS decided they were neglecting the child. So they took the boy and his brother. And, since DCS had removed the two children, when Alethia Watson gave birth to a daughter last June, DCS took her, too, directly from the hospital.
The agency's apparent concern, Watson said, was that his wife was unfit to care for the children. That determination was made primarily on the fact she has difficulty following written instructions, such as recipes.
During the course of their two-year ordeal, Watson said he and his wife underwent psychological evaluations and completed parenting classes.
"We complied with everything they put down in front of us," he said, "but they always had something else for us to do."
What the family really needed, though, was a little help specifically addressing their limited -- and easily correctable -- needs.
And they finally got it. But not from DCS.
Help came from the family rights group, Honk For Kids, and a pair of nurses from the Marion County Health Department who had already been working with the Watsons. They pushed to find alternate methods for teaching Alethia Watson key information about caring for her children and pulled together a network of volunteers to help with child care.
Dawn Robertson, spokeswoman for Honk For Kids, said the Watsons are like many families the group encounters: caught up in a system that appears more intent on punishing parents, rather than helping them.
Making changes
Houseworth said the number of removals in Indiana is "higher than desirable" but defended the work of DCS.
"If any child cannot safely remain in his or her home," Houseworth said, "it is our legal duty to place that child in a safe, stable environment."
As part of the continuing reform effort, Houseworth said officials are implementing a management by data approach "so we can better understand our challenges." The agency also has recently established a centralized reporting hotline that officials hope will ensure a more consistent review and response to reports of abuse and neglect. Previously, calls were routed to individual county offices, where responses often varied widely.
And, she said, when DCS does need to remove children the agency is placing more children with relatives.
"DCS recognizes the need to keep children in familiar surroundings and now utilizes relative placements as the first option," she said. "The DCS involvement, once intruding, is less intrusive."
Call Star reporter Tim Evans at (317) 444-6204.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20100609/LOCAL/6060373/1001/news
State bucks national trend geared toward helping keep more families together
By Tim Evans
Posted: June 9, 2010
It is among the most devastating and gut-wrenching decisions government can make: taking a child away from his or her parents.
As child welfare experts understand more about the lasting effects of such a decision, social workers have sought new ways to support troubled families and keep children in their homes.
That is one of the likely explanations for the most recent federal data that reveals a 7 percent drop in the number of U.S. children removed from their homes -- the most significant one-year decline in a decade.
But that's not the case in Indiana.
According to that same data, the number of Hoosier children removed and placed in foster care has climbed to an all-time high, 9,375 -- a 22 percent jump in removals from 2007 to 2008. That means the Indiana Department of Child Services is removing, on average, about 180 children per week.
During the same period, only Illinois had a higher one-year increase -- and Illinois, despite its larger population, removes significantly fewer children than Indiana.
And the trend in Indiana does not appear to be waning: Preliminary data indicates DCS removed about 5 percent more children in 2009 than it did in 2008.
Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, calls the Indiana data a "dismal" sign that reforms launched in 2005 have not improved the state's troubled child welfare system.
Wexler's organization, which advocates for stronger efforts to keep families together whenever possible, compiles an annual review of removal data as part of its work monitoring the performance of child welfare systems.
"No state moved backwards farther and faster than Indiana," Wexler said of the removal data. "This means the big accomplishment of the whole Indiana reform effort in recent years has been to give Indiana the same lousy system -- only bigger."
Ann Houseworth, DCS spokeswoman, said in a written response to questions from The Indianapolis Star that several factors contribute to the situation in Indiana. They include an increase in the number of caseworkers in the field, a growing number of reports of abuse and neglect, and economic factors that place stress on families.
(2 of 5)
She also said that DCS is continuing efforts to develop community partners who can assist struggling families, and working to place more children in the care of relatives.
But state data show that back in 2004 -- before Indiana's reforms started -- DCS left 28 percent of children in their own homes. In 2008, it dropped to 26 percent. And while relative placement increased from 14 percent to 16 percent during that time, foster placements also grew -- from 40 percent in 2004 to 43 percent in 2008.
Child welfare experts, including Wexler, agree it is necessary to remove some children to protect them from serious neglect or abuse. But the large and growing number of removals in Indiana worries Wexler. Separation can be extremely traumatic to children -- worse, some research has shown, than the effects of neglect, which is the source of 83 percent of the Indiana removals.
What's more, Indiana continues to fare poorly in what is considered one of the most important indicators of how well a child welfare system is performing: children who suffer repeat maltreatment within six months after a state intervention.
The Indiana repeat maltreatment rate for 2008 is basically the same as it was in 2004, before the reform project was launched, and remains worse than the national standard set by the federal government. In 2008, that translated to 506 repeat victims -- almost 10 children every week.
Removing children also is costly. Indiana spends more than $70 million a year to house the children who will, on average, remain in the state's care for about 600 days.
Poverty as a problem
Since 1999, the number of Hoosier children removed from their families has increased every year except for 2001 and 2006, and the number taken in 2008 is nearly double the number removed in 1999, according to the data.
Based on Indiana's child population, DCS removes children at a rate of 5.9 per 1,000, which is the 10th highest rate in the U.S. and 59 percent higher than the national average.
More than 80 percent of removals in 2008 were in cases involving neglect, which Wexler and other experts say often is rooted in poverty.
(3 of 5)
Cari DeSantis, interim executive director at the American Public Human Services Association, said many states have found that a large number of neglect cases "can be addressed without removing the children."
DeSantis, who formerly served as cabinet secretary for the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Their Families, said the national drop in foster care placements reflects that trend.
"In those jurisdictions where the numbers are not coming down," she said, "it often has to do with a lack of capacity to provide support in a family setting."
To address that shortage in Delaware, she said the state shifted funding from foster care to support services.
Wexler thinks DCS workers too often follow what he believes is a misguided mentality that it is better to "err on the side of the child" -- even when there is not a serious threat. He said that approach protects the agency and individual workers from negative publicity that can crop up when DCS fails to intervene and a child is injured or dies.
"That 'better safe than sorry' mentality leaves children unsafe," Wexler said, "and can really harm them because it underestimates the emotional devastation of being ripped from your family and stuck in the home of a stranger."
It also clogs the system with children that Wexler said shouldn't be there. That limits workers' ability to properly investigate reports and help families work through their troubles.
"When you look at states known for keeping children safe," he said, "they take children at rates much lower than in Indiana.
"A child in Indiana is nearly three times as likely to be taken from her or his parents as a child in Illinois. Does anyone seriously believe Indiana children are three times 'safer' than those in Illinois?"
Wexler said the situation can't be explained solely by the state's new reforms or its doubling of caseworkers.
In Utah, which served as a model for the Indiana reforms, removals fell from 2007 to 2008 and the rate of removal is 2.3 per 1,000 children, compared with Indiana's rate of 5.9.
(4 of 5)
Unpleasant experience
Indianapolis parents Malcolm and Alethia Watson have been fighting for two years to clear their names -- and reclaim their family -- after DCS alleged they neglected one of their children. Their children were returned in May, and the case is set to be closed Thursday -- but not without a lot of residual damage.
While the children were in the state's care, one was abused in a foster home. The incident prompted DCS to revoke the foster parent's license.
"I just pray to God I never have to deal with DCS again," Malcolm Watson said. "They come into people's lives and literally destroy them. This whole thing could have been addressed without taking our kids."
Watson said their problems started when his wife took one of their sons to the hospital in 2008 because he wasn't gaining weight and seemed to be sick all the time. Someone at the hospital reported the family to DCS for possible neglect.
Despite their efforts to seek medical treatment for the boy, Watson said, DCS decided they were neglecting the child. So they took the boy and his brother. And, since DCS had removed the two children, when Alethia Watson gave birth to a daughter last June, DCS took her, too, directly from the hospital.
The agency's apparent concern, Watson said, was that his wife was unfit to care for the children. That determination was made primarily on the fact she has difficulty following written instructions, such as recipes.
During the course of their two-year ordeal, Watson said he and his wife underwent psychological evaluations and completed parenting classes.
"We complied with everything they put down in front of us," he said, "but they always had something else for us to do."
What the family really needed, though, was a little help specifically addressing their limited -- and easily correctable -- needs.
And they finally got it. But not from DCS.
Help came from the family rights group, Honk For Kids, and a pair of nurses from the Marion County Health Department who had already been working with the Watsons. They pushed to find alternate methods for teaching Alethia Watson key information about caring for her children and pulled together a network of volunteers to help with child care.
(5 of 5)
Dawn Robertson, spokeswoman for Honk For Kids, said the Watsons are like many families the group encounters: caught up in a system that appears more intent on punishing parents, rather than helping them.
Making changes
Houseworth said the number of removals in Indiana is "higher than desirable" but defended the work of DCS.
"If any child cannot safely remain in his or her home," Houseworth said, "it is our legal duty to place that child in a safe, stable environment."
As part of the continuing reform effort, Houseworth said officials are implementing a management by data approach "so we can better understand our challenges." The agency also has recently established a centralized reporting hotline that officials hope will ensure a more consistent review and response to reports of abuse and neglect. Previously, calls were routed to individual county offices, where responses often varied widely.
And, she said, when DCS does need to remove children the agency is placing more children with relatives.
"DCS recognizes the need to keep children in familiar surroundings and now utilizes relative placements as the first option," she said. "The DCS involvement, once intruding, is less intrusive."
She also said that DCS is continuing efforts to develop community partners who can assist struggling families, and working to place more children in the care of relatives.
But state data show that back in 2004 -- before Indiana's reforms started -- DCS left 28 percent of children in their own homes. In 2008, it dropped to 26 percent. And while relative placement increased from 14 percent to 16 percent during that time, foster placements also grew -- from 40 percent in 2004 to 43 percent in 2008.
Child welfare experts, including Wexler, agree it is necessary to remove some children to protect them from serious neglect or abuse. But the large and growing number of removals in Indiana worries Wexler. Separation can be extremely traumatic to children -- worse, some research has shown, than the effects of neglect, which is the source of 83 percent of the Indiana removals.
What's more, Indiana continues to fare poorly in what is considered one of the most important indicators of how well a child welfare system is performing: children who suffer repeat maltreatment within six months after a state intervention.
The Indiana repeat maltreatment rate for 2008 is basically the same as it was in 2004, before the reform project was launched, and remains worse than the national standard set by the federal government. In 2008, that translated to 506 repeat victims -- almost 10 children every week.
Removing children also is costly. Indiana spends more than $70 million a year to house the children who will, on average, remain in the state's care for about 600 days.
Poverty as a problem
Since 1999, the number of Hoosier children removed from their families has increased every year except for 2001 and 2006, and the number taken in 2008 is nearly double the number removed in 1999, according to the data.
Based on Indiana's child population, DCS removes children at a rate of 5.9 per 1,000, which is the 10th highest rate in the U.S. and 59 percent higher than the national average.
More than 80 percent of removals in 2008 were in cases involving neglect, which Wexler and other experts say often is rooted in poverty.
(3 of 5)
Cari DeSantis, interim executive director at the American Public Human Services Association, said many states have found that a large number of neglect cases "can be addressed without removing the children."
DeSantis, who formerly served as cabinet secretary for the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Their Families, said the national drop in foster care placements reflects that trend.
"In those jurisdictions where the numbers are not coming down," she said, "it often has to do with a lack of capacity to provide support in a family setting."
To address that shortage in Delaware, she said the state shifted funding from foster care to support services.
Wexler thinks DCS workers too often follow what he believes is a misguided mentality that it is better to "err on the side of the child" -- even when there is not a serious threat. He said that approach protects the agency and individual workers from negative publicity that can crop up when DCS fails to intervene and a child is injured or dies.
"That 'better safe than sorry' mentality leaves children unsafe," Wexler said, "and can really harm them because it underestimates the emotional devastation of being ripped from your family and stuck in the home of a stranger."
It also clogs the system with children that Wexler said shouldn't be there. That limits workers' ability to properly investigate reports and help families work through their troubles.
"When you look at states known for keeping children safe," he said, "they take children at rates much lower than in Indiana.
"A child in Indiana is nearly three times as likely to be taken from her or his parents as a child in Illinois. Does anyone seriously believe Indiana children are three times 'safer' than those in Illinois?"
Wexler said the situation can't be explained solely by the state's new reforms or its doubling of caseworkers.
In Utah, which served as a model for the Indiana reforms, removals fell from 2007 to 2008 and the rate of removal is 2.3 per 1,000 children, compared with Indiana's rate of 5.9.
Unpleasant experience
Indianapolis parents Malcolm and Alethia Watson have been fighting for two years to clear their names -- and reclaim their family -- after DCS alleged they neglected one of their children. Their children were returned in May, and the case is set to be closed Thursday -- but not without a lot of residual damage.
While the children were in the state's care, one was abused in a foster home. The incident prompted DCS to revoke the foster parent's license.
"I just pray to God I never have to deal with DCS again," Malcolm Watson said. "They come into people's lives and literally destroy them. This whole thing could have been addressed without taking our kids."
Watson said their problems started when his wife took one of their sons to the hospital in 2008 because he wasn't gaining weight and seemed to be sick all the time. Someone at the hospital reported the family to DCS for possible neglect.
Despite their efforts to seek medical treatment for the boy, Watson said, DCS decided they were neglecting the child. So they took the boy and his brother. And, since DCS had removed the two children, when Alethia Watson gave birth to a daughter last June, DCS took her, too, directly from the hospital.
The agency's apparent concern, Watson said, was that his wife was unfit to care for the children. That determination was made primarily on the fact she has difficulty following written instructions, such as recipes.
During the course of their two-year ordeal, Watson said he and his wife underwent psychological evaluations and completed parenting classes.
"We complied with everything they put down in front of us," he said, "but they always had something else for us to do."
What the family really needed, though, was a little help specifically addressing their limited -- and easily correctable -- needs.
And they finally got it. But not from DCS.
Help came from the family rights group, Honk For Kids, and a pair of nurses from the Marion County Health Department who had already been working with the Watsons. They pushed to find alternate methods for teaching Alethia Watson key information about caring for her children and pulled together a network of volunteers to help with child care.
(5 of 5)
Dawn Robertson, spokeswoman for Honk For Kids, said the Watsons are like many families the group encounters: caught up in a system that appears more intent on punishing parents, rather than helping them.
Making changes
Houseworth said the number of removals in Indiana is "higher than desirable" but defended the work of DCS.
"If any child cannot safely remain in his or her home," Houseworth said, "it is our legal duty to place that child in a safe, stable environment."
As part of the continuing reform effort, Houseworth said officials are implementing a management by data approach "so we can better understand our challenges." The agency also has recently established a centralized reporting hotline that officials hope will ensure a more consistent review and response to reports of abuse and neglect. Previously, calls were routed to individual county offices, where responses often varied widely.
And, she said, when DCS does need to remove children the agency is placing more children with relatives.
"DCS recognizes the need to keep children in familiar surroundings and now utilizes relative placements as the first option," she said. "The DCS involvement, once intruding, is less intrusive."
Cari DeSantis, interim executive director at the American Public Human Services Association, said many states have found that a large number of neglect cases "can be addressed without removing the children."
DeSantis, who formerly served as cabinet secretary for the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Their Families, said the national drop in foster care placements reflects that trend.
"In those jurisdictions where the numbers are not coming down," she said, "it often has to do with a lack of capacity to provide support in a family setting."
To address that shortage in Delaware, she said the state shifted funding from foster care to support services.
Wexler thinks DCS workers too often follow what he believes is a misguided mentality that it is better to "err on the side of the child" -- even when there is not a serious threat. He said that approach protects the agency and individual workers from negative publicity that can crop up when DCS fails to intervene and a child is injured or dies.
"That 'better safe than sorry' mentality leaves children unsafe," Wexler said, "and can really harm them because it underestimates the emotional devastation of being ripped from your family and stuck in the home of a stranger."
It also clogs the system with children that Wexler said shouldn't be there. That limits workers' ability to properly investigate reports and help families work through their troubles.
"When you look at states known for keeping children safe," he said, "they take children at rates much lower than in Indiana.
"A child in Indiana is nearly three times as likely to be taken from her or his parents as a child in Illinois. Does anyone seriously believe Indiana children are three times 'safer' than those in Illinois?"
Wexler said the situation can't be explained solely by the state's new reforms or its doubling of caseworkers.
In Utah, which served as a model for the Indiana reforms, removals fell from 2007 to 2008 and the rate of removal is 2.3 per 1,000 children, compared with Indiana's rate of 5.9.
(4 of 5)
Unpleasant experience
Indianapolis parents Malcolm and Alethia Watson have been fighting for two years to clear their names -- and reclaim their family -- after DCS alleged they neglected one of their children. Their children were returned in May, and the case is set to be closed Thursday -- but not without a lot of residual damage.
While the children were in the state's care, one was abused in a foster home. The incident prompted DCS to revoke the foster parent's license.
"I just pray to God I never have to deal with DCS again," Malcolm Watson said. "They come into people's lives and literally destroy them. This whole thing could have been addressed without taking our kids."
Watson said their problems started when his wife took one of their sons to the hospital in 2008 because he wasn't gaining weight and seemed to be sick all the time. Someone at the hospital reported the family to DCS for possible neglect.
Despite their efforts to seek medical treatment for the boy, Watson said, DCS decided they were neglecting the child. So they took the boy and his brother. And, since DCS had removed the two children, when Alethia Watson gave birth to a daughter last June, DCS took her, too, directly from the hospital.
The agency's apparent concern, Watson said, was that his wife was unfit to care for the children. That determination was made primarily on the fact she has difficulty following written instructions, such as recipes.
During the course of their two-year ordeal, Watson said he and his wife underwent psychological evaluations and completed parenting classes.
"We complied with everything they put down in front of us," he said, "but they always had something else for us to do."
What the family really needed, though, was a little help specifically addressing their limited -- and easily correctable -- needs.
And they finally got it. But not from DCS.
Help came from the family rights group, Honk For Kids, and a pair of nurses from the Marion County Health Department who had already been working with the Watsons. They pushed to find alternate methods for teaching Alethia Watson key information about caring for her children and pulled together a network of volunteers to help with child care.
(5 of 5)
Dawn Robertson, spokeswoman for Honk For Kids, said the Watsons are like many families the group encounters: caught up in a system that appears more intent on punishing parents, rather than helping them.
Making changes
Houseworth said the number of removals in Indiana is "higher than desirable" but defended the work of DCS.
"If any child cannot safely remain in his or her home," Houseworth said, "it is our legal duty to place that child in a safe, stable environment."
As part of the continuing reform effort, Houseworth said officials are implementing a management by data approach "so we can better understand our challenges." The agency also has recently established a centralized reporting hotline that officials hope will ensure a more consistent review and response to reports of abuse and neglect. Previously, calls were routed to individual county offices, where responses often varied widely.
And, she said, when DCS does need to remove children the agency is placing more children with relatives.
"DCS recognizes the need to keep children in familiar surroundings and now utilizes relative placements as the first option," she said. "The DCS involvement, once intruding, is less intrusive."
Unpleasant experience
Indianapolis parents Malcolm and Alethia Watson have been fighting for two years to clear their names -- and reclaim their family -- after DCS alleged they neglected one of their children. Their children were returned in May, and the case is set to be closed Thursday -- but not without a lot of residual damage.
While the children were in the state's care, one was abused in a foster home. The incident prompted DCS to revoke the foster parent's license.
"I just pray to God I never have to deal with DCS again," Malcolm Watson said. "They come into people's lives and literally destroy them. This whole thing could have been addressed without taking our kids."
Watson said their problems started when his wife took one of their sons to the hospital in 2008 because he wasn't gaining weight and seemed to be sick all the time. Someone at the hospital reported the family to DCS for possible neglect.
Despite their efforts to seek medical treatment for the boy, Watson said, DCS decided they were neglecting the child. So they took the boy and his brother. And, since DCS had removed the two children, when Alethia Watson gave birth to a daughter last June, DCS took her, too, directly from the hospital.
The agency's apparent concern, Watson said, was that his wife was unfit to care for the children. That determination was made primarily on the fact she has difficulty following written instructions, such as recipes.
During the course of their two-year ordeal, Watson said he and his wife underwent psychological evaluations and completed parenting classes.
"We complied with everything they put down in front of us," he said, "but they always had something else for us to do."
What the family really needed, though, was a little help specifically addressing their limited -- and easily correctable -- needs.
And they finally got it. But not from DCS.
Help came from the family rights group, Honk For Kids, and a pair of nurses from the Marion County Health Department who had already been working with the Watsons. They pushed to find alternate methods for teaching Alethia Watson key information about caring for her children and pulled together a network of volunteers to help with child care.
Dawn Robertson, spokeswoman for Honk For Kids, said the Watsons are like many families the group encounters: caught up in a system that appears more intent on punishing parents, rather than helping them.
Making changes
Houseworth said the number of removals in Indiana is "higher than desirable" but defended the work of DCS.
"If any child cannot safely remain in his or her home," Houseworth said, "it is our legal duty to place that child in a safe, stable environment."
As part of the continuing reform effort, Houseworth said officials are implementing a management by data approach "so we can better understand our challenges." The agency also has recently established a centralized reporting hotline that officials hope will ensure a more consistent review and response to reports of abuse and neglect. Previously, calls were routed to individual county offices, where responses often varied widely.
And, she said, when DCS does need to remove children the agency is placing more children with relatives.
"DCS recognizes the need to keep children in familiar surroundings and now utilizes relative placements as the first option," she said. "The DCS involvement, once intruding, is less intrusive."
Call Star reporter Tim Evans at (317) 444-6204.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20100609/LOCAL/6060373/1001/news
DSHS audit finds new problems
DSHS audit finds new problems
Foster Care: Agency says it requires checks
SIMILAR STORIES
DSHS auditors find persistent problems
Reforms help states cut foster-care populations
Reforms help states cut foster-care populations
THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Published: 06/10/1012:05 am
State officials say they aren’t placing children with foster parents who haven’t cleared background checks, defending their agency after an audit found problems with handling of foster care.
The state auditor’s office reported this week that the Department of Social and Health Services didn’t comply with criminal background check requirements in 2009, failing to fix problems that were also found in audits from 2003 to 2008.
Auditors found 24 foster care providers they said were paid without clearing background checks, including seven with a criminal record or a history of being investigated for potential child abuse or neglect, and 17 others who were never checked at all.
But Dan Ashby, senior finance manager for the Children’s Administration agency within DSHS, said anyone who had custody of a child got a background check, except for the children’s parents, who aren’t required to be checked.
Those parents account for some of the audit’s findings, he said, while other missing information is because of a new state database that wasn’t always accurate.
Ashby said only one case involved a true criminal history, a decades-old conviction from the provider’s teenage years.
Still, the questions about background checks have persisted for years. But Children’s Administration officials said updates in January to the state’s case management system would fix them. No payments will be allowed to providers now unless a background check is on file, they said.
Jordan Schrader, staff writer
Read more: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/06/10/1220373/dshs-audit-finds-new-problems.html#ixzz0qSUF8jwG
Foster Care: Agency says it requires checks
SIMILAR STORIES
DSHS auditors find persistent problems
Reforms help states cut foster-care populations
Reforms help states cut foster-care populations
THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Published: 06/10/1012:05 am
State officials say they aren’t placing children with foster parents who haven’t cleared background checks, defending their agency after an audit found problems with handling of foster care.
The state auditor’s office reported this week that the Department of Social and Health Services didn’t comply with criminal background check requirements in 2009, failing to fix problems that were also found in audits from 2003 to 2008.
Auditors found 24 foster care providers they said were paid without clearing background checks, including seven with a criminal record or a history of being investigated for potential child abuse or neglect, and 17 others who were never checked at all.
But Dan Ashby, senior finance manager for the Children’s Administration agency within DSHS, said anyone who had custody of a child got a background check, except for the children’s parents, who aren’t required to be checked.
Those parents account for some of the audit’s findings, he said, while other missing information is because of a new state database that wasn’t always accurate.
Ashby said only one case involved a true criminal history, a decades-old conviction from the provider’s teenage years.
Still, the questions about background checks have persisted for years. But Children’s Administration officials said updates in January to the state’s case management system would fix them. No payments will be allowed to providers now unless a background check is on file, they said.
Jordan Schrader, staff writer
Read more: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/06/10/1220373/dshs-audit-finds-new-problems.html#ixzz0qSUF8jwG
Child attempts suicide after moved from care of grandparents-Sound Familiar?
Child attempts suicide after moved from care of grandparents
Sara Everingham reported this story on Monday, June 7, 2010 18:18:00
Unhappygrammy-My grandson Austin tried to commit suicide at age six, after being removed from mine and his grandfather's home, because DCYF didn't want him around his Aunt. The Aunt who saved him from being beaten, who was thrown against the wall pregnant. The Aunt he loved so much, her's was the first name he spoke. The Aunt he has no memory of since being drugged by the state!
Listen to MP3 of this story ( minutes)
ALTERNATE WMA VERSION | MP3 DOWNLOAD
MARK COLVIN: An inquiry into the Northern Territory's Child protection system has been told that a ten year old boy attempted suicide after he was sent to live with an alcohol-dependent relative in a remote Indigenous community.
An independent Northern Territory politician presented a letter from a senior psychiatrist at the inquiry last week. The psychiatrist says the Northern Territory's Department of Health and Families had been warned that moving the boy would put him in a high risk situation.
Sara Everingham reports.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The story of the ten year-old boy is distressing. It's outlined in a letter from a senior psychiatrist to Northern Territory Health authorities in May this year.
The psychiatrist says the boy had been living happily with his grandparents in a large Northern Territory town and was going to a school which he loved. But he was forced to leave.
The boy's grandmother had a chronic illness and the letter says agencies, including the Northern Territory's Department of Families and Children, decided the boy's grandfather couldn't care for them both.
In the letter the senior psychiatrist says the ten year old had to go back to a remote Indigenous community to be looked after by an Aunty who had an alcohol problem and was extremely neglectful.
(Excerpt from psychiatrist's letter)
PSYCHIATRIST (voiceover): The obvious possibility of engaging an external part-time carer to help look after the grandmother and lighten the grandfather's load was never canvassed. This had disastrous consequences.
(End of excerpt)
SARA EVERINGHAM: The psychiatrist concludes that the boy had what's known as "reactive detachment disorder" and was emotionally vulnerable because of childhood neglect. The boy has no father and his mother has alcohol and cognitive problems.
In the letter the psychiatrist says that once back in the community, the boy was teased at school and then attempted to kill himself.
(Excerpt from psychiatrist's letter)
PSYCHIATRIST (voiceover): This would have had a fatal outcome had not his male teacher caught him just in time.
(End of Excerpt)
SARA EVERINGHAM: According to the psychiatrist the Territory's Department of Families and Children had been warned that moving the boy to the remote community would place him at high risk.
He writes that the warning had come from a psychiatric registrar who'd also suggested the alternative of employing part-time care to help the grandfather cope. The senior psychiatrist's letter has been presented to the board of inquiry into the Northern Territory's child protection system.
The paediatrician Dr Rob Roseby, one of the members of the Board, couldn't comment specifically about this case. But he says so far the inquiry has heard evidence of a system that's overstretched.
ROB ROSEBY: Pretty much everyone who engages with the system is identifying that and commenting about it and that, that is coming from all walks of life really in the Northern Territory Community.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The inquiry had been due to deliver a report to the Government in April this year but has asked for a second extension until September this year. Dr Roseby says that's because of the overwhelming public response.
ROB ROSEBY: There is a sense of urgency. We feel it. They feel it. And I know the public comments from other people contribute to that sense of urgency which is very real.
I guess the balance, the balancing act there is between needing to act and needing to spend some time coming with up sensible actions.
JODEEN CARNEY: Certainly an inquiry was necessary however the delays are unsatisfactory.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The Northern Territory Opposition's spokeswoman for child protection, Jodeen Carney, says it was already well known that the system was in crisis.
JODEEN CARNEY: The child protection system was in crisis late last year. It was known to be in crisis well before then as evidenced by various remarks made by the coroner in relation to several inquests.
People are entitled to ask when will the inquiries stop and when will action begin.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The Northern Territory's Child Protection Minister says he is serious about getting the best results for Northern Territory children.
VON KATSKALIS: I'm determined to work with the enquiry. I'm prepared to work with the community and I call upon the Opposition to work by bi-partisan - bi-partisan in this issue together in order to make sure that all Territory children are protected.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The Associate Professor Leon Petchkovsky is a psychiatrist who has more than 20 years experience working in Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory. He says the child protection system fails to properly deal with children who are most at risk.
LEON PETCHKOVSKY: The Child and Family Protection agencies seem to get things wrong at both ends of the spectrum. They seem to overreact in situations where overreaction actually worsens the situation. And then they seem to underreact at times when they need to make much stronger interventions.
SARA EVERINGHAM: He says health professionals are frustrated their advice is often ignored.
LEON PETCHKOVSKY: The agency just doesn't seem to take much notice of our views and our concerns.
SARA EVERINGHAM: In the letter about the 10 year old boy the senior psychiatrist says the boy is still at high risk of suicide but is settling in to the remote community. He writes that any future decisions about the boy's movements would have to be carefully considered.
MARK COLVIN: Sara Everingham.
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s2920589.htm
Sara Everingham reported this story on Monday, June 7, 2010 18:18:00
Unhappygrammy-My grandson Austin tried to commit suicide at age six, after being removed from mine and his grandfather's home, because DCYF didn't want him around his Aunt. The Aunt who saved him from being beaten, who was thrown against the wall pregnant. The Aunt he loved so much, her's was the first name he spoke. The Aunt he has no memory of since being drugged by the state!
Listen to MP3 of this story ( minutes)
ALTERNATE WMA VERSION | MP3 DOWNLOAD
MARK COLVIN: An inquiry into the Northern Territory's Child protection system has been told that a ten year old boy attempted suicide after he was sent to live with an alcohol-dependent relative in a remote Indigenous community.
An independent Northern Territory politician presented a letter from a senior psychiatrist at the inquiry last week. The psychiatrist says the Northern Territory's Department of Health and Families had been warned that moving the boy would put him in a high risk situation.
Sara Everingham reports.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The story of the ten year-old boy is distressing. It's outlined in a letter from a senior psychiatrist to Northern Territory Health authorities in May this year.
The psychiatrist says the boy had been living happily with his grandparents in a large Northern Territory town and was going to a school which he loved. But he was forced to leave.
The boy's grandmother had a chronic illness and the letter says agencies, including the Northern Territory's Department of Families and Children, decided the boy's grandfather couldn't care for them both.
In the letter the senior psychiatrist says the ten year old had to go back to a remote Indigenous community to be looked after by an Aunty who had an alcohol problem and was extremely neglectful.
(Excerpt from psychiatrist's letter)
PSYCHIATRIST (voiceover): The obvious possibility of engaging an external part-time carer to help look after the grandmother and lighten the grandfather's load was never canvassed. This had disastrous consequences.
(End of excerpt)
SARA EVERINGHAM: The psychiatrist concludes that the boy had what's known as "reactive detachment disorder" and was emotionally vulnerable because of childhood neglect. The boy has no father and his mother has alcohol and cognitive problems.
In the letter the psychiatrist says that once back in the community, the boy was teased at school and then attempted to kill himself.
(Excerpt from psychiatrist's letter)
PSYCHIATRIST (voiceover): This would have had a fatal outcome had not his male teacher caught him just in time.
(End of Excerpt)
SARA EVERINGHAM: According to the psychiatrist the Territory's Department of Families and Children had been warned that moving the boy to the remote community would place him at high risk.
He writes that the warning had come from a psychiatric registrar who'd also suggested the alternative of employing part-time care to help the grandfather cope. The senior psychiatrist's letter has been presented to the board of inquiry into the Northern Territory's child protection system.
The paediatrician Dr Rob Roseby, one of the members of the Board, couldn't comment specifically about this case. But he says so far the inquiry has heard evidence of a system that's overstretched.
ROB ROSEBY: Pretty much everyone who engages with the system is identifying that and commenting about it and that, that is coming from all walks of life really in the Northern Territory Community.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The inquiry had been due to deliver a report to the Government in April this year but has asked for a second extension until September this year. Dr Roseby says that's because of the overwhelming public response.
ROB ROSEBY: There is a sense of urgency. We feel it. They feel it. And I know the public comments from other people contribute to that sense of urgency which is very real.
I guess the balance, the balancing act there is between needing to act and needing to spend some time coming with up sensible actions.
JODEEN CARNEY: Certainly an inquiry was necessary however the delays are unsatisfactory.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The Northern Territory Opposition's spokeswoman for child protection, Jodeen Carney, says it was already well known that the system was in crisis.
JODEEN CARNEY: The child protection system was in crisis late last year. It was known to be in crisis well before then as evidenced by various remarks made by the coroner in relation to several inquests.
People are entitled to ask when will the inquiries stop and when will action begin.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The Northern Territory's Child Protection Minister says he is serious about getting the best results for Northern Territory children.
VON KATSKALIS: I'm determined to work with the enquiry. I'm prepared to work with the community and I call upon the Opposition to work by bi-partisan - bi-partisan in this issue together in order to make sure that all Territory children are protected.
SARA EVERINGHAM: The Associate Professor Leon Petchkovsky is a psychiatrist who has more than 20 years experience working in Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory. He says the child protection system fails to properly deal with children who are most at risk.
LEON PETCHKOVSKY: The Child and Family Protection agencies seem to get things wrong at both ends of the spectrum. They seem to overreact in situations where overreaction actually worsens the situation. And then they seem to underreact at times when they need to make much stronger interventions.
SARA EVERINGHAM: He says health professionals are frustrated their advice is often ignored.
LEON PETCHKOVSKY: The agency just doesn't seem to take much notice of our views and our concerns.
SARA EVERINGHAM: In the letter about the 10 year old boy the senior psychiatrist says the boy is still at high risk of suicide but is settling in to the remote community. He writes that any future decisions about the boy's movements would have to be carefully considered.
MARK COLVIN: Sara Everingham.
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s2920589.htm
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)