Exposing Child Protective Service
by
Black Michael
(name changed)
transcribed exclusive interview part 2 of 3
as told to Georgie and Destiny
CONFESSIONS OF A CPS HEADHUNTER
(where marked (x-x), signifies the recording was unclear to transcribe)
My name is Black Michael and I granted way of Canada and Australia and the world my exclusive story as a retired headhunter who is trying to make amends for the over 25,000 children removed over a twenty-two year period.
CPS and other agencies paid me to falsify information to make these children wards of the court. As I said last week my job was to locate families on welfare, low income, low I.Q. or the least likely to be able to afford counsel that could get them their children returned to their custody. I was paid $1,800 per child I brought into care, with a $500.00 bonus if a child was in someway handicapped and a $10,000 bonus if a child was adopted out without parental consent.
I am not proud of what I did and I am now trying to see that as many children as I can will be returned to their loving families. This is why I am stepping forward to give testimony to what we headhunters do.
First, we located a family that fit the criteria. Then watched that family for a circumstance that really happened, that was not really dangerous. But, when which likely made it look likely abuse, neglect or some other endangerment was going on. We then made written, sworn statements to the agencies we worked for and a warrant would then be issued for the child or children in that family to be removed from the family home.
As headhunters, we often testified in court as to our allegations under oath and then to the false identity so that our names would not show as in a stream of cases before the court. It has come to my attention that CPS and other agencies in the last month have doubled the
2010 - 11 children can be brought into care quota. Instead of the approximately 240,000
children, the headhunter quota has risen from 80,000 souls and innocents 155 during this physical term.
It sickens me that this is happening to innocent families, and I am determined to see that those for whom I was responsible for falsifying records are returned home where possible.
I am at great risk doing this interview and would not have consented had Georgie had not agreed to keep my true identity hidden and my voice altered. If she had not agreed to these terms I would not be granting this exclusive interview.
With the economy as it is and the expected depression through by 2012, CPS and like organizations are doubling their quotas to stay in business and have no doubt for them this business is slowly monetary and has nothing to do with the safety of children in legitimate terms.
More children die in the hands of their foster parents than in the hands of their true parents for which I know I am responsible for the loss of life to these 11 of these children by falsifying records and statements.
I am not proud of the work I did, nor of the money I earned. All my efforts are now being put into bringing as many of these children home as possible. I have been instrumental in having 22 children now returned to their rightful families and I continue to work on bringing more home. To (x-x) I have to step forward slowly and cautiously because should it become known that I am the one known who is contacting judges and prosecutors and recanting my testimony I would be dead within weeks, if not days.
As headhunters, we took a full week long course on how to spot vulnerable families, how to falsify allegations, how to testify to CPS benefit. This course also taught us that when children were taken into care the immediate program of separation of child from family would begin. The child would be rewarded for compliance and punished for defiance. A type of mind control would be used by foster parents even though these foster parents did not know they were being taught these skills during their training of two weeks.
Foster parents only have criminal checks. They are not interviewed by psychologists or trained personnel. They merely have to express their want to be foster parents and follow the instructions of care and reward and punishment to keep the children in their care under their control. The foster parent school is to separate the child from his or her parents as widely as possible.
The child, when the prearranged telephone call or visit has not produced, the child is told your mother and father hate you, they don't want you, that is why they never showed up. We love you, we want you, you are safe with us as long as you follow our simple rules and expectations. Very quickly most contact with birth parents and families is brought to very limited contact.
Every session and visit is monitored and if the parent probes into the well being of their child, the foster parent is taught how to reprogram the child's responses to such questions. In essence, they are taught to forget their former families and accept foster homes or adoption as their only recourse to being truly loved.
I have agreed to keep these interviews going with Georgie as I can to expose the system for the deceitful, despicable corporations that they are. While I am not beyond being called those same names, I do hope parents realize the great danger I am currently putting myself in exposing CPS and other like agencies and their reprogramming of children's lives.
As headhunters, we were aware that approximately 50% of children in foster homes are abused, sexually assaulted and mind controlled. We worked for pay and put those statistics to the back of our minds, shoved that knowledge away, knowing we were not the perpetrators of these atrocities. But the truth is, we put those children in harms way and are just as guilty as the foster parents who abuse these children on an ongoing and daily basis.
While child protection agencies are aware of these atrocities, they also ignore them for the greater part as conditioning of children and separation (x-x) from real families plays a real part of reprogramming of these innocent minds.
I will continue this interview at later date. Again my most humble apologies for the pain I have caused both parents and children for whom I was responsible in separating.
May God have mercy on my soul……..Black Michael
http://www.examiner.com/family-court-in-grand-rapids/confessions-of-a-cps-headhunter-part-2-of-3
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
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Exposing Child Protective Service-CONFESSIONS OF A CPS HEADHUNTER
Exposing Child Protective Service
by
Black Michael
(name changed)
transcribed exclusive interview part 1 of 3
as told to Georgie and Destiny
CONFESSIONS OF A CPS HEADHUNTER
(where marked (x-x), signifies the recording was unclear to transcribe)
I worked as a headhunter for twenty-two years and with false allegations brought in over 25,000 children for which I was paid $1,800 a head for. If a child was mentally handicapped, fetal drug alcohol syndrome and MS handicapped, I got a bonus of $500.00 for each of them.
We targeted low income, the impoverished and little to no education. The less means they had to fight a legal battle with, the more bonuses we received. I know I was responsible for bringing in 11 children, that were later murdered by their foster parent and the guilt of that has eaten and chewed at my spirit until it is so full of holes, I sure my heart looks like Swiss cheese.
In one case a woman was doing laundry in the projects and sat beside her about a 18 month old playing with a metal hanger. The mother’s view of the child was restricted by blowing wet sheets on the wind and I in my allegations said the child was utterly alone and could have poked his eye out or wandered out into traffic less than thirty feet away and be killed. Her little boy ended up being adopted out to a white family in India without parental consent. I am not proud of what I did. I am sickened to my sole by what I did to those innocent little children.
It really did not hit me what I was really doing until another headhunter came up to me and congratulated me on my 25,000 score on innocents taken from loving homes. I know those parents were good parents. They loved their children enough to die for them, they just lacked the money, education and to know how to get their children safely home. Point -They changed my name for every court case, so no name would link me in other files.
God, I have lived in mansions, had a body guard, drove swanky cars. I had it all. Every time a child was adopted out without parental consent that I have given child protective services, I got another $10,000 as a reward. Not for all the cars, houses, villas, not for all the money around the world, would I send one more innocent into a foster family as a repent.
I know I am going to hell. But, starting with Australia and Canada and the world, I am confessing my story and the only amends I can move and for a lot of these kids, it is far to late. I vow to bring them home and tell the judges what I was hired to do and why and who paid me.
I promised Georgie the exclusive interview and she left square bracketed as (x-x) and I cannot go on. The guilt is choking my throat and soon I will not be able to talk. But, I will come back and finish this exclusive interview. You ladies are doing a fine smart job. I give you both credits - high credits, for seeing so clearly all the corruption going on from judges to lawyers to crown counsel to social workers to simple clerks. You are headed in the right direction and you are both going to make a huge difference in this sick world by bring some babies home to their mothers and fathers where they have belonged since they were born.
I can say it and mean it I am so very sorry, so very sorry. That words do not make amend, owning up to our mistakes does. So I am off to my office here at home to see which child I can return home next.
http://www.examiner.com/family-court-in-grand-rapids/confessions-of-a-cps-headhunter
by
Black Michael
(name changed)
transcribed exclusive interview part 1 of 3
as told to Georgie and Destiny
CONFESSIONS OF A CPS HEADHUNTER
(where marked (x-x), signifies the recording was unclear to transcribe)
I worked as a headhunter for twenty-two years and with false allegations brought in over 25,000 children for which I was paid $1,800 a head for. If a child was mentally handicapped, fetal drug alcohol syndrome and MS handicapped, I got a bonus of $500.00 for each of them.
We targeted low income, the impoverished and little to no education. The less means they had to fight a legal battle with, the more bonuses we received. I know I was responsible for bringing in 11 children, that were later murdered by their foster parent and the guilt of that has eaten and chewed at my spirit until it is so full of holes, I sure my heart looks like Swiss cheese.
In one case a woman was doing laundry in the projects and sat beside her about a 18 month old playing with a metal hanger. The mother’s view of the child was restricted by blowing wet sheets on the wind and I in my allegations said the child was utterly alone and could have poked his eye out or wandered out into traffic less than thirty feet away and be killed. Her little boy ended up being adopted out to a white family in India without parental consent. I am not proud of what I did. I am sickened to my sole by what I did to those innocent little children.
It really did not hit me what I was really doing until another headhunter came up to me and congratulated me on my 25,000 score on innocents taken from loving homes. I know those parents were good parents. They loved their children enough to die for them, they just lacked the money, education and to know how to get their children safely home. Point -They changed my name for every court case, so no name would link me in other files.
God, I have lived in mansions, had a body guard, drove swanky cars. I had it all. Every time a child was adopted out without parental consent that I have given child protective services, I got another $10,000 as a reward. Not for all the cars, houses, villas, not for all the money around the world, would I send one more innocent into a foster family as a repent.
I know I am going to hell. But, starting with Australia and Canada and the world, I am confessing my story and the only amends I can move and for a lot of these kids, it is far to late. I vow to bring them home and tell the judges what I was hired to do and why and who paid me.
I promised Georgie the exclusive interview and she left square bracketed as (x-x) and I cannot go on. The guilt is choking my throat and soon I will not be able to talk. But, I will come back and finish this exclusive interview. You ladies are doing a fine smart job. I give you both credits - high credits, for seeing so clearly all the corruption going on from judges to lawyers to crown counsel to social workers to simple clerks. You are headed in the right direction and you are both going to make a huge difference in this sick world by bring some babies home to their mothers and fathers where they have belonged since they were born.
I can say it and mean it I am so very sorry, so very sorry. That words do not make amend, owning up to our mistakes does. So I am off to my office here at home to see which child I can return home next.
http://www.examiner.com/family-court-in-grand-rapids/confessions-of-a-cps-headhunter
Foster Parents; Did you know? CPS and relative placements. Part 1 of 4
Foster Parents; Did you know? CPS and relative placements. Part 1 of 4
August 28th, 2010 1:41 pm ET
Foster Parents: Did you know?
CPS Relative placements
Part 1 of 4
In this series we will explore the controversial subject; relative placements.
In the foster care system, most states have made provisions for relative placements, the statutes are often bypassed.
In other words; it is in the Statutes that instruct each CPS office make every effort to locate relatives immediately after the child (ren) are taken into custody in order to place them with family. However, many times even though relatives are located, as the statutes dictate, we find that relatives are often not contacted, considered, or interviewed as possible placements for the child (ren).
Clarification; even though relatives have successfully been located, relatives like; grandparents, uncles, aunts, who often stand by to assist children who been removed from their parents, the relatives are never considered for placement. Your examiner has witnessed these cases personally in serving as advocate for grandparents.
We offer you the following quotes, eliminating the non-essential wording. If you would like to read the entire report, compiled as of Jan. 2008, you may view it at the website below; Child Welfare Information Gateway. http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/placement.cfm
Pay close attention to this one; In order for States to receive Federal payments for foster care and adoption assistance, Federal law requires that they "consider giving preference to an adult relative over a non-related caregiver when determining placement for a child, provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant State child protection standards".
Here are some facts pertaining to relative placements;
Approximately 36 States and Puerto Rico give preference or priority to relative placements in their statutes remaining States use statutory language such as "may consider" placement with relatives.
Generally, preference is given to the child's grandparents, followed by aunts, uncles, adult siblings, and cousins.
Approximately 23 States and the District of Columbia require relatives to undergo a criminal background check.
Approximately 14 States and the District of Columbia have established "kinship care" or "relative caregiver" programs by statute to provide relatives with benefits to help offset the cost of caring for a placed child.
Nine States address foster care payments for kin caregivers in statute, benefits whether in money or services.
Approximately seven States also give preference to relatives when making adoptive placements.
http://www.examiner.com/foster-families-in-national/foster-parents-did-you-know-cps-and-relative-placements-part-1-of-4
August 28th, 2010 1:41 pm ET
Foster Parents: Did you know?
CPS Relative placements
Part 1 of 4
In this series we will explore the controversial subject; relative placements.
In the foster care system, most states have made provisions for relative placements, the statutes are often bypassed.
In other words; it is in the Statutes that instruct each CPS office make every effort to locate relatives immediately after the child (ren) are taken into custody in order to place them with family. However, many times even though relatives are located, as the statutes dictate, we find that relatives are often not contacted, considered, or interviewed as possible placements for the child (ren).
Clarification; even though relatives have successfully been located, relatives like; grandparents, uncles, aunts, who often stand by to assist children who been removed from their parents, the relatives are never considered for placement. Your examiner has witnessed these cases personally in serving as advocate for grandparents.
We offer you the following quotes, eliminating the non-essential wording. If you would like to read the entire report, compiled as of Jan. 2008, you may view it at the website below; Child Welfare Information Gateway. http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/placement.cfm
Pay close attention to this one; In order for States to receive Federal payments for foster care and adoption assistance, Federal law requires that they "consider giving preference to an adult relative over a non-related caregiver when determining placement for a child, provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant State child protection standards".
Here are some facts pertaining to relative placements;
Approximately 36 States and Puerto Rico give preference or priority to relative placements in their statutes remaining States use statutory language such as "may consider" placement with relatives.
Generally, preference is given to the child's grandparents, followed by aunts, uncles, adult siblings, and cousins.
Approximately 23 States and the District of Columbia require relatives to undergo a criminal background check.
Approximately 14 States and the District of Columbia have established "kinship care" or "relative caregiver" programs by statute to provide relatives with benefits to help offset the cost of caring for a placed child.
Nine States address foster care payments for kin caregivers in statute, benefits whether in money or services.
Approximately seven States also give preference to relatives when making adoptive placements.
http://www.examiner.com/foster-families-in-national/foster-parents-did-you-know-cps-and-relative-placements-part-1-of-4
Placement of Children With Relatives: Summary of State Laws
Placement of Children With Relatives: Summary of State Laws
Email Print (PDF 302 KB) Share
Rate This Not yet rated.
Series: State Statutes
Author(s): Child Welfare Information Gateway
Year Published: 2008
Current Through January 2008
You may wish to review this introductory text to better understand the information contained in your State's statute. To see how your State addresses this issue, visit the State Statutes Search.
In order for States to receive Federal payments for foster care and adoption assistance, Federal law requires that they "consider giving preference to an adult relative over a nonrelated caregiver when determining placement for a child, provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant State child protection standards." 1 (Placement refers to the placing of a child in the home of an individual other than a parent or guardian or in a facility other than a youth services center.) Approximately 36 States and Puerto Rico give preference or priority to relative placements in their statutes.2 Approximately six States, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands do not address the issue of the placement of children for foster care with relatives in their statutes.3 The remaining States use statutory language such as "may consider" placement with relatives.
(Back to Top)
Preference to Relatives
Each State defines "relative" differently, including relatives through blood, marriage, or adoption ranging from the first to the fifth degree. Generally, preference is given to the child's grandparents, followed by aunts, uncles, adult siblings, and cousins. For Indian children, six States allow members of the child's Tribe to be considered "extended family members" for placement purposes.4
The main requirements for placement are that the relative be "fit and willing," able to ensure the child's safety, and able to meet the child's needs. Approximately 23 States and the District of Columbia require relatives to undergo a criminal background check that may include all adult members of the household.5
(Back to Top)
Financial Support
Approximately 14 States and the District of Columbia have established "kinship care" or "relative caregiver" programs by statute to provide relatives with benefits to help offset the cost of caring for a placed child.6 Nine States address foster care payments for kin caregivers in statute.7 In these States, if a relative meets the qualifications for being a foster parent, he or she may receive payments at the full foster care rate and any other benefits available to foster parents, whether in money or services.
(Back to Top)
Adoption by Relatives
Approximately seven States also give preference to relatives when making adoptive placements.8 However, in Tennessee, if the child has been placed in foster care with a nonrelative and has been living with the same foster parent for 12 months or longer when he or she becomes available for adoption, the nonrelative foster parent is given first preference to adopt.
In approximately 29 States, when a parent makes a direct placement of the child with a relative, the laws provide for a streamlined adoption process, such as not requiring a preplacement assessment or home study unless specifically ordered by the court.9 In 11 States, the child must have resided with the relative for a period of time or have established a significant relationship with the relative in some other way.10 Approximately 21 States require a criminal records check of the adoptive parents and other adult household members.11
To see how your State addresses this issue, visit the State Statutes Search.
To find information on all of the States and territories, view the complete printable PDF, Placement of Children With Relatives: Summary of State Laws (PDF - 301 KB).
(Back to Top)
1 42 U.S.C. 671(a)(19). back
2 The word approximately is used to stress the fact that States frequently amend their laws; this information is current only through January 2008. Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington address preference for relative placements in their statutes. back
3 Hawaii, Idaho, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming. back
4 Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. back
5 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin. back
6 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. back
7 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Tennessee. back
8 Arkansas, California, Illinois, Minnesota, Nebraska (for Indian children), Ohio, and Wisconsin. back
9 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin. back
10 Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Virginia. back
11 Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, and Vermont. back
This publication is a product of the State Statutes Series prepared by Child Welfare Information Gateway. While every attempt has been made to be as complete as possible, additional information on these topics may be in other sections of a State's code as well as agency regulations, case law, and informal practices and procedures.
This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare Information Gateway.
http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/placement.cfm
Email Print (PDF 302 KB) Share
Rate This Not yet rated.
Series: State Statutes
Author(s): Child Welfare Information Gateway
Year Published: 2008
Current Through January 2008
You may wish to review this introductory text to better understand the information contained in your State's statute. To see how your State addresses this issue, visit the State Statutes Search.
In order for States to receive Federal payments for foster care and adoption assistance, Federal law requires that they "consider giving preference to an adult relative over a nonrelated caregiver when determining placement for a child, provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant State child protection standards." 1 (Placement refers to the placing of a child in the home of an individual other than a parent or guardian or in a facility other than a youth services center.) Approximately 36 States and Puerto Rico give preference or priority to relative placements in their statutes.2 Approximately six States, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands do not address the issue of the placement of children for foster care with relatives in their statutes.3 The remaining States use statutory language such as "may consider" placement with relatives.
(Back to Top)
Preference to Relatives
Each State defines "relative" differently, including relatives through blood, marriage, or adoption ranging from the first to the fifth degree. Generally, preference is given to the child's grandparents, followed by aunts, uncles, adult siblings, and cousins. For Indian children, six States allow members of the child's Tribe to be considered "extended family members" for placement purposes.4
The main requirements for placement are that the relative be "fit and willing," able to ensure the child's safety, and able to meet the child's needs. Approximately 23 States and the District of Columbia require relatives to undergo a criminal background check that may include all adult members of the household.5
(Back to Top)
Financial Support
Approximately 14 States and the District of Columbia have established "kinship care" or "relative caregiver" programs by statute to provide relatives with benefits to help offset the cost of caring for a placed child.6 Nine States address foster care payments for kin caregivers in statute.7 In these States, if a relative meets the qualifications for being a foster parent, he or she may receive payments at the full foster care rate and any other benefits available to foster parents, whether in money or services.
(Back to Top)
Adoption by Relatives
Approximately seven States also give preference to relatives when making adoptive placements.8 However, in Tennessee, if the child has been placed in foster care with a nonrelative and has been living with the same foster parent for 12 months or longer when he or she becomes available for adoption, the nonrelative foster parent is given first preference to adopt.
In approximately 29 States, when a parent makes a direct placement of the child with a relative, the laws provide for a streamlined adoption process, such as not requiring a preplacement assessment or home study unless specifically ordered by the court.9 In 11 States, the child must have resided with the relative for a period of time or have established a significant relationship with the relative in some other way.10 Approximately 21 States require a criminal records check of the adoptive parents and other adult household members.11
To see how your State addresses this issue, visit the State Statutes Search.
To find information on all of the States and territories, view the complete printable PDF, Placement of Children With Relatives: Summary of State Laws (PDF - 301 KB).
(Back to Top)
1 42 U.S.C. 671(a)(19). back
2 The word approximately is used to stress the fact that States frequently amend their laws; this information is current only through January 2008. Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington address preference for relative placements in their statutes. back
3 Hawaii, Idaho, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming. back
4 Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. back
5 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin. back
6 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. back
7 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Tennessee. back
8 Arkansas, California, Illinois, Minnesota, Nebraska (for Indian children), Ohio, and Wisconsin. back
9 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin. back
10 Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Virginia. back
11 Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, and Vermont. back
This publication is a product of the State Statutes Series prepared by Child Welfare Information Gateway. While every attempt has been made to be as complete as possible, additional information on these topics may be in other sections of a State's code as well as agency regulations, case law, and informal practices and procedures.
This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare Information Gateway.
http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/placement.cfm
Friday, August 27, 2010
Child Abuse Advocate Takes Story Public
Child Abuse Advocate Takes Story Public
Reported by: Brian Miller
Melanie Doty is a self-described child abuse advocate. She has taken her battle against the state to the courtroom. This mother of five has been battling state and local government over what she calls a broken system.
"When we cannot depend on these agencies that are set up to protect children and give the best justice we can do the we have to seek action," Doty said.
In 2008-- Doty sued the Indiana Department Of Child Services-- the Vanderburgh County Prosecutor's Office and the Evansville Police Department.
The suit claims information had been withheld about a child who had been abused.
The suspect in that case was the same person who had previously been accused of abusing one of Doty's children.
Doty won a settlement in the case but that case has since moved to appeals court.
"There is a systematic failure going on at all levels local state and federal," she said.
"Basically I waited and hoped the agencies put in place would do the right thing and they have to get to do that there was no investigation of the crimes that have been committed against our children there has been a lack of communication."
Doty organizes a weekly meeting with others united in her cause to raise awareness for what national statistics show is a growing trend. She has been working mostly behind the scenes-- until now. She says she can longer stay quiet and is taking her cause public.
"This is a community problem we have to do something..not one person can do everything but somebody can do something."
Doty says her child advocate group is planning a 40 day march which is being planned for September.
She is drawing on the community to help support what she calls a march for children's justice.
http://tristatehomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=189305&shr=addthis See video
Reported by: Brian Miller
Melanie Doty is a self-described child abuse advocate. She has taken her battle against the state to the courtroom. This mother of five has been battling state and local government over what she calls a broken system.
"When we cannot depend on these agencies that are set up to protect children and give the best justice we can do the we have to seek action," Doty said.
In 2008-- Doty sued the Indiana Department Of Child Services-- the Vanderburgh County Prosecutor's Office and the Evansville Police Department.
The suit claims information had been withheld about a child who had been abused.
The suspect in that case was the same person who had previously been accused of abusing one of Doty's children.
Doty won a settlement in the case but that case has since moved to appeals court.
"There is a systematic failure going on at all levels local state and federal," she said.
"Basically I waited and hoped the agencies put in place would do the right thing and they have to get to do that there was no investigation of the crimes that have been committed against our children there has been a lack of communication."
Doty organizes a weekly meeting with others united in her cause to raise awareness for what national statistics show is a growing trend. She has been working mostly behind the scenes-- until now. She says she can longer stay quiet and is taking her cause public.
"This is a community problem we have to do something..not one person can do everything but somebody can do something."
Doty says her child advocate group is planning a 40 day march which is being planned for September.
She is drawing on the community to help support what she calls a march for children's justice.
http://tristatehomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=189305&shr=addthis See video
The Adoption Tax Credit-Paid for With the Blood Money of Our Stolen Children
The Adoption Tax Credit
What You Need to Know
This is not a substitute for professional financial advice and should not be relied upon without consulting your tax advisor.
If you had adoption-related income and/or expenses, any one or a combination of benefits, credits and exclusions could substantially reduce your tax liability.
NOTE: The tax credit does not cover expenses for adoption of a spouse's child (stepparent adoption).
The Adoption Tax Credit is a valuable benefit for adopting families, but one of the most complicated tax law provisions applicable to middle-income families. The details of how it works, acceptable expenses, who qualifies, and other "small print" items have been harder to understand.
The following information is presented in two parts:
What you need to know
IRS definitions and explanations
The first step is to learn what the tax credit covers, and how it works with other incentives, such as employer-paid adoption benefits.
The tax credit applies to domestic and international adoptions, but the procedure is not the same. Credit for expenses for international adoptions can be claimed only after finalization; for domestic adoptions, the credit can be applied even if the adoption does not go through.
The full credit can be taken for domestic special needs adoption even when the qualifying expenses don't reach that limit.
The credit of $12,150 is per child, not per year, so even if you claim expenses paid out over more than one year for one adoption, the total credit amount remains $12,150.
Then, you'll want to
determine your eligibility;
learn how the credit works with your particular adoption;
develop a system to track and document expenses;
do your taxes, work with a professional.
Forms
Form 8839 is the form you need to file. The form will include expenses covered by the Adoption Tax Credit, any payments or reimbursements you may have received from Employer Adoption Assistance Benefits, and your child's Social Security or Tax ID number (required for filing).
To take the credit or exclusion, complete Form 8839 (PDF), Qualified Adoption Expenses. You will attach Form 8839 to Form 1040 (PDF) or Form 1040A (PDF) and report the credit on line 52 of Form 1040 or line 34 of Form 1040A.
Visit the download page to view and/or download the forms you'll need for adoption-related tax filing. Forms are available in various formats, and include:
Form 8839 - for itemizing qualifying adoption-related expenses.
Form SS-5 - to apply for a Social Security Number for your child.
Form W-7 - to apply for an Individual Taxpayer ID Number (ITIN) if your child is a resident or non-resident alien who does not qualify for an SSN.
Form W-7A - to apply for an Adoption Taxpayer ID Number (ATIN) if you are in the process of adopting a US citizen or resident, and cannot get an SSN until the adoption is final.
Additional Benefits & Guidance
Many states provide reimbursement of a certain amount of non-recurring adoption expenses. Be sure to check with your state tax office to learn more about it, and contact your local IRS office if you need more information or direct assistance with preparing your tax return.
Finally, consult your own tax advisor to make sure you haven't overlooked anything!
http://tax-credit.adoption.com/
What You Need to Know
This is not a substitute for professional financial advice and should not be relied upon without consulting your tax advisor.
If you had adoption-related income and/or expenses, any one or a combination of benefits, credits and exclusions could substantially reduce your tax liability.
NOTE: The tax credit does not cover expenses for adoption of a spouse's child (stepparent adoption).
The Adoption Tax Credit is a valuable benefit for adopting families, but one of the most complicated tax law provisions applicable to middle-income families. The details of how it works, acceptable expenses, who qualifies, and other "small print" items have been harder to understand.
The following information is presented in two parts:
What you need to know
IRS definitions and explanations
The first step is to learn what the tax credit covers, and how it works with other incentives, such as employer-paid adoption benefits.
The tax credit applies to domestic and international adoptions, but the procedure is not the same. Credit for expenses for international adoptions can be claimed only after finalization; for domestic adoptions, the credit can be applied even if the adoption does not go through.
The full credit can be taken for domestic special needs adoption even when the qualifying expenses don't reach that limit.
The credit of $12,150 is per child, not per year, so even if you claim expenses paid out over more than one year for one adoption, the total credit amount remains $12,150.
Then, you'll want to
determine your eligibility;
learn how the credit works with your particular adoption;
develop a system to track and document expenses;
do your taxes, work with a professional.
Forms
Form 8839 is the form you need to file. The form will include expenses covered by the Adoption Tax Credit, any payments or reimbursements you may have received from Employer Adoption Assistance Benefits, and your child's Social Security or Tax ID number (required for filing).
To take the credit or exclusion, complete Form 8839 (PDF), Qualified Adoption Expenses. You will attach Form 8839 to Form 1040 (PDF) or Form 1040A (PDF) and report the credit on line 52 of Form 1040 or line 34 of Form 1040A.
Visit the download page to view and/or download the forms you'll need for adoption-related tax filing. Forms are available in various formats, and include:
Form 8839 - for itemizing qualifying adoption-related expenses.
Form SS-5 - to apply for a Social Security Number for your child.
Form W-7 - to apply for an Individual Taxpayer ID Number (ITIN) if your child is a resident or non-resident alien who does not qualify for an SSN.
Form W-7A - to apply for an Adoption Taxpayer ID Number (ATIN) if you are in the process of adopting a US citizen or resident, and cannot get an SSN until the adoption is final.
Additional Benefits & Guidance
Many states provide reimbursement of a certain amount of non-recurring adoption expenses. Be sure to check with your state tax office to learn more about it, and contact your local IRS office if you need more information or direct assistance with preparing your tax return.
Finally, consult your own tax advisor to make sure you haven't overlooked anything!
http://tax-credit.adoption.com/
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)