LA supervisors oust child welfare chief | abc7.com: "LOS ANGELES (KABC) -- L.A. County's Child Welfare Chief Trish Ploehn was removed from her post because county supervisors were not satisfied with her management of the department and a disturbing number of child deaths.
Now, there will be a nationwide search for a new director."
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
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Monday, December 13, 2010
NCCPR Child Welfare Blog: Foster care in New York: Will ACS apply “the Madoff standard” to poor people?
NCCPR Child Welfare Blog: Foster care in New York: Will ACS apply “the Madoff standard” to poor people?: " Imagine for a moment that a son of someone who was once America’s most notorious drug dealers kills himself. The drug dealer-father is serving a long, long jail term. The son may have learned in the past week that he might have been facing criminal charges himself. His own son, age 2, is sleeping in the next room. His wife is a thousand miles away.
Another close relative finds the body. Because the little boy had been left alone for a time, the police say they will notify the child protective services agency."
Another close relative finds the body. Because the little boy had been left alone for a time, the police say they will notify the child protective services agency."
Father Harassed By CPS For Feeding Kids Organic Food
Father Harassed By CPS For Feeding Kids Organic Food: "A father of two was harassed and investigated by Child Protective Services and police for feeding his daughters organic food, refusing to make them drink fluoride-poisoned tap water and not having them injected with mercury-laden vaccines, all of which constitutes “suspicious activity” in the new Sovietized America, a foretaste of what’s to come once Big Sis’ Wal-Mart spy campaign gets up and running."
Relating his story to the Sherrie Questioning All blog, the man states that a child abuse investigation was launched after one of his neighbors reported him to the authorities, prompting a CPS worker to visit his home accompanied by a police officer, during which she bombarded him with questions and conducted a warrantless search of his house, even down to the contents of his refrigerator.
The case worker turned up at the man’s door with a police cruiser in close attendance. The woman nervously began to question him and was obviously under the impression that he could pose a physical threat.
“She said that there were allegations that I wouldn’t give my children tap water,” writes the father, before noting how he explained to the woman that municipal tap water in most parts of the United States is poisoned with sodium fluoride, a form of toxic waste that contributes to innumerable health problems, including disorders affecting teeth, bones, the brain and the thyroid gland, as well as lowering IQ.
The woman’s line of questioning took an even more bizarre turn after she told him that one of the accusations against him which led to allegations of child abuse was that he fed his daughters organic food. That’s right – Americans actually think that if you don’t feed your children genetically-modified, gluten-stuffed, high fructose corn syrup-crammed, aspartame-laden garbage like KFC or McDonalds then you’re probably a child abuser. Eating natural, clean and healthy food not sprayed with sickening pesticides is now a suspicious activity.
“I was still quite frightened by this woman in my house, I mean really think about it,” writes the father. “This woman has the authority to take the only things worth living for away from me. My girls. So the allegations continued.”
The CPS worker then demanded to know why the man refused to have his daughters vaccinated, again implying that this was a form of child abuse. “I said yes that’s true, I refuse to allow my children to be poked with syringes filled with squalene, thimerasol, mercury,etc. I promptly produced my states exemption form. That was the end of that allegation,” he writes.
The interrogation concluded with the CPS worker asking the man’s daughters if he smacked them.
“They said ‘oh yeah my daddy will whoop my backside if I say a nasty word,’ he writes. “The woman asked me if this was true, I said yes, and it is completely legal to spank your child in this state, in fact there are school districts here in my state that allow it in public schools.”
The woman, who had not obtained a legal warrant to search the house, inspected the girls’ rooms and even the father’s fridge before leaving.
Despite the fact that the man’s behavior in not making his kids drink toxic waste and eat GMO garbage, while protecting them from mercury-filled vaccines, actually proves that he is an outstanding parent who cares deeply for his children, he was subject to a one month investigation before the case was closed.
The man was able to confirm that he was informed on by someone he knew after the case worker asked him about his “bug bag,” a 72 hour emergency preparedness kit. Apparently, even though Homeland Security itself encourages Americans to prepare for emergencies, actually doing so is a sign of “child abuse”.
Presumably, this is the kind of community spirit Big Sis is seeking to encourage as part of Homeland Security’s “See Something, Say Something” program, where Wal-Mart shoppers are encouraged to report suspicious activity to the authorities after watching a video message at the checkout featuring Janet Napolitano.
Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)
Since the DHS program makes no reference to what constitutes “suspicious activity,” expect to read many more stories about Americans being investigated and harassed for their personal lifestyle choices as a result of being turned in by ignorant Americans who think that being knowledgable about health issues is a form of child abuse.
—
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show. Watson has been interviewed by many publications and radio shows, including Vanity Fair and Coast to Coast AM, America’s most listened to late night talk show.
Relating his story to the Sherrie Questioning All blog, the man states that a child abuse investigation was launched after one of his neighbors reported him to the authorities, prompting a CPS worker to visit his home accompanied by a police officer, during which she bombarded him with questions and conducted a warrantless search of his house, even down to the contents of his refrigerator.
The case worker turned up at the man’s door with a police cruiser in close attendance. The woman nervously began to question him and was obviously under the impression that he could pose a physical threat.
“She said that there were allegations that I wouldn’t give my children tap water,” writes the father, before noting how he explained to the woman that municipal tap water in most parts of the United States is poisoned with sodium fluoride, a form of toxic waste that contributes to innumerable health problems, including disorders affecting teeth, bones, the brain and the thyroid gland, as well as lowering IQ.
The woman’s line of questioning took an even more bizarre turn after she told him that one of the accusations against him which led to allegations of child abuse was that he fed his daughters organic food. That’s right – Americans actually think that if you don’t feed your children genetically-modified, gluten-stuffed, high fructose corn syrup-crammed, aspartame-laden garbage like KFC or McDonalds then you’re probably a child abuser. Eating natural, clean and healthy food not sprayed with sickening pesticides is now a suspicious activity.
“I was still quite frightened by this woman in my house, I mean really think about it,” writes the father. “This woman has the authority to take the only things worth living for away from me. My girls. So the allegations continued.”
The CPS worker then demanded to know why the man refused to have his daughters vaccinated, again implying that this was a form of child abuse. “I said yes that’s true, I refuse to allow my children to be poked with syringes filled with squalene, thimerasol, mercury,etc. I promptly produced my states exemption form. That was the end of that allegation,” he writes.
The interrogation concluded with the CPS worker asking the man’s daughters if he smacked them.
“They said ‘oh yeah my daddy will whoop my backside if I say a nasty word,’ he writes. “The woman asked me if this was true, I said yes, and it is completely legal to spank your child in this state, in fact there are school districts here in my state that allow it in public schools.”
The woman, who had not obtained a legal warrant to search the house, inspected the girls’ rooms and even the father’s fridge before leaving.
Despite the fact that the man’s behavior in not making his kids drink toxic waste and eat GMO garbage, while protecting them from mercury-filled vaccines, actually proves that he is an outstanding parent who cares deeply for his children, he was subject to a one month investigation before the case was closed.
The man was able to confirm that he was informed on by someone he knew after the case worker asked him about his “bug bag,” a 72 hour emergency preparedness kit. Apparently, even though Homeland Security itself encourages Americans to prepare for emergencies, actually doing so is a sign of “child abuse”.
Presumably, this is the kind of community spirit Big Sis is seeking to encourage as part of Homeland Security’s “See Something, Say Something” program, where Wal-Mart shoppers are encouraged to report suspicious activity to the authorities after watching a video message at the checkout featuring Janet Napolitano.
Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)
Since the DHS program makes no reference to what constitutes “suspicious activity,” expect to read many more stories about Americans being investigated and harassed for their personal lifestyle choices as a result of being turned in by ignorant Americans who think that being knowledgable about health issues is a form of child abuse.
—
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show. Watson has been interviewed by many publications and radio shows, including Vanity Fair and Coast to Coast AM, America’s most listened to late night talk show.
Police: Teen running from CPS worker struck by car
Police: Teen running from CPS worker struck by car: "TEXAS CITY — A 16-year-old girl who police said was trying to run away from a Child Protective Services worker was struck by a car on the Interstate 45 feeder road in Texas City on Wednesday night."
False Allegations: What the Data Really Show
http://www.nccpr.org/reports/OTHER3.pdf
National Coalition for Child Protection Reform / Supplemental Issue Paper 3
False Allegations: What the Data Really Show
As the previous paper in this series
noted, of the roughly 3.5 children investigated as
a result of reports alleging child abuse every
year, more than 2.7 million of them are victims of
false allegations.
But to a child saver, there is virtually no
such thing as a false allegation of child abuse.
False reports are labeled "unfounded" or
"unsubstantiated" but child savers insist that's
not the same thing as false. They offer several
reasons why, in all likelihood, any parent
accused of child abuse must be guilty. Such
arguments are a classic example of a half&truth.
They are, quite literally, half of the truth.
Of course, America's stumbling,
bumbling child&saving bureaucracy is going to
mislabel some real cases of abuse && some
guilty families will be let off the hook after an
investigation. But that same bureaucracy
repeatedly labels innocent families guilty.
This question was examined by a major
federal study, commonly known as the second
National Incidence Study or NIS2. This study
second&guessed child protective workers, re&
checking records to see if they had reached the
right conclusion. The researchers found that
protective workers were at least twice as
likely and perhaps as much as six times
more likely to wrongly label an innocent
family guilty as they were to wrongly label a
guilty family innocent.[1] Thus, not only are
more than three&quarters of all allegations false,
chances are that figure is an underestimate.
Yet child savers insist that false reports
are not really false. These are their reasons,
and why those arguments don't wash:
● The case was labeled unfounded
because the worker couldn't "prove" guilt. In
fact, workers don't have to prove guilt. There
is no trial, no judge, no jury. A worker can
label a parent guilty and place his or her
name in a state central register based
entirely on her own suspicions.
The real problem is the reverse:
innocent people whose cases have been
wrongly "substantiated." In about half the
states, workers need only believe it is
slightly more likely than not that
maltreatment occurred to declare the case
“substantiated.” In only one state is the
standard higher. In the other half, the
standard is even lower: Typically, in these
states, a worker can label a case
"substantiated" if she thinks she has "some
credible evidence" of maltreatment, even if
there is more evidence of innocence.[2]
In a case brought by a member of
the NCCPR Board of Directors, the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit ruled in 1994 that "the 'some credible
evidence' standard results in many
individuals being placed [in the Central
Register] who do not belong there."[3] It is
grossly misleading for child savers to label
such cases as "confirmed" or
"substantiated."
● The parents are guilty but the law
doesn't define what they did as child abuse. In
fact. state laws are so broad that virtually
anything a parent does or does not do can
be labeled abuse or neglect, if a worker sees
fit. Indeed, as the previous paper explains,
the largest single category of
"substantiated" maltreatment is "neglect," a
category filled with cases in which parents
have been accused of maltreatment because
they are poor.
● The investigator had so many cases
that she couldn't investigate long enough to
uncover abuse or she was not trained well
enough to detect it. But the same worker may
miss evidence showing that a parent is
innocent for the same reasons.
● The parents are guilty but the system
has no help to offer, so the case was labeled
unfounded. On the other hand, often the
system will provide help for any kind of
family problem only if the family is accused
of child abuse. Therefore, workers
sometimes deliberately mislabel innocent
parents guilty in order to get them help with
other problems.
In addition, most states lump together
cases in which there has been actual
maltreatment with cases where the worker
thinks something just might happen in the future.
These so&called "at risk" cases may make up
half or more of all allegations that are
"substantiated." And finally, the enormous
pressure on workers has to be considered. If they label a case false and harm comes to a
child, they face loss of their jobs, the enmity of
the press and the public, and perhaps even
criminal charges. If they wrongly label parents
guilty, even if that leads to needless foster care
placement and all the harm that can cause for a
child, the worker suffers no penalty. So workers
practice "defensive social work" and wrongly
accuse innocent parents.
For all of these reasons it is clear that of
the 3.2 million children alleged to be victims of
child abuse every year, a minimum of three&
quarters are victims of allegations that are false &
& not "unfounded," not "unsubstantiated" && just
plain false.
Updated,January 1. 2010
1. Study Findings: Study of National Incidence and Prevalence of Child Abuse and Neglect: 1988 (Washington: U.S. Dept. of Health
and Human Services, National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1988), Chapter 6, Page 5.
2. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth and Families. Child Maltreatment 2007, Appendix D,
available online at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm07/appendd.htm
3. Valmonte v. Bane, 18 F.3d 992 (2nd Cir. 1994).
National Coalition for Child Protection Reform / Supplemental Issue Paper 3
False Allegations: What the Data Really Show
As the previous paper in this series
noted, of the roughly 3.5 children investigated as
a result of reports alleging child abuse every
year, more than 2.7 million of them are victims of
false allegations.
But to a child saver, there is virtually no
such thing as a false allegation of child abuse.
False reports are labeled "unfounded" or
"unsubstantiated" but child savers insist that's
not the same thing as false. They offer several
reasons why, in all likelihood, any parent
accused of child abuse must be guilty. Such
arguments are a classic example of a half&truth.
They are, quite literally, half of the truth.
Of course, America's stumbling,
bumbling child&saving bureaucracy is going to
mislabel some real cases of abuse && some
guilty families will be let off the hook after an
investigation. But that same bureaucracy
repeatedly labels innocent families guilty.
This question was examined by a major
federal study, commonly known as the second
National Incidence Study or NIS2. This study
second&guessed child protective workers, re&
checking records to see if they had reached the
right conclusion. The researchers found that
protective workers were at least twice as
likely and perhaps as much as six times
more likely to wrongly label an innocent
family guilty as they were to wrongly label a
guilty family innocent.[1] Thus, not only are
more than three&quarters of all allegations false,
chances are that figure is an underestimate.
Yet child savers insist that false reports
are not really false. These are their reasons,
and why those arguments don't wash:
● The case was labeled unfounded
because the worker couldn't "prove" guilt. In
fact, workers don't have to prove guilt. There
is no trial, no judge, no jury. A worker can
label a parent guilty and place his or her
name in a state central register based
entirely on her own suspicions.
The real problem is the reverse:
innocent people whose cases have been
wrongly "substantiated." In about half the
states, workers need only believe it is
slightly more likely than not that
maltreatment occurred to declare the case
“substantiated.” In only one state is the
standard higher. In the other half, the
standard is even lower: Typically, in these
states, a worker can label a case
"substantiated" if she thinks she has "some
credible evidence" of maltreatment, even if
there is more evidence of innocence.[2]
In a case brought by a member of
the NCCPR Board of Directors, the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit ruled in 1994 that "the 'some credible
evidence' standard results in many
individuals being placed [in the Central
Register] who do not belong there."[3] It is
grossly misleading for child savers to label
such cases as "confirmed" or
"substantiated."
● The parents are guilty but the law
doesn't define what they did as child abuse. In
fact. state laws are so broad that virtually
anything a parent does or does not do can
be labeled abuse or neglect, if a worker sees
fit. Indeed, as the previous paper explains,
the largest single category of
"substantiated" maltreatment is "neglect," a
category filled with cases in which parents
have been accused of maltreatment because
they are poor.
● The investigator had so many cases
that she couldn't investigate long enough to
uncover abuse or she was not trained well
enough to detect it. But the same worker may
miss evidence showing that a parent is
innocent for the same reasons.
● The parents are guilty but the system
has no help to offer, so the case was labeled
unfounded. On the other hand, often the
system will provide help for any kind of
family problem only if the family is accused
of child abuse. Therefore, workers
sometimes deliberately mislabel innocent
parents guilty in order to get them help with
other problems.
In addition, most states lump together
cases in which there has been actual
maltreatment with cases where the worker
thinks something just might happen in the future.
These so&called "at risk" cases may make up
half or more of all allegations that are
"substantiated." And finally, the enormous
pressure on workers has to be considered. If they label a case false and harm comes to a
child, they face loss of their jobs, the enmity of
the press and the public, and perhaps even
criminal charges. If they wrongly label parents
guilty, even if that leads to needless foster care
placement and all the harm that can cause for a
child, the worker suffers no penalty. So workers
practice "defensive social work" and wrongly
accuse innocent parents.
For all of these reasons it is clear that of
the 3.2 million children alleged to be victims of
child abuse every year, a minimum of three&
quarters are victims of allegations that are false &
& not "unfounded," not "unsubstantiated" && just
plain false.
Updated,January 1. 2010
1. Study Findings: Study of National Incidence and Prevalence of Child Abuse and Neglect: 1988 (Washington: U.S. Dept. of Health
and Human Services, National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1988), Chapter 6, Page 5.
2. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth and Families. Child Maltreatment 2007, Appendix D,
available online at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm07/appendd.htm
3. Valmonte v. Bane, 18 F.3d 992 (2nd Cir. 1994).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)