Defend Yourself?: Liberty, Justice & The Rule of Law by Jurisdictionary
Do you Know Your State Statutes? Do you Know Court Proceedings? Whether you seek legal advice OR defend yourself, doing your homework and answering the above questions are vital.
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
Sunday, February 27, 2011
WATCH your back- your doctor may not be your friend
WATCH your back
This message hopefully will serve to help make parents more aware of what may be more common than most want to believe about the doctor or pediatrician you choose to take care of your children. Here is what happened this week with a local mother who was using a "supposedly" well known and respected doctor for her son who happened to be diabetic.
Over the past several months this mom, who was using one such physician in the Dallas, TX area kept having CPS called on her right after she would take her son in for a check-up monitoring and treating him for diabetes. She couldn't figure it out. Fortunately, the local CPS agency is not an aggressive family destructive unit, or this family would have been destroyed, as is so common for several northern counties, particularly, Tarrant, Parker, Denton, and Collin counties, Dallas county has gotten better in the last few months, but the physician in Dallas apparently, is still working "for" CPS reporting parents and their children who have done nothing wrong so the agencies can keep their flow of government money rolling in.
This Mother "got smart". She went to a local pharmacy and purchased a brand new, one of the latest and best models of diabetic testing meters presently on the market and started testing her son and recording the results. She "KEPT" her receipt of purchase with her. Every time in the recent months she would take the child in to this doctor, the doctor was telling her the child's sugar was "way too high" and just ream her out! She was telling the doctor that the checks she was doing at home were good and her son was doing well. This doctor wouldn't accept anything she was saying and was calling CPS after "every" visit claiming or reporting her as "medically neglectful of her son" and deliberately not properly caring for her son. Of course, we all know what that translated into - a visit by CPS.
On this day, the mother using the brand new state of the art meter she had purchased, checked her son's blood sugar within minutes of being called back to see the doctor, recorded the results which were what they should be. Once again, soon as they were called back to the patient room, Mom used her new meter and checked the boy's sugar level right in front of the nurse and once again the result was what it was supposed to be. The doctor had sent in another nurse to check the boy's sugar level with "his" meter unit. When the doctor then came into the patient room, he informed the mother that the child's sugar level was "way too high" and once again proceeded to just ream her out.
This time, she was prepared and called his hand on it. She asked the nurse to come into the room who had witnessed and watched her test her son's blood before the doctor entered the room or had "his" test done. She also presented her "new meter and purchase receipt" and informed him of the tests she had performed in the presence of that nurse right there in his office, and then asked him WHY was his test reading so high when hers with the new meter was reading normal. She then asked him was he telling her that her brand new state of the art meter was wrong?
He turned quite red in the face and replied "He had mis-read the results". The numbers he claimed and the numbers of the actual result were not even close, so NO he did NOT mis-read it. He was "deliberately" reporting this family to CPS for the purpose of increasing or trying to "give" CPS a case against them.
He was caught red handed!
That incident now begs the question and an investigation as to "how many" families has this doctor reported to CPS to help them start "unjustified and unwarranted" cases in the DFW metro and north Texas who uses physicians in the metroplex? I have a feeling that number would be quite shocking!
I am working with this family to help them "expose" this doctor and clinic as well as file the documents into their CPS records to prevent any further investigation into the matter. Mom is going to insist that this "quack" doctor sign a statement admitting his "wrongful reporting with incorrect information" to CPS. She also got the witnessing nurse to put the info into the records at the clinic and give her a copy of that report for her records and to present copy to CPS locally.
I don't anticipate any further investigation by the local CPS. I know most of the caseworkers and supervisors and they do abide by the law here and are not so aggressive and family destructive.
The matter is "not" yet resolved so far as that physician is concerned.
There is going to be complaints filed against him with the state medical board. Wouldn't it be nice if he lost his license to practice?
We are working with the family now to get the child under the care of a local doctor, rather than this so-called pediatric diabetic "specialist".
Moms, Dads, IF you are having problems with your child's doctor reporting you to CPS, take a hard and close look at the situation. Take whatever steps necessary to "bust" those doctors for their mal-practice! It really makes us wonder just how many cases, how many families has this (*^%^%&*) so-called doctor filed false reports on that ultimately destroyed the family or caused harm?
As soon as I can get the information on this doctor, name, clinic where he practices, etc, I will post that information. In the meantime, BEWARE -- he is in the Dallas, TX area.
This message hopefully will serve to help make parents more aware of what may be more common than most want to believe about the doctor or pediatrician you choose to take care of your children. Here is what happened this week with a local mother who was using a "supposedly" well known and respected doctor for her son who happened to be diabetic.
Over the past several months this mom, who was using one such physician in the Dallas, TX area kept having CPS called on her right after she would take her son in for a check-up monitoring and treating him for diabetes. She couldn't figure it out. Fortunately, the local CPS agency is not an aggressive family destructive unit, or this family would have been destroyed, as is so common for several northern counties, particularly, Tarrant, Parker, Denton, and Collin counties, Dallas county has gotten better in the last few months, but the physician in Dallas apparently, is still working "for" CPS reporting parents and their children who have done nothing wrong so the agencies can keep their flow of government money rolling in.
This Mother "got smart". She went to a local pharmacy and purchased a brand new, one of the latest and best models of diabetic testing meters presently on the market and started testing her son and recording the results. She "KEPT" her receipt of purchase with her. Every time in the recent months she would take the child in to this doctor, the doctor was telling her the child's sugar was "way too high" and just ream her out! She was telling the doctor that the checks she was doing at home were good and her son was doing well. This doctor wouldn't accept anything she was saying and was calling CPS after "every" visit claiming or reporting her as "medically neglectful of her son" and deliberately not properly caring for her son. Of course, we all know what that translated into - a visit by CPS.
On this day, the mother using the brand new state of the art meter she had purchased, checked her son's blood sugar within minutes of being called back to see the doctor, recorded the results which were what they should be. Once again, soon as they were called back to the patient room, Mom used her new meter and checked the boy's sugar level right in front of the nurse and once again the result was what it was supposed to be. The doctor had sent in another nurse to check the boy's sugar level with "his" meter unit. When the doctor then came into the patient room, he informed the mother that the child's sugar level was "way too high" and once again proceeded to just ream her out.
This time, she was prepared and called his hand on it. She asked the nurse to come into the room who had witnessed and watched her test her son's blood before the doctor entered the room or had "his" test done. She also presented her "new meter and purchase receipt" and informed him of the tests she had performed in the presence of that nurse right there in his office, and then asked him WHY was his test reading so high when hers with the new meter was reading normal. She then asked him was he telling her that her brand new state of the art meter was wrong?
He turned quite red in the face and replied "He had mis-read the results". The numbers he claimed and the numbers of the actual result were not even close, so NO he did NOT mis-read it. He was "deliberately" reporting this family to CPS for the purpose of increasing or trying to "give" CPS a case against them.
He was caught red handed!
That incident now begs the question and an investigation as to "how many" families has this doctor reported to CPS to help them start "unjustified and unwarranted" cases in the DFW metro and north Texas who uses physicians in the metroplex? I have a feeling that number would be quite shocking!
I am working with this family to help them "expose" this doctor and clinic as well as file the documents into their CPS records to prevent any further investigation into the matter. Mom is going to insist that this "quack" doctor sign a statement admitting his "wrongful reporting with incorrect information" to CPS. She also got the witnessing nurse to put the info into the records at the clinic and give her a copy of that report for her records and to present copy to CPS locally.
I don't anticipate any further investigation by the local CPS. I know most of the caseworkers and supervisors and they do abide by the law here and are not so aggressive and family destructive.
The matter is "not" yet resolved so far as that physician is concerned.
There is going to be complaints filed against him with the state medical board. Wouldn't it be nice if he lost his license to practice?
We are working with the family now to get the child under the care of a local doctor, rather than this so-called pediatric diabetic "specialist".
Moms, Dads, IF you are having problems with your child's doctor reporting you to CPS, take a hard and close look at the situation. Take whatever steps necessary to "bust" those doctors for their mal-practice! It really makes us wonder just how many cases, how many families has this (*^%^%&*) so-called doctor filed false reports on that ultimately destroyed the family or caused harm?
As soon as I can get the information on this doctor, name, clinic where he practices, etc, I will post that information. In the meantime, BEWARE -- he is in the Dallas, TX area.
Heritage Map - News | Heritage Defense
Heritage Map - News | Heritage Defense
Welcome to the News section of the Heritage Map, where we read, sift, and comment on news concerning the family. We are currently tracking news relating to social services. As we track more issues in the future, you will be able to click and unclick categories on the right to broaden or narrow your view to the issues that are important to you.
Welcome to the News section of the Heritage Map, where we read, sift, and comment on news concerning the family. We are currently tracking news relating to social services. As we track more issues in the future, you will be able to click and unclick categories on the right to broaden or narrow your view to the issues that are important to you.
Legal Terminology
Legal Terminology
Legal Terminology and Related Terms
Web Edition w/ continuous updates
The following pages contain legal terminology and related terms you will need to be familiar with. These pages contain words particular to our cases as parents. "Please be advised that the information provided to you as a courtesy may not reflect current revisions, amendments and/or changes in your states statutes and codes. You must go to your government website to check for and download those revisions and/or amendments yourself". (If you can't find a definition on this page Go To this page now and search terms. However, the most widely used legal dictionary is Black's Law Dictionary)
Legal Terminology and Related Terms
Web Edition w/ continuous updates
The following pages contain legal terminology and related terms you will need to be familiar with. These pages contain words particular to our cases as parents. "Please be advised that the information provided to you as a courtesy may not reflect current revisions, amendments and/or changes in your states statutes and codes. You must go to your government website to check for and download those revisions and/or amendments yourself". (If you can't find a definition on this page Go To this page now and search terms. However, the most widely used legal dictionary is Black's Law Dictionary)
Proposed Bill Would Change Child Questioning Procedures in Abuse Cases
Proposed Bill Would Change Child Questioning Procedures in Abuse Cases on KFYR-TV North Dakota's NBC News Leader
Child abuse is one of the most terrible crimes a parent could commit, but some parents are falsely accused and may need more protections. So, lawmakers introduced a bill to address that.
However, many people who deal with the issue on a regular basis are afraid the legislation would jeopardize the safety of victims.
The House Human Services Committee discussed a bill today that would change the way victims under the age of 15 are questioned.
Legislators are considering a bill which would require the parents of suspected child abuse victims to be given the opportunity to be present during their child`s questioning with investigators.
Under current law, authorities don`t have to notify parents until after the interview is completed.
Opponents packed into the committee room to express their concerns. Representatives from law enforcement, social services, state`s attorneys and judges say things are fine the way they are and parents are protected.
"They have the resources to hire an attorney to represent them. And then they have the full rights under state statute and the constitution to protect them. Children don`t have that," said Jim Vukelic, former judge and prosecutor.
Supporters of the legislation say this bill is about protecting parents who are falsely accused.
Rep. Robin Weisz, R-Hurdsfield said: "The deck is stacked against them, from the standpoint if you have a social worker who is technically neutral, so the courts give high precedence to anything they say and under the assumption they`re only looking out for the child, and they will tend to discount testimony from other experts who testify on behalf of the the parents."
Opponents say the legislation would do more harm than good.
"The forensic interview is supposed to be a neutral environment to allow the child to tell their story," said Paula Condol with Dakota Children`s Advisory Center. "Having a parent in the room will influence the entire process."
Opponents say the legislation would also have a negative economic impact, especially for social services in rural areas.
Child abuse is one of the most terrible crimes a parent could commit, but some parents are falsely accused and may need more protections. So, lawmakers introduced a bill to address that.
However, many people who deal with the issue on a regular basis are afraid the legislation would jeopardize the safety of victims.
The House Human Services Committee discussed a bill today that would change the way victims under the age of 15 are questioned.
Legislators are considering a bill which would require the parents of suspected child abuse victims to be given the opportunity to be present during their child`s questioning with investigators.
Under current law, authorities don`t have to notify parents until after the interview is completed.
Opponents packed into the committee room to express their concerns. Representatives from law enforcement, social services, state`s attorneys and judges say things are fine the way they are and parents are protected.
"They have the resources to hire an attorney to represent them. And then they have the full rights under state statute and the constitution to protect them. Children don`t have that," said Jim Vukelic, former judge and prosecutor.
Supporters of the legislation say this bill is about protecting parents who are falsely accused.
Rep. Robin Weisz, R-Hurdsfield said: "The deck is stacked against them, from the standpoint if you have a social worker who is technically neutral, so the courts give high precedence to anything they say and under the assumption they`re only looking out for the child, and they will tend to discount testimony from other experts who testify on behalf of the the parents."
Opponents say the legislation would do more harm than good.
"The forensic interview is supposed to be a neutral environment to allow the child to tell their story," said Paula Condol with Dakota Children`s Advisory Center. "Having a parent in the room will influence the entire process."
Opponents say the legislation would also have a negative economic impact, especially for social services in rural areas.
Rick Casey: Judge's adoption express had one final run
Rick Casey: Judge's adoption express had one final run | Rick Casey | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle
This time Juvenile District Judge Pat Shelton and CPS may get away with it.
As regular readers know, Shelton was stopped by a higher court last week from paving the way for the adoption of a pair of twins by foster parents while a home study of relatives who wanted to adopt them was under way.
But last Wednesday — two days later and two days before he stepped down from the bench - Shelton granted a fast-track adoption of a baby to foster parents over the objections of lawyers for the mother's aunt and uncle, who also wanted to adopt.
On both occasions, the babies' mothers wanted their aunts and uncles to adopt. And in both cases the aunt and uncle appeared well-qualified.
This time Juvenile District Judge Pat Shelton and CPS may get away with it.
As regular readers know, Shelton was stopped by a higher court last week from paving the way for the adoption of a pair of twins by foster parents while a home study of relatives who wanted to adopt them was under way.
But last Wednesday — two days later and two days before he stepped down from the bench - Shelton granted a fast-track adoption of a baby to foster parents over the objections of lawyers for the mother's aunt and uncle, who also wanted to adopt.
On both occasions, the babies' mothers wanted their aunts and uncles to adopt. And in both cases the aunt and uncle appeared well-qualified.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)