CPS is Awarded Grants to take your Children « How Child Protection Services Buys and Sells Our Children
From the U.S. Code Online via GPO Access
[www.gpoaccess.gov]
[Laws in effect as of January 3, 2007]
[CITE: 42USC5106]
[Page 926-929]
CHAPTER 67–CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT AND ADOPTION REFORM
SUBCHAPTER I–GENERAL PROGRAM
Sec. 5106. Grants to States and public or private agencies and
organizations
(a) Grants for programs and projects
Read more, click on the above link.
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, April 3, 2011
FBI — Color of Law Abuses
FBI — Color of Law
Color of Law Abuses
U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.
Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. “Color of law” simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.
The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law abuses, which include acts carried out by government officials operating both within and beyond the limits of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may be covered if the perpetrator asserted his or her official status in some way.
During 2009, the FBI investigated 385 color of law cases. Most of these crimes fall into five broad areas:
Excessive force;
Sexual assaults;
False arrest and fabrication of evidence;
Deprivation of property; and
Failure to keep from harm.
Excessive force: In making arrests, maintaining order, and defending life, law enforcement officers are allowed to use whatever force is "reasonably" necessary. The breadth and scope of the use of force is vast—from just the physical presence of the officer…to the use of deadly force. Violations of federal law occur when it can be shown that the force used was willfully "unreasonable" or "excessive."
Sexual assaults by officials acting under color of law can happen in jails, during traffic stops, or in other settings where officials might use their position of authority to coerce an individual into sexual compliance. The compliance is generally gained because of a threat of an official action against the person if he or she doesn’t comply.
False arrest and fabrication of evidence: The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable searches or seizures. A law enforcement official using authority provided under the color of law is allowed to stop individuals and, under certain circumstances, to search them and retain their property. It is in the abuse of that discretionary power—such as an unlawful detention or illegal confiscation of property—that a violation of a person's civil rights may occur.
Fabricating evidence against or falsely arresting an individual also violates the color of law statute, taking away the person’s rights of due process and unreasonable seizure. In the case of deprivation of property, the color of law statute would be violated by unlawfully obtaining or maintaining a person’s property, which oversteps or misapplies the official’s authority.
The Fourteenth Amendment secures the right to due process; the Eighth Amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment. During an arrest or detention, these rights can be violated by the use of force amounting to punishment (summary judgment). The person accused of a crime must be allowed the opportunity to have a trial and should not be subjected to punishment without having been afforded the opportunity of the legal process.
Failure to keep from harm: The public counts on its law enforcement officials to protect local communities. If it’s shown that an official willfully failed to keep an individual from harm, that official could be in violation of the color of law statute.
Filing a Complaint
To file a color of law complaint, contact your local FBI office by telephone, in writing, or in person. The following information should be provided:
All identifying information for the victim(s);
As much identifying information as possible for the subject(s), including position, rank, and agency employed;
Date and time of incident;
Location of incident;
Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of any witness(es);
A complete chronology of events; and
Any report numbers and charges with respect to the incident.
You may also contact the United States Attorney's Office in your district or send a written complaint to:
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
Criminal Section
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest
Washington, DC 20530
FBI investigations vary in length. Once our investigation is complete, we forward the findings to the U.S. Attorney’s Office within the local jurisdiction and to the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., which decide whether or not to proceed toward prosecution and handle any prosecutions that follow.
Civil Applications
Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141 makes it unlawful for state or local law enforcement agencies to allow officers to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives persons of rights protected by the Constitution or U.S. laws. This law, commonly referred to as the Police Misconduct Statute, gives the Department of Justice authority to seek civil remedies in cases where law enforcement agencies have policies or practices that foster a pattern of misconduct by employees. This action is directed against an agency, not against individual officers. The types of issues which may initiate a pattern and practice investigation include:
Lack of supervision/monitoring of officers' actions;
Lack of justification or reporting by officers on incidents involving the use of force;
Lack of, or improper training of, officers; and
Citizen complaint processes that treat complainants as adversaries.
Under Title 42, U.S.C., Section 1997, the Department of Justice has the ability to initiate civil actions against mental hospitals, retardation facilities, jails, prisons, nursing homes, and juvenile detention facilities when there are allegations of systemic derivations of the constitutional rights of institutionalized persons.
Report Civil Rights Violations
File a Report with Your Local FBI Office
File a Report over Our Internet Tip Line
Visit Our Victim Assistance Site
Resources
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law Statute
Principles for Promoting Police Integrity (pdf)
Addressing Police Misconduct Brochure
Law Enforcement Misconduct FAQs
Color of Law Abuses
U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.
Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. “Color of law” simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.
The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law abuses, which include acts carried out by government officials operating both within and beyond the limits of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may be covered if the perpetrator asserted his or her official status in some way.
During 2009, the FBI investigated 385 color of law cases. Most of these crimes fall into five broad areas:
Excessive force;
Sexual assaults;
False arrest and fabrication of evidence;
Deprivation of property; and
Failure to keep from harm.
Excessive force: In making arrests, maintaining order, and defending life, law enforcement officers are allowed to use whatever force is "reasonably" necessary. The breadth and scope of the use of force is vast—from just the physical presence of the officer…to the use of deadly force. Violations of federal law occur when it can be shown that the force used was willfully "unreasonable" or "excessive."
Sexual assaults by officials acting under color of law can happen in jails, during traffic stops, or in other settings where officials might use their position of authority to coerce an individual into sexual compliance. The compliance is generally gained because of a threat of an official action against the person if he or she doesn’t comply.
False arrest and fabrication of evidence: The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable searches or seizures. A law enforcement official using authority provided under the color of law is allowed to stop individuals and, under certain circumstances, to search them and retain their property. It is in the abuse of that discretionary power—such as an unlawful detention or illegal confiscation of property—that a violation of a person's civil rights may occur.
Fabricating evidence against or falsely arresting an individual also violates the color of law statute, taking away the person’s rights of due process and unreasonable seizure. In the case of deprivation of property, the color of law statute would be violated by unlawfully obtaining or maintaining a person’s property, which oversteps or misapplies the official’s authority.
The Fourteenth Amendment secures the right to due process; the Eighth Amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment. During an arrest or detention, these rights can be violated by the use of force amounting to punishment (summary judgment). The person accused of a crime must be allowed the opportunity to have a trial and should not be subjected to punishment without having been afforded the opportunity of the legal process.
Failure to keep from harm: The public counts on its law enforcement officials to protect local communities. If it’s shown that an official willfully failed to keep an individual from harm, that official could be in violation of the color of law statute.
Filing a Complaint
To file a color of law complaint, contact your local FBI office by telephone, in writing, or in person. The following information should be provided:
All identifying information for the victim(s);
As much identifying information as possible for the subject(s), including position, rank, and agency employed;
Date and time of incident;
Location of incident;
Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of any witness(es);
A complete chronology of events; and
Any report numbers and charges with respect to the incident.
You may also contact the United States Attorney's Office in your district or send a written complaint to:
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
Criminal Section
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest
Washington, DC 20530
FBI investigations vary in length. Once our investigation is complete, we forward the findings to the U.S. Attorney’s Office within the local jurisdiction and to the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., which decide whether or not to proceed toward prosecution and handle any prosecutions that follow.
Civil Applications
Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141 makes it unlawful for state or local law enforcement agencies to allow officers to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives persons of rights protected by the Constitution or U.S. laws. This law, commonly referred to as the Police Misconduct Statute, gives the Department of Justice authority to seek civil remedies in cases where law enforcement agencies have policies or practices that foster a pattern of misconduct by employees. This action is directed against an agency, not against individual officers. The types of issues which may initiate a pattern and practice investigation include:
Lack of supervision/monitoring of officers' actions;
Lack of justification or reporting by officers on incidents involving the use of force;
Lack of, or improper training of, officers; and
Citizen complaint processes that treat complainants as adversaries.
Under Title 42, U.S.C., Section 1997, the Department of Justice has the ability to initiate civil actions against mental hospitals, retardation facilities, jails, prisons, nursing homes, and juvenile detention facilities when there are allegations of systemic derivations of the constitutional rights of institutionalized persons.
Report Civil Rights Violations
File a Report with Your Local FBI Office
File a Report over Our Internet Tip Line
Visit Our Victim Assistance Site
Resources
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law Statute
Principles for Promoting Police Integrity (pdf)
Addressing Police Misconduct Brochure
Law Enforcement Misconduct FAQs
THE EVIDENCE IS IN Foster Care vs. Keeping Families Together: The Definitive Studies
National Coalition for Child Protection Reform / 53 Skyhill Road (Suite 202) / Alexandria, Va. 22314
(703) 212&2006 / info@nccpr.org / www.nccpr.org
THE EVIDENCE IS IN
Foster Care vs. Keeping Families Together: The Definitive Studies
NCCPR long has argued that many children now trapped in foster care would be far
better off if they had remained with their own families and those families had been given the right
kinds of help.
Turns out that’s not quite right.
In fact, many children now trapped in foster care would be far better off if they remained
with their own families even if those families got only the typical help (which tends to be little help,
wrong help, or no help) commonly offered by child welfare agencies.
That’s the message from the largest studies ever undertaken to compare the impact on
children of foster care versus keeping comparably maltreated children with their own families. The
study was the subject of a front&page story in USA Today, available here: http://bit.ly/5JpHmU
The first study, published in 2007, and available here,
http://www.mit.edu/~jjdoyle/fostercare_aer.pdf looked at outcomes for more than 15,000 children.
It compared foster children not to the general population but to comparably-maltreated children
left in their own homes. The result: On measure after measure the children left in their own
homes do better.
In fact, it’s not even close.
Children left in their own homes are far less likely to become pregnant as teenagers, far
less likely to wind up in the juvenile justice system and far more likely to hold a job for at least
three months than comparably maltreated children who were placed in foster care.
One year later, the same researcher published another study,available here:
http://www.mit.edu/~jjdoyle/doyle_jpe_aug08.pdf, his time of 23,000 cases. Again he compared
foster children to comparably&maltreated children left in their own homes. This time he looked at
which children were more likely to be arrested as adults. Once again, the children left in their
own homes fared better than the foster children.
Implications
● The studies use the term “foster care” generically; they include children placed in any
form of substitute care. That’s important because whenever information like this comes out,
people who want to warehouse children in orphanages try to use it to justify their schemes. But
these studies were not limited to family foster homes. And it takes three single&spaced pages just
to list all the other studies documenting the harm of orphanages. (Those pages are available
from NCCPR.)
● This does not mean that no child ever should be placed in foster care. But it
means many fewer children should be placed in foster care.
The studies excluded the most severe cases of maltreatment, a very small proportion of
any child protective worker’s caseload, precisely because, horror stories that make the front page
notwithstanding, these are cases where everyone with time to investigate would agree that
removal from the home was the only alternative.
Rather, the studies focused on, by far, the largest group of cases any worker sees, those
that can best be called the “in&between cases” where the parent is neither all victim nor all villain;
cases where there are real problems in the home, but wide disagreement over what should be
done. As the first study itself notes: “These are the cases most likely to be affected by policy
changes that alter the threshold for placement.” They also, are, of course, the cases most likely
to be affected by a foster&care panic – which also alters the threshold for placement. THE EVIDENCE IS IN/2
Even among these cases, the figures are averages. Certainly there are some individual
cases among the thousands studied in which foster care was the less harmful alternative. But
what the data make clear is that foster care is vastly overused, damaging large numbers of
children who would do better in life had they remained in their own homes, even with the minimal
help most child welfare agencies offer to families.
This says less about how well child protection agencies do in helping families than it does
about how enormously toxic a foster care intervention is. Anything that toxic must be used very
sparingly and in very small doses.
● Child welfare agencies have a disingenuous response to all this: “Why yes, of course,”
they like to say. “This research just shows what we’ve always said ourselves: foster care only
should be used as a last resort; of course we keep families together whenever possible.” But this
research shows that agency actions belie their words. These studies found thousands of
children already in foster care who would have done better had child protection agencies
not taken them away in the first place.
● The USA Today story quotes one deservedly well&respected expert as saying that the
2007 study was the first to produce such results. But that is an error. Actually it was at least the
second since 2006. A University of Minnesota study, available here: http://bit.ly/76Hhqk used a
different methodology and measured different outcomes, but came to very similar conclusions.
● Though the USA Today story says other “studies” go the other way, the one cited, with
less than 1/100
th
the sample size of the new studies, a shorter duration and at least one other
serious flaw (omitting foster children in care for less than six months) is the only one we know of.
And that study focused on reunification, not on children never removed in the first place.
And, of course, that study also compared foster care only to typical “help” for families in
their own homes, which generally is little or nothing. Providing the kinds of real help NCCPR
recommends (See Twelve Ways to do Child Welfare Right, available here:
http://nccpr.info/solutions-services/ ) would likely change the result and, in the case of the three
more recent and more rigorous studies, create an even wider gap in outcomes favoring keeping
families together.
● Perhaps most intriguing, these studies suggest it actually may be possible to quantify
the harm of a foster&care panic, a huge, sudden upsurge in needless removals after the death of
a child “known to the system” gets extensive news coverage.
Thanks to these studies, we now have an estimate of how much worse foster children do
on key outcomes compared with comparably&maltreated children left in their own homes. It’s also
usually possible to calculate how many more children are taken away during a foster&care panic.
So it should be possible to estimate how many more children will wind up under arrest, how many
more will become pregnant and how many more will be jobless as a result of a foster&care panic.
It also should be possible to estimate roughly how many children have been saved from
these rotten outcomes in states and localities that have reformed their systems to emphasize
safe, proven programs to keep families together.
These new studies and the Minnesota study are in addition to the comprehensive study
of foster care alumni showing that only one in five could be said to be doing well as a young adult
– in other words, foster care churns out walking wounded four times out of five. (See NCCPR’s
publication 80 Percent Failure (http://www.nccpr.org/reports/cfpanalysis.pdf)for more on this
study) and the mass of evidence showing that simply in terms of physical safety, real family
preservation programs have a far better track record than foster care. (See NCCPR Issue Paper
#1: http://www.nccpr.org/reports/01SAFETY.pdf)
The buzzword in child welfare is “evidence&based.” What that really means is: How dare
proponents of any new, innovative approach to child welfare expect to get funding if they can’t dot
every i and cross every t on evaluations proving the innovation’s efficacy beyond a shadow of a
doubt? Old, non&innovative programs, however, are not held to this standard. If they were, child
welfare would be turned upside down by the results of this new research.
Because now, more than ever, the evidence is in. Updated June 3, 2009
(703) 212&2006 / info@nccpr.org / www.nccpr.org
THE EVIDENCE IS IN
Foster Care vs. Keeping Families Together: The Definitive Studies
NCCPR long has argued that many children now trapped in foster care would be far
better off if they had remained with their own families and those families had been given the right
kinds of help.
Turns out that’s not quite right.
In fact, many children now trapped in foster care would be far better off if they remained
with their own families even if those families got only the typical help (which tends to be little help,
wrong help, or no help) commonly offered by child welfare agencies.
That’s the message from the largest studies ever undertaken to compare the impact on
children of foster care versus keeping comparably maltreated children with their own families. The
study was the subject of a front&page story in USA Today, available here: http://bit.ly/5JpHmU
The first study, published in 2007, and available here,
http://www.mit.edu/~jjdoyle/fostercare_aer.pdf looked at outcomes for more than 15,000 children.
It compared foster children not to the general population but to comparably-maltreated children
left in their own homes. The result: On measure after measure the children left in their own
homes do better.
In fact, it’s not even close.
Children left in their own homes are far less likely to become pregnant as teenagers, far
less likely to wind up in the juvenile justice system and far more likely to hold a job for at least
three months than comparably maltreated children who were placed in foster care.
One year later, the same researcher published another study,available here:
http://www.mit.edu/~jjdoyle/doyle_jpe_aug08.pdf, his time of 23,000 cases. Again he compared
foster children to comparably&maltreated children left in their own homes. This time he looked at
which children were more likely to be arrested as adults. Once again, the children left in their
own homes fared better than the foster children.
Implications
● The studies use the term “foster care” generically; they include children placed in any
form of substitute care. That’s important because whenever information like this comes out,
people who want to warehouse children in orphanages try to use it to justify their schemes. But
these studies were not limited to family foster homes. And it takes three single&spaced pages just
to list all the other studies documenting the harm of orphanages. (Those pages are available
from NCCPR.)
● This does not mean that no child ever should be placed in foster care. But it
means many fewer children should be placed in foster care.
The studies excluded the most severe cases of maltreatment, a very small proportion of
any child protective worker’s caseload, precisely because, horror stories that make the front page
notwithstanding, these are cases where everyone with time to investigate would agree that
removal from the home was the only alternative.
Rather, the studies focused on, by far, the largest group of cases any worker sees, those
that can best be called the “in&between cases” where the parent is neither all victim nor all villain;
cases where there are real problems in the home, but wide disagreement over what should be
done. As the first study itself notes: “These are the cases most likely to be affected by policy
changes that alter the threshold for placement.” They also, are, of course, the cases most likely
to be affected by a foster&care panic – which also alters the threshold for placement. THE EVIDENCE IS IN/2
Even among these cases, the figures are averages. Certainly there are some individual
cases among the thousands studied in which foster care was the less harmful alternative. But
what the data make clear is that foster care is vastly overused, damaging large numbers of
children who would do better in life had they remained in their own homes, even with the minimal
help most child welfare agencies offer to families.
This says less about how well child protection agencies do in helping families than it does
about how enormously toxic a foster care intervention is. Anything that toxic must be used very
sparingly and in very small doses.
● Child welfare agencies have a disingenuous response to all this: “Why yes, of course,”
they like to say. “This research just shows what we’ve always said ourselves: foster care only
should be used as a last resort; of course we keep families together whenever possible.” But this
research shows that agency actions belie their words. These studies found thousands of
children already in foster care who would have done better had child protection agencies
not taken them away in the first place.
● The USA Today story quotes one deservedly well&respected expert as saying that the
2007 study was the first to produce such results. But that is an error. Actually it was at least the
second since 2006. A University of Minnesota study, available here: http://bit.ly/76Hhqk used a
different methodology and measured different outcomes, but came to very similar conclusions.
● Though the USA Today story says other “studies” go the other way, the one cited, with
less than 1/100
th
the sample size of the new studies, a shorter duration and at least one other
serious flaw (omitting foster children in care for less than six months) is the only one we know of.
And that study focused on reunification, not on children never removed in the first place.
And, of course, that study also compared foster care only to typical “help” for families in
their own homes, which generally is little or nothing. Providing the kinds of real help NCCPR
recommends (See Twelve Ways to do Child Welfare Right, available here:
http://nccpr.info/solutions-services/ ) would likely change the result and, in the case of the three
more recent and more rigorous studies, create an even wider gap in outcomes favoring keeping
families together.
● Perhaps most intriguing, these studies suggest it actually may be possible to quantify
the harm of a foster&care panic, a huge, sudden upsurge in needless removals after the death of
a child “known to the system” gets extensive news coverage.
Thanks to these studies, we now have an estimate of how much worse foster children do
on key outcomes compared with comparably&maltreated children left in their own homes. It’s also
usually possible to calculate how many more children are taken away during a foster&care panic.
So it should be possible to estimate how many more children will wind up under arrest, how many
more will become pregnant and how many more will be jobless as a result of a foster&care panic.
It also should be possible to estimate roughly how many children have been saved from
these rotten outcomes in states and localities that have reformed their systems to emphasize
safe, proven programs to keep families together.
These new studies and the Minnesota study are in addition to the comprehensive study
of foster care alumni showing that only one in five could be said to be doing well as a young adult
– in other words, foster care churns out walking wounded four times out of five. (See NCCPR’s
publication 80 Percent Failure (http://www.nccpr.org/reports/cfpanalysis.pdf)for more on this
study) and the mass of evidence showing that simply in terms of physical safety, real family
preservation programs have a far better track record than foster care. (See NCCPR Issue Paper
#1: http://www.nccpr.org/reports/01SAFETY.pdf)
The buzzword in child welfare is “evidence&based.” What that really means is: How dare
proponents of any new, innovative approach to child welfare expect to get funding if they can’t dot
every i and cross every t on evaluations proving the innovation’s efficacy beyond a shadow of a
doubt? Old, non&innovative programs, however, are not held to this standard. If they were, child
welfare would be turned upside down by the results of this new research.
Because now, more than ever, the evidence is in. Updated June 3, 2009
Parents, civil rights groups support Detroit mom jailed over daughter's meds
Parents, civil rights groups support Detroit mom jailed over daughter's meds | detnews.com | The Detroit News
Detroit — A group of parental rights supporters and activists gathered at a northwest-side church this morning to raise awareness and money for a mother jailed after a 10-hour standoff with police over her daughter's medications.
Detroit — A group of parental rights supporters and activists gathered at a northwest-side church this morning to raise awareness and money for a mother jailed after a 10-hour standoff with police over her daughter's medications.
The family justice system is callous, corrupt and staggeringly expensive
The family justice system is callous, corrupt and staggeringly expensive - Telegraph
David Norgrove's interim review of the family justice system only scratches the surface of what has become a national scandal, says Christopher Booker.
David Norgrove's interim review of the family justice system only scratches the surface of what has become a national scandal, says Christopher Booker.
The Duties of Child Protective Caseworkers-Total Crock!
The Duties of Child Protective Caseworkers | eHow.com
E-How writes an article on the practices Child Protective Services are MANDATED to follow. Then why don't they? Would it mean less incentive money and federal funding? You're dam right it would! If only mandates were followed, the families that WOULD be PRESERVED, not destroyed! What do we have to do to make our Federal Government open their eyes to the deceitful practices used by CPS? The Federal funding just keep's rolling in, which can only mean one thing. CPS HAS to be falsifying the Fed's paperwork as well as everyone else's!
E-How writes an article on the practices Child Protective Services are MANDATED to follow. Then why don't they? Would it mean less incentive money and federal funding? You're dam right it would! If only mandates were followed, the families that WOULD be PRESERVED, not destroyed! What do we have to do to make our Federal Government open their eyes to the deceitful practices used by CPS? The Federal funding just keep's rolling in, which can only mean one thing. CPS HAS to be falsifying the Fed's paperwork as well as everyone else's!
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Davenport woman's baby dies while in foster care
Davenport woman's baby dies while in foster care - Quad Cities Online
Originally Posted Online: March 31, 2011, 6:45 pm
Last Updated: April 01, 2011, 11:22 am
Comment on this story | Print this story | Email this story
By Stephen Elliott, selliott@qconline.com
DAVENPORT -- Dawn Burkhardt has had a life of bad: bad checks, bad boyfriends, bad stints in jail.
But the worst came March 4 when her 9-month-old son, Brandon Jordan, died at the home of his foster parents.
"I was just getting out of jail for not paying a fine, and DCFS (the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services)told me, cold heartedly, 'Dawn, your son's dead,'" she said.
"It didn't sink in. The more I think about it, the more it hurts, the more pain and suffering I'm going through," she said."They took a baby from a parent that's fully functional."
Ms. Burkhardt, 29, is no stranger to DCFS. Shehas had six children; DCFS has placedtwo in foster care. Two live with an aunt and another is with its father. In June, DCFS also took Brandon from Ms. Burkhardt and placed him with foster parents,Deandrea and Roshanda Washington, in Peoria.
Now, Brandon is dead.He died from asphyxiation, according to Peoria County Coroner Johnna Ingersoll, who said the babyapparently had been left alone in his crib for nine hours.
"It is under investigation with the Peoria Police Department and the Peoria Coroner's Office," Ms. Ingersoll said Wednesday. "An inquest will likely be within the next couple of weeks.
"Perhaps it may be necessary to delay the inquest if the investigation is not complete within the next couple of weeks," she said."But, hopefully, it will be."
DCFS spokesman Kendall Marlowe confirmed the agency began investigating Brandon's death on March 5. He also said two other foster children living in the same Peoria home have been placed with another foster family.
The court granted temporary custody of Brandon to DCFS on June 17, 2010, Mr. Marlowe said. Custody is granted based on either abuse or neglect, he added.
There have been subsequent hearings on Brandon's status since his foster care placement, Mr. Marlowe said. Those hearing's files, he noted, generally are not open to the public.
Ms. Burkhardt said she left the Quad-Cities last year after an abusive relationship with Brandon's father.
"He's in prison right now," she said. "He's a very bad person. I don't bring him up. I had a baby by him, but when I got pregnant by him, I had already left him.
"But, things got worse," Ms. Burkhardt said. "He started beating on me, showing up at places I was at."
So she moved.She got a bus ticket to Peoria, where she contacted and resided at a domestic violence shelter.
"I felt if I didn't leave town, me and my baby wouldn't be alive," she said.
Ms. Burkhardt said that, after Brandon was born at OSF St. Francis Hospital in Peoria, he was taken from her by DCFS and put into foster care.
"DCFS took my child away at the hospital," Ms. Burkhardt said.
"I don't see how I can be unstable," she said. "It (the shelter)was a domestic violence place.They provided transitional housing, transportation if needed, clothing. They helped you get to the food stamp place to sign up for cash assistance. I had not had a chance to get everything situated."
Currently in Illinois, there are 15,540 children in foster care, according to Mr. Marlowe. That's down markedly from 1997, he said, when the state had more than 52,000 kids in state care.
"We've made tremendous progress through adoptions, guardianships, in reunifying children with their families," he said. "There is a large body of research showing children do better when they maintain ties to community and maintain their family ties to the family."
Mr. Marlowe said he could not comment specifically on Brandon's case. But he noted that every Illinois foster parent goes through a criminal background check and a DCFS background check.
DCFS takes numerous variables into account when determining a child's safety, he said.
"The difficulty is, neglect is very closely linked to poverty," Mr. Marlowe said. "Parents highly impoverished who may not mean to harm children may still place them in a neglectful situation."
Ms. Burkhardt believes Brandon was betrayed by the system. And she said she feels she's getting the run-around from authorities.
Until Thursday -- when she said she was told to leave -- Ms.Burkhardt had lived at the Humility of Mary homeless shelter in Davenport. She said she is working on her GED and plans to enter the massage therapy field.
For now, she and her current boyfriend, Tyrone Stewart, stay at shelters while seeking some footing. She said that, without Mr. Stewart, "I don't think I would be able to handle this."
On Thursday afternoon, the two were at Vander Veer Botanical Park as parents and grandparents passed, holding their children's hands or pushing them in strollers. Although children played close to where she on a bench, their two worlds were miles apart.
Ms. Burkhardt shared that she doesn't even know where Brandon is buried.
"Somewhere in Peoria," she said, her voice crackingslightly as she reached back for a memory of her son, trying to connect with a reality that never was.
"I was planning on getting Brandon back and making a healthy home for him," she said.
"He never got a chance to know his mother," she said."Part of me feels guilty; my son didn't get a chance to live in this world.
"My son cannot rest until something is done," she said. "I just want my son to have some justice."
Originally Posted Online: March 31, 2011, 6:45 pm
Last Updated: April 01, 2011, 11:22 am
Comment on this story | Print this story | Email this story
By Stephen Elliott, selliott@qconline.com
DAVENPORT -- Dawn Burkhardt has had a life of bad: bad checks, bad boyfriends, bad stints in jail.
But the worst came March 4 when her 9-month-old son, Brandon Jordan, died at the home of his foster parents.
"I was just getting out of jail for not paying a fine, and DCFS (the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services)told me, cold heartedly, 'Dawn, your son's dead,'" she said.
"It didn't sink in. The more I think about it, the more it hurts, the more pain and suffering I'm going through," she said."They took a baby from a parent that's fully functional."
Ms. Burkhardt, 29, is no stranger to DCFS. Shehas had six children; DCFS has placedtwo in foster care. Two live with an aunt and another is with its father. In June, DCFS also took Brandon from Ms. Burkhardt and placed him with foster parents,Deandrea and Roshanda Washington, in Peoria.
Now, Brandon is dead.He died from asphyxiation, according to Peoria County Coroner Johnna Ingersoll, who said the babyapparently had been left alone in his crib for nine hours.
"It is under investigation with the Peoria Police Department and the Peoria Coroner's Office," Ms. Ingersoll said Wednesday. "An inquest will likely be within the next couple of weeks.
"Perhaps it may be necessary to delay the inquest if the investigation is not complete within the next couple of weeks," she said."But, hopefully, it will be."
DCFS spokesman Kendall Marlowe confirmed the agency began investigating Brandon's death on March 5. He also said two other foster children living in the same Peoria home have been placed with another foster family.
The court granted temporary custody of Brandon to DCFS on June 17, 2010, Mr. Marlowe said. Custody is granted based on either abuse or neglect, he added.
There have been subsequent hearings on Brandon's status since his foster care placement, Mr. Marlowe said. Those hearing's files, he noted, generally are not open to the public.
Ms. Burkhardt said she left the Quad-Cities last year after an abusive relationship with Brandon's father.
"He's in prison right now," she said. "He's a very bad person. I don't bring him up. I had a baby by him, but when I got pregnant by him, I had already left him.
"But, things got worse," Ms. Burkhardt said. "He started beating on me, showing up at places I was at."
So she moved.She got a bus ticket to Peoria, where she contacted and resided at a domestic violence shelter.
"I felt if I didn't leave town, me and my baby wouldn't be alive," she said.
Ms. Burkhardt said that, after Brandon was born at OSF St. Francis Hospital in Peoria, he was taken from her by DCFS and put into foster care.
"DCFS took my child away at the hospital," Ms. Burkhardt said.
"I don't see how I can be unstable," she said. "It (the shelter)was a domestic violence place.They provided transitional housing, transportation if needed, clothing. They helped you get to the food stamp place to sign up for cash assistance. I had not had a chance to get everything situated."
Currently in Illinois, there are 15,540 children in foster care, according to Mr. Marlowe. That's down markedly from 1997, he said, when the state had more than 52,000 kids in state care.
"We've made tremendous progress through adoptions, guardianships, in reunifying children with their families," he said. "There is a large body of research showing children do better when they maintain ties to community and maintain their family ties to the family."
Mr. Marlowe said he could not comment specifically on Brandon's case. But he noted that every Illinois foster parent goes through a criminal background check and a DCFS background check.
DCFS takes numerous variables into account when determining a child's safety, he said.
"The difficulty is, neglect is very closely linked to poverty," Mr. Marlowe said. "Parents highly impoverished who may not mean to harm children may still place them in a neglectful situation."
Ms. Burkhardt believes Brandon was betrayed by the system. And she said she feels she's getting the run-around from authorities.
Until Thursday -- when she said she was told to leave -- Ms.Burkhardt had lived at the Humility of Mary homeless shelter in Davenport. She said she is working on her GED and plans to enter the massage therapy field.
For now, she and her current boyfriend, Tyrone Stewart, stay at shelters while seeking some footing. She said that, without Mr. Stewart, "I don't think I would be able to handle this."
On Thursday afternoon, the two were at Vander Veer Botanical Park as parents and grandparents passed, holding their children's hands or pushing them in strollers. Although children played close to where she on a bench, their two worlds were miles apart.
Ms. Burkhardt shared that she doesn't even know where Brandon is buried.
"Somewhere in Peoria," she said, her voice crackingslightly as she reached back for a memory of her son, trying to connect with a reality that never was.
"I was planning on getting Brandon back and making a healthy home for him," she said.
"He never got a chance to know his mother," she said."Part of me feels guilty; my son didn't get a chance to live in this world.
"My son cannot rest until something is done," she said. "I just want my son to have some justice."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)