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, October 16, 2011
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Parent's Guide to the System
Parents Guide to the System
by Cheryl Barnes
Dedicated to Taler Corbin Barnes
With the hope that no child will ever again suffer government abuse as Taler did due to his parent’s lack of knowledge and understanding of the child welfare system.
Please click on the above link:
by Cheryl Barnes
Dedicated to Taler Corbin Barnes
With the hope that no child will ever again suffer government abuse as Taler did due to his parent’s lack of knowledge and understanding of the child welfare system.
Please click on the above link:
The little ADOPTED boy who started a sex change aged eight because he (and his lesbian parents) knew he always wanted to be a girl
The little boy who started a sex change aged eight because he (and his lesbian parents) knew he always wanted to be a girl[???] | Survive Change:
EDITORS Note: Do I really have to say anything??? Thats what I thought….
The lesbian parents of an 11-year-old boy who is undergoing the process of becoming a girl last night defended the decision, claiming it was better for a child to have a sex change when young.
EDITORS Note: Do I really have to say anything??? Thats what I thought….
The lesbian parents of an 11-year-old boy who is undergoing the process of becoming a girl last night defended the decision, claiming it was better for a child to have a sex change when young.
Friday, October 14, 2011
The Existing Civil Right to Counsel Infrastructure
The Existing Civil Right to Counsel
Infrastructure
By Laura K. Abel and Judge Lora J. Livingston
In August 2006 the ABA House of
Delegates unanimously passed a resolution endorsing a civil right to counsel
in cases concerning basic human needs.1
The resolution was, in the words of
former ABA President Michael Greco,
“historic.”2
At the same time, the report
accompanying the resolution made clear
that it was offering “a careful, incremental
approach . . . limited to those cases where
the most basic of human needs are at
stake.”3
Read More at the above link:
Infrastructure
By Laura K. Abel and Judge Lora J. Livingston
In August 2006 the ABA House of
Delegates unanimously passed a resolution endorsing a civil right to counsel
in cases concerning basic human needs.1
The resolution was, in the words of
former ABA President Michael Greco,
“historic.”2
At the same time, the report
accompanying the resolution made clear
that it was offering “a careful, incremental
approach . . . limited to those cases where
the most basic of human needs are at
stake.”3
Read More at the above link:
American Bar Association Standards of Practice for Attorneys Representing Parents in Abuse and Neglect Cases
American Bar Association
Standards of Practice for Attorneys Representing
Parents in Abuse and Neglect Cases
Introduction
These standards promote quality representation and uniformity of practice throughout the
country for parents’ attorneys in child abuse and neglect cases. The standards were written with
the help of a committee of practicing parents’ attorneys and child welfare professionals from
different jurisdictions in the country. With their help, the standards were written with the
difficulties of day-to-day practice in mind, but also with the goal of raising the quality of
representation. While local adjustments may be necessary to apply these standards in practice,
jurisdictions should strive to meet their fundamental principles and spirit.
The standards are divided into the following categories:
1. Summary of the Standards
2. Basic Obligations of Parents’ Attorneys
3. Obligations of Attorney Manager
4. The Role of the Court
Read More at the above link:
Standards of Practice for Attorneys Representing
Parents in Abuse and Neglect Cases
Introduction
These standards promote quality representation and uniformity of practice throughout the
country for parents’ attorneys in child abuse and neglect cases. The standards were written with
the help of a committee of practicing parents’ attorneys and child welfare professionals from
different jurisdictions in the country. With their help, the standards were written with the
difficulties of day-to-day practice in mind, but also with the goal of raising the quality of
representation. While local adjustments may be necessary to apply these standards in practice,
jurisdictions should strive to meet their fundamental principles and spirit.
The standards are divided into the following categories:
1. Summary of the Standards
2. Basic Obligations of Parents’ Attorneys
3. Obligations of Attorney Manager
4. The Role of the Court
Read More at the above link:
Too many children are being seized by social workers without good reason: why do these families have no protection from the Human Rights Act?
Too many children are being seized by social workers without good reason: why do these families have no protection from the Human Rights Act? | CatholicHerald.co.uk:
The Evangelical group Christian Voice (described in a hostile Wikipedia entry as a “fundamentalist Christian pressure group”) has been dismissed by one churchman as “a disgrace”, and its claims to represent Christians as “absurd”. Well, maybe they are absurd, and maybe they aren’t (though I have to say that I find myself agreeing with Christian Voice more often than I disagree).
The Evangelical group Christian Voice (described in a hostile Wikipedia entry as a “fundamentalist Christian pressure group”) has been dismissed by one churchman as “a disgrace”, and its claims to represent Christians as “absurd”. Well, maybe they are absurd, and maybe they aren’t (though I have to say that I find myself agreeing with Christian Voice more often than I disagree).
Determining the Best Interests of the Child: Summary of State Laws
Determining the Best Interests of the Child: Summary of State Laws:
Determining the Best Interests of the Child: Summary of State Laws
Series: State Statutes
Author(s): Child Welfare Information Gateway
Year Published: 2010
Current through March 2010
This brief introduction summarizes how States address this topic in statute. To access the statutes for a specific State or territory, visit the State Statutes Search.
Courts make a variety of decisions that affect children, including placement and custody determinations, safety and permanency planning, and proceedings for termination of parental rights. Whenever a court makes such a determination, it must weigh whether its decision will be in the "best interests" of the child.
All States, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have statutes requiring that the child's best interests be considered whenever specified types of decisions are made regarding a child's custody, placement, or other critical life issues.
Best Interests Definition
Although there is no standard definition of "best interests of the child," the term generally refers to the deliberation that courts undertake when deciding what type of services, actions, and orders will best serve a child as well as who is best suited to take care of a child. "Best interests" determinations are generally made by considering a number of factors related to the circumstances of the child and the circumstances and capacity of the child's potential caregiver(s), with the child's ultimate safety and well-being as the paramount concern.
Guiding Principles of Best Interests Determinations
State statutes frequently reference overarching goals, purposes, and objectives that shape the analysis in making best interests determinations. The following are among the most frequently stated guiding principles:
The importance of family integrity and preference for avoiding removal of the child from his/her
home (approximately 24 States, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands)1
The health, safety, and/or protection of the child (16 States and the Northern Mariana Islands)2
The importance of timely permanency decisions (16 States and the U.S. Virgin Islands)3
The assurance that a child removed from his/her home will be given care, treatment, and guidance that will assist the child in developing into a self-sufficient adult (9 States, American Samoa, and Guam)4
Best Interests Factors
Approximately 16 States and the District of Columbia list in their statutes specific factors for courts to consider in making determinations regarding the best interests of the child.5 While the factors vary considerably from State to State, some factors commonly required include:
The emotional ties and relationships between the child and his or her parents, siblings, family and household members, or other caregivers (13 States and the District of Columbia)6
The capacity of the parents to provide a safe home and adequate food, clothing, and medical care (eight States)7
The mental and physical health needs of the child (five States and the District of Columbia)8
The mental and physical health of the parents (six States and the District of Columbia)9
The presence of domestic violence in the home (eight States)10
In six of these States and the District of Columbia, all the factors listed in the statute must be considered.11 For example, Illinois law provides a list of the factors that, within the context of the child's age and developmental needs, "shall be considered" in determining best interests. Similarly, the District of Columbia requires that courts consider each factor listed in its best interests statute in making such decisions. In the remaining eight States whose statutes list best interests factors, courts making best interests determinations are directed to consider all relevant factors, not only those specifically listed in the statute.12
Three States also list factor(s) that should not be considered in the best interests analysis. For example, Connecticut law states that the determination of the best interests of the child shall not be based on the consideration of the socioeconomic status of the birth parent or caregiver. Delaware prohibits courts from assuming that one parent, because of his or her sex, is better qualified than the other parent to act as a custodian or primary residential parent. Idaho does not permit discrimination on the basis of a parent's disability.
Statutes in the remaining 34 States, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands provide more general guidance and give more discretion to the courts to make best interests determinations.13 Under Alabama law, for example, courts are provided with a set of goals to "facilitate the care, protection, and discipline of children" who come within their jurisdiction. South Dakota law vests the court with discretion to determine "the suitable disposition of a child according to the least restrictive alternative available in keeping with the child's best interests and with due regard to the rights and interests of the parents, guardian, custodian, the public, and the State."
Other factors that courts commonly take into consideration in making best interests determinations include the following:
Federal and/or State Constitutional protections. For example, New Hampshire law provides that its processes related to reports of child abuse or neglect are to be carried out within a judicial framework that recognizes and enforces the constitutional and other rights of the parties involved. Pennsylvania's statute states that it shall be interpreted so as to provide a means through which parties are afforded a fair hearing and assured the recognition of their constitutional and legal rights.14
The importance of maintaining sibling and other close family bonds. For example, Alaska law notes the importance of frequent, regular, and reasonable visitation with parents and family members when a child has been removed from the home. Florida considers the love, affection, and other emotional ties between the child and his or her parents, siblings, and other relatives to be important in determining the manifest interests of the child.15
The child's wishes. Approximately 11 States and the District of Columbia require courts to consider the child's wishes when making a determination of best interests.16 In making this determination, the court will consider whether the child is of an age and level of maturity to express a reasonable preference.
To access the statutes for a specific State or territory, visit the State Statutes Search.
1 In Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. The word approximately is used to stress the fact that States frequently amend their laws. This information is current as of March 2010. Back
2 In Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Back
3 In Alabama, Alaska, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia. Back
4 In Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and West Virginia. Back
5 Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Back
6 Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee, Vermont, and Virginia. Back
7 Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, North Dakota, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin. Back
8 Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Michigan, and Virginia. Back
9 Delaware, Kentucky, Michigan, North Dakota, Texas, and Virginia. Back
10 Delaware, Kentucky, Michigan, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Back
11 Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Oregon, Vermont, and Virginia. Back
12 Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. Back
13 In Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Back
14 Other States that address the issue of parent and/or child rights within their best interests statutes include Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington, West Virginia, and Puerto Rico. Back
15 Other States that address the importance of maintaining family and sibling relationships include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, as well at the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Back
16 Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maine (when the child is age 12 or older), Massachusetts (when the child is age 12 or older), Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Wisconsin. 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.
Determining the Best Interests of the Child: Summary of State Laws
Series: State Statutes
Author(s): Child Welfare Information Gateway
Year Published: 2010
Current through March 2010
This brief introduction summarizes how States address this topic in statute. To access the statutes for a specific State or territory, visit the State Statutes Search.
Courts make a variety of decisions that affect children, including placement and custody determinations, safety and permanency planning, and proceedings for termination of parental rights. Whenever a court makes such a determination, it must weigh whether its decision will be in the "best interests" of the child.
All States, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have statutes requiring that the child's best interests be considered whenever specified types of decisions are made regarding a child's custody, placement, or other critical life issues.
Best Interests Definition
Although there is no standard definition of "best interests of the child," the term generally refers to the deliberation that courts undertake when deciding what type of services, actions, and orders will best serve a child as well as who is best suited to take care of a child. "Best interests" determinations are generally made by considering a number of factors related to the circumstances of the child and the circumstances and capacity of the child's potential caregiver(s), with the child's ultimate safety and well-being as the paramount concern.
Guiding Principles of Best Interests Determinations
State statutes frequently reference overarching goals, purposes, and objectives that shape the analysis in making best interests determinations. The following are among the most frequently stated guiding principles:
The importance of family integrity and preference for avoiding removal of the child from his/her
home (approximately 24 States, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands)1
The health, safety, and/or protection of the child (16 States and the Northern Mariana Islands)2
The importance of timely permanency decisions (16 States and the U.S. Virgin Islands)3
The assurance that a child removed from his/her home will be given care, treatment, and guidance that will assist the child in developing into a self-sufficient adult (9 States, American Samoa, and Guam)4
Best Interests Factors
Approximately 16 States and the District of Columbia list in their statutes specific factors for courts to consider in making determinations regarding the best interests of the child.5 While the factors vary considerably from State to State, some factors commonly required include:
The emotional ties and relationships between the child and his or her parents, siblings, family and household members, or other caregivers (13 States and the District of Columbia)6
The capacity of the parents to provide a safe home and adequate food, clothing, and medical care (eight States)7
The mental and physical health needs of the child (five States and the District of Columbia)8
The mental and physical health of the parents (six States and the District of Columbia)9
The presence of domestic violence in the home (eight States)10
In six of these States and the District of Columbia, all the factors listed in the statute must be considered.11 For example, Illinois law provides a list of the factors that, within the context of the child's age and developmental needs, "shall be considered" in determining best interests. Similarly, the District of Columbia requires that courts consider each factor listed in its best interests statute in making such decisions. In the remaining eight States whose statutes list best interests factors, courts making best interests determinations are directed to consider all relevant factors, not only those specifically listed in the statute.12
Three States also list factor(s) that should not be considered in the best interests analysis. For example, Connecticut law states that the determination of the best interests of the child shall not be based on the consideration of the socioeconomic status of the birth parent or caregiver. Delaware prohibits courts from assuming that one parent, because of his or her sex, is better qualified than the other parent to act as a custodian or primary residential parent. Idaho does not permit discrimination on the basis of a parent's disability.
Statutes in the remaining 34 States, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands provide more general guidance and give more discretion to the courts to make best interests determinations.13 Under Alabama law, for example, courts are provided with a set of goals to "facilitate the care, protection, and discipline of children" who come within their jurisdiction. South Dakota law vests the court with discretion to determine "the suitable disposition of a child according to the least restrictive alternative available in keeping with the child's best interests and with due regard to the rights and interests of the parents, guardian, custodian, the public, and the State."
Other factors that courts commonly take into consideration in making best interests determinations include the following:
Federal and/or State Constitutional protections. For example, New Hampshire law provides that its processes related to reports of child abuse or neglect are to be carried out within a judicial framework that recognizes and enforces the constitutional and other rights of the parties involved. Pennsylvania's statute states that it shall be interpreted so as to provide a means through which parties are afforded a fair hearing and assured the recognition of their constitutional and legal rights.14
The importance of maintaining sibling and other close family bonds. For example, Alaska law notes the importance of frequent, regular, and reasonable visitation with parents and family members when a child has been removed from the home. Florida considers the love, affection, and other emotional ties between the child and his or her parents, siblings, and other relatives to be important in determining the manifest interests of the child.15
The child's wishes. Approximately 11 States and the District of Columbia require courts to consider the child's wishes when making a determination of best interests.16 In making this determination, the court will consider whether the child is of an age and level of maturity to express a reasonable preference.
To access the statutes for a specific State or territory, visit the State Statutes Search.
1 In Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. The word approximately is used to stress the fact that States frequently amend their laws. This information is current as of March 2010. Back
2 In Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Back
3 In Alabama, Alaska, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia. Back
4 In Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and West Virginia. Back
5 Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Back
6 Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee, Vermont, and Virginia. Back
7 Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, North Dakota, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin. Back
8 Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Michigan, and Virginia. Back
9 Delaware, Kentucky, Michigan, North Dakota, Texas, and Virginia. Back
10 Delaware, Kentucky, Michigan, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Back
11 Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Oregon, Vermont, and Virginia. Back
12 Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. Back
13 In Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Back
14 Other States that address the issue of parent and/or child rights within their best interests statutes include Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington, West Virginia, and Puerto Rico. Back
15 Other States that address the importance of maintaining family and sibling relationships include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, as well at the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Back
16 Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maine (when the child is age 12 or older), Massachusetts (when the child is age 12 or older), Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Wisconsin. 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.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)