Restoring families
Laws permitting reinstatement of parental rights are admirable, but in many cases the rights shouldn't have been terminated in the first place.
Cynthia Godsoe
May 31, 2010
New York state will likely soon enact groundbreaking legislation to restore parental rights in limited cases to neglectful parents who have been rehabilitated. Only a few other states, including California and Washington, have enacted similar laws to help restore families. Although New York Bill A8524/S03868 is necessary to help some of the many children waiting in foster care "limbo" with no prospects of adoption to return to safe and loving families, it wouldn't need to exist in a world that cared more about keeping families safe and together.
More than 8,000 children in New York were in foster care waiting to be adopted in 2006, the most recent year for which numbers are available. (New York state has the third highest number of children waiting nationwide.) As is true with children in foster care nationwide, they are disproportionately from low-income or minority households. Adoptive families are scarce for many of these children. Many, especially older children or those with special needs, live for years in foster care as legal orphans after their parents' rights have been terminated. The sad statistics reveal that children in the United States remain in foster care an average of 38 months after a termination. Many will remain in foster care throughout adolescence without being adopted.
Often, these children maintain a relationship with the person who is the only parent they have ever known — regardless of whether that person remains the legal parent. And youth frequently return to their birth parents after they "age out" of foster care at 18. As one teenage client once told me, "I don't care what they say. She'll always be my mom. A piece of paper doesn't change that."
Children whose parents' rights have been terminated need a permanent legal connection to an adult — something that the foster care system is not designed to provide. The pending legislation would allow parents who are rehabilitated to have their rights restored if a court rules that restoration is in the child's best interests. There are numerous safeguards in the legislation so that restoration occurs only when the parent is capable of caring for the child in a loving and safe home. The parents' rights must have been terminated more than two years before, termination cannot have been on the basis of serious abuse and both the child protection agency and the child must consent.
Although efforts to reform current policy are admirable, they do not get to the root of the problem. The tragic thing is that, in many cases, the parents' rights shouldn't have to be terminated in the first place. Certainly, some parents abuse their children or cannot care for them safely. Yet most parents lose their rights because of "permanent neglect," a nebulous designation often masking the real problem plaguing these families — poverty. Many children end up in foster care because their families do not have adequate housing, appropriate child care or access to services such as drug and alcohol rehabilitation, parenting support, domestic violence shelters or respite care.
Recognizing this socioeconomic disparity, 85% of states have identified poverty as one of the top two challenges facing families reported to child protective services. But services supporting families are in short supply, and preventive services to help families at risk of involvement in the child welfare system are now being drastically cut. It is both morally wrong and economically foolish to focus our resources on paying for the administrative costs of terminating parental rights and then reversing them. Instead, we should spend resources to help families grow strong and healthy, so that they are not torn apart in the first place.
New York is a leader on many issues important to children and families — for instance, offering state child and earned-income tax credits to help working families, mandating some paid family leave and expanding coverage of public health insurance for children beyond the national minimum. The New York state Legislature should follow the example of other family- friendly states and enact legislation restoring families. But why not set a better example still, by helping to keep them together in the first place?
Cynthia Godsoe is an instructor of law at Brooklyn Law School. Previously, she represented children and youth in delinquency, education and child-protective matters.
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202458927528&Restoring_families&hbxlogin=1
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
Friday, May 28, 2010
Two more Census workers blow the whistle
Two more Census workers blow the whistle
Last Updated: 1:23 AM, May 25, 2010
Posted: 12:42 AM, May 25, 2010
John Crudele
You know the old saying: "Everyone loves a charade." Well, it seems that the Census Bureau may be playing games.
Last week, one of the millions of workers hired by Census 2010 to parade around the country counting Americans blew the whistle on some statistical tricks.
The worker, Naomi Cohn, told The Post that she was hired and fired a number of times by Census. Each time she was hired back, it seems, Census was able to report the creation of a new job to the Labor Department.
Below, I have a couple more readers who worked for Census 2010 and have tales to tell.
But first, this much we know.
Each month Census gives Labor a figure on the number of workers it has hired. That figure goes into the closely followed monthly employment report Labor provides. For the past two months the hiring by Census has made up a good portion of the new jobs.
Labor doesn't check the Census hiring figure or whether the jobs are actually new or recycled. It considers a new job to have been created if someone is hired to work at least one hour a month.
One hour! A month! So, if a worker is terminated after only one hour and another is hired in her place, then a second new job can apparently be reported to Labor . (I've been unable to get Census to explain this to me.)
Here's a note from a Census worker -- this one from Manhattan:
"John: I am on my fourth rehire with the 2010 Census.
"I have been hired, trained for a week, given a few hours of work, then laid off. So my unemployed self now counts for four new jobs.
"I have been paid more to train all four times than I have been paid to actually produce results. These are my tax dollars and your tax dollars at work.
"A few months ago I was trained for three days and offered five hours of work counting the homeless. Now, I am knocking (on) doors trying to find the people that have not returned their Census forms. I worked the 2000 Census. It was a far more organized venture.
"Have to run and meet my crew leader, even though with this rain I did not work today. So I can put in a pay sheet for the hour or hour and a half this meeting will take. Sincerely, C.M."
And here's another:
"John: I worked for (Census) and I was paid $18.75 (an hour) just like Ms. Naomi Cohn from your article.
"I worked for about six weeks or so and I picked the hours I wanted to work. I was checking the work of others. While I was classifying addresses, another junior supervisor was checking my work.
"In short, we had a "checkers checking checkers" quality control. I was eventually let go and was told all the work was finished when, in fact, other people were being trained for the same assignment(s).
"I was re-hired about eight months later and was informed that I would have to go through one week of additional training.
"On the third day of training, I got sick and visited my doctor. I called my supervisor and asked how I can make up the class. She informed me that I was 'terminated.' She elaborated that she had to terminate three other people for being five minutes late to class.
"I did get two days' pay and I am sure the 'late people' got paid also. I think you would concur that this is an expensive way to attempt to control sickness plus lateness. I am totally convinced that the Census work could be very easily done by the US Postal Service.
"When I was trying to look for an address or had a question about a building, I would ask the postman on the beat. They knew the history of the route and can expand in detail who moved in or out etc. I have found it interesting that if someone works one hour, they are included in the labor statistics as a new job being full.
"I am not surprised that you can't get any answers from Census staff; I found there were very few people who knew the big picture. M.G."
When I received my Census form in the mail, I filled it out. Nobody had to knock on my door.
I answered truthfully about the number of people living in my household. But I could have just as easily dou bled the number. Why not? Didn't Census ad vertisements imply that my community would get more federal money if the popula tion were larger?
I'm glad people are finding work with the Census. For some it's the only work they have had this year and the chump change they are making for a few hours' work is a godsend.
But wasting taxpayers' money on busywork isn't going to do much for the economy. john.crudele@nypost.com
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/two_more_census_workers_blow_the_OqY80N3DBTvL17VmxKKR0O#ixzz0pG6AEfwr
Last Updated: 1:23 AM, May 25, 2010
Posted: 12:42 AM, May 25, 2010
John Crudele
You know the old saying: "Everyone loves a charade." Well, it seems that the Census Bureau may be playing games.
Last week, one of the millions of workers hired by Census 2010 to parade around the country counting Americans blew the whistle on some statistical tricks.
The worker, Naomi Cohn, told The Post that she was hired and fired a number of times by Census. Each time she was hired back, it seems, Census was able to report the creation of a new job to the Labor Department.
Below, I have a couple more readers who worked for Census 2010 and have tales to tell.
But first, this much we know.
Each month Census gives Labor a figure on the number of workers it has hired. That figure goes into the closely followed monthly employment report Labor provides. For the past two months the hiring by Census has made up a good portion of the new jobs.
Labor doesn't check the Census hiring figure or whether the jobs are actually new or recycled. It considers a new job to have been created if someone is hired to work at least one hour a month.
One hour! A month! So, if a worker is terminated after only one hour and another is hired in her place, then a second new job can apparently be reported to Labor . (I've been unable to get Census to explain this to me.)
Here's a note from a Census worker -- this one from Manhattan:
"John: I am on my fourth rehire with the 2010 Census.
"I have been hired, trained for a week, given a few hours of work, then laid off. So my unemployed self now counts for four new jobs.
"I have been paid more to train all four times than I have been paid to actually produce results. These are my tax dollars and your tax dollars at work.
"A few months ago I was trained for three days and offered five hours of work counting the homeless. Now, I am knocking (on) doors trying to find the people that have not returned their Census forms. I worked the 2000 Census. It was a far more organized venture.
"Have to run and meet my crew leader, even though with this rain I did not work today. So I can put in a pay sheet for the hour or hour and a half this meeting will take. Sincerely, C.M."
And here's another:
"John: I worked for (Census) and I was paid $18.75 (an hour) just like Ms. Naomi Cohn from your article.
"I worked for about six weeks or so and I picked the hours I wanted to work. I was checking the work of others. While I was classifying addresses, another junior supervisor was checking my work.
"In short, we had a "checkers checking checkers" quality control. I was eventually let go and was told all the work was finished when, in fact, other people were being trained for the same assignment(s).
"I was re-hired about eight months later and was informed that I would have to go through one week of additional training.
"On the third day of training, I got sick and visited my doctor. I called my supervisor and asked how I can make up the class. She informed me that I was 'terminated.' She elaborated that she had to terminate three other people for being five minutes late to class.
"I did get two days' pay and I am sure the 'late people' got paid also. I think you would concur that this is an expensive way to attempt to control sickness plus lateness. I am totally convinced that the Census work could be very easily done by the US Postal Service.
"When I was trying to look for an address or had a question about a building, I would ask the postman on the beat. They knew the history of the route and can expand in detail who moved in or out etc. I have found it interesting that if someone works one hour, they are included in the labor statistics as a new job being full.
"I am not surprised that you can't get any answers from Census staff; I found there were very few people who knew the big picture. M.G."
When I received my Census form in the mail, I filled it out. Nobody had to knock on my door.
I answered truthfully about the number of people living in my household. But I could have just as easily dou bled the number. Why not? Didn't Census ad vertisements imply that my community would get more federal money if the popula tion were larger?
I'm glad people are finding work with the Census. For some it's the only work they have had this year and the chump change they are making for a few hours' work is a godsend.
But wasting taxpayers' money on busywork isn't going to do much for the economy. john.crudele@nypost.com
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/two_more_census_workers_blow_the_OqY80N3DBTvL17VmxKKR0O#ixzz0pG6AEfwr
The Services People need most from CPS
AFRA EDITORIALS
May 28, 2010
Guest Editorial
The Services People need most from CPS
By The Committee
There are a lot of services both parents and children could benefit from, at the behest of CPS, but it seems the only "services" available are psychological ones.
It's either classes of some sort, (psychological, parenting, etc.), or evaluations of some sort, or assessments, or programs, treatments, etc.
What is rarely afforded to parents and children are what they really need: legal help, financial help, housing, employment, all of the things that could turn a family's life around for the better and make them contributing members of society rather than a continued burden to it.
The problem with that concept is that it would terminate their involvement with the agency in question, and so would the funnel by which the money flows.
I've been involved with hundreds of families personally and I can tell you from that personal experience that agencies within the CPS are mainly concerned with just how many workers they can get involved in a family's life- child protection worker, family services worker, kinship worker, child services worker, family coordination worker, child intermediate worker, etc., and of course all of the supervisors attached to them.
Then there's the time frame of involvement. It would seem that to serve a family and child's best interests- get in and get out- is not in the agency's best interest. An agency will milk a case for as long as possible, a year, two years, sometimes longer, sometimes almost indefinitely, just to keep that flow of government funding going.
It's "capitalism" at its worst*, and as any detective novel will plainly preach, "Follow the money".
There is little if no incentive what-so-ever to get involved in a case and expedite matters efficiently, swiftly, and effectively. However there is all kinds of financial, employment, and social incentives to expedite the matter slowly, arduously, and with as much complexity and confusion as possible.
One can hide a mountain of irrelevance and non essentials within the confusion and confoundings of a complex and least understood case file, and that's just the way the CPS likes it.
But most of all, it is the easiest way to bury the truth of a situation and hide it behind a whole plethora of; suspicion, innuendo, rumor, speculation, opinion, and even plain old gossip.
Last but not least, the most important aspect of defense and offense for a CPS agency is to prolong a case file for as long as possible, sometimes growing new cases from an old one, generating new cases with the children and their children's children.
It's called securing one's position within the establishment.
Whatever happened to the Constitution? Whatever happened to civil rights? Whatever happened to personal protections? Whatever happened to security of person? Do all of these things just get in the way of these people continuously manipulating the system, perverting the judiciary, subverting our society, and suborning those many values that our ancestors fought and died to defend and protect?
But most of all, what happened to "Miranda"? You know, "You have the right to remain silent, if you give up the right to remain silent anything and everything you say may be used in evidence against you in court, you have the right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for you, do you understand these rights as I have explained them to you?"
Since the days of Ernesto Miranda and the Supreme Court of Arizona, this proclamation has long held to protect the rights of every individual from the onslaught of government oppression upon those who are brought to justice.
However, in Family Court, things like Miranda just don't seem to apply- while Perjury and Subornation of witnesses by CPS and their contractors is perfectly acceptable.
The real question we should all be asking is, "Why Not Miranda?" Why is there a difference from one court in the land and another?
Why can't the law be applicable to one and all, equally, fairly, without regard to; race, creed, color, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, general location, and nationality?
*AFRA Editor note- "capitalism at it's worst" is socialism- "(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."
COMMENT on this story
"Better be wise by the misfortunes of others than by your own." --Aesop (c. 550 B.C.) legendary Greek fabulist
If CPS hasn't attacked YOUR FAMILY yet, see If you are ever approached by anyone from social services.... and WHEN THEY COME AFTER YOU
Learn as much as you can, as fast as you can at How To Fight CPS
Get YOUR VERSION OF HISTORY ON THE RECORD with your Sworn Declaration
May 28, 2010
Guest Editorial
The Services People need most from CPS
By The Committee
There are a lot of services both parents and children could benefit from, at the behest of CPS, but it seems the only "services" available are psychological ones.
It's either classes of some sort, (psychological, parenting, etc.), or evaluations of some sort, or assessments, or programs, treatments, etc.
What is rarely afforded to parents and children are what they really need: legal help, financial help, housing, employment, all of the things that could turn a family's life around for the better and make them contributing members of society rather than a continued burden to it.
The problem with that concept is that it would terminate their involvement with the agency in question, and so would the funnel by which the money flows.
I've been involved with hundreds of families personally and I can tell you from that personal experience that agencies within the CPS are mainly concerned with just how many workers they can get involved in a family's life- child protection worker, family services worker, kinship worker, child services worker, family coordination worker, child intermediate worker, etc., and of course all of the supervisors attached to them.
Then there's the time frame of involvement. It would seem that to serve a family and child's best interests- get in and get out- is not in the agency's best interest. An agency will milk a case for as long as possible, a year, two years, sometimes longer, sometimes almost indefinitely, just to keep that flow of government funding going.
It's "capitalism" at its worst*, and as any detective novel will plainly preach, "Follow the money".
There is little if no incentive what-so-ever to get involved in a case and expedite matters efficiently, swiftly, and effectively. However there is all kinds of financial, employment, and social incentives to expedite the matter slowly, arduously, and with as much complexity and confusion as possible.
One can hide a mountain of irrelevance and non essentials within the confusion and confoundings of a complex and least understood case file, and that's just the way the CPS likes it.
But most of all, it is the easiest way to bury the truth of a situation and hide it behind a whole plethora of; suspicion, innuendo, rumor, speculation, opinion, and even plain old gossip.
Last but not least, the most important aspect of defense and offense for a CPS agency is to prolong a case file for as long as possible, sometimes growing new cases from an old one, generating new cases with the children and their children's children.
It's called securing one's position within the establishment.
Whatever happened to the Constitution? Whatever happened to civil rights? Whatever happened to personal protections? Whatever happened to security of person? Do all of these things just get in the way of these people continuously manipulating the system, perverting the judiciary, subverting our society, and suborning those many values that our ancestors fought and died to defend and protect?
But most of all, what happened to "Miranda"? You know, "You have the right to remain silent, if you give up the right to remain silent anything and everything you say may be used in evidence against you in court, you have the right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for you, do you understand these rights as I have explained them to you?"
Since the days of Ernesto Miranda and the Supreme Court of Arizona, this proclamation has long held to protect the rights of every individual from the onslaught of government oppression upon those who are brought to justice.
However, in Family Court, things like Miranda just don't seem to apply- while Perjury and Subornation of witnesses by CPS and their contractors is perfectly acceptable.
The real question we should all be asking is, "Why Not Miranda?" Why is there a difference from one court in the land and another?
Why can't the law be applicable to one and all, equally, fairly, without regard to; race, creed, color, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, general location, and nationality?
*AFRA Editor note- "capitalism at it's worst" is socialism- "(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."
COMMENT on this story
"Better be wise by the misfortunes of others than by your own." --Aesop (c. 550 B.C.) legendary Greek fabulist
If CPS hasn't attacked YOUR FAMILY yet, see If you are ever approached by anyone from social services.... and WHEN THEY COME AFTER YOU
Learn as much as you can, as fast as you can at How To Fight CPS
Get YOUR VERSION OF HISTORY ON THE RECORD with your Sworn Declaration
The service people need most from CPS: A good Lawyer
AFRA EDITORIALS
By Leonard Henderson
May 27, 2010
The service people need most from CPS: A good Lawyer
When CPS becomes involved with a family, the standard routine is to get people to sign a "Service Plan". (Also called a "Safety Plan" in some states).
To CPS, the most ideal situation (their dream case) is the parent(s) VOLUNTEER for "Services".
In fact, here in Oregon, the only "Civil Right" people have is to NOT be "denied" "services" due to race, religion, sexual preference.
People think these "services" are supposed to help parents get a job, find housing, learn house-keeping, financial skills. If the parent is accused of a drug or alcohol (or not), they get "classes". Everybody gets "parenting class", whether the accusation had anything to to with parenting or not. And people are likely to get "psych evals".
As a general rule, parents find themselves in court. Since very few people CPS goes after can afford a lawyer, they may or may NOT be appointed a lawyer. If a lawyer is appointed, he might not talk with anybody about your case. You walk into the court hallway and perhaps 5 minutes before court, you meet your appointed lawyer.
You walk into the courtroom and BOOM! It turns into a hockey game and you're the puck.
And that may be the last you ever see of your appointed lawyer.
Of all the services families need, a LAWYER is #1
Not just "a" lawyer. A LAWYER. One who knows how- will protect people's Rights and best interests, and WILL present a vigorous defense.
People are searching for occupations that have a virtually unlimited future-
How about becoming a lawyer specializing in CPS cases?
The only thing wrong with it, is there's not a lot of money in it because most of the people CPS victimizes are poor, and the state doesn't pay appointed lawyers much.
Some of us would do the job and take French fries for pay.
COMMENT on this story
"Better be wise by the misfortunes of others than by your own." --Aesop (c. 550 B.C.) legendary Greek fabulist
If CPS hasn't attacked YOUR FAMILY yet, see If you are ever approached by anyone from social services.... and WHEN THEY COME AFTER YOU
Learn as much as you can, as fast as you can at "How To Fight CPS"-
http://familyrights.us/how_to/fight_cps.html
Get YOUR VERSION OF HISTORY ON THE RECORD with your Sworn Affidavit-
http://familyrights.us/bin/FORMS/sworn_affidavit.html
Leonard Henderson, co-founder
American Family Rights Association
http://familyrights.us
"Until Every Child Comes Home" ©
"The Voice of America's Families" ©
Have you seen AFRA News Today?
http://familyrights.us/news
I am not a lawyer and I do not pretend to give legal advice. If you need legal advice, see AFRA's Lawyer Friends who certainly are not pretenders (http://familyrights.us/info/law) I merely relate the things I learned in the past that seemed to work in my own case or things that others have related to me that worked in their cases. I provide information for free and do not expect to receive any form of payment or reward on this side of heaven. Therefore, DO NOT rely on this information as legal advice. Real Legal advice would come from a real lawyer who hates CPS and prepares a VIGOROUS DEFENSE against a negative (proving nothing happened) instead an ATTORNEY (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/attorn) talking you into a plea bargain (http://familyrights.us/bin/The_Problem_with_Plea_Bargaining.htm)
By Leonard Henderson
May 27, 2010
The service people need most from CPS: A good Lawyer
When CPS becomes involved with a family, the standard routine is to get people to sign a "Service Plan". (Also called a "Safety Plan" in some states).
To CPS, the most ideal situation (their dream case) is the parent(s) VOLUNTEER for "Services".
In fact, here in Oregon, the only "Civil Right" people have is to NOT be "denied" "services" due to race, religion, sexual preference.
People think these "services" are supposed to help parents get a job, find housing, learn house-keeping, financial skills. If the parent is accused of a drug or alcohol (or not), they get "classes". Everybody gets "parenting class", whether the accusation had anything to to with parenting or not. And people are likely to get "psych evals".
As a general rule, parents find themselves in court. Since very few people CPS goes after can afford a lawyer, they may or may NOT be appointed a lawyer. If a lawyer is appointed, he might not talk with anybody about your case. You walk into the court hallway and perhaps 5 minutes before court, you meet your appointed lawyer.
You walk into the courtroom and BOOM! It turns into a hockey game and you're the puck.
And that may be the last you ever see of your appointed lawyer.
Of all the services families need, a LAWYER is #1
Not just "a" lawyer. A LAWYER. One who knows how- will protect people's Rights and best interests, and WILL present a vigorous defense.
People are searching for occupations that have a virtually unlimited future-
How about becoming a lawyer specializing in CPS cases?
The only thing wrong with it, is there's not a lot of money in it because most of the people CPS victimizes are poor, and the state doesn't pay appointed lawyers much.
Some of us would do the job and take French fries for pay.
COMMENT on this story
"Better be wise by the misfortunes of others than by your own." --Aesop (c. 550 B.C.) legendary Greek fabulist
If CPS hasn't attacked YOUR FAMILY yet, see If you are ever approached by anyone from social services.... and WHEN THEY COME AFTER YOU
Learn as much as you can, as fast as you can at "How To Fight CPS"-
http://familyrights.us/how_to/fight_cps.html
Get YOUR VERSION OF HISTORY ON THE RECORD with your Sworn Affidavit-
http://familyrights.us/bin/FORMS/sworn_affidavit.html
Leonard Henderson, co-founder
American Family Rights Association
http://familyrights.us
"Until Every Child Comes Home" ©
"The Voice of America's Families" ©
Have you seen AFRA News Today?
http://familyrights.us/news
I am not a lawyer and I do not pretend to give legal advice. If you need legal advice, see AFRA's Lawyer Friends who certainly are not pretenders (http://familyrights.us/info/law) I merely relate the things I learned in the past that seemed to work in my own case or things that others have related to me that worked in their cases. I provide information for free and do not expect to receive any form of payment or reward on this side of heaven. Therefore, DO NOT rely on this information as legal advice. Real Legal advice would come from a real lawyer who hates CPS and prepares a VIGOROUS DEFENSE against a negative (proving nothing happened) instead an ATTORNEY (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/attorn) talking you into a plea bargain (http://familyrights.us/bin/The_Problem_with_Plea_Bargaining.htm)
The Head Start Scam
May 28, 2010 10:35 AM UTC by John Stossel
The Head Start Scam (II)
On my FBN show this week (which re-airs tonight at 10pm) I interviewed Greg Kutz, the director of Government Accountability Office's Special Investigations unit, about fraud he discovered in the government’s Energy Star certification program. Kutz's team managed to get the EPA’s seal of approval on things like a space heater with a feather duster taped on, and a gas powered alarm clock .
Such exposes make the GAO my favorite government agency. This month, they discovered fraud in Head Start programs:
GAO attempted to register fictitious children as part of 15 undercover test scenarios at centers in six states and the District of Columbia. In 8 instances staff at these centers fraudulently misrepresented information, including disregarding part of the families’ income to register over-income children into under-income slots. The undercover tests revealed that 7 Head Start employees lied about applicants’ employment status or misrepresented their earnings.
A DHHS study from earlier this year found that the effects of Head Start wore off entirely by the first grade. So Head Start is both ineffective and ridden with fraud.
Over at BigGovernment.com, Robert Bluey of the Heritage Foundation wonders why the new GAO report hasn't gotten much press.
While the scandal drew coverage from the New York Times and Washington Post , those stories were buried on pages 18 and 17, respectively.
Arguably, the Head Start scandal deserved front-page headlines on newspapers across America last week. Outrage over ACORN centered on the group’s taxpayer funding. The total amount of federal funds that flowed to ACORN was about $53 million dating to 1994.
Head Start, a Great Society program created in 1965 for low-income children, received $9 billion — yes, billion — in appropriations and stimulus funding last year alone. Over the lifetime of the program, it has cost taxpayers more than $150 billion. [QUOTE ENDS]
The head start story is less sexy than the ACORN investigation by two young citizen journalists posing as a pimp and prostitute.
But it's still important.
Read more: http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/05/28/the-head-start-scam-ii/#ixzz0pFeqSys2
http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/05/28/the-head-start-scam-ii/
The Head Start Scam (II)
On my FBN show this week (which re-airs tonight at 10pm) I interviewed Greg Kutz, the director of Government Accountability Office's Special Investigations unit, about fraud he discovered in the government’s Energy Star certification program. Kutz's team managed to get the EPA’s seal of approval on things like a space heater with a feather duster taped on, and a gas powered alarm clock .
Such exposes make the GAO my favorite government agency. This month, they discovered fraud in Head Start programs:
GAO attempted to register fictitious children as part of 15 undercover test scenarios at centers in six states and the District of Columbia. In 8 instances staff at these centers fraudulently misrepresented information, including disregarding part of the families’ income to register over-income children into under-income slots. The undercover tests revealed that 7 Head Start employees lied about applicants’ employment status or misrepresented their earnings.
A DHHS study from earlier this year found that the effects of Head Start wore off entirely by the first grade. So Head Start is both ineffective and ridden with fraud.
Over at BigGovernment.com, Robert Bluey of the Heritage Foundation wonders why the new GAO report hasn't gotten much press.
While the scandal drew coverage from the New York Times and Washington Post , those stories were buried on pages 18 and 17, respectively.
Arguably, the Head Start scandal deserved front-page headlines on newspapers across America last week. Outrage over ACORN centered on the group’s taxpayer funding. The total amount of federal funds that flowed to ACORN was about $53 million dating to 1994.
Head Start, a Great Society program created in 1965 for low-income children, received $9 billion — yes, billion — in appropriations and stimulus funding last year alone. Over the lifetime of the program, it has cost taxpayers more than $150 billion. [QUOTE ENDS]
The head start story is less sexy than the ACORN investigation by two young citizen journalists posing as a pimp and prostitute.
But it's still important.
Read more: http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/05/28/the-head-start-scam-ii/#ixzz0pFeqSys2
http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/05/28/the-head-start-scam-ii/
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Is Adoption Through Facebook a Safe Choice?
pp
http://www.newsy.com/videos/is-adoption-through-facebook-a-safe-choice
Multisource political news, world news, and entertainment news analysis by Newsy.com
http://www.newsy.com/videos/is-adoption-through-facebook-a-safe-choice
N.H. Families Request Audit of NH DHHS/DCYF
Please Sign this Petition at:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/nh-families-request-audit-of-nh-dhhs/dcyf
petition overview | letter
N.H. Families Request Audit of NH DHHS/DCYFNH DCYF
Target:Petition for Audit of NH DCYF
Sponsored by: Dorothy Knightly and Hope Nardone and Pat Patterson
NH families are requesting an audit of NH DHHS/DCYF. A list of points has been put together by NH families to show how much an audit is duly warranted in this state.
1) thorough investigation of skillset/mindset/educational backgrounds/experience of the NH DCYF caseworkers, supervisors and subcontracted staff, to determine if NH DCYF staff (and subcontracted staff) are capable of the determinations that they make for children taken into NH DCYF custody and of the decisions regarding the families of those children
2) indepth investigation of the actions of NH DCYF caseworkers,supervisors, lawyers and subcontracted staff upon taking *children away from their families and placing the children* into "protective custody," and proof that the child in NH DCYF custody is kept safe and that all actions of NH DCYF are soley in the best interest of the child, instead of in the best interest of NH DCYF staff.
3) an in-depth investigation to study the damages that NH DCYF has caused to children and their families, resulting from NH DCYF allegations of parents and families of the children/youth in "protective custody"
3A) That a yearly clinical study needs to be done on each child that NH DCYF takes into custody and places outside of the family to assess the damage and trauma the child has suffered while in DCYF custody, until the child reaches 18 years of age (21 years of age for disabled children) or until DCYF returns the child to his/her family
4) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's failure to ensure continued proper assessment and medical/mental health treatment of the children in the system
5) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's failure to place children with relatives prior to placing children in foster homes
6) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's actions to abuse their authority within the NH judicial. legal, healthcare, medical and school system (this includes and is not limited to: stalling court ordered testing of a child in NH DCYF custody, stalling homestudies, stalling homestudy results and incomplete home studies in order to keep a child in NH DCYF custody, gaining further power via abusing exparte hearings to make false allegations against a parent/family of a child taken into NH DCYF custody, abusing their authority to access medical and healthcare records of a child (or of the child's family) prior to being taken into NH DCYF custody, NH DCYF caseworkers influencing healthcare and medical professionals in order to obtain a slanted 2nd opinion or what should have been a neutral professional opinion, NH DCYF abusing their power to cover up a child's special needs in order to create a false picture that the child is making progress while in NH DCYF custody when in fact the child is not making progress, delaying the child's IEP testing, etc ) and medicating foster children with psychiatric medication for violent behavior, without the parents consent. Behavior the child never experienced until taken from his/her family.
6A) an indepth investigation as to actions and influence of NH DYCF regarding the result/finding of homestudies and the decision/denial of homestudy appeals filed by families to the Administrative Appeals Unit
7) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's actions that failed to follow court orders. IE: court ordered visitation, acting within the timeframes as required by law for any and all actions and decisions regarding children in the system as well as the families of those children
8) an in-depth investigation to study allegations made by NH DCYF's staff to schools, medical professionals, health care professionals, relatives, etc about parents/families of children in NH DCYF custody
9) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's falsifying any type of document and withholding evidence that might be a contradiction of such NH DCYF false allegations and might clear the parent/family of the false allegations made by NH DCYF: This includes and is not limited to: falsifying information on birth certificates in order to promote adoption of a child in NH DCYF custody, false statements and manipulation of facts in order to take a child into NH DCYF custody, false statements in order to obtain social security monies, false statements in order to gain further federal or state monies and false statements to Judges without proof of allegations in order to remove a child from their parents.
10) an in-depth investigation to study how monies were obtained by NH DCYF from the families of the children in protective custody and an audit to the penny of all monies spent by NH DCYF/NH DHHS
11) an in-depth investigation to study the extent of NH DCYF's "double billing" to gain additional funding from the Government, from the State and from families of children in NH DCYF custody
12) an in-depth investigation for a complete audit that will include how every penny of foster care monies was spent on each child in NH DCYF custody
13) an in-depth investigation for determination of financial damages caused by NH
DCYF to the families of those children taken fraudalently by NH DCYF
14) an in-depth investigation for determination of physical, social, psychological, emotional damages caused to the children and to the families of children in NH DCYF custody
15) an in-depth investigation for determination of the extent that NH DCYF has alienated children from their families, including the extent that NH DCYF has alienated the parent from the child in NH DCYF custody
16) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's actions as abuse and neglect of children in NH DCYF's custody (IE: as those children were and are entitled to freedom to practice the same religion that they practiced prior to being taken into NH DCYF custody, children who were not considered to be placed with relatives instead of being placed into foster care, children who were denied the right to prompt IEP testing within the allotted timeframe from the moment that IEP testing was requested of NH DCYF in writing by the guardian or parent of the child in NH DCYF custody, prompt and proper evaluation and treatment of mental, physical and psychiatric illness of the children in NH DCYF custody, and an indepth review of the medications that were given to the children in NH DCYF custody with a full explanation as to the reason for each medication given, the right of the child to spend time with their family, the social and emotional and physical trauma or injury caused to the child as a direct result of the child being taken into NH DCYF custody: this includes and is not limited to: children placed in foster care or in other settings, any bruises, open skin areas, broken bones, fall/accidents, hospitalizations, broken teeth, signs/symptoms of anxiety or depression including suicide attempts of each and every child during the time that the child is in NH DCYF custody)
17) an indepth investigation to determine if NH DCYF has acted on behalf or in violation of our constitution
18) an indepth look at NH DCYF's actions to determine whether NH DCYF has followed or violated their own mission statement: including determination of how NH DCYF has "reunified families" in a timely manner and in the least traumatic way for the children, youth and families that they are supposed to be servicing
18A) an indepth investigation as to how many families have been reunified by NH DCYF within the last five years
18B) an indepth investigation as to how many parent's rights were terminated in NH within a five year period and how many TPR's(termination of parental rights) were filed by NH DCYF within that five year period
18C) an indepth investigation to determine if NH DCYF has violated federal law via the manner in which NH DCYF takes children into the system, via the manner in which NH DCYF gains further legal power through the use of exparte hearings, via tampering with documents, via falsifying documents, illegally gaining access to information such as medical and health information without full consent and full knowledge of the child's parent/guardian during the time that NH DCYF doesn't have full custody, via stalling documents and testing in order to stall for time within the legal system in order to keep a child in NH DCYF custody
19) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's actions to determine what extent NH DCYF has acted outside of the scope of their usual practice or their Administrative Rules (IE: slandering any families of children in the system, practicing medicine without a license, stalking families, delaying testing/evaluations of the children in NH DCYF custody, tampering/manipulating evidence and truths in order to obtain physical custody of a child, denial of family homestudies of children in NH DCYF custody in order to keep the child in foster care instead of relative placement, tampering with birth certificates as a means to adopt a child to different family, terminating parental rights without just cause, denying families their parental rights when the parental rights have not been terminated, dating family members/having romantic relationships with families of children in the system, and forceful separations of married couples, and other unethical and inappropriate behaviors
20) an indepth investigation as to financial costs to the people of NH for each NH DCYF allegation (which includes and is not limited to, court costs, transportation costs) and to the financial gains that NH DCYF/NH DHHS makes for each child that they take into NH DCYF custody.
21) An indepth investigation of DCYF files showing services given to at-risk families before the removal of a child
21A) What pertains to imminent danger and how many children have been removed from their families in the last five years for anticipated "Neglect in the Future"
22) an indepth investigation as to the amount of federal money being paid to DCYF for the removal for each child compared to the amount of money paid for each family kept together
And request that there be specific requirements for NH DCYF caseworkers and staff who directly work with children in NH DCYF custody and their families (to include parent aids) as there are for doctors, nurses, health aids.
These specific requirements are to include a professional conduct code for each level of staff, specific levels of education for each level of staff (including ongoing training to work with children youth and families), professional licensure codes and professional and licensure accountability of biased or falsified information for all NH DCYF staff and all NH DCYF subcontracted staff who have direct or indirect contact/work with the children in NH DCYF custody or their families (this would include parent aids also).
Request that NH DCYF be made to correct their wrongdoings, return children promptly to the family as soon as there is evidence that contradicts the allegations made by NH DCYF staff, that NH DCYF be required to financially compensate each child/youth/family whom NH DCYF has traumatized, injured, abused, neglected, slandered. NH DCYF must be required to compensate each parent for the loss of job, loss of home, all physical and emotional insults and injuries caused by NH DCYF staff for practicing outside of the scope of their practice, for obtaining privately protected health and medical information without the consent of the child's parent/guardian, for each false statement made about a family member, for each failure to keep the child in safe environment that is most appropriate for the child's needs, financial compensation for failure to ensure that a child in NH DCYF custody be allowed their Constitutional rights, financial compensation for failure to promptly assess, and ensure appropriate diagnosis and treatment of a child in NH DCYF custody.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/nh-families-request-audit-of-nh-dhhs/dcyf
petition overview | letter
N.H. Families Request Audit of NH DHHS/DCYFNH DCYF
Target:Petition for Audit of NH DCYF
Sponsored by: Dorothy Knightly and Hope Nardone and Pat Patterson
NH families are requesting an audit of NH DHHS/DCYF. A list of points has been put together by NH families to show how much an audit is duly warranted in this state.
1) thorough investigation of skillset/mindset/educational backgrounds/experience of the NH DCYF caseworkers, supervisors and subcontracted staff, to determine if NH DCYF staff (and subcontracted staff) are capable of the determinations that they make for children taken into NH DCYF custody and of the decisions regarding the families of those children
2) indepth investigation of the actions of NH DCYF caseworkers,supervisors, lawyers and subcontracted staff upon taking *children away from their families and placing the children* into "protective custody," and proof that the child in NH DCYF custody is kept safe and that all actions of NH DCYF are soley in the best interest of the child, instead of in the best interest of NH DCYF staff.
3) an in-depth investigation to study the damages that NH DCYF has caused to children and their families, resulting from NH DCYF allegations of parents and families of the children/youth in "protective custody"
3A) That a yearly clinical study needs to be done on each child that NH DCYF takes into custody and places outside of the family to assess the damage and trauma the child has suffered while in DCYF custody, until the child reaches 18 years of age (21 years of age for disabled children) or until DCYF returns the child to his/her family
4) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's failure to ensure continued proper assessment and medical/mental health treatment of the children in the system
5) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's failure to place children with relatives prior to placing children in foster homes
6) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's actions to abuse their authority within the NH judicial. legal, healthcare, medical and school system (this includes and is not limited to: stalling court ordered testing of a child in NH DCYF custody, stalling homestudies, stalling homestudy results and incomplete home studies in order to keep a child in NH DCYF custody, gaining further power via abusing exparte hearings to make false allegations against a parent/family of a child taken into NH DCYF custody, abusing their authority to access medical and healthcare records of a child (or of the child's family) prior to being taken into NH DCYF custody, NH DCYF caseworkers influencing healthcare and medical professionals in order to obtain a slanted 2nd opinion or what should have been a neutral professional opinion, NH DCYF abusing their power to cover up a child's special needs in order to create a false picture that the child is making progress while in NH DCYF custody when in fact the child is not making progress, delaying the child's IEP testing, etc ) and medicating foster children with psychiatric medication for violent behavior, without the parents consent. Behavior the child never experienced until taken from his/her family.
6A) an indepth investigation as to actions and influence of NH DYCF regarding the result/finding of homestudies and the decision/denial of homestudy appeals filed by families to the Administrative Appeals Unit
7) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's actions that failed to follow court orders. IE: court ordered visitation, acting within the timeframes as required by law for any and all actions and decisions regarding children in the system as well as the families of those children
8) an in-depth investigation to study allegations made by NH DCYF's staff to schools, medical professionals, health care professionals, relatives, etc about parents/families of children in NH DCYF custody
9) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's falsifying any type of document and withholding evidence that might be a contradiction of such NH DCYF false allegations and might clear the parent/family of the false allegations made by NH DCYF: This includes and is not limited to: falsifying information on birth certificates in order to promote adoption of a child in NH DCYF custody, false statements and manipulation of facts in order to take a child into NH DCYF custody, false statements in order to obtain social security monies, false statements in order to gain further federal or state monies and false statements to Judges without proof of allegations in order to remove a child from their parents.
10) an in-depth investigation to study how monies were obtained by NH DCYF from the families of the children in protective custody and an audit to the penny of all monies spent by NH DCYF/NH DHHS
11) an in-depth investigation to study the extent of NH DCYF's "double billing" to gain additional funding from the Government, from the State and from families of children in NH DCYF custody
12) an in-depth investigation for a complete audit that will include how every penny of foster care monies was spent on each child in NH DCYF custody
13) an in-depth investigation for determination of financial damages caused by NH
DCYF to the families of those children taken fraudalently by NH DCYF
14) an in-depth investigation for determination of physical, social, psychological, emotional damages caused to the children and to the families of children in NH DCYF custody
15) an in-depth investigation for determination of the extent that NH DCYF has alienated children from their families, including the extent that NH DCYF has alienated the parent from the child in NH DCYF custody
16) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's actions as abuse and neglect of children in NH DCYF's custody (IE: as those children were and are entitled to freedom to practice the same religion that they practiced prior to being taken into NH DCYF custody, children who were not considered to be placed with relatives instead of being placed into foster care, children who were denied the right to prompt IEP testing within the allotted timeframe from the moment that IEP testing was requested of NH DCYF in writing by the guardian or parent of the child in NH DCYF custody, prompt and proper evaluation and treatment of mental, physical and psychiatric illness of the children in NH DCYF custody, and an indepth review of the medications that were given to the children in NH DCYF custody with a full explanation as to the reason for each medication given, the right of the child to spend time with their family, the social and emotional and physical trauma or injury caused to the child as a direct result of the child being taken into NH DCYF custody: this includes and is not limited to: children placed in foster care or in other settings, any bruises, open skin areas, broken bones, fall/accidents, hospitalizations, broken teeth, signs/symptoms of anxiety or depression including suicide attempts of each and every child during the time that the child is in NH DCYF custody)
17) an indepth investigation to determine if NH DCYF has acted on behalf or in violation of our constitution
18) an indepth look at NH DCYF's actions to determine whether NH DCYF has followed or violated their own mission statement: including determination of how NH DCYF has "reunified families" in a timely manner and in the least traumatic way for the children, youth and families that they are supposed to be servicing
18A) an indepth investigation as to how many families have been reunified by NH DCYF within the last five years
18B) an indepth investigation as to how many parent's rights were terminated in NH within a five year period and how many TPR's(termination of parental rights) were filed by NH DCYF within that five year period
18C) an indepth investigation to determine if NH DCYF has violated federal law via the manner in which NH DCYF takes children into the system, via the manner in which NH DCYF gains further legal power through the use of exparte hearings, via tampering with documents, via falsifying documents, illegally gaining access to information such as medical and health information without full consent and full knowledge of the child's parent/guardian during the time that NH DCYF doesn't have full custody, via stalling documents and testing in order to stall for time within the legal system in order to keep a child in NH DCYF custody
19) an in-depth investigation to study NH DCYF's actions to determine what extent NH DCYF has acted outside of the scope of their usual practice or their Administrative Rules (IE: slandering any families of children in the system, practicing medicine without a license, stalking families, delaying testing/evaluations of the children in NH DCYF custody, tampering/manipulating evidence and truths in order to obtain physical custody of a child, denial of family homestudies of children in NH DCYF custody in order to keep the child in foster care instead of relative placement, tampering with birth certificates as a means to adopt a child to different family, terminating parental rights without just cause, denying families their parental rights when the parental rights have not been terminated, dating family members/having romantic relationships with families of children in the system, and forceful separations of married couples, and other unethical and inappropriate behaviors
20) an indepth investigation as to financial costs to the people of NH for each NH DCYF allegation (which includes and is not limited to, court costs, transportation costs) and to the financial gains that NH DCYF/NH DHHS makes for each child that they take into NH DCYF custody.
21) An indepth investigation of DCYF files showing services given to at-risk families before the removal of a child
21A) What pertains to imminent danger and how many children have been removed from their families in the last five years for anticipated "Neglect in the Future"
22) an indepth investigation as to the amount of federal money being paid to DCYF for the removal for each child compared to the amount of money paid for each family kept together
And request that there be specific requirements for NH DCYF caseworkers and staff who directly work with children in NH DCYF custody and their families (to include parent aids) as there are for doctors, nurses, health aids.
These specific requirements are to include a professional conduct code for each level of staff, specific levels of education for each level of staff (including ongoing training to work with children youth and families), professional licensure codes and professional and licensure accountability of biased or falsified information for all NH DCYF staff and all NH DCYF subcontracted staff who have direct or indirect contact/work with the children in NH DCYF custody or their families (this would include parent aids also).
Request that NH DCYF be made to correct their wrongdoings, return children promptly to the family as soon as there is evidence that contradicts the allegations made by NH DCYF staff, that NH DCYF be required to financially compensate each child/youth/family whom NH DCYF has traumatized, injured, abused, neglected, slandered. NH DCYF must be required to compensate each parent for the loss of job, loss of home, all physical and emotional insults and injuries caused by NH DCYF staff for practicing outside of the scope of their practice, for obtaining privately protected health and medical information without the consent of the child's parent/guardian, for each false statement made about a family member, for each failure to keep the child in safe environment that is most appropriate for the child's needs, financial compensation for failure to ensure that a child in NH DCYF custody be allowed their Constitutional rights, financial compensation for failure to promptly assess, and ensure appropriate diagnosis and treatment of a child in NH DCYF custody.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)