Character References - Part Two

While I wipe the vomit from my keyboard.

We know our grandkids. We see them AFTER OCs. This is straight out of OCS's handbook on public relations. "Make us look pretty" section. The WORST thing that has EVER happened to our grandkids is... ready? OCS

Let's put this in the "Kids for bucks" program

Letter to the editor
March 29, 2011

To the editor:

April marks the annual recognition of Child Abuse Prevention Month around the country. Sadly, Alaska is ranked third in the country as having the highest rates of child maltreatment per capita by the federal Children’s Bureau 2009 report.

Child abuse is one of our country’s most serious public health problems. Research outlines distinct links between child abuse and a wide range of medical, emotional, psychological and behavioral disorders, including depression, alcoholism, drug abuse, obesity, juvenile delinquency and the need for special education services.

“Safe children, strong families” is the vision of the Office of Children’s Services, whose statutory charge is to respond to reports of abuse and neglect and provide safe haven for those children who cannot remain safely in their own home.

Foster care, while a necessary and important method for ensuring child safety, cannot replace birth parents. Year after year, we see children return to their parents the moment they’re able to do so because the parent-child bonds are so strong. There is no replacing the biological family of origin, nor is that the answer for most of the children who enter the system.

Preventing and responding to child abuse must be a community wide effort. What can you do to help?

• Remember that children are our future; their early development and success have an enormous impact on their future health and success.

• Recognize that prevention is a shared responsibility.

• Speak up about the issue of prevention.

• Reach out to children and their parents.

• Recommend and support opportunities for community based family activities, networks, services, and crisis management.

In Alaska, every 33 minutes a child is reported to OCS due to allegations of abuse or neglect. Forty percent of these alleged victims are children age 6 and under.

We can reduce these alarming statistics if we work together and collectively refuse to settle for anything less than the best for all children in our great state. For more information on OCS and related topics, please visit our website at http://hss.state.ak.us/ocs/.



Read more: Fairbanks Daily News-Miner - Safe children

Our post visit observations

As written word for word from Mary Ann's notes:

9/28 9-11 AM

"Went to OCS to have visitation with the grand kids. Each of them have all lost weight and none of them were their bubbly normal selves. [L] was so reserved. [M] was just NOT [M] and [A] was very quiet. None of them seemed to have any hope or aspirations. They were all destitute like they have all given up. [L] and [M] are in school, [allegedly] but not [A] whom I had registered to start head start is not going anywhere to school that I can see. They were not the same 3 children that left us on August 18th 2011!!"

[L] also kept telling Mary Ann that she wanted to come home to our house. [M] and [A] held my hand until we got outside. [M] started crying because he want to go in grampa's car to grampa's house.

We are no psychiatrists, but we are grand parents and we can tell you that these kids, especially [L] WILL NOT survive in foster care away from home.

[L's] right arm at the elbow was hurt. She would not tell us why. She also said her leg (did not specify which one) hurt and she either said she wanted to go to the doctor or that she had to go. She was reserved in her speech.

We can see that damage has already been done to these kids while with OCS. Our opinion.

Pictures have been removed due to OCS putting the kids in harms way.

[L] holding her arm.
Compare this picture with the ones on the main page. They were taken only about 1 1/2 to 2 months apart. You can see the weight loss.

We Have A Visit

Thanks to the Ombudsman's office, we will be able to see our grand kids on Thursday morning. Sept. 29th, for two hours.

Letter to the kids

Since we have not been able to see our grand kids yet, we will send them a letter into cyberspace.

Gramma and Grampa did not send you away. You were taken by bad people. We have always told you that we love you and that we would always be here for you. We still are and we will not stop. We will fight until you can come home. We miss you bunches. Gramma cries at night. She misses giving you your baths in your red tub. Your chickens are okay. They are still laying eggs, but no baby chickens yet. Your garden grew nicely. We ate some of the cauliflower, but the rest is still out there in the cold. Since you are not here, we have not cared about it enough to harvest it. Cabbage is great and the tatas are plentiful from what we can see. We guess the chickens will eat it. Keeneye, Rosie, Bonehead and Merle all say hi and that they miss you too. Keeneye wanders around the house looking for you. She won't leave my side no matter where I am.
We have taken out the big fireplace. The living room is now way bigger. Boy, that was hard work. We still need to finish the Sheetrock and stuff, but we can do that in the winter time. We have also almost completed your new bedroom addition on the house. It is nice. The roof is on, the siding is on and in a day or two the outside will be all done. Then we can work on the inside. We have to tear out that big window and put in a door for you. Otherwise, how would you get in there silly.
All your friends at work miss you. They ask how you are when we see them.

[L]: Your new glasses are here. They came in the day after you were taken. We have told your mom and others that they are here but no one has picked them up yet. I heard your other ones are broken all the way now. We know it will be hard in school without them.

[M]: I had to take down John Cena. I had to put him in Smack Down. He was in the way when I was fixing the wall. I will put him back up in the new room when I get it finished. Your jacket is hanging in the kitchen. When you get back, we will hang out. Just me and you.

Elliot: Grampa misses our morning routine when I get home from work. I miss you jumping up out of bed and saying "Hi Grampa!" and I would say "HI Elliot!". Then we would make coffee together and eat donuts if I brought any home. I also miss your little happy jumpy sideways thingy.

We miss all of you and it will be okay. We will see you soon.
Love Gramma and Grampa.

Character References - Part One

These are scans of some of the character references we were not allowed to read or show in court to show our standing concerning our grand children. More will follow. Their last names are blacked out to prevent retaliation by OCS. We have no standing according to the court and have been thrown out like yesterdays trash.

ALASKA OFFICE OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES MANUAL

ALASKA OFFICE OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES CPS manual can be downloaded from HERE. Read it, know your rights, see the lies.

There's A Bear On The Porch!

When I wrote this book in 2004, I never realized the bear would someday be OCS.

$54,000 tax refund

Even the taxman can't believe it: Family's astonishing $54,000 tax refund... and it's all down to the kindness of their hearts

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1372662/Couple-receive-54-000-tax-refund-big-tax-officer-believe-it.html#ixzz1YlK7v4FQ

From this article: "According to CNN, the credit has been around since 1997, but this tax season it is refundable for the first time."
That was the same year that Slick Willie started the bonus program for stealing children.

I am sure that orders for kids have and will climb. I bet social workers are just wringing their hands in joy.

I think our next President should repeal this bonus and tax advantage program and will be on my list of questions for candidates.

Pennsylvania Judge Jailed for 28 Years in “Kids-for-Cash” Scheme

 
Photo: Mark Ciavarella leaves the federal courthouse in Scranton, Pa.: AP Images

After more than 10 years of allegedly sending youths to private prisons in exchange for around $1 million in kickbacks, former Luzerne County, Pennsylvania Judge Mark Ciavarella (left) was sentenced to 28 years in prison — essentially a life sentence for the 61-year-old convicted criminal. In February, a jury found Ciavarella guilty on 12 counts of everything from conspiracy and racketeering to money laundering and tax evasion. Another 27 counts, including bribery and extortion, were rejected by jurors.
The federal charges stemmed from Ciavarella’s involvement in a criminal plot to fill up privately owned juvenile-detention facilities. According to prosecutors, he was handing out wildly inappropriate sentences to first-time offenders and even children as young as 10.
Some of the crimes for which children were being jailed by Ciavarella included stealing a jar of nutmeg and countless first-time drug paraphernalia charges. One teenage girl was sentenced to three months for making fun of a school official on the Internet.

Another teenager sent to a correctional facility by Ciavarella later killed himself, which the family blames on the corrupt former judge. A video of the mother screaming at Ciavarella after a hearing earlier this year was posted online and seen around the world.

The whole scandal, eventually dubbed “Kids for Cash” in the press, attracted international condemnation and outrage. "The media attention to this matter has exceeded coverage given to ... almost all capital murders,” noted Ciavarella’s defense attorneys in a memo requesting a “reasonable” sentence.

One of the defense lawyers, William Ruzzo, told the "Law Blog" of the Wall Street Journal that the 28-year term was “much too harsh” — basically assuring that Ciavarella will spend the rest of his life behind bars. “This was a nonviolent offense,” he claimed, noting that the ruling would be appealed. “I’ve had people convicted of murder who received as little as a 6-to-12 year sentence.”

Ciavarella was also ordered to pay $1.2 million in restitution. And after the scandal made headlines worldwide, the state Supreme Court overturned about 5,000 convictions. Apparently Ciavarella had denied the rights of youngsters in his court to have counsel and enter intelligent pleas.

At his sentencing hearing on Thursday, the former judge initially sounded remorseful. “I blame no one but myself for what has happened,” he told the court. “I had the opportunity to say ‘no’ to taking money that I believed was legal to receive, but knew that I should not take.”

But the apparent remorse soon faded as Ciavarella began to lash out, attacking prosecutors and independent investigators for allegedly helping to create a negative public image of him and his courtroom. Assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon Zubrod responded by telling the court that Ciavarella’s refusal to accept responsibility was one of the reasons he deserved a life sentence.

“It seems to me Mr. Ciavarella says ‘I was not selling kids retail,’” Zubrod was quoted as saying in a local newspaper. “We agree. We think he was selling them wholesale.” The U.S. Attorney for the district said the sentence was fair.

Ciavarella originally pleaded guilty, but eventually decided to take the case to trial after officials rejected the first 87-month-sentence agreement. Another former judge involved in the conspiracy, Michael Conahan, pleaded guilty and is awaiting sentencing. Two private-prison officials connected to the scandal also pleaded guilty.

Many of the families and youths victimized by the corrupt duo expressed relief after Thursday’s sentence was handed down. “This is all I could have hoped for today,” Sandy Fonzo, whose son committed suicide after a tough sentence from Ciavarella, told local reporters when the news broke. Many others echoed her remarks.

Ciavarella, who was allowed to remain free until sentencing, was immediately taken into federal custody following the ruling. It is not yet known where he will be serving his sentence or how soon an appeal may be filed.

Article from:
The New American Magazine

Definition of POTENTIAL

¹po·ten·tial

adj \pə-ˈten(t)-shəl\

Definition of POTENTIAL

1

: existing in possibility : capable of development into actuality <potential benefits>

2

: expressing possibility; specifically : of, relating to, or constituting a verb phrase expressing possibility, liberty, or power by the use of an auxiliary with the infinitive of the verb (as in “it may rain”)

— po·ten·tial·ly \-ˈten(t)-sh(ə-)lē\ adverb

See potential defined for English-language learners »

See potential defined for kids »

Examples of POTENTIAL

1. Doctors are excited about the new drug's potential benefits.
2. Critics say the factory poses a potential threat to the environment.
3. He is a potential candidate for president.
4. The project has potential risks.

Origin of POTENTIAL

Middle English potencial, from Late Latin potentialis, from potentia potentiality, from Latin, power, from potent-, potens

First Known Use: 14th century

Related to POTENTIAL

Synonyms: implicit, possible

Antonyms: actual, existent, factual, real

Related Words: conceivable, generable, imaginable, plausible, thinkable; likely, probable; conjectural, hypothetical, suppositional, theoretical (also theoretic); alleged, assumed, purported, reputed, supposed; achievable, attainable, doable, feasible, practicable, viable, workable

Near Antonyms: authenticated, confirmed, demonstrated, established, proven, substantiated; authentic, bona fide, genuine, true 

 

*In other words: our case was NOT authenticated, confirmed, demonstrated, established, proven, substantiated; authentic, bona fide, genuine, true.

 

The word potential is probably one of the biggest words in their own manual that is used to take children.

POLICY: Reports of Harm will be prioritized according to the immediate or "potential" risk of harm to the child.

POLICY: Reports of Harm will be prioritized according to the immediate or potential risk of

harm to the child. The assigned priority determines the division's response time.

Each case accepted for investigation will be assigned a priority rating of "Priority 1", "Priority 2" or "Priority 3", contingent on the severity of the reported risk of harm to the child.

The priority rating assigned determines the response time to the Report of Harm.

a. "Priority 1" must be responded to within 24 hours of the time the report is received by the

division. Priority 1 reports are defined as reports which present the greatest degree of risk

to the child and requires an emergency response; including reports that the child:

1. is believed to be in immediate danger;
* There was NO immediate danger.

2. is believed to be unattended and is of an age, or possesses special needs which would

indicate the child would be subject to imminent danger of physical harm if left

unsupervised;
*They were not ever unattended

3. has suffered potential serious physical injury as a result of abuse or neglect;
*Nope, not that one either.

4. is believed to be in immediate need of medical attention and is being denied such

treatment or follow through for treatment;
*They had a clean bill of health from their doctor. Dental was finished. Eye check up were finished. [L] had new glasses and another new pair on order. The other two were fine.

5. who is the subject of the report has died as a result of suspicious causes and has

siblings who remain in the home;
*Not that one.

6. has disclosed sexual abuse and there is current risk/accessibility.
*This is were one of the lies were used for the kidnapping. NONE of them were sexually abused. [L] State Police report came back as a "false positive" from forensics. The initial lab used by OCS conventionally started all this by stating she had been molested.  This is were the word "potential" comes in and a meal ticket for OCS, lawyers, judges, ad litems and on and on. Can't make money without a product.

b. "Priority 2" must be responded to within 72 hours of the time the report is received by the

division. Priority two reports are defined as reports which indicate that while the situation is

serious, information available does not indicate the child is in immediate danger.

c. "Priority 3" must be responded to within seven (7) calendar days of the time the report is

received by the division. Priority three reports are defined as reports which indicate that a

delay in assessing the situation will not result in significant additional harm to the child

The priority rating may be revised if additional information is received prior to the investigation

CODE OF ETHICS FOR THE STAFF OF THE OFFICE OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES

1.6 CODE OF ETHICS FOR THE STAFF OF THE OFFICE OF CHILDREN’S
SERVICES
The Division is a public agency established to provide public services which have been determined
to be necessary through the representative governmental process. It is the responsibility of each
employee to perform their assigned tasks, in the delivery of service to the client, with appropriate
and professional conduct. Any personal interaction with the public, other agencies, clients, or any
other person that comes in contact with an employee as a part of their assigned job duties, must
occur with the employee displaying proper respect toward the individual. Alaska's population is
composed of a diversity of lifestyles, ethnic and cultural backgrounds. It is expected that those
differences will be respected and every individual will be treated with dignity. State employees must
adhere to the State Code of Ethics.
Because of the perceived and real power of the agency, it is essential that employees not misuse their
authority.
The National Association of Social Workers code of ethics is the Division's adopted conduct code
for the staff members directly involved in providing services to clients. The code sets forth the
values, principles, and standards of the social work profession.
See the NASW Code of Ethics, and the State of Alaska Code of Ethics for more detail.

---------------------------------------------

ALL but one social worker we ever met concerning our grand children were the most lying, arrogant (God like attitudes) self centered people we have ever met. I almost threw up when I read this. The one social worker that was nice, was transferred... somewhere.

Video: CPS Taking Orders for Children/ CPS workers jailed

Child Protective Services and Organized Crime Management in Government

This information was borrowed from

Abused Swan

http://www.abusedswan.com/child_protective_services

The Terrible Truth About

Child Protective Services and

Organized Crime Management

in Government
by James Roger Brown

"Beginning about 1973, criminal elements in the mental health and social work professions began cooperating to construct an organized criminal enterprise that exploits children behind the legislated secrecy of the child protection, juvenile justice, and mental health systems."
    
The contemporary end result is a nationwide organized criminal operation that uses everything from sophisticated science-fraud-based "evaluation" instruments structured to produce false positives to third party state service contracts written to sustain a system of structural corruption in which state employees and contract service providers must falsify records and testimony or they will not continue to be employed or paid.

To maintain their existence, organized criminal operations must construct management bureaucracies with policies and procedures necessary to sustain daily operations, just like any other bureaucracy. The only adaptation required to run criminal operations in the government and quasi-government agencies which constitute the child protection system is that they must be integrated into the policies and procedures of the umbrella agency and not be detected as components of a criminal bureaucracy.

The existence of organized crime in the child protection system of any given state is not that difficult to detect. Prominent among the indicators are:

 (1) the annual number of founded child abuse allegations can be predicted from the number of conditional federal grant and reimbursement salary fund dollars needed to balance the state child protection agency payroll (the number of children taken into state custody each year will be the number sufficient to generate the federal fund claims necessary to balance the agency payroll); and

(2) third party contracts to file state child protection agency federal fund claims will contain provisions that only compensate the contractor for increases in federal funds paid to the state over and above the amount paid in the previous contract for such claim filing services. The latter creates a system that will only result in compensation to the contractor if the number of children taken into state custody constantly increases and/or the total claims generated from each child in state custody increases each contract cycle. The net result is a system in which everyone stays employed only if the number of founded child abuse cases and children taken into state custody always increases and never decreases. An important byproduct of this criminal process of exploiting children independent of the true child abuse rate is the blind political support for the criminal operations generated by the constant flow of conditional federal funds into the respective State's economy.

There are similar lessons to be drawn from the embarrassment of the Bush Administration over numerous ignored warnings that Osama bin Laden planned to hijack planes and fly them into buildings and the embarrassment of Florida Officials having to explain fifteen months of falsified child protection records, sworn court testimony that Rilya Wilson was in Florida State custody and doing fine, and falsified federal fund claims for services delivered to a child that may have been dead the entire time.

After the collapse of the World Trade Center, both the American Public and terrorists worldwide now know the United States is vulnerable to attack, due in large part to corruption, incompetence and mismanagement in intelligence and law enforcement agencies. After the Rilya Wilson case in Florida, the Public and every child molester, pornographer and other criminal who need children for their misdeeds know that the corruption, incompetence and mismanagement in the child protection system can be exploited as cover to acquire children for their own illicit purposes.

What happened to Rilya Wilson in Florida can happen in any state where the current organized criminal exploitation of children is allowed to continue. Sooner or later other criminals, including child molesters and child pornographers, are going to become sufficiently aware of the mechanisms the current organized criminals are using to manage their criminal bureaucracy that they will also be able to exploit the system, as were the people who reportedly kidnapped Rilya Wilson and returned a week later to collect her clothes. Among the obvious possibilities is obtaining information about the criminal activity (falsifying federal claims, official reports, insurance claims, etc.) of individual state employees or licensed professionals, like psychiatrists and psychologist, and blackmailing them to allow access to children for criminal exploitation or perversion.

Austin, Texas DHS Supervisor committed suicide after allegedly being caught running a foster child prostitution ring from his office computer. In a recent Arkansas Legislative Session, a bill drafted by Arkansas Department of Human Services employees was discovered to contain provisions that would have required employees to lie about records and facts, even if subpoenaed. The bill was withdrawn once the Legislator duped into being the primary sponsor was made aware of its contents. In a June 6, 2002, opinion, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that an infant Arkansas citizen had been illegally transferred to Florida State custody in what was essentially an interstate criminal conspiracy to seize and transport children in complete disregard of State and Federal law. (See Arkansas Department of Human Services v Cox, Supreme Court of Arkansas No. 01-1021, 349ark, issue 3, sc 9, 6 June 2002 http://courts.state.ar.us/opinions/2002a/20020606/01-1021.wpd)

The important point being that these child protection system criminals will be pushing the envelop on what they can get away with, as in these examples, and sometimes that envelop will rupture, as in the Rilya Wilson case, exposing not only the criminals but government officials and private citizens who were indirectly benefiting from the criminal activity. The important question being how sophisticated, brutal and embarrassing will organized crime in the child protection system be allowed to become before it is addressed. The recent horror story of a fifteen-month delay in Florida officials discovering that foster child Rilya Wilson had apparently been kidnapped by persons knowledgeable of the inner workings of the child protection system was due to the systematic falsification of child protection system records. This falsification of child protection system records is part of a national pattern of organized crime. It is not an isolated incident. In the Rilya Wilson case, even the Foster Mother continued to receive and accept payments for the care of Rilya over a year after the child disappeared. Caseworkers reportedly told her to take the money.

If I may be of further assistance, please contact me at:

James Roger Brown
Director
THE SOCIOLOGY CENTER
P.O. Box 2075

Little Rock, AR 72115
(501) 374-1788
thesociologist@aol.com

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86IHL8L9tIo

The Kids New Bedroom

We are building the kids a new bedroom of their own. We bought their new bunk bed the day before they were kidnapped. Eventually, they will have two sets of bunk beds in their new room.

A few pics of construction:

 

The "Bucks For Kids" program.

Sometimes, when we talk to people about how OCS has kidnapped our grand kids, they look at us with glazed eyes and probably think we are conspiracy theorists. This is NOT a local thing. It started with Bill and Hillary Clinton in 1997 when they turned children's services into a huge money making scheme by providing the "bucks for kids" (my words) program. Go see what the system is doing for yourself. Click on this VIDEO LINK on youtube, watch the video then click and watch more. The truth will be shown that we are not evil grand parents and parents here. Us and our children are the victims of the "buck for kids" program run by THIS state (Alaska, Inc.). Then speak up and spread the word. It may be YOUR kids next or your family's kids or friends kids. They have our kids. I am sure under medication by now (kickback profits). They have already initiated child support from the parents (bonuses). We want them back ASAP and we will never shut up until they are home, here, where they grew up.

Oddities in the Nancy Schaefer “Suicide” Case

Oddly enough... I would also like to re-post this article from:
http://www.infowars.com/oddities-in-the-nancy-schaefer-suicide-case/
Garland Favorito
Infowars.com
March 30, 2010
On Friday, former Senator Nancy Schaefer and her husband were found dead in their home in Habersham County. Even before a GBI investigation could be initiated, media outlets began pronouncing that their death was a “murder-suicide” and shut off most public comment posting on their web sites. The “murder suicide” theory implies that Sen. Schaefer’s husband shot her and then killed himself (or vice versa). Both Habersham County and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation began investigating the case as a “murder suicide” rather than the more obvious “murder made to look like suicide”. Like so many people, I have known former Sen. Nancy Schaefer for 15 years and spoken to several people who know her better than I do. They believe that the “murder suicide” theory is highly unlikely for any one of the following reasons:
1. It is totally against Nancy Schaefer’s consistently strong commitment to the sanctity of life principles that she has fought so valiantly to uphold;
2. Nancy and her husband, Bruce, have five children and more than a dozen grandchildren who they would not choose to leave behind so abruptly;
3. Bruce’s problem with cancer was corrected and under control so there was no reason to end his life as one senator tried to imply;
4. Nancy or Bruce would not likely agree to commit such an act that violates the fundamental principles of their Christian faith;
5. Bruce was retired and the couple did not appear to be in any type of dire financial crisis that would lead them to commit such acts;
6. Bruce and Nancy knew that her sister who had Alzheimer’s disease needed her to help take care of her;
7. Friends who knew the couple best state that Bruce would simply not have the capability to kill his wife;
8. Nancy was dedicated, as a national leader, to help needy people overcome abuse within Child Protective Services organizations;
9. Nancy was actively exposing corruption within the Department of Family & Child Services (DFCS) including actions by the DFCS director in the county where she lived.
10. Nancy knew that she was needed in the fight against child sex slave trafficking in Atlanta which has one of the highest activity rates in the country;
11. Bruce was highly supportive of Nancy’s work for decades and would have little or no reason to suddenly try to kill her at such a critical juncture in her career.

Specifically in Georgia, former Senator Nancy Schaefer had found during the last few years that:

- in Georgia housed children in a foster home with a known pedophile who molested the children.
- in Habersham County failed to remove six children from a home where they are being abused and tortured.
- in Georgia turned two girls over to a California father who had a pornographic video business.
A report that Nancy Schaefer produced on these remarkable cases can be found here:
http://fightcps.com/2008/02/29/report-of-georgia-senator-nancy-schaefer-on-cps-corruption/
Nancy Schaefer was also interviewed extensively by talk show host Alex Jones about corruption in Child Protection Services nationally. A multi-part series of her interview and an Eagle Forum presentation can be found on You Tube here:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=nancy+schaefer&search_type=&aq=f
In addition, Senator Schaefer led opposition to HB582 and SB304, two bills introduced by fellow Republicans that would have likely resulted in increasing child sex slave trafficking. These bills would have made it legal for teenagers to participate in certain illicit acts. The bills effectively removed the legal authority that police now have to pick teenagers up and get them into protective custody so that they can no longer be pimped for those acts.
As President of Georgia Eagle Forum, Nancy Schaefer planned to be in Alabama this weekend for an Eagle Forum convention. Instead she chose to stay in Georgia to develop new information that would have further exposed corruption in DFCS and beyond. Many Eagle forum members who were close to Sen. Schaefer were aware of her courageous efforts. None of them believe that either she or her husband was involved in any type of suicide.
It is particularly ironic that the Atlanta Journal Constitution (AJC) chose to quote State Sen. Don Thomas in their March 26 article about Sen. Schaefer’s death. The AJC portrayed him as a friend of the couple even though he lives on the other side of the state from the Schaefer family and was diametrically opposed to many of their core beliefs. Sen. Thomas, the Chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee, immediately propagated and expanded the “murder-suicide” theory without any first-hand knowledge or evidence. That is very disturbing considering it is his committee that should have been helping to clean up the corruption at DFCS. Activists supporting Sen. Schaefer explained that he constantly advocated increased power and authority for DFCS in spite of the evidence showing the organization was misusing that authority.
With Nancy Schaefer no longer on the scene the question may be raised as to how best to continue her legacy. I believe that she would want conservatives, progressives, libertarians, constitutionalists as well as grass roots Democrats and Republicans throughout Georgia to unite and work to rectify the corruption in DFCS and eliminate child sex slave trafficking in Georgia.

The Corrupt Business of Child Protective Services

I wish to re-post here the words of former Georgia State Senator Nancy Schaefer. From; 

http://www.parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={5433EE7C-6775-4D17-A2A1-CE4686AE1697}

 ------------------------------------------------

By Nancy Schaefer
Georgia State Senate, 50th District
revised September 25, 2008

My introduction into Child Protective Service cases was due to a grandmother in an adjoining state who called me with her tragic story. Her two granddaughters had been taken from her daughter who lived in my district. Her daughter was told wrongly that if she wanted to see her children again she should sign a paper and give up her children. Frightened and young, the daughter did. I have since discovered that parents are often threatened into cooperation of permanent separation of their children.

The children were taken to another county and placed in foster care. The foster parents were told wrongly that they could adopt the children. The grandmother then jumped through every hoop known to man in order to get her granddaughters. When the case finally came to court it was made evident by one of the foster parent’s children that the foster parents had, at any given time, 18 foster children and that the foster mother had an inappropriate relationship with a caseworker. In the courtroom, the juvenile judge acted as though she was shocked and said the two girls would be removed quickly. They were not removed. Finally, after much pressure being applied to the Department of Family and Children Services of Georgia (DFCS), the children were driven to South Georgia to meet their grandmother who gladly drove to meet them.

After being with their grandmother two or three days, the judge, quite out of the blue, wrote up a new order to send the girls to their father, who previously had no interest in the case and who lived on the West Coast. The father was in “adult entertainment”. His girlfriend worked as an “escort” and his brother, who also worked in the business, had a sexual charge brought against him.

Within a couple of days the father was knocking on the grandmother’s door and took the girls kicking and screaming to California.

The father developed an unusual relationship with the former foster parents and soon moved to the southeast. The foster parents began driving to the father’s residence and picking up the little girls for visits. The oldest child had told her mother and grandmother on two different occasions that the foster father molested her.

To this day after five years, this loving, caring blood relative grandmother does not even have visitation privileges with the children. The little girls are, in my opinion, permanently traumatized and the young mother of the girls was so traumatized with shock when the girls were first removed from her that she has never completely recovered. The mother has rights but the father still has custody of the children.

Throughout this case and through the process of dealing with multiple other mismanaged cases of the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS), I have worked with other desperate parents across the state of Georgia and in many other States because their children were taken for no cause and they have no one with whom to turn. I have witnessed ruthless behavior from many caseworkers, social workers, investigators, lawyers, judges, therapists, and others such as those who “pick up” the children. I have been stunned by what I have seen and heard from victims all across this land.

In this report, I have focused mainly on the Georgia Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS). However, I believe Child Protective Services nationwide has become corrupt and that the entire system is broken beyond repair. I am convinced parents and families should be warned of the dangers.

The Department of Child Protective Services, known as the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS) in Georgia and other titles in other states, has become a “protected empire” built on taking children and separating families. This is not to say that there are not those children who do need to be removed from wretched situations and need protection.

However, this report is concerned with the children and parents caught up in “legal kidnapping,” ineffective policies, and an agency that on certain occasions would not remove a child (or children) when the child was enduring torment and abuse.

In one county in my District, I arranged a meeting for thirty-seven families to speak freely and without fear. These poor parents and grandparents spoke of their painful, heart wrenching encounters with DFCS. Their suffering was overwhelming. They wept and cried. Some did not know where their children were and had not seen them in years. I had witnessed the “Gestapo” at work and I witnessed the deceitful conditions under which children were taken in the middle of the night, out of hospitals, off of school buses, and out of homes. In one county a private drug testing business was operating within the agency’s department that required many, many drug tests from parents and individuals for profit. It has already made over $100,000.

Due to being exposed, several employees in this particular office were fired. However, they have now been rehired either in neighboring counties or in the same county again. According to the calls I am now receiving, the conditions in that county are returning to the same practices that they had before the light was shown on their evil deeds.

Having worked with probably 300 cases statewide, and now hundreds and hundreds across this nation and in nearly every state, I am convinced there is no responsibility and no accountability in Child Protective Services system.

I have come to the conclusion:

· that poor parents very often are targeted to lose their children because they do not have the where-with-all to hire lawyers and fight the system. Being poor does not mean you are not a good parent or that you do not love your child, or that your child should be removed and placed with strangers;

· that all parents are capable of making mistakes and that making a mistake does not mean your children are to be removed from the home. Even if the home is not perfect, it is home; and that’s where a child is the safest and where he or she wants to be, with family;

· that parenting classes, anger management classes, counseling referrals, therapy classes and on and on are demanded of parents with no compassion by the system even while the parents are at work and while their children are separated from them. (some times parents are required to pay for the programs) This can take months or even years and it emotionally devastates both children and parents. Parents are victimized by “the system” that makes a profit for holding children longer and “bonuses” for not returning children to their parents;

· that caseworkers and social workers are very often guilty of fraud. They withhold and destroy evidence. They fabricate evidence and they seek to terminate parental rights unnecessarily. However, when charges are made against Child Protective Services, the charges are ignored;

· that the separation of families and the “snatching of children” is growing as a business because local governments have grown accustomed to having these taxpayer dollars to balance their ever-expanding budgets;

· that Child Protective Services and Juvenile Court can always hide behind a confidentiality clause in order to protect their decisions and keep the funds flowing. There should be open records and “court watches”! Look who is being paid! There are state employees, lawyers, court investigators, guardian ad litems, court personnel, and judges. There are psychologists, and psychiatrists, counselors, caseworkers, therapists, foster parents, adoptive parents, and on and on. All are looking to the children in state custody to provide job security. Parents do not realize that the social workers are the glue that hold “the system” together that funds the court, funds the court appointed attorneys, and the multiple other jobs including the “system’s” psychiatrists, therapists, their own attorneys and others.

· that The Adoption and the Safe Families Act, set in motion first in 1974 by Walter Mondale and later in 1997 by President Bill Clinton, offered cash “bonuses” to the states for every child they adopted out of foster care. In order to receive the “adoption incentive bonuses” local child protective services need more children. They must have merchandise (children) that sells and you must have plenty so the buyer can choose. Some counties are known to give a $4,000 to $6,000 bonus for each child adopted out to strangers and an additional $2,000 for a “special needs” child. Employees work to keep the federal dollars flowing;

· State Departments of Human Resources (DHR) and affiliates are given a baseline number of expected adoptions based on population. For every child DHR and CPS can get adopted, there is the bonus of $4,000 or maybe $6,000. But that is only the beginning figure in the formula in which each bonus is multiplied by the percentage that the State has managed to exceed its baseline adoption number. Therefore States and local communities work hard to reach their goals for increased numbers of adoptions for children in foster care.

· that there is double dipping. The funding continues as long as the child is out of the home. There is funding for foster care then when a child is placed with a new family, then “adoption bonus funds” are available. When a child is placed in a mental health facility and is on 16 drugs per day, like two children of a constituent of mine, more funds are involved and so is Medicaid;

· As you can see this program is ordered from the very top and run by Health and Human Resources. This is why victims of CPS get no help from their legislators. It explains why my bill, SB 415 suffered such defeat in the Judicial Committee, why I was cut off at every juncture. Legislators and Governors must remember who funds their paychecks.

· that there are no financial resources and no real drive to unite a family and help keep them together or provide effective care;

· that the incentive for social workers to return children to their parents quickly after taking them has disappeared and who in protective services will step up to the plate and say, “This must end! No one, because they are all in the system together and a system with no leader and no clear policies will always fail the children. Just look at the waste in government that is forced upon the tax payer;

· that the “Policy Manual” is considered “the last word” for CPS/DFCS. However, it is too long, too confusing, poorly written and does not take the law into consideration;

· that if the lives of children were improved by removing them from their homes, there might be a greater need for protective services, but today children are not safer. Children, of whom I am aware, have been raped and impregnated in foster care;

· It is a known fact that children are in much more danger in foster care than they are in their own home even though home may not be perfect;

· that some parents are even told if they want to see their children or grandchildren, they must divorce their spouse. Many, who are under privileged, feeling they have no option, will divorce and then just continue to live together. This is an anti-family policy, but parents will do anything to get their children home with them. However, when the parents cooperate with Child Protective Services, their behavior is interpreted as guilt when nothing could be further from the truth;

· Fathers, (non-custodial parents) I must add, are oftentimes treated as criminals without access to visit or even see their own children and have child support payments strangling the very life out of them;

· that the Foster Parents Bill of Rights does not stress that a foster parent is there temporarily to care for a child until the child can be returned home. Many foster parents today use the Foster Parent Bill of Rights as a means to hire a lawyer and seek to adopt the child placed in their care from the real parents, who are desperately trying to get their child home and out of the system. Recently in Atlanta, a young couple learning to be new parents and loving it, were told that because of an anonymous complaint, their daughter would be taken into custody by the State DFCS. The couple was devastated and then was required by DFCS to take parenting classes, alcohol counseling and psychological evaluations if they wanted to get their child back. All of the courses cost money for which most parents are required to pay. While in their anxiety and turmoil to get their child home, the baby was left for hours in a car to die in the heat in her car seat by a foster parent who forgot about the child. This should never have happened. It is tragic. In many cases after the parents have jumped through all the hoops, they still do not get their child. As long as the child is not returned, there is money for the agency, for foster parents, for adoptive parents, and for the State;

· that tax dollars are being used to keep this gigantic system afloat, yet the victims, parents, grandparents, guardians and especially the children, are charged for the system’s services;

· that grandparents have called from all over the State of Georgia and from other states trying to get custody of their grandchildren. CPS claims relatives are contacted, but there are many many cases that prove differently. Grandparents who lose their grandchildren to strangers have lost their own flesh and blood. The children lose their family heritage and grandparents, and parents too, lose all connections to their heirs;

· that The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect in 1998 reported that six times as many children died in foster care than in the general public and that once removed to official “safety”, these children are far more likely to suffer abuse, including sexual molestation than in the general population. Think what that number is today ten years later!

· That according to the California Little Hoover Commission Report in 2003, 30% to 70% of the children in California group homes do not belong there and should not have been removed from their homes.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Call for an independent audit of all State Child Protective Services (CPS) and for a Federal Congressional hearing on Child Protective Services nationwide.

2. Activate immediate change. Every day that passes means more families and children are subject to being held hostage and their lives destroyed.

3. Abolish the Federal and State financial incentives that have turned Child Protective Services into a business that separate families for money.

4. Grant to parents their rights verbally and in writing.

5. Mandate a search for family members to be given the opportunity to adopt their own relatives if children need to be removed permanently.

6. Mandate a jury trial where every piece of evidence is presented before permanently removing a child from his or her parents. Open family court. Remove the secrecy. Allow the press and family members access. Give parents the opportunity in court to speak and be a part of their children’s future.

7. Require a warrant or a positive emergency circumstance before removing children from their parents. (Judge Arthur G. Christean, Utah Bar Journal, January, 1997 reported that “except in emergency circumstances, including the need for immediate medical care, require warrants upon affidavits of probable cause before entry upon private property is permitted for the forcible removal of children from their parents.”)

8. Uphold the laws when someone fabricates or presents false evidence. If a parent alleges fraud, hold a hearing with the right to discovery of all evidence made available to parents.

FINAL REMARKS

On my desk are scores of cases of exhausted families and terrified children. It has been beyond me to turn my back on these suffering, crying, and beaten down individuals. We are mistreating the most innocent. Child Protective Services have become an adult centered business to the detriment of children. No longer is judgment based on what the child needs or who the child wants to be or with whom, or what is really best for the whole family; it is some adult or bureaucrat who makes the decisions, based often on just hearsay, without ever consulting a family member, or just what is convenient, profitable, or less troublesome for the social workers.

I have witnessed such injustice and harm brought to so many families that I am not sure if I even believe reform of the system is possible! The system cannot be trusted. It does not serve the people. It obliterates families and children simply because it has the power to do so.

Children deserve better. Families deserve better. It’s time to pull back the curtain and set our children and families free.

“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute.

Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and the needy” Proverbs 31:8-9

--------------------------------------------------------

It's all about money.

First... they must get kids INTO foster care. It's all about money.

From: http://omb.alaska.gov/results/view_details.php?p=71

From:

PUBLIC LAW 105-89 [H.R. 867]  

NOVEMBER 19, 1997  
ADOPTION AND SAFE FAMILIES ACT OF 1997

 [**2122]        TITLE II--INCENTIVES FOR PROVIDING PERMANENT FAMILIES FOR CHILDREN

 [*201]  Sec. 201. ADOPTION INCENTIVE PAYMENTS.

How Can Abandonment Affect Kids and Adults?

How Can Abandonment Affect Kids and Adults?

Impacts on Children

        The childhood and long-term effects of excessive parental absence can range from moderate to severe, depending on a child's age, gender, their bond with the absent adult (weak > strong), and their extended family's nurturance-level (low > high).

        Common experience suggests that when young children are physically abandoned by a parent or caregiver - or if a primary caregiver is "emotionally unavailable" (can't bond) - the kids are "badly hurt." Their hurt is a mix of...

shock, if the abandonment was unexpected and explosive; and...

confusion - many mental questions and uncertainties about the abandonment and what it means; and...

shame ("low self esteem") - feeling unlovable and unworthy, even if other adults are genu-inely nurturing and attentive; and perhaps...

guilts - feeling (irrationally) that they did something bad or wrong that caused the abandon-ment; and/or...

fears of (a) bonding with some or all adults / men / women; and that (b) their other care-givers will also abandon them, and they will die; and...

grief over (a) involuntarily broken bonds, and later, (b) over lost hopes and fantasies of reunion. If a child is raised in an "anti-grief"  family, s/he can unconsciously carry unfinished mourning into adulthood as periodic or chronic "depression."

We, as grand parents, DID NOT abandon our grand kids. They were stolen from us by a system  with proclaimed immunity through lies, false accusations, coercion, and trickery effecting our fourth amendment rights. Building a case on us by entering our house by us letting them in through fear of "we are going to take the kids". We now know that we could have said "no" when they asked to come in. We now know that entering our house due to "fear of losing the kids" is not legal because we did not know we could say no. We were fear driven.

It has been four weeks now since the kids were stolen. As far as we know, NO family member other than the recipient from North Carolina has seen these kids.
The AAG was to have Justin call us about visitation last week. He never called.
A few days ago, the kids school called to ask why we had not yet sent the kids to school. We told them why. They said they would leave their slot open for us.

We know these kids. They ALREADY have abandonment issues. Now, their nightmares have been inflicted on them by the same people purported to protect them. We know the real reason why they were taken, and the nightmares are real to the kids. If anything happens to these kids, physically or mentally, while they are not with us, we are holding the AAG, the Office of Children's Services of Alaska, the Guardian ad litum and (an unnamed party) 100% responsible.

The grand mother was herself adopted when she was 1 1/2. Reconciliation with her birth mother did not happen until she was in her forties.

The grand father comes from a large east coast family where large family reunions were common when he was young. Family was and still is important.

False accusations, Child abuse, Workplace bullying, Defamation per se

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

False accusations

A false allegation can occur as the result of intentional lying on the part of the accuser; or unintentionally, due to a confabulation, either arising spontaneously due to mental illness or resulting from deliberate or accidental suggestive questioning, or faulty interviewing techniques. Researchers Poole and Lindsay suggested in 1997 applying separate labels to the two concepts, proposing the term "false allegations" be used specifically when the accuser is aware they are lying, and "false suspicions" (weasel word phrase; dissimulation) for the wider range of false accusations in which suggestive questioning may have been involved.

Child abuse

A false allegation of child sexual abuse is an accusation that a person committed one or more acts of child sexual abuse when in reality there was no perpetration of abuse by the accused person as alleged. Such accusations can be brought by the victim, or by another person on the alleged victim's behalf. Studies of child abuse allegations suggest that the overall rate of false accusation is under 10%, as approximated based on multiple studies. Of the allegations determined to be false, only a small portion originated with the child, the studies showed; most false allegations originated with an adult bringing the accusations on behalf of a child, and of those, a large majority occurred in the context of divorce and child-custody battles.

Workplace bullying

^{Research by the Workplace Bullying Institute, suggests that "falsely accused someone of 'errors' not actually made" is the most common of all bullying tactics experienced, in 71 percent of cases.}

Defamation per se

The four (4) categories of slander that are actionable per se are (i) accusing someone of a crime; (ii) alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease; (iii) adversely reflecting on a person’s fitness to conduct their business or trade; and (iv) imputing serious sexual misconduct. Here again, the plaintiff need only prove that someone had published the statement to any third party. No proof of special damages is required.