Published on Aug 17, 2014

by Stephen M. Krason: Why should the average American Catholic care about the subject of this book? The collection of six papers presented at a recent conference held at The Catholic University apply Catholic social teachings and related ethical and legal principles, all in the name of protecting families and children from the Child Protective System, an overzealous government agency. 

Must-see interview for anyone concerned with possible violation of rights against parents.

 

Child Abuse, Family Rights, and the Child Protective System: A Critical Analysis from Law, Ethics, and Catholic Social Teaching

"The child protective system (CPS), shaped by federal law forty years ago and run on the state and county levels in the United States, offered in utopian fashion the hope of preventing all possible child abuse or neglect. In response, legislators enacted a spate of vague laws that poorly defined such categories as “abuse” and “neglect,” and granted the CPS sweeping powers to intrude into families, often on the basis of nothing more than anonymous complaints about standard childrearing practices. This arrangement, which followed from the questionable assertion of the existence of a crisis of child abuse and neglect, became the basis in theory for the universal monitoring of American families that has resulted in the sharp curtailing of parental rights and responsibilities. With overreaching by local and state governments into family affairs, the current CPS has not only damaged untold numbers of families but also undercut the legitimacy of parental authority through the continuous threat to parents of child removal.

In Child Abuse, Family Rights, and the Child Protective System: A Critical Analysis from Law, Ethics, and Catholic Social Teaching, Stephen M. Krason gathers essays by leading scholars and practitioners to comment through the prism of Catholic social thought, on the plight afflicting American families and the role of the child protective system. Here readers will find critical essays on the deleterious effect of the1974 passage of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act; assessments of current American policies on child abuse and neglect and the role of the CPS within the context of prevailing international human rights principles and Catholic social teaching; a survey of the enforcement of CPS policies from a legal and constitutional perspective; research data disputing the CPS principle that all parents are potential abusers and illustrating the greater prevalence of abuse and neglect in broken, “blended,” and “untraditional” families; and arguments for poverty and unemployment as the prime culprits in the mistreatment of children. Also included are the amicus curiae briefs that the Society of Catholic Social Scientists submitted in two U.S. Supreme Court cases on parental rights, the CPS, and state control over the family. Child Abuse, Family Rights, and the Child Protective System should appeal to a variety of professionals as well as scholars, from family court attorneys, social workers, family counselors, and clergy to researchers in the fields of social work, law, family studies, American politics, sociology, human services, counseling and psychology, and education, as well as public officials...."


*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

New Commission to Regulate Prosecutorial Misconduct

From:  Mad Angel- a prosecutor is suppose to find all the facts of the case even if it proves you innocent. But that's not what prosecutors are doing even in cps cases. Instead they are just another lawyer on cps side.

From: Huffington Post THE BLOG
Posted: 05/20/2014 12:09 pm EDT

"New York State is poised to become the first state in the nation to create a public commission specifically designed to investigate complaints of misconduct by prosecutors and impose discipline upon prosecutors who violate the rules. The commission is modeled after commissions on judicial conduct, which exist in every state, including New York, to regulate the conduct of judges. Given the prosecutor's unique role as a "minister of justice" who occupies a "quasi-judicial" position, the huge costs on the criminal justice system from prosecutorial misconduct, and the abject failure of other mechanisms to discipline prosecutors, it is essential to the integrity of the justice system and the public's confidence that the system functions fairly and accurately, that this commission be created.
The incidence of misconduct by prosecutors in New York and across the country is escalating. Flagrant misconduct by prosecutors has been documented in several recent high-profile cases: late Senator Ted Stevens' conviction was thrown out because of egregious misconduct by federal prosecutors; the Duke Lacrosse prosecutor Michael Nifong was disbarred and jailed because of his misconduct; and prosecutor Ken Anderson, who hid evidence that wrongfully convicted Michael Morton and sent him to jail for 25 years, also was disbarred and jailed. But these cases are the tip of the iceberg. They illustrate the terrible consequences of misconduct that occurs regularly in thousands and thousands of other cases but do not receive the same publicity.
Prosecutors claim that reports of misconduct are exaggerated, and that misconduct is the work of a few bad apples, or a handful of rogue prosecutors. Indeed, some prosecutors in New York even claim that the prosecutor commission has been created to retaliate against the Moreland Commission, which subpoenaed legislators in connection with its investigation into public corruption. But given the extent of misconduct nationally and in New York, and the fact that this proposed commission has been studied for several years, this response by prosecutors is misguided and misinformed. Indeed, in a remarkable opinion by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in which he was joined by several colleagues, Kozinski writes that the culture of prosecution has changed dramatically in recent years; no longer is misconduct by prosecutors the "exception" or "a rare blemish." One of the most pervasive forms of misconduct - hiding favorable evidence that could prove a defendant's innocence -- "has reached epidemic proportions." Judge Kozinski concludes, just as so many courts and commentators have previously concluded, that "some prosecutors turn a blind eye to misconduct because they're more interested in gaining a conviction than achieving a just result."
The increasing incidence of misconduct by prosecutors is not surprising. The phenomenon is closely linked to the post-9/11 legal and political culture of fear, secrecy and repression in which the power of law enforcement, especially of prosecutors, has become much more dominant and aggressive. Prosecutors see themselves almost exclusively as "Accusers and Convicters." This unsettling spectacle has replaced almost completely the prosecutor's other important function to respect the rights of everybody, including defendants, and ensure justice for all persons. In this changed climate, the goal of finding the truth becomes submerged in an overly-aggressive law enforcement culture. In this troubling period of criminal justice, prosecutors get the message that they can prosecute as hard as they want and as far as they want, and there is virtually nothing to stop them. This new climate is manifested by massive and warrantless electronic surveillance, far broader leeway for law enforcement to search, seize and get confessions, a huge increase in drug arrests and prosecutions, a huge increase in the prison population, and more and more legislatively and judicially-created weapons in the hands of prosecutors to help them get convictions.
Moreover, it is well-known that sanctions against prosecutors who commit misconduct are either inadequate or non-existent. Prosecutors who commit misconduct are hardly ever disciplined. They are almost never disciplined by their own office, rarely disciplined by federal and state disciplinary agencies, and hardly ever disciplined by the courts, even for gross and repeated acts of misconduct. Consider the case of upstate New York prosecutor Jeffrey Taylor. As documented by the New York State Criminal Defense Lawyers' Association, despite six cases in which he was harshly rebuked by state and federal courts for his misconduct, and where four of those cases were reversed because of his misconduct, Taylor has never been disciplined. Despite numerous reports of misconduct against the office of former Brooklyn County District Attorney Charles Hynes, there is no report of any prosecutor in his office being disciplined for misconduct. And when a judge actually disciplines an offending prosecutor, it becomes headline news because of its rarity, as occurred a few months ago when a Bronx judge banished a prosecutor from his courtroom for life because of her flagrant misconduct.
Errant conduct by prosecutors exacts tremendous costs. First, scarce taxpayer resources are expended on having to litigate and re-litigate cases over and over again because of a prosecutor's misconduct, which money could be much better spent making communities safer. Second, the failure of the criminal justice system to deal effectively with misconduct by prosecutors and make them accountable when they violate the law erodes public confidence in the system and undermines the public's faith in the integrity of criminal trials. And third, let's never forget the enormous pain and suffering inflicted on innocent persons, and their families, when they are subjected to a wrongful prosecution through the deliberate misconduct of a prosecutor who, in Judge Kozinski's words, wants a conviction and turns a blind eye to justice. The National Registry of Exonerations, covering cases since 1989, ranks New York State fourth nationally with 166 exonerations out of 1,367 nationally. And many, maybe most of these wrongful convictions are attributable to the prosecutor's misconduct.
To be sure, a state commission on prosecutorial conduct will not prevent a prosecutor from engaging in misconduct, particularly when so much misconduct is hidden, as when prosecutors suppress favorable evidence from the defendant. But a commission that is independent from the legal profession, and independent from the prosecutor's office, will be able to conduct investigations in a nonpartisan, non-political, and objective manner. Indeed, for 100 years prior to 1975, when the state commission on judicial conduct was created, only 23 judges were disciplined. Since 1975, 826 judges were disciplined, and 166 removed from office. That's a fairly dramatic testament to the importance of an independent disciplinary commission, and to its effectiveness. The creation of such a commission to regulate prosecutors very likely would achieve similar results. It is imperative that this bill be enacted by the state legislature, and Governor Cuomo sign it."

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Mind what you say and do

From a former foster child thrown into the system. In her words:

They say mind what you say and do because the children are watching. (Well former foster kids are watching too)
I have so many things that have really bothered me lately about the so called child protection services. And it has to do more with their claims than anything. As cps claims millions of calls have come in about child abuse, during this very line to plead for more money, they do not tell people that many of these calls are unfounded and in retaliation.
The true numbers of child abuse are actually way down. And of course the number of neglect cases are way up. But let's look at what they consider neglect. As a child is moved around from place to place because parents are struggling financially cps steps in to remove the kid because of lack of stability.
But look at what cps and the foster care system provides for these children, many moved once or twice every six month. (One girl had been moved over forty times in her life of foster care) the lack of stability and structure in these children's lives are appalling and this is their response for a loving family who is in a financial crises.
The child had already been dealing with struggle but had the strength and love of the family, yet suddenly ripped up and taken away permanently traumatized with a lack of security and (here I want to call it a shield from the outside world, a child no longer believes his parents can protect them from anything)
Removed from everyone, school, friends, grandparents, aunts and uncles some of the most important people in a child's life. And placed with complete strangers (afraid to really trust anyone) held captive away from their family they become angry, depressed withdrawn, (an emotional wreck) and for this normal response they are labeled and placed on medication for their best interest.
And from one excuse to another through the courts ever burdened large case loads (caused by this abuse of power) and cps claims of their ever burdening case loads (ditto on why) the children are held in a purgatory of this system abuse. Remaining on medications they shouldn't be on (without their parents permission) being subjected to sometime traumatic and unjust counseling sessions (my position stands here as I was told since I was molested I would molest in one of their therapy sessions, it broke my heart, I've learned better
Dear cps just because you get mugged doesn't make you a mugger lay off your junk therapy)
Every day children beg to see and hear from their parents, wanting to hear that their parents are trying everything to win back the child's freedom. But sadly parents are not allowed to tell their children this because cps claims the parent should not give the child false hopes. Again how cruel. Leaving the child in such a confusing state continually visiting and walking away and as the child begs the parent to take them home all the parent is allowed to say is I love you. (THIS IS NOT ENOUGH FOR THE CHILD)
As the bond and closeness of the family slips away because cps holds on to the child for so long it becomes a struggle to reunite and bond these family members are no longer the same, pain and stress has taken its toll on the parents in court and the child is so use to closing people out that all this creates a new burden on the family. (But no one including me would ever tell cps this or they would use it as an excuse to hold on to the child longer)
Here I have to tell you of a very loved happy little girl. She'd shown such great signs of intelligence eager to start school soon and very happy with her family. She was ripped away by cps with the excuse of failure to thrive. (No she wasn't malnourished, but she was extremely hyper and happy and her mother is only five foot) because this adorable little girl was short and skinny cps took her away and placed her first in a foster care and then to her paternal grandmother's home.
In court she was then described as inconsolable, she begged everyone to take her home to her mom and dad (the caseworker claimed the child had been couched even though the parents hadn't been allowed to see her) this already tiny child started to lose weight as the pain and depression kicked in. There was talk of placing her on medication. (This is when the parents finally got to visit and begged their little girl to be strong, so afraid of the type of medications they planned to force onto her without the parents permission, yes cps told the parents they were well within their rights to do so)
Everyday this child was put through more and more abuse from cps. As she was taken from the grandmother's home (the caseworker said for a mental evaluation) and as the little girl was instructed at this evaluation to take off all her clothes and get on the table she had no one familiar to give her strength at this violation of her rights.
After she was returned to the grandmother the caseworker left and said nothing. And this now timid five year old girl took her 13 year old sister aside and told her what had really happened. As she described how they had touched her, how they had touched her down there and then placed something inside her. (This crushed the older sister and she told her parents) all the parents ever received was an apology for not telling them what had happened and that they usually don't have a five year old tell the parents (yeah I can imagine they are usually to scared, that's why the five year old told her sister)
Never once was there a claim of sexual abuse, molestation or physical abuse. She was taken for being short. And for this she was anal and vaginal probed. (They caseworker CLAIMED in court they where we'll within their rights, but this really wasn't true. Doing this to every single child who enters cps care would truly be abuse.)
(Fyi I have documented proof of this case)
All the importance of keeping secrets to spare a child from being teased in school over their cases is allowing some truly horrific abuse to take place. All the claims of cps in the best interest of the child is also helping to facility and perpetuate even more atrocious abuse that many children should never have ever experienced.
Now I can see the news and I even know from my own childhood that child abuse is real. But the solution and response to this for far to many years has actually caused a greater amount of child abuse than it has stopped. (Sadly I know from experience the real amount of abuse children suffer while in cps care will never be reported because abusers don't tell on themselves, not tell they've been caught, notice this pattern with cps.....it's an abuser mentality)
I can show hundreds of double standards and abuser mentality within cps very own policies, procedures and manuals but I have to find someone who will listen and look. And far to many people still believe cps is there to save and protect children.....maybe someday someone will want to see.

https://www.facebook.com/mad.angel.750


*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

CPS Steals Children for Profit - Your Tax Dollars in Action!

Uploaded on Aug 12, 2010

Short video detailing abuse of power by Child Protective Services - CPS. Highlights financial incentives to steal kids and place them on drugs. Contains multiple news clips and interviews from families that CPS stole the kids from, & includes the late (possibly murdered) Nancy Schaefer.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

FPS [Family Protection Services]

From Fairbanks Daily News miner Letters to the Editor

Don't cut ocs budget

Feb. 24, 2014

To the editor: In 2012, a workload study, commissioned by the current governor, recommended an increase in support staff for the Office of Children’s Services. This department, already underfunded to achieve its goal of protecting children from abuse and neglect, is set to receive serious budget cuts this year.

How can it be that those we’ve elected can turn away from such information? How can they say “these are the tough choices” we have to make?

The governor and our elected officials have an independent workload study recommending a feasible solution to protect our most vulnerable population, our children, from abuse and neglect. I wonder what they will say when more stories of abused children end up in the news.
Tough choices should not include gambling with the lives of children. “Choosing Respect” is more than words. Actions demonstrate respect. Our children deserve protection from violence, abuse and neglect. Voting to cut child protection is not choosing respect.
Kim Swisher
Fairbanks

 Now... lets follow the money:

Kim Swisher:

Department of Social Work. UAF

Clinical Assistant Professer and Feild Director for BSW program.

"... Master's of Social Work from the University of Alaska Anchorage in 2000 with an emphasis in Children, Youth and Families. ..."
"... in the field working with severely emotionally disturbed children, providing advocacy in court for children, child welfare, and child protection. Kim has worked as a Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) for children in foster care, and spent ten years with the Office of Children's Services, both in Anchorage and Fairbanks. Kim spent three years working for the Family and Youth Services Training Academy, through the UAA School of Social Work, traveling Alaska and training child protection workers in best practice. Kim currently serves on the Board of Directors for the Interior Center for Non-Violent Living (IAC), and the Advisory Board for the Birch Center in Fairbanks. She provides consultation to Stevie's Place, the Child Advocacy Center in Fairbanks, through the Resource Center for Parents and Children (RCPC). Kim's area of interest include direct practice with individuals, groups and communities, and she delights in inspiring students to become social workers. ..."

So... respect for whom?

The budget needs to be cut. Many, many positions need to be eliminated. CPS needs to be eliminated. It can then be rebuilt into FPS. "Family Protection Services" of which it is currently not. FPS can then hire individuals who have respect for families. Not those who concern themselves with the bottom dollar and where they get new inventory.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Kidnapping: CPS’s billion dollar industry

Kidnapping: CPS’s billion dollar industry
Julie Wilson
Infowars.com
July 25, 2013

Shaymus Crow’s film is an excellent overview of the treacherous acts committed by the government funded program known as Child Protective Services (CPS).
Social welfare-agencies have been allowed the right to remove neglected and abused children from the care of their families since the early 1800s.
A report by John E.B. Meyers describes the birth of the first governmental agency supposedly created to protect children. The agency, born in New York in 1875 was called the New York Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NYSPCC).
According to Meyers’ report, by 1922 over 300 nongovernmental child protection societies were existing across America, the creation of  the juvenile court soon followed which was first established 1899 in Chicago. By 1919, most states had juvenile courts.
In 1825, the Humane Society, a group dedicated to curbing violence against animals and humans, founded the National Federation of Child Rescue agency which was aimed at conducting investigations on child abuse.
The Humane Society, which branched off of the British Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), pushed forward private child protection agencies modeled after “existing animal protection organizations.”
While the federal Children’s Bureau was first introduced in 1912, it didn’t receive mandatory funding until an amendment was made in 1958 which required the state to begin funding the agency.
In 1974, the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) was introduced to provide “financial assistance for a demonstration program for the prevention, identification, and treatment of child abuse and neglect.”
According to Meyers’, “Prior to 1974, the federal government played a useful but minor role in child protection. The Children’s Bureau paid little to no attention to child abuse until the 1960s.”
The Social Security Act of 1935 was amended in 1962 to “provide money to expand child welfare services.”  However, in 1973 U.S. Senator Walter Mondale wrote, “Nowhere in the Federal Government could we find one official assigned full time to the prevention, identification and treatment of child abuse and neglect.”
It was Mondale’s interest and persuasion in the matter that influenced Congress to “assume a leadership role with the passage of” CAPTA.
CAPTA allocated funds for “training, regional multidisciplinary centers focused on child abuse and neglect, and demonstration projects.”
Meyers’ report states, “CAPTA played a major role in shaping the nationwide system of governmental CPS” that’s in place today.
The video’s narrator quotes Mondale stating that after the bill passed it would turn “child protection into a child snatching business.”
The legislation soon turned the operation into a $12 billion a year business.
In 1997, President Clinton passed the Adoption and Safe Families Act which was intended to “promote the adoption of children in foster care.”
ABC News aired an exclusive segment that featured interviews of foster children describing the various kinds of prescription drugs they were given under the state’s care.
Instead of finding a solution to prevent this future for children, the segment publicized the need for more state funding and further promoted the myth that children are institutionalized because of the abundance of bad parents.
Legislation that was originally created for the purpose of helping children, has transformed into a financial operation aimed at kidnapping children for the financial benefit of the state.
The more children removed, the more money that’s made. The children while under the state’s care are prescribed an average of seven medications in an attempt to keep them chained to the system for a lifetime.
The business is so lucrative that advocates like Nancy Schaefer, who aggressively took action against CPS exposing their crimes, were subsequently removed.   The media reported that Nancy Schaefer’s husband, troubled by financial problems, shot his wife to death while she slept before turning the gun on himself in 2010.
A report by Infowars.com speculated on the circumstances surrounding the couple’s death, finding it odd that a suicide victim would shoot them self in the chest.
The report read, “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.”
Most disturbing is that, not unlike many other evil government programs, the atrocities are directly funded by the taxpayer.  In essence, citizen are paying for programs that could potentially remove their own children.




*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Adoption Bonuses: The Money Behind the Madness

[This article is not dated, but I see that it matters not, as the information is still pertinent. ]

DSS and affiliates rewarded for breaking up families
By Nev Moore
Massachusetts News
Child "protection" is one of the biggest businesses in the country. We spend $12 billion a year on it. 
The money goes to tens of thousands of a) state employees, b) collateral professionals, such as lawyers, court personnel, court investigators, evaluators and guardians, judges, and c) DSS contracted vendors such as counselors, therapists, more "evaluators", junk psychologists, residential facilities, foster parents, adoptive parents, MSPCC, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, YMCA, etc. This newspaper is not big enough to list all of the people in this state who have a job, draw a paycheck, or make their profits off the kids in DSS custody. 
In this article I explain the financial infrastructure that provides the motivation for DSS to take people’s children – and not give them back. 
In 1974 Walter Mondale promoted the Child Abuse and Prevention Act which began feeding massive amounts of federal funding to states to set up programs to combat child abuse and neglect. From that came Child "Protective" Services, as we know it today. After the bill passed, Mondale himself expressed concerns that it could be misused. He worried that it could lead states to create a "business" in dealing with children. 
Then in 1997 President Clinton passed the "Adoption and Safe Families Act." The public relations campaign promoted it as a way to help abused and neglected children who languished in foster care for years, often being shuffled among dozens of foster homes, never having a real home and family. In a press release from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services dated November 24, 1999, it refers to "President Clinton’s initiative to double by 2002 the number of children in foster care who are adopted or otherwise permanently placed." 
It all sounded so heartwarming. We, the American public, are so easily led. We love to buy stereotypes; we just eat them up, no questions asked. But, my mother, bless her heart, taught me from the time I was young to "consider the source." In the stereotype that we’ve been sold about kids in foster care, we picture a forlorn, hollow-eyed child, thin and pale, looking up at us beseechingly through a dirt streaked face. Unconsciously, we pull up old pictures from Life magazine of children in Appalachia in the 1930s. We think of orphans and children abandoned by parents who look like Manson family members. We play a nostalgic movie in our heads of the little fellow shyly walking across an emerald green, manicured lawn to meet Ward and June Cleaver, his new adoptive parents, who lead him into their lovely suburban home. We imagine the little tyke’s eyes growing as big as saucers as the Cleavers show him his very own room, full of toys and sports gear. And we just feel so gosh darn good about ourselves. 
Now it’s time to wake up to the reality of the adoption business. 
Very few children who are being used to supply the adoption market are hollow-eyed tykes from Appalachia. Very few are crack babies from the projects. [Oh… you thought those were the children they were saving? Think again]. When you are marketing a product you have to provide a desirable product that sells. In the adoption business that would be nice kids with reasonably good genetics who clean up good. An interesting point is that the Cape Cod & Islands office leads the state in terms of processing kids into the system and having them adopted out. More than the inner city areas, the projects, Mission Hill, Brockton, Lynn, etc. Interesting… 
With the implementation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act, President Clinton tried to make himself look like a humanitarian who is responsible for saving the abused and neglected children. The drive of this initiative is to offer cash "bonuses" to states for every child they have adopted out of foster care, with the goal of doubling their adoptions by 2002, and sustaining that for each subsequent year. They actually call them "adoption incentive bonuses," to promote the adoption of children. 
Where to Find the Children
A whole new industry was put into motion. A sweet marketing scheme that even Bill Gates could envy. Now, if you have a basket of apples, and people start giving you $100 per apple, what are you going to do? Make sure that you have an unlimited supply of apples, right? 
The United States Department of Health & Human Services administers Child Protective Services. To accompany the ASF Act, the President requested, by executive memorandum, an initiative entitled Adoption 2002, to be implemented and managed by Health & Human Services. The initiative not only gives the cash adoption bonuses to the states, it also provides cash adoption subsidies to adoptive parents until the children turn eighteen. 
Everybody makes money. If anyone really believes that these people are doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, then I’ve got some bad news for you. The fact that this program is run by HHS, ordered from the very top, explains why the citizens who are victims of DSS get no response from their legislators. It explains why no one in the Administration cares about the abuse and fatalities of children in the "care" of DSS, and no one wants to hear about the broken arms, verbal abuse, or rapes. They are just business casualties. It explains why the legislators I’ve talked to for the past three years look at me with pity. Because I’m preaching to the already damned. 
The legislators have forgotten who funds their paychecks and who they need to account to, as has the Governor. Because it isn’t the President. It’s us. 
How DSS Is Helped
The way that the adoption bonuses work is that each state is given a baseline number of expected adoptions based on population. 
For every child that DSS can get adopted, there is a bonus of $4,000 to $6,000. 
But that is just the starting figure in a complex mathematical formula in which each bonus is multiplied by the percentage that the state has managed to exceed its baseline adoption number. The states must maintain this increase in each successive year. [Like compound interest.] The bill reads: "$4,000 to $6,000 will be multiplied by the amount (if any) by which the number of foster child adoptions in the State exceeds the base number of foster child adoptions for the State for the fiscal year." In the "technical assistance" section of the bill it states that, "the Secretary [of HHS] may, directly or through grants or contracts, provide technical assistance to assist states and local communities to reach their targets for increased numbers of adoptions for children in foster care." The technical assistance is to support "the goal of encouraging more adoptions out of the foster care system; the development of best practice guidelines for expediting the termination of parental rights; the development of special units and expertise in moving children toward adoption as a permanent goal; models to encourage the fast tracking of children who have not attained 1 year of age into pre-adoptive placements; and the development of programs that place children into pre-adoptive placements without waiting for termination of parental rights." 
In the November press release from HHS it continues, " HHS awarded the first ever adoption bonuses to States for increases in the adoption of children from the public foster care system." Some of the other incentives offered are "innovative grants" to reduce barriers to adoption [i.e., parents], more State support for adoptive families, making adoption affordable for families by providing cash subsides and tax credits. 
A report from a private think tank, the National Center for Policy Analysis, reads: "The way the federal government reimburses States rewards a growth in the size of the program instead of the effective care of children." Another incentive being promoted is the use of the Internet to make adoption easier. Clinton directed HHS to develop an Internet site to "link children in foster care with adoptive families." So we will be able to window shop for children on a government web site. If you don’t find anything you like there, you can surf on over to the "Adopt Shoppe." 
If you prefer to actually be able to kick tires instead of just looking at pictures you could attend one of DSS’s quaint "Adoption Fairs," where live children are put on display and you can walk around and browse. Like a flea market to sell kids. If one of them begs you to take him home you can always say, "Sorry. Just looking." The incentives for government child snatching are so good that I’m surprised we don’t have government agents breaking down people’s doors and just shooting the parents in the heads and grabbing the kids. But then, if you need more apples you don’t chop down your apple trees. 
Benefits for Foster Parents
That covers the goodies the State gets. Now let’s have a look at how the Cleavers make out financially after the adoption is finalized. 
After the adoption is finalized, the State and federal subsidies continue. The adoptive parents may collect cash subsidies until the child is 18. If the child stays in school, subsidies continue to the age of 22. There are State funded subsidies as well as federal funds through the Title IV-E section of the Social Security Act. The daily rate for State funds is the same as the foster care payments, which range from $410-$486 per month per child. Unless the child can be designated "special needs," which of course, they all can. 
According to the NAATRIN State Subsidy profile from DSS, "special needs" may be defined as: "Physical disability, mental disability, emotional disturbance; a significant emotional tie with the foster parents where the child has resided with the foster parents for one or more years and separation would adversely affect the child’s development if not adopted by them." [But their significant emotional ties with their parents, since birth, never enter the equation.] 
Additional "special needs" designations are: a child twelve years of age or older; racial or ethnic factors; child having siblings or half-siblings. In their report on the State of the Children, Boston’s Institute for Children says: "In part because the States can garner extra federal funds for special needs children the designation has been broadened so far as to become meaningless." "Special needs" children may also get an additional Social Security check. 
The adoptive parents also receive Medicaid for the child, a clothing allowance and reimbursement for adoption costs such as adoption fees, court and attorney fees, cost of adoption home study, and "reasonable costs of food and lodging for the child and adoptive parents when necessary to complete the adoption process." Under Title XX of the Social Security Act adoptive parents are also entitled to post adoption services "that may be helpful in keeping the family intact," including "daycare, specialized daycare, respite care, in-house support services such as housekeeping, and personal care, counseling, and other child welfare services". [Wow! Everything short of being knighted by the Queen!] 
The subsidy profile actually states that it does not include money to remodel the home to accommodate the child. But, as subsidies can be negotiated, remodeling could possibly be accomplished under the "innovative incentives to remove barriers to adoption" section. The subsidy regulations read that "adoption assistance is based solely on the needs of the child without regard to the income of the family." What an interesting government policy when compared to the welfare program that the same child’s mother may have been on before losing her children, and in which she may not own anything, must prove that she has no money in the bank; no boats, real estate, stocks or bonds; and cannot even own a car that is safe to drive worth over $1000. This is all so she can collect $539 per month for herself and two children. The foster parent who gets her children gets $820 plus. We spit on the mother on welfare as a parasite who is bleeding the taxpayers, yet we hold the foster and adoptive parents [who are bleeding ten times as much from the taxpayers] up as saints. The adoptive and foster parents aren’t subjected to psychological evaluations, ink blot tests, MMPI’s, drug & alcohol evaluations, or urine screens as the parents are. 
Adoption subsidies may be negotiated on a case by case basis. [Anyone ever tried to "negotiate" with the Welfare Department?] There are many e-mail lists and books published to teach adoptive parents how to negotiate to maximize their subsidies. As one pro writes on an e-mail list: "We receive a subsidy for our kids of $1,900 per month plus another $500 from the State of Florida. We are trying to adopt three more teens and we will get subsidies for them, too. It sure helps out with the bills." 
I can’t help but wonder why we don’t give this same level of support to the children’s parents in the first place? According to Cornell University, about 68% of all child protective cases "do not involve child maltreatment." The largest percentage of CPS/DSS cases are for "deprivation of necessities" due to poverty. So, if the natural parents were given the incredible incentives and services listed above that are provided to the adoptive parents, wouldn’t it stand to reason that the causes for removing children in the first place would be eliminated? How many less children would enter foster care in the first place? The child protective budget would be reduced from $12 billion to around $4 billion. Granted, tens of thousands of social workers, administrators, lawyers, juvenile court personnel, therapists, and foster parents would be out of business, but we would have safe, healthy, intact families, which are the foundation of any society. 
That’s just a fantasy, of course. The reality is that maybe we will see Kathleen Crowley’s children on the government home-shopping-for-children web site and some one out there can buy them.
May is national adoption month. To support "Adoption 2002," the U.S. Postal Service is issuing special adoption stamps. Let us hope they don’t feature pictures of kids who are for sale. I urge everyone to boycott these stamps and register complaints with the post office.
I know that I’m feeling pretty smug and superior about being part of such a socially advanced and compassionate society. How about you?

  MassNews.com- Masschusett's Conservative Voice.



*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Child Protective Services Under Fire!

 This is an awesome video and speaks volumes of truth.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Lawyer Taking On OC Child Protective Services

Los Angeles Local News, Weather, and Traffic

Brian Claypool is one of the lead attorneys in the Miramonte child abuse case. Now, he's taking on Orange County's child protective services.  Claypool is accusing CPS of engaging in child trafficking and exposing children to sexual abuse for financial gain.  All of this, after the airing of one of our stories of children "Lost In The System".
Claypool is calling for a state and federal investigation into Orange County's CPS Department.  He says he's filing a federal civil lawsuit against CPS.
Claypool is representing Ruby Dillon. A woman who says her 7 year old daughter was taken away from her after she reported suspected molestation by the father. The father denies the allegations.
Among the allegations by Claypool, that CPS abducted Dillon's daughter by "fabricating evidence, obstructing justice, committing perjury and violating the law." CPS officials wouldn't talk to us on camera but they issued the following statement: We will look into concerns raised and proceed accordingly.
Claypool claims to have proof that Orange County CPS is a motivated by state and federal funding and does not operate in the best interest of the children.

Read more: http://www.myfoxla.com/story/22188922/lawyer-taking-on-oc-child-protective-services#ixzz2T0EZbm2v

 *The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

CA Lawmaker Demands Audit of CPS After Baby Is Taken From Parents

Read more: http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/05/03/california-lawmaker-tim-donnelly-wants-audit-child-protective-services-after-baby-taken#ixzz2ScnrDXNK

A California lawmaker is now calling for a full audit of the state’s Child Protective Services after the agency helped police take a 5-month-old baby boy from his parents. As Megyn Kelly reported throughout this week, police ripped little Sammy from his home after his parents, Anna and Alex Nikolayev, told the hospital that was treating him that they wanted a second opinion on his condition.

Unbelievable video captured police, along with a social worker, in the Nikolayev home. One officer can be heard telling Anna, “I’m going to grab your baby and don’t resist and don’t fight me okay?”

Joe Weinberger, an attorney for Anna Nikolayev, joined America Live Friday and said that this happens all too often. “CPS oversteps its bounds, tries to protect its image more than the people they’re charged with the care and custody of,” he said.
Tim Donnelly is the California assemblyman behind the push for an audit of Child Protective Services. “If this mother committed any crime, it’s caring about her child too much […] The mother is the only rational figure here, and so I am demanding answers from CPS.”

Read more: http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/05/03/california-lawmaker-tim-donnelly-wants-audit-child-protective-services-after-baby-taken#ixzz2ScmspMWX

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

CPS family court corruption: Sign the petition

 CPS family court corruption
 http://www.petition2congress.com/3499/cps-family-court-corruption/?m=4135005

Recruit your family and friends to take action: Sign the petition

Tell a Friend

Families are being abused by State CPS and Family Courts through out the United States of America, this is a major issue that needs to be addressed, Families that have had their civil rights violated through family court proceedings and the fact that all due process and constitutional rights are violated and manipulated by family court judges, District Attorneys, and Commissioners of /social services departments as well as CPS workers, and court appointed attorneys that are not working for the clients but have helped incriminate parents. Also of extreme interest, is obtaining names/phone/location of CPS workers who are falsifying or have falsified documents in court and who have lied in a court setting. The people of New York State and the People of the United States of America demand a full investigation of all departments, and the termination of department until further the people also wish to sue for government entrapment as well as a suit brought against the case workers, family court judges, and district lawyers. The People through discovery have found:
1. The imbalance of funding is creating corruption
2. Corruption has filtered through all manner of government and related agencies
3. Judicial decisions violate the public trust
4. Laws are created and passed that give parens patriae unlimited power not provided by the Constitution
5. The pendulum has swung to create a monopoly strategy of funding extracted from dwindling Social Services that have been set up to help families in need is devastating families across America
6. Children's lives are at stake while in the care of government funded agencies, such as rape, sexual abuse, physical abuse and neglect, mental abuse, and statistics show our children are being killed while in government placements out side of the parental home/or close relatives
7. That the states are not following guidelines placing children with relatives but are screening them out using different criteria with foster families, or falsifying documents to entrap parents and not keeping the children in the home with parents but removing the children without due process or any true purpose other then to incriminate parents/family members and to insure family is unfit
8. That pockets of tyranny are going unchecked without recourse
9. Congress local government/ civil and family courts is not responsive to The People
10. That The People have been turned away from civil courts, and from family courts higher court of appeals, only to remain battered and bruised by the tyranny of these local government funded courts as the judges, case workers/commissioners and district attorneys mock the outraged parents and children of which they so willingly strip of their civil rights and liberties
The People are declaring a public health crisis and human rights violation as well as their Civil rights are being stripped and taken from them and their families, as a result of these above atrocities and also In addition, The People find the Parens Patriae to be more than a doctrine but a specialized position created by the government for the government that violates Article 1 Sec 9, 10: No title of nobility or honors shall be granted by the United States. The title extends to the courts, Childrens Administration and public education violating Amendment 14 depriving persons of life, liberty and property without due process. The position applies as a collective.
The People are ordering an investigation of the departments as well as Family courts through out the United States of America and most important in New York State the people of the United States ask that all family court files,case files, court tapes, and videos be put into the investigation, as well as there be a federal lockdown on all CPS and family courts so that no tampering of documents can be done by such agencies, the fact is family court documents will show the fact that they are mishandled and manipulated by these agencies to insure incriminating charges are inevitable and due process is not being carried out, civil rights are violated, all human rights are violated and the United States Constitution is not on the agenda of these agencies. And the people of the United States of America are being abused by these powers.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

CPS is drugging 6 and 7 year old children - for profit

"NBC TV news affiliate W O A I cover an important issue revealing that CPS drugging children without merit.

The motivation for this horrific act was and still is money..."

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Child Protective Services and the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution

From  http://voices.yahoo.com/child-protective-services-sixth-amendment-2744288.html
Published by MD Lynn

 The United States of America's citizens have a Bill of Rights granted to us in the US Constitution. Of these rights, I've regularly written about violations, such as my articles where many public school districts require children and parents to waive their Fourth Amendment rights in order to receive a free public education.
Today, I want to tackle the US Sixth Amendment and Child Protective Services. First, let me start with the Sixth Amendment. Many of you probably know this as the 'Right to a speedy trial amendment'. However, there is much more to the Sixth Amendment than that.
Let's look at the text first: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
The part I want to focus on in this article is the bolded part that reads: "... to be confronted with the witnesses against him..."
Child Protective Services Procedure
There are many ways a report of alleged child abuse can occur. The only proper way is for the person suspecting the abuse to notify local law enforcement officers and let them investigate the crime. If the law enforcement officer believes there is enough evidence a crime has occurred, that officer can bring in Child Protective Services to offer services to the family.
Unfortunately, it usually happens the other way around. Generally, people report child abuse directly to CPS, and more often than not, they use the toll-free anonymous hotlines. The problem with anything that is 'anonymous' is that anyone, for any reason (including nefarious reasons) can report a suspicion of alleged abuse.
How Anonymous CPS Hotlines Circumvent the Sixth Amendment Rights
The Sixth Amendment provides that people have a right to face their accuser. In the instance of a CPS anonymous telephone report, there is no ability to face an accuser. CPS will use whatever information gathered in the hotline report to conduct their investigation, and any evidence found against the alleged perpetrator of child abuse or neglect is offered to the courts.
How this circumvents the Sixth Amendment is by letting CPS do the investigation, they are then using what is found in the investigation as the evidence against the alleged perpetrator, thus making CPS the accuser instead of the anonymous tipster.
CPS Doesn't Have the Right to Investigate
This is where knowing your rights becomes so very important. CPS does not have the right to investigate a family or children based on an anonymous CPS hotline phone call. They can attempt to perform an investigation, and if the parents or legal guardian allow them to by consenting to the investigation, they can use anything they gather or see during the investigation against the accused.
However, if all CPS has to go on is an anonymous phone call placed to a CPS hotline, and the parent or legal guardian refuses to cooperate, the only things CPS can do at that point is call law enforcement, get a court order (without evidence, this is tough) or close the case uninvestigated. This is true even when the tipster is not anonymous, because anything the tipster says to CPS is hearsay until investigated or proven by some other means, and that other means is usually found during the investigation that isn't required to happen.
Hearsay Is Inadmissible in Court
Because the accused has a right to confront their accuser, as provided in the Sixth Amendment, hearsay is not admissible in court. Therefore, CPS cannot use information gained from a CPS hotline call as evidence in court for 'probable cause' to get an order to enter a home or remove a child.
You Can Give Up Your Rights
CPS will not tell you the legalese of the pamphlets and brochures they give you, but it comes down to this: you don't have to let them in your home, you don't have to let them talk to your child, and you do not have to cooperate with a CPS investigation.
You do, however, have to cooperate with a police investigation. This is usually how CPS intimidates parents into cooperating. They will show up at your door with a police officer and ask to be let in to discuss things with you. Your response at that point should be, "I would be happy to comply, if you have a court order. Do you have an order to enter my home and search it and speak to my child?"
If their answer is, "No," your response should be: "I'm sorry, then. I cannot let you enter. Thank you." Then close the door. A police officer might come with them, but that officer knows as well as you should that he can't force his way into your home. He's there for their safety and for the intimidation factor the gun and badge and uniforms brings for the social worker with CPS.
If I'm Not Guilty...
Many people wonder why they should refuse an investigation with CPS if they know they aren't guilty. Many mistakenly assume that if they aren't doing anything wrong, nothing bad can happen to them. There are entire websites and programs and groups dedicated to the very fact that CPS can indeed find something wrong if they want to find it, even if the child is not abused or neglected.
It is in CPS's best interests to find something wrong with your household. They get paid for it if they do. If you refuse investigation by CPS, they will have no choice but to get law enforcement involved and go before a judge to get a court order.
The courts know that unless there is physical evidence to show justifiable cause that a crime of child abuse or neglect has occurred, they cannot allow CPS or law enforcement to enter your home (that's your Fourth Amendment right). The courts also know that if the only evidence CPS has is a phone call to a hotline reporting alleged abuse, that is not enough evidence to issue a court order to come into your home.
If you don't allow CPS into your home, they cannot gather evidence to use against you in a court case, and thus, you maintain your Sixth Amendment rights to face your accuser (in this case the caller/reporter of alleged abuse). Because CPS can't reveal the person, or the person refuses to reveal themselves, CPS has no choice but to close the case and leave you alone.
Protect Your Rights but Be Calm and Professional
An accusation of child abuse is stressful and frustrating at best. Please try not to take it personally, even though it might feel personal to you. CPS employees are only doing their jobs, and some of the workers do still believe they are doing the right thing and protecting children. Remember, even the employees of CPS are victims of the system for which they work. However, they do know what your rights are, and they will try to circumvent those rights as much as possible in order to do their jobs. It's not personal to most of them; it's just a job.
Stand your ground. Invoke your rights. Tell them you are not guilty, but you also know your legal rights and you choose to invoke them. If it makes you feel better, and you can afford it, contact an attorney. CPS doesn't like when attorneys get involved, because they know they have to watch their steps and actually follow the law.
Be firm, but be polite when you turn CPS away from your door. Never raise your voice, never get angry or show anger toward the social worker from CPS, and never threaten them in such a way that they can claim evidence of abuse.
The law is on your side, and it's actually on the side of your children too, if you know how to take advantage of your legal rights and require they are enforced.
Not Condoning Abuse
Please know that I do not in any way condone child abuse and that I'm not trying to say that people who abuse children should not be severely punished and the children protected. What I am saying is that law enforcement is better trained and equipped to deal with allegations and investigations of abuse than a social worker for CPS is, and that law enforcement knows how to handle evidence so that evidence is all admissible in court, so that real abusers don't walk away on a technicality. If you see abuse, don't be afraid to report it immediately to protect that precious child, but be sure to report it to the right agency - law enforcement!
To read more about CPS and your rights as a citizen and parent, see The Truth about Child Protective Services, my other article on this topic.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Brian Gerrish (Common Purpose) takes on Social workers & Adoption Agencies

Brian Gerrish takes on our social services. CAFCASS, CPS, DCSF, BAAF, CORAM, hang your head in shame.

Brian Gerrish is working with Ian Josephs of www.forced-adoption.com, who works with John Hemming MP.
This series was filmed by EMTV.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Child Protection Worker

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Coffee talk with Robert Coleman exposing corruption with CPS

A new book written by local resident [Huron, South Dakota] Robert Coleman describes the true-life story of his family’s nightmare experiences at the hands of CPS (Child Protective Services) in the state of Michigan.
The events took place in 2008 when the Coleman family claims they were falsely accused of child abuse by a vindictive couple they had evicted from the apartments the Colemans owned in Ironwood, Michigan.
In Coleman’s account, he describes how local law enforcement authorities and state officials, eager to go after him because of previous conflicts he had experienced with them via disputes he had with them while in business in Ironwood, jumped at the opportunity when the claims were made, without properly investigating the backgrounds and claims of the vindictive couple. The ensuing investigation purportedly included statements of his then six-year-old step daughter, who today at age ten, denies much of what the state claimed happened. The step daughter’s own account of what, in fact, took place, indicates the state used threats that she could never go home unless she said what they wanted her to say as a means of getting her to say what she did, in fact, say. That was coupled with many straight out lies, according to Coleman, as well as creation of so-called evidence manufactured by the state, which was never supported by any indisputable facts. Coleman’s claims in the book are all supported by either tape recordings he made of state officials at the time, the state’s own memos created at the time, or in actual court proceedings, which are fully documented in Coleman’s book.
The book further exploits the state of Michigan’s documented abuses of the CPS system, with referrals to other abusive CPS cases that resulted in a class action lawsuit, lost by the state of Michigan, a direct result of their abusive actions. In Coleman’s case, the state actually raided his hotel room at three o’clock in the morning, in a kidnap style, swat type of raid, to take his children on a Sunday morning, and attempted to paint Robert up as a dangerous person, when in fact, he had no criminal record nor as much as a fight in school while growing up to support such allegations.
The Coleman family left Ironwood when their case was finally closed in 2009, seeking out a desirable community to live in, and finally settled on Huron where Robert went about the writing of this book and the family now enjoys a new and peaceful life. Robert is presently engaged in his effort to establish a book publishing
business where others, such as himself, can effectively expose corruption and abuse by the system in real life cases such as his own. According to Coleman, there are plenty of those stories to be divulged.

A must read. Also a need to watch video below. Are your children next?

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Parental alienation syndrome

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_alienation_syndrome

Initial description

Parental alienation syndrome was a term coined by child psychiatrist Richard A. Gardner drawing upon his clinical experiences since the early 1980s. The concept of one parent attempting to separate their child from the other parent as punishment or part of a divorce have been described since at least the 1940s, but Gardner was the first to define a specific syndrome. In a 1985 article, he defined PAS as "...a disorder that arises primarily in the context of child-custody disputes. Its primary manifestation is the child's campaign of denigration against the parent, a campaign that has no justification. The disorder results from the combination of indoctrinations by the alienating parent and the child's own contributions to the vilification of the alienated parent" also stating that the indoctrination may be deliberate or unconscious on the part of the alienating parent. PAS was originally developed as an explanation for the increase in the number of reports of child abuse in the 1980s. Gardner initially believed that parents (usually mothers) made false accusations of child abuse and sexual abuse against the other parent (usually fathers) in order to prevent further contact between them. While Gardner initially described the mother was the alienator in 90% of PAS cases, he later stated both parents were equally likely to alienate. He also later stated that in his experience accusations of sexual abuse were not present in the vast majority of cases of PAS. The initial work was self-published by Gardner, but later papers were released in peer reviewed scientific journals.

Characteristics

Gardner described PAS as a preoccupation by the child with criticism and deprecation of a parent. Gardner stated that PAS occurs when, in the context of child custody disputes, one parent deliberately or unconsciously attempts to alienate a child from the other parent.

According to Gardner, PAS is characterized by a cluster of eight symptoms that appear in the child. These include;
-a campaign of denigration and hatred against the targeted parent;
-weak, absurd, or frivolous rationalizations for this deprecation and hatred;
-lack of the usual ambivalence about the targeted parent;
-strong assertions that the decision to reject the parent is theirs alone (the "independent-thinker phenomenon");
-reflexive support of the favored parent in the conflict;
-lack of guilt over the treatment of the alienated parent;
-use of borrowed scenarios and phrases from the alienating parent;
-and the denigration not just of the targeted parent but also to that parent's extended family and friends.

Despite frequent citations of these factors in scientific literature, "the value ascribed to these factors has not been explored with professionals in the field."
Gardner and others have divided PAS into mild, moderate and severe levels. The number and severity of the eight symptoms displayed increase through the different levels. The recommendations for management differ according to the severity level of the child's symptoms. While a diagnosis of PAS is made based on the child's symptoms, Gardner stated that any change in custody should be based primarily on the symptom level of the alienating parent.
-In mild cases, there is some parental programming against the targeted parent, but little or no disruption of visitation, and Gardner did not recommend court-ordered visitation.
-In moderate cases, there is more parental programming and greater resistance to visits with the targeted parent. Gardner recommended that primary custody remain with the programming parent if the brainwashing was expected to be discontinued, but if not, that custody should be transferred to the targeted parent. In addition, therapy with the child to stop alienation and remediate the damaged relationship with the targeted parent was recommended.
-In severe cases, children display most or all of the 8 symptoms, and will refuse steadfastly to visit the targeted parent, including threatening to run away or commit suicide if the visitation is forced. Gardner recommended that the child be removed from the alienating parent's home into a transition home before moving into the home of the targeted parent. In addition, therapy for the child is recommended. Gardner's proposed intervention for moderate and severe PAS, including court-ordered transfer to the alienated parent, fines, house arrest, incarceration, have been critiqued for their punitive nature towards the alienating parent and alienated child, and for the risk of abuse of power and violation of their civil rights. With time, Gardner revised his views and expressed less support for the most aggressive management strategies.


More can be read about this subject at wikipedia.org

To me, this reeks of a familiar CPS trend. How many parents (and grand parents) are kept from their children?

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Happy Birthday

To our Grand Children,

Someday... when you kids are old enough to use this and other information to burn the narcissistic ones that destroyed your life for fun and profit, make sure you make it very personal. Name names and institutions responsible. Dead or alive, we will be with you. Sue them for all it's worth and you will be set up for life. Also, let it be known that Gramma and Grampa did indeed wish you a happy birthday on the first year we never saw you on your birthdays. It must be a proud year for the narcissists. No matter what rock they live under or what mask they hide behind.

WE love you,
Gramma and Grampa.


*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Pseudo-Sciences

 The majority of reasonably intelligent people today recognize that Nazi attempts to designate one race as superior to others based on physical racial characteristics was nothing more than superstitious bigotry unsupported by science.  The Nazis actually created a ‘science’ of racial studies, endorsed by ‘experts’ and supported with manufactured ‘scientific evidence,’ in order to support their pet theory that the so-called Aryan race was superior to all others.  They had panels of experts, advisory councils, college courses, and specially trained bureaucrats to develop and implement their ‘racial hygiene’ policies.  This cadre of ‘experts’ would devise, implement, oversee, evaluate and propagandize the various racial hygiene programs, including Lebensborn.  Nazi society abounded with popular literature, textbooks, and manuals touting this most important Nazi platform.  Nazi Germany was inundated with racially based propaganda which extolled the virtues of the Aryan and justified the ‘solutions’ imposed on inferior races. 
          Of Pure Blood by Marc Hillel and Clarissa Henry is a 1976 book detailing the Nazi Lebensborn program.  “Doctors specializing in ‘racial knowledge’, all members of the SS or the police, were out in charge of racial testing at the reception centers. . .The children’s heads, bodies, arms and legs were measured, as well as the pelvis in the case of girls and the penis in the case of boys, and they were then divided into three groups: a - those representing a desirable addition to the German populations: b - those representing an acceptable addition to that population, and c - the unwanted. . .More than 200,000 Polish children were thus declared . . to be ‘racially useful’. 
           In the United States, the state cannot legally evaluate a person based on their race, or use physical or racial characteristics to judge them.  CPS agencies use something much more subtle, but no less specious than Nazi racial hygiene measurements; they use psychological measurements to determine how defective (dangerous to his own child) a parent has been or is likely to be.  Under the mechanism of court ordered or coerced ‘voluntary’ psychological evaluations, many parents are being ‘diagnosed’ as a ‘risk’ to their children based on psych eval findings from service providers who are paid for by the state; who conduct their evaluations based on a tainted family history provided by the state; and who, by their own admissions, stand to lose their contract with the state if they submit any findings that are contrary to what the caseworker has ordained.  
          American law has already established protections for persons who are disabled by virtue of their psychology.  Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, ( 42 U.S.C 12101, 12102, & 12131 et seq), disability is a physical or mental impairment the substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual; having a record of such impairment; or being regarded as having such an impairment. Caring for, nurturing and raising their children is undoubtedly on of the most important major life activities of a parent.  This country, through CPS, has raised psychology to the exalted status of Nazi Racial Studies on no more scientific evidence than the Nazis had to support their theories and programs.  This pseudo-science is used to demonize parents and justify the legal kidnapping of their children in order to satisfy the state’s need for adoptive children.  
          For example, the most popular psychological test given today is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Index (MMPI II).  According to one whistle blower evaluator, the completed test is fed into a computer that analyses the responses and returns a list of diagnoses to choose from. It is then up to the evaluator to decide which diagnosis applies to the subject.  This is not a scientifically-based, measurable, objective diagnosis if it is left up the subjective interpretation of the ‘expert.’  The selected diagnosis is based on a gut hunch, intuition, or maybe wishful thinking, or perhaps a state-contracted fee.  Whatever it is based on, it is not based on measurable science in any instance; nor even the most rudimentary common sense in the hands of many self-serving psychological evaluators.  
          Psycho-sexual evaluations for allegations of child sexual abuse are used by caseworkers as tool of making a determination whether or not the accused was a perpetrator.  Many psychological experts will assert that these tools are not designed to be used on anyone who has not admitted guilt.  However, caseworkers continue to use this tool inappropriately to validate allegations.  
          There are volumes of tests employed against parents.  This process is inherently flawed based on the fact that once the children have been taken, the parents are depressed, suspicious, angry, anxious, traumatized, worried, frightened, and more.  Requiring any person to submit to any psychological evaluation under these horrendous emotional circumstances is clearly setting them up for failure.  There is no hope they could present as being ‘normal.’  Naturally, psychological ‘deficiencies’ will show up, and those deficiencies are effectively used by the experts against the parents.  
          However, none of the findings from psychological tests were ever designed to indicate that the parents actually are mentally impaired or that they legitimately justify the application of any psychological label upon the parents.  Experts will admit that the findings of the parents’ tests show that they share some of the same characteristics with others who are so psychologically labeled does not mean that any findings are proof positive that the diagnosis is scientifically accurate.  
          The United States has a powerful industry backing up this ‘science.’  There are schools and seminars that teach and accredit the psychology of child abuse/child abusers; advisory councils against child abuse that advise powerful political figures and who lobby for intrusive and offensive legislation that undermines the sanctity of the family; cadres of ‘experts’ who analyze, devise, implement, oversee, evaluate and propagandize child abuse and prevention programs in the private and public sector and whose livelihoods depend on the perpetuation of this pseudo-science; and millions of service providers who provide ‘voluntary’ or court ordered services and whose livelihoods literally depend on the removal of children from their homes.  There are many ‘expert’ tomes on the subjects of the psychology of children, parents, child abuse, risks of abuse, and prevention of abuse. Parents have no credibility in the face of this multi-billion dollar industry.  
          These people take this pseudo science very seriously, sometimes with deadly consequences.  The May 24, 2000 Rocky Mountain news reported about a therapy technique used on a troubled child in Evergreen, Colorado.  The 10 year-old child had been adopted in 1996 and died as a result of this ‘therapy.’  “Sheriff’s investigators say Watkins and Ponder, both therapists, wrapped Candace in a flannel blanket to simulate a womb that the girl should be “born” from.  Then, in an attempt to mimic birth contractions, all four allegedly pushed against pillows Candace was lying under.  
          “Rebirthing is a controversial technique Watkins has used for about a year.  It is used to treat children who suffer from attachment disorder, which prevents children from bonding with their [adoptive] parents. Critics of the technique call the treatment radical and say it hasn’t been researched well.”  However, these ‘experts’ fail to acknowledge what anyone with common sense can see - that perhaps removing this child from her mother precipitated the attachment disorder in this child; that they caused this child’s psychological problems by employing this pseudo science in the first place.  
          Traditional parenting practices are under massive attack with responsible parents being targeted for their refusal to conform to this pseudo-science.  The ‘virtuous’ parents are those who do not spank or punish or subject their children to any undesirable circumstances such as an argument; and who casually inflict their consciousless brats on decent society saying, “Oh, isn’t my darling so cute?” when he’s really too bratty to bear.  Conspicuous by its absence is any expert acknowledgment for the self-evident consequences of this pseudo-science - as demonstrated by offensive childhood behavior from the regular cacophony of temper tantrums in department stores; to bratty kids running out of control in inappropriate places; to children’s complete lack of respect for others; all the way to the extreme of kids mowing down their classmates with guns because they were ‘teased.’  
          Demonstrating a callous lack of common sense, the practice of this ‘science’ is based on the premise that removing a child from his parents presents less trauma to the child than being merely ‘at risk’ of future abuse if he remained with his family in a dirty house.  People often say, ‘They don’t remove a child for a dirty home!” shocked that anyone could even suggest such a vile act.  But there are volumes of documented cases where not only were the children removed for a dirty home, but parental rights were terminated based on that initial removal and the resultant, non-scientific ‘risk assessment’ administered by the intake caseworker.  


Nazis and CPS by Suzanne Shell 
Pseudo-Sciences
Legalizing Kidnapping Of Children 
Turning Children Against Their Parents
Social Work
Abuse In State Custody
Throw away Children
Returning Children Home
Evaluating The System

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207