The Evil Entity of OCS. Testimony of Rep. Alan Dick, District 6, 27th Legislature

 The Evil Entity of OCS

Testimony of Rep. Alan Dick, District 6, 27th Legislature
alancanyon@yahoo.com

I am 71 and have lived in bush Alaska for over 50 years. I have been married 48 years, and have 5 children, 14 grandchildren and 7 great-grandchildren.
I flew through the Alaska Range today for the sole reason of testifying before you.
During the 27th Legislature I served as vice Chair of the State House HSS Committee.

In 2011, I worked for one of my constituents regarding an OCS concern, and was immediately inundated by distressed families from across the State. The need was and continues to be desperate. I thank Rep. Tammie Wilson for her continued efforts to reveal OCS violations.

Children who are in danger certainly need protection. However OCS has a clear history of either not showing up when needed or of brutally destroying families. Some good has been done by OCS, but this is not a spelling test where 60% is a passing grade. OCS has been unaccountable and untouchable, with practices unconscionable. Please allow me to cite a few examples from my many related experiences.

• Responsible leaders such as a health professional east of Glennallen told me OCS workers and the local magistrate worked together to cherry-pick their cases, ignoring some egregious situations while targeting certain families. • A community leader in Pilot Station told me she had been calling OCS for over six months regarding a child in danger and could not get help.

• A responsible mature couple in Wasilla told me they tried taking in foster children. They said they enjoyed the children, but dealing with OCS was so insane they would never consider having foster children ever again.

• A grandfather from the northwest coast of Alaska tried to get custody of his three grandchildren that had been taken from his daughter. In desperation, he sold his house, and exhausted the $30K equity in a failed attempt to secure his grandchildren from OCS. When I had a meeting with Director Christy Lawton in Fairbanks regarding his situation, I was told “He was noncompliant.” My response was, “Since when is total compliance with you a prerequisite for good parenting skills?”

• OCS workers, the GALs (guardian ad litems) and court officials are paid state professionals who are quite accustomed to working together. For most families, OCS intrusion is bewilderingly unfamiliar with no means of resolution. The State Ombudsman’s office, who is supposed to defend citizenry against government intrusion, was defunded to the point of worthlessness over a decade ago. Once children are Taken by OCS, even Liam Neeson would have a hard time getting them back.

• When concerned family members or even Legislators try to find out what is going on they are kept at bay by 1” of plexiglass. An Anchorage mother tried to get her two children back for many, many years. OCS had given her children to a woman that literally starved them and kept them chained up. That documented case was made public in the Anchorage media, but two years later, that adoptive, abusive OCS mother still had legal custody of the children and the dedicated biological mother could not contact them! I went with that mother to the OCS office in Anchorage and waited one hour-forty-five minutes attempting to get ROI (release of information) paperwork so the mother could give me legal access to the information regarding her case. The OCS office refused to give us the paperwork which is supposed to be freely available. While waiting, two OCS workers separately called the mother aside and spoke quite rudely to her. I later told OCS Director Christy Lawton about the rebuff, and she admitted that we should have been given the ROI paperwork, but I was not able to get any farther on that case. I was neither the first nor the last Representative who failed in a efforts to break the OCS stronghold.

• Recently in McGrath, an OCS approved home was given a 13 year old girl. For an extended period of time that family allowed her 19 year old boyfriend to move in and stay in the same bedroom. The OCS office was a half of a mile away and most of the community was aware of the situation. The OCS worker did absolutely nothing until pressured by community members. She was later fired, I was told for long-term substance abuse.

• In 2012 Rep. Wes Keller, Chairman of HSS, conducted a public hearing with HSS Commissioner Streur in Wasilla. As vice Chair of HSS, I attended that meeting. Many aggrieved families testified. Commissioner Streur appeared to listen, and said “Game on.” But when I followed up with the families, I discovered that none of them had been contacted after that meeting and absolutely nothing had been resolved for the parents.

• It is the assignment of the GAL (guardian-ad-litem) under the Dept. of Admin. to focus exclusively on the safety of the child. It is, in theory, the function of OCS to restore families. I saw several situations where the GAL pleaded for the child to be returned to the family, yet OCS was adamantly opposed, as the whole focus has been to seize and adopt out the children.

• A grandmother from the mid-west with a Master’s degree is a professional social worker in her own state. I spent several hours with her in the Valley. She was articulate, intelligent and seemed completely responsible. Her Alaskan daughter had not been a good mother, so the grandmother took the grandchildren to stay with her in the mid-west. She later thought it right that the children have contact with the father’s family, and brought the children to Alaska on a short visit. OCS seized the children and later managed to adopt them out to strangers despite the grandmother’s best efforts. When I asked her what the solution was, she immediately said, “Record all conversations!” She said OCS workers lie constantly in and out of court, and without recording all conversations there is no recourse.

• OCS workers commonly extort parents, “If you don’t relinquish your parental rights to these children, then we will seize the others.” Not understanding their rights, the intimidated parents do so and never see their children again. One mother told me that OCS assured her that her children were better off with their paternal grandparents, and that she would have free access to her children if she relinquished her parental rights. She complied and the children were moved out of state within two weeks. Multiple tactics are used to get uninformed parents to relinquish parental rights.

• The same mother was previously told that she had to attend training in Anchorage in order to keep her children, but she had no job, no housing, no transportation in Anchorage. Her children were taken away as there was no way for her to take that training in her village. I arranged for that mother to have an interview with Governor Parnell’s Legislative Liaison, Heather Hebdon, in the Anchorage LIO, but the 45 minute meeting produced no results for that mother.

• Instead of working with ICWA, OCS has been adversarial and has gone out of its way to keep village people uninformed about the purpose and legal authority granted by ICWA. At the same time, the criminal justice system in western Alaska is so broken that many village people are saddled with boundary crimes as they have had to plea-bargain out of exaggerated allegations and impossible bail requirements. Those families will never be able to get custody of a related family member even if they maintain a good, loving home.

• Extreme turnover among OCS staff members statewide has produced inconsistent interpretation and implementation of OCS regulations. I understand that families can say absolutely anything they want, true, false, or exaggerated, while OCS must outwardly appear professional. There are multiple facets of all situations. It is not until you get to the third or fourth layer that the whole truth starts to emerge. Families do not attract OCS attention without having some form of functional issues. However, as I told Commissioner Struer in person, “You can’t fix dysfunction with worse dysfunction. OCS is more dysfunctional than the families they purportedly restore.” Over a long period of time, State government has been extremely non-responsive to the cries of the people. How unresponsive? As a State Representative, I told Governor Parnell, in the presence of Heather Hebdon, that one of my constituents had told me he murdered seven people. That man told me who he murdered and how he murdered them. Governor Parnell’s response was identical to that of over a dozen people in state government including the Commissioner of Public Safety… absolute… extended… dead… silence. Pleas regarding OCS transgressions have fallen on the same deaf ears. The anecdotes I have cited sound exaggerated, incredible, even impossible, yet it is that incredulity that has allowed the transgressions to continue in plain sight. “Certainly, this couldn’t be true!” I know there are concerned and responsible workers within the OCS operation, but I also believe that a large number, and perhaps majority, would end up behind bars if the 1” of plexiglass and impenetrable wall of “confidentiality” were removed.

Solutions:

1) To stop human trafficking in Alaska, start by dismantling OCS. A rigorous yet clear, informative, positive, restorative process must be created for families to follow who have been identified as lacking good parenting skills. Create a Restoration Handbook for families needing help including clear information regarding parents’ rights.

2) GAL’s must be held accountable as well. Biased and inept GAL’s also exist.

3) Malfeasance and outright perjury by OCS workers and GAL’s should constitute a felony with the same sentence as aggravated kidnapping because the result is identical: family members are stolen and scores of hearts are scarred for life.

4) The authority and resources of ICWA should be maximized in villages.

5) All conversations with parents must be recorded and digital copies provided for use in appeal processes.

6) All OCS activities within the statute of limitations should be seriously investigated and human rights violations prosecuted to the full extent of the existing law, with guilty OCS workers doing actual prison time. Prove to the wounded families and all the people of Alaska that reform is genuine.

In sum, OCS is an evil entity whose reign must end, at least in current form. For those who think they are not impacted by current OCS issues, the question arises- If government can seize children without accountability for alleged “abuse,” who then defines abuse? Is my personal belief system or your personal belief system abusive? If not today, could it be tomorrow?

Family is the fundamental inviolable structure in a stable society. Healthy family values must be nurtured, encouraged and defended.

Thank you for your attention. Please fully support Rep. Wilson’s efforts.

*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

Report: Alaska [OCS] pays $1 million to settle abuse lawsuit

 Report: Alaska pays $1 million to settle abuse lawsuit
The Associated Press | Posted: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:48 pm

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - The state of Alaska has agreed to pay $1 million to settle a lawsuit filed by man who claims he was placed into the adoptive care of an abusive couple.
Thomas Joseph White, 20, reached the settlement in the case filed against the state Office of Children's Services, the Anchorage Daily News (http://bit.ly/1o7Bg4j ) reported Saturday.
White told the newspaper he wants his story told to make sure other neglected children do not suffer in the system.
"They could have done a lot better, actually," White said of the Office of Children's Services and its predecessor, the Division of Family and Youth Services.
The state did not acknowledge any wrongdoing in the settlement.
The abuse was revealed in 2004, three years after state oversight ended, Christy Lawton, director of the Office of Children's Services, said by email.
"The only lesson to be learned was that OCS does not have a crystal ball that will perfectly predict the future," she wrote.
Sherry Kelley was convicted of assault and criminal nonsupport. Patrick Kelley was convicted of child endangerment. Both were jailed for 17 months.
White first needed state protection in 1993 as the 2-month-old son of a cocaine addict, the newspaper said. In July 2000, the Kelleys made him their fifth adopted child.
His aunt, Betsy Golan, claimed she saw signs of abuse during a visit in May 2001, including locks on the outside of his bedroom door and a bucket used for a toilet in his bedroom. Lawton said the office had no record of complaints by Golan.
The family moved from Anchorage to a compound between Big Lake and Wasilla, and the children were put to work, White said. They did not go to school and were not educated at home, he said.
White claims the children were beaten and older children in the family were forced to sleep outside.
In February 2004, White said, he was ordered outside for the night. He slept near a fire and woke with his clothes on fire. He suffered third-degree burns that he said were treated with rubbing alcohol.
He lost the tip of a finger to frostbite and ate dog food but not regular meals, he said.
His adoptive grandfather in July 2004 called Alaska State Troopers and said he feared White might die.
___
Information from: Anchorage (Alaska) Daily News, http://www.adn.com

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

[Alaska] Child Protective Services Manual [2012]

As of this date, this is the current copy of [as far as we know] [Alaska] Child Protective Services Manual for those asking.
Dated 2012.  All 912 pages of it in .PDF format. Easily downloadable.

Child Protective Services Manual (PDF - 3983KB)
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Office of Children's Services

Other Alaska manuals are also downloadable;

Adoption and Guardianship: Making Permanent Plans for Children (PDF - 2406KB)
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services [2001]

Parent's Rights: What You Need to Know About a Child Protection Initial Assessment (PDF - 296KB)
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Office of Children's Services [2010]

A Toolkit for Hosting a Community Cafe Series: On Choosing Respect and Ending Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault and Child Sexual Abuse (PDF - 2540KB)
Alaska Department Health & Social Services, Office of Children's Services & Alaska Strengthening Families Program [2012]

Guidelines for the Multidisciplinary Response to Child Abuse in Alaska (PDF - 1669KB)
Alaska Children's Justice Act Task Force [2-10]

A Guide to Child Protective Services for Relatives (PDF - 337KB)
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Office of Children's Services [2007]

A Handbook for Parents and Guardians in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases (PDF - 375KB)
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Family and Youth Services [2003]

Engaging With Parents: Self-Study Guide (PDF - 878KB)
Alaska Office of Children's Services [2009]

Reporting Child Abuse in Alaska
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Office of Children's Services & Alaska Children's Justice Act Task Force [2003]

What Am I Doing Here?: A Roadmap for Youth in the Alaska Child in Need of Aid System (PDF - 5990KB)
Alaska Court System [2010]

Title IV-E Manual (PDF - 1915KB)
Alaska Office of Children's Services [2012]

Alaska's Resource Family Handbook (PDF - 2458KB)
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Office of Children's Services [2012]

Practice Model (PDF - 846KB)
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Office of Children's Services [2009]

Community Care (PDF - 1167KB)
Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Office of Children's Services [2012]

Youth Checklists (PDF - 81KB)
Alaska Court System, Alaska Office of Public Advocacy & Alaska Office of Children's Services [2010]



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

WND EXCLUSIVE Child 'protectors' accused of destroying families. Statewide audit launched in response to deaths, tales of abuse.

California lawmakers have voted unanimously to order an audit of the state’s powerful Department of Child Protective Services after testimony from parents who stunned their representatives with testimony of atrocities.
“It’s the most helpless feeling in the world when this happens to you. It feels like there is no hope left. I have not seen my daughter since December… she doesn’t even look like the same child any more. There is nothing in her eyes. She looks hopeless and there is just nothing I can do…”
That was from Dr. Ruby Dillon, whose daughter, Alexis, was removed from her family 16 months ago.
The audit plan passed the committee unanimously, and now the California state auditor, who has subpoena powers, will investigate CPS.
Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, who sponsored the bill and organized parents to speak about their experiences, said it’s a good step forward.
“Now we are going to be able to pull back the veil and see what happened, what went wrong so that we can then gather data on how to fix it.”
Donnelly says a lot has gone wrong.
Child Protective Services is supposed to help children and families overcome stressful events in life, and stay together and healthy. But there are families who say that CPS does anything but that.
Family members testified before the legislative hearing that CPS actually has worked to destroy, not restore, their families. And others suggested there was a profit motive in the situation.
The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) is the federal law that prompts most state and local legislation and funding for child protective services.
CAPTA was a federal mandate enacted in 1988. It directed that Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families provide grants to communities for child abuse prevention programs. It mandated that states implement child abuse laws on their own, in order to qualify for massive funding and federal grants that will match and reward those on the state level.
This experimental federal mandate, backed by significant funding, was intended to keep more families together. However, the National Coalition for Child Protection (NCCPR) reports that the results of CAPTA are quite different than the original intention. NCCPR says that CAPTA, in fact, disrupted more families, and has made life for children in this experimental government program much, much worse.
NCCPR says that the failings of today’s child welfare system “can be summed up by the very rationalization often used to justify the way it works today, an approach that can be boiled down to ‘take the child and run.’”
The parental rights group says that foster care is a bad answer to the suspicion of a problem. Their studies indicate that abuse in foster care is “far higher than generally realized and far higher than in the general population.”
They say orphanage abuse rates are even higher, so that is not the answer, either. NCCPR maintains that its research indicates that in most, but not 100 percent of cases, the best scenario is that the family remains intact until “due process” takes place.
That is not the way states are handling many cases today. One recent example is the Nikolayev case that has made national headlines.
On April 24, Alex and Anna Nikolayev took their young child, Sammy, to Sutter Memorial Hospital in Sacramento, Calif., with flu-like symptoms. Baby Sammy was born with a heart condition, and they knew he would need surgery eventually.
While he was there, the Nikolayevs witnessed a nurse giving him antibiotics – something doctors later confirmed should not have happened.
Shortly afterward, they were told Sammy needed immediate open-heart surgery. Already questioning the treatment their son was receiving, they decided to seek a second opinion before putting their child through such a risky procedure.
They were told, “You can leave the hospital, but your baby cannot.”
The Nikolayevs decided to take Sammy to another hospital, despite the hospital saying they could not do so. Police and CPS agents showed up at the second hospital under the belief that Sammy was in danger. After seeing that the mother was pursuing medical care for her son, they concluded that the child was not in danger.
But that would not be the last the Nikolayevs heard of CPS.
The next day, Child Protective Services showed up at the Nikolayev home with five armed police officers. The mother, a German immigrant, was skeptical of government and captured the incident on video.
One officer can be heard saying, “I’m going to grab your baby, and don’t resist, and don’t fight me, okay?”
Donnelly said he felt compelled to act, as a father, and as a legislator.
“The footage is frightening for parents everywhere to think that your children might be confiscated should CPS disagree with your parental instincts. It’s chilling to think that a government agency can take your child right back to a hospital that you as a parent have lost faith in, but it happened.”
Donnelly began demanding answers. In a letter, he asked Sheri Heller, director of California’s Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees CPS, to account for how this was allowed to happen.
Heller responded that she couldn’t share that information with an assemblyman, unless a judge ordered her to do so. Donnelly responded, “It has become clear that CPS answers to no one, but this abuse of power cannot be tolerated.”
“I’m hearing all kinds of stories about children being horribly abused,” said Donnelly, “and CPS does not rescue the child from that imminent danger, which is why they have this immense power in the first place.”
The mother in the case, Anna Nikolayev, told WND that since that day, Sammy had a doctor’s appointment and is doing very well.
“He is gaining, weight,” she giggled, “he is even getting a little bit chubby!”
But in her case, a hearing has been delayed for 60 days, and she worries.
“The fear is that they might walk in my house and ask questions again to try to prove their case…(to make them) look good.”
She said that the worst thing that could happen is that “in 60 days (if) he hasn’t gained weight, they could say, ‘oh, she’s probably not holding him the right way, not feeding him correctly…’”
She said that she and her husband “always, always worry about that.”
Her hope is for quick resolution, but the court has ordered eight more visits, inside and outside of their home, before CPS makes a decision whether or not to continue their investigation of the family.
Orange County CPS spokesperson Ann Broussard said that she had “no comment” on the Baby Sammy Nikolayev case. But she described the scenario whereby CPS says it is entitled to take children without a warrant:

“We regularly bring police. Sometimes police call us. The term is exigent. If there is imminent danger to the child we do have the legal right, if it is deemed. There would be a social worker on site; they would consult with their supervisors, and the authorities. Often we are called by a hospital. They are mandated reporters. So is a school district.”

Such cases are not isolated. Another, making headlines in Orange County, contends that CPS testified in defense of the abuser.
There, Ruby Dillon’s 7 year-old daughter was removed from her family due to a custody battle, and has been held for 15 months.
Dillon accuses the father of sexual abuse that she says she has on tape. Bryan Claypool, her attorney in the case (who is suing CPS for $1 million per month), contends that CPS does not want the custody battle between the estranged spouses to end because it wants to profit off of the case.
According to a local CBS affiliate, Claypool commented that, “Simply put, the more children that are removed from a household (whether lawfully or not) the more money that flows to CPS through state and federal funding.”
Claypool further alleged that CPS is more motivated to protect its $2.2 billion budget than it is focused on child safety and adoption efforts. He calls it a “legal kidnapping.”
Claypool told WND the institutionalized corruption goes much deeper, and farther than the cases he represents. “Every word we have said we can back up,” he said.
CPS declined to comment on the case.
And yet another case alleged that two young girls were taken away from their mother based on a social worker’s fabricated story.
Deanna Fogarty won a $4.9 million judgment against Orange County, which ultimately paid $11 million after losing appeals all the way up to U.S. Supreme Court.
Orange County has never admitted to any wrongdoing although the court found the social worker involved had filed false reports and suppressed evidence that would have cleared Fogarty. That same employee was later promoted to supervisor in charge of training other social workers.
Appeals court justice William Bedsworth wrote in his opinion, “the evidence adduced at trial obviously caused both the jury and the judge to conclude not only that something seriously wrong was done to Fogarty-Hardwick in this case, but also that the wrongful conduct was not an isolated incident.”
Fogarty told WND the case destroyed her life, and that no amount of money changes that. She has become a volunteer spokesperson for the cause, because she says that “child abuse has become an industry that actually pays states to legally abduct your children and put them up for adoption.”
She continued, “Counties can bring in big dollars for each child in foster care. Lack of accountability allows unbridled access to this revenue creating more incentive to remove children from their families.”
She notes that these kinds of profits are hard to resist for these CPS workers, and also the foster parents.
Broussard declined comment on the case.
Fogarty warned other parents that something as minor as a trip to the ER, or a scrape that a school finds suspicious, can mean the family devastation that she endured.
“The minute CPS is involved or the second the EMTs are called, parents are already labeled as child abusers,” said Fogarty.
“Can you believed this happened in America?” Donnelly said.
“Instead of protecting kids at risk,” Donnelly says that, “CPS has become a rogue agency that is stealing kids away from good parents and returning them to bad ones and needs to be investigated and reformed. We cannot allow a government agency to exercise unlimited power in complete secrecy.”
He said the heart of the dispute really is “who is … in control of your child’s health care? If you don’t like a doctor’s decision, and seek a second opinion, could this nightmare happen to you? I’m afraid this is a foreshadowing of things to come as the government becomes more involved in health care.”
He said the problem in nationwide, too.
In Connecticut, he said, judges and court workers are accused of setting up businesses, then ordering children before the court to patronize those vendors, and families are ordered to participate in organizations where judges sit on the board of directors.

WND EXCLUSIVE

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

Medicating Children: A “Whistleblower’s” Lawsuit Raises a Novel Legal Question

 Published on Psychology Today (http://www.psychologytoday.com)

 Medicating Children: A “Whistleblower’s” Lawsuit Raises a Novel Legal Question

By Robert Whitaker

Created Jun 2 2010 - 12:08pm

In the past few years, a number of pharmaceutical companies have admitted to federal charges that they illegally marketed psychiatric medications for non-approved uses, with the companies paying large sums to settle the cases. Now, a legal complaint filed by the Law Project for Psychiatric Rights in an Alaskan federal court is raising a related question. When healthcare providers bill Medicaid for prescriptions of psychiatric drugs to children for non-approved uses, are they committing Medicaid fraud?
The case, United States ex-rel Law Project for Psychiatric Rights v. Matsutani, was unsealed earlier this year, and legal papers were recently filed that have brought this novel question -- which obviously has profound implications for the prescribing of psychiatric medications to poor children and adolescents -- into sharp focus.
The Law Project for Psychiatric Rights (PsychRights), which is headed by Alaskan attorney James Gottstein, filed its whistleblower complaint in April 2009. Known as a qui tam lawsuit, PsychRights sued on behalf of the federal government under the False Claims Act, which allows private individuals to pursue legal complaints against individuals or companies that are allegedly defrauding the government. In December, the federal government declined to join PsychRights in the case.
PsychRights named Alaskan state officials, hospitals, mental health agencies, psychiatrists, and pharmacies as defendants. In its complaint, PsychRights argues that the federal government has agreed to provide Medicaid reimbursement only for those outpatient drugs that are prescribed for an FDA-approved use or for a use supported by a medical compendium (such as the DRUGDEX Information System.) PsychRights maintains that the defendants defrauded the federal government when they billed Medicaid (or the federal Children's Health Insurance Program) for outpatient drugs that didn't meet this standard.
As part of its complaint, PsychRights identified 16 commonly prescribed psychiatric medications that have no "medically accepted indication" for youth under 18 years old, and it also identified the limited number of "medically accepted indications" that exist for 32 other psychiatric drugs. PsychRights compiled this list of "approved" uses by methodically going through the drug compendiums, and it serves as the evidential heart of the complaint, for it reveals that psychiatric medications are regularly prescribed to poor children for non-approved uses. PsychRights is asking the federal court to stop this practice (which it argues is harmful), and to pay hefty financial penalties for the fraudulent claims made to date.
In early April, the defendants petitioned the court to dismiss the complaint, arguing that it was "fatally flawed" for a number of reasons, including several technical ones. For example, the defendants maintain that PsychRights has not "disclosed" private information that is required of "whistleblowers" in qui tam suits. But the defendants also argued --and this goes to the core legal issue of interest to healthcare providers -- that PsychRights has misinterpreted the applicable Medicaid law. Medicaid is a joint state-federal program, with each state establishing a Medicaid plan that must be approved by the federal government, and the defendants argue that a state may in fact choose to provide Medicaid reimbursement for outpatient drugs that are not FDA approved or "medically indicated" by drug compendia. The defendants argue that Alaska implicitly made that choice in regard to off-label use of psychiatric medications in children, and thus no fraud was committed.
The U.S. District Court in Alaska will likely take months to rule on the defendants' motions to dismiss the complaints. If the court rules on the central issue, it will help define whether Medicaid law supports off-label, non-compendia-approved use of psychiatric medications in children, or deems this commonplace practice to be medically unjustified.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mad-in-america/201006/medicating-children-whistleblower-s-lawsuit-raises-novel-legal-question

*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

On this day... In Memoriam

On this day one year ago, our grand children were kidnapped for profit by the office of children's services in Fairbanks, Alaska.

  In Memoriam

In our hearts your memory lingers, sweetly, tender, fond and true. There is not a day, dear children, that we do not think of you.



*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

Child Slavery USA: Child Protective Services (CPS)

Child Protective Services (CPS) is wreaking havoc in the lives of families across the country. Join the Justice Journalist as she interviews young mother, Karin Lowery and others whose children have been abducted by CPS and one advocate Dawne Worswick, who was victimized by--but, survived--the CPS system.

Listen to internet radio with 4Justice on Blog Talk Radio

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

What is a Consent Decree?

 From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Consent+Decree

A settlement of a lawsuit or criminal case in which a person or company agrees to take specific actions without admitting fault or guilt for the situation that led to the lawsuit.
A consent decree is a settlement that is contained in a court order. The court orders injunctive relief against the defendant and agrees to maintain jurisdiction over the case to ensure that the settlement is followed. (Injunctive relief is a remedy imposed by a court in which a party is instructed to do or not do something. Failure to obey the order may lead the court to find the party in Contempt and to impose other penalties.) Plaintiffs in lawsuits generally prefer consent decrees because they have the power of the court behind the agreements; defendants who wish to avoid publicity also tend to prefer such agreements because they limit the exposure of damaging details. Critics of consent decrees argue that federal district courts assert too much power over the defendant. They also contend that federal courts have imposed conditions on state and local governments in Civil Rights Cases that usurp the power of the states...

... Certain types of lawsuits require a court to issue a consent decree. In Class Action settlements, Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Procedure mandates that a federal district court must determine whether a proposed settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable before approving it. Under the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (the Tunney Act), 15 U.S.C.A. § 16(b)-(h), the court must review proposed consent decrees in antitrust suits filed by the Justice Department. The statute directs the court to review certain items, including whether the decree advances the public interest.

From:  http://www.cwla.org/advocacy/consentdecrees.pdf

Alaska: No record of any past or current settlements or consent decrees. (Child Welfare)



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

28 USC § 453 - Oaths of justices and judges

 28 USC § 453 - Oaths of justices and judges

 Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, XXX XXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as XXX under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”


I just want to get this straight so there are no double standards. So help me God.


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

Citizen Review Panel, Alaska

 Citizen Review Panel, Alaska

 Brief Description:
 Alaska has one Citizen Review Panel which started around 2003.   The Panel has a chair and vice-chair.  Staffing is provided through a contract with an outside agency.
Other Information: Alaska’s CRP got off to a slow start, as initially the Panel received no funding. This made it challenging to serve a state that is equal in size to 20% of the contiguous U.S.  There are many challenges trying to serve such a large area, much of which is not connected by roads.

Sample of Current Work Projects/Focus:
• Relationship between Office of Children’s Services and foster parents
• Relationship between Office of Children’s Services and tribal entities

Website:  www.crpalaska.org
Started in: 2003
Annual Report Submitted:  June 30,
response due from state within 6 months
Total Members:  Currently 8, hoping to
add a member from Southwest Alaska

Budget Amount and Source:  $110,000 from state general funds.  Information Insights is
contracted through Alaska’s child welfare agency to provide program coordination.
 Started in: 2003
Annual Report Submitted:  June 30,
response due from state within 6 months
Total Members:  Currently 8, hoping to
add a member from Southwest Alaska

Contact Information:
Sylvan Robb
Senior Consultant at Information
Insights
Coordinator for Citizen Review Panel
212 Front Street, Suite 100
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
(907) 450-2456
sylvan@iialaska.com


Source: Citizen Review Panel National Directory of States

Membership and Staff Support 

Required membership  The Panel shall be composed of volunteer members who are broadly representative of the state, including members who have expertise in the prevention and treatment of child abuse and
neglect. 

Current membership

Susan Heuer, Chair, Anchorage
Bonnie Edmondson, North Pole
Dana W. Hallett, Haines
Kristin Hull, Wasilla
Steve McComb, Palmer
Stella Schuchardt, Fairbanks 

Former members who left the group during this reporting period 

Arthur Hansen, Fairbanks
George Kirchner, Fairbanks
Ralph Taylor, Eagle River
Fred Van Wallinga, Willow 

Desired membership  The CRP would like to meet its requirement to be broadly
representative of the state by widening the geographic and racial and ethnic diversity of
the membership.  The group is working to recruit new members from underrepresented
areas of the state as well as a greater diversity of child-centered expertise and backgrounds.


Source: Citizen Review Panel Annual Report (2011 Annual Report)


My question would be... who is reviewing the Citizens Review Panel? I have seen plenty of evidence that this state has MANY good ol' boys clubs. Who's watching the watchers?
The Citizen Review Panels (all three) should be treated like jury duty. Normal citizens picked for Review duty. Never the same ones twice. 
--------------------------------------------------------------
Never doubt that a small, dedicated group of citizens can make a difference.  Indeed,
it is the only thing that ever has…..
                                                     ~ Margaret Mead
--------------------------------------------------------------

I might ad that, that small, dedicated group of citizens find what and who they are dedicated to.

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

The Meaning and History of the Constitution: Part Three

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

How To Make Money In Tough Times

 Become a foster parent. You can make $25,000 per year on each kid you take in! Let's say you take in three kids, you could get $50,000 to $75,000 per year!

Tap... tap... tap... where do you get kids you ask? One cool way is to listen to your relatives. Sooner or later, one will confide in you and when they do, talk to their local child protective service worker. You can place an ORDER for THEIR kids. That social worker will make false allegations, lie and eventually kidnap your relatives kids. Even if you are only a small part relative! No matter. That social worker makes money too! It's a monetarily win win situation for you and that social worker! You'll be best buddies from then on. You will benefit many service organizations like psychotherapists, doctors, lawyers... heck, even cab drivers! Let's say, the psychco- therapist says those kids are "special needs kids". That's more money for the social worker. Does it affect the kids you ask? Who cares! They are only little money machines! You don't actually have to care for the kids. Just give them the basics and make money. That detente in your couch will love you.

You will no longer need real jobs. You will no longer have to leave home "to work".

What if the kids are not happy? No biggie here either! The social worker will delay tactic until the "Stockholm syndrome" kicks in. Or drug them! (Doctors need money too!) The kids will learn to accept their captors one way or the other.

What if some other relative protests and what could happen in the future? That relative may not EVER let it go. They may tell the world of how you illegally placed an order for kids and how that social worker group kidnapped those kids from their care for you. And some day... those kids will grow up (maybe). They will know the truth. They may hate you and your detented couch. Again, no biggie. You made a crap load of money along the way!

Who cares!... Even though you and those socialist workers would be considered the lowest form of life on earth, you made it through tough times! Those of us that have real jobs honor you!


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

Repost from: Thursday, October 20, 2011

"From Mary Ann's notes from today:

10/20/2011 11:40 AM

Called OCS about visitation. Left message on Justin's answering machine voice mail.

12 NOON

Called ******* to ask her if she heard anything about baby ******. She told me that Jennifer and Archie had another emergency TDM about *******, ****** and ***** and that Christy was supposed to have left with the kids @ 9 AM this morning to go to North Carolina. If it's true, we did not even get to say good-bye to them.
Justin called @ 1:15 PM to tell me the kids had already been sent to North Carolina. I asked him why he didn't call back Friday or Monday to at least let us see them one more time. He said that we were supposed to be invited to the emergency TDM meeting they had on Tuesday (not sure what Tuesday). We were never contacted about the TDM meeting. He also said that OCS is trying to have Jennifer and Archies's parental rights taken away and that the kids are being put up for adoption. That everybody... OCS, Jen and Archie all said that we are not acceptable people to raise children.
He also said that it was because of the incident about why they (OCS) took the kids in the first place."


From then until now, not one shred of evidence or proof has been given us that the kids are indeed in North Carolina. We know Justin, and the other minions at OCS are liars. It would not surprise us that they lied and the kids are still in Alaska.

It is amazing that a group of social misfits such as OCS think that "If we just shut up and stay silent, this case will go away and through patience, their paychecks are protected.

The answer is no, no, no. This dinosaur train is moving forward. Secrecy is the key to their happiness. Our next steps are billboards and car top carriers naming names and telling of this theft. We figure if they wish to make false allegations, then the world should know about it. Our hope is that people, city and state wide, will reel their children in and protect them from the hypocrisy of The Office of Children's Services. At least in Fairbanks, Alaska. Maybe next year, they will be cleaning toilets instead of kidnapping kids.This message has gone independently worldwide. Should we disappear, guess who they will look at.

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

Permanency Hearing Date 01/05/2012

Here is the Permanency Hearing Date for the kids. When the last hearing was held in December, Office of Children's Services told us it would be on one date... it was held the day before. The same M.O. seems to be happening here. We were told it would be on the 6th but it will be held on the 5th with no notice. Ex Parte? It seems very popular. Watch for it if you have a case. Keep an eye on the below address (for Alaska, Fairbanks). Check it every day. It is public information.



http://www.courts.alaska.gov/trialcts.htm#cal

*Adoption by Relatives:

...In 12 States, the child must have resided with the relative for a period of time or have established a
significant relationship with the relative in some other way. (14)

(14) Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, New
Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Virginia.
http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/placement.pdf


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

What if: ex parte?

What if:

What if the Fairbanks office of children's services had already kidnapped certain children with usual lies, false allegation for an order placement and pocket money. What if these kids had been shipped to North Carolina from Alaska to live in foster care with the order placer. What if the next step was to remove parental rights so the final step of adoption can happen. With annoying parents in the way, what if child services used taxpayer money to send the parents to North Carolina to "visit" their kidnapped kids. All the parents had to do was sign a paper authorizing the "tickets" (read: giving up parental rights). What if while the parents were gone and out of the way, a secret ex parte hearing was held without them? What if the excuse was "The parents were given notice, but chose to not be here".
What if we already KNOW child services uses ex parte to steal their way to the bank as they have already done it before. What if everyone knew it was about to happen before it happens?


*One type of ex parte hearing is presided over by a judge at which all the parties are not present. The most common reason being a request for an emergency injunction of some sort. The most common of those requests are domestic matters such as requests for a temporary restraining orders or temporary custody. In the United States any orders issued at an ex parte hearing are temporary in nature so as not to deprive any party of due process. A full hearing on the matter will be scheduled where both parties are present. In this type of case no appeal is necessary since the order is temporary.

Another type of ex-parte proceeding is a proceeding in the case where only one party participates or appears in Court although the other party was given notice. In order for this type of an ex-parte hearing to be valid, it must be shown that the non-participant has been provided with proper notice of the proceedings. In spite of proper notice, if the non-participant chooses not to appear and contest the action, then it will result in an ex-parte decree against them.

A common claim in an appeal from an ex parte ruling is that the party didn't receive proper notice. In most jurisdictions that party can file an affidavit asking that the court vacate the order and grant a new trial. The time period for filing is brief and the affidavit must provide compelling evidence for the court to approve the request.

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_an_'ex_parte'_hearing#ixzz1i4tVHSXw



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

Legal child kidnapping

Watch your kids... they are looking for yours as well. Alaska and the Fairbanks Office of Children's (alleged) Services are no different. They want YOUR kids to sell.






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

Public Participation in the Planning and Budget (Profit) Process

Go here for an un-screwed up version of the following information: (this PDF file is transcripeted with something that makes it VERY difficult to copy. http://hss.state.ak.us/ocs/Publications/pdf/20100528_103428_0615.pdf

This is page six. Check out the family reunification budget of "0". Next: I will post North Carolina's budget. Where our Grand Kids are, allegedly. They could be in North Dakota or Arizona for all we know.

http://hss.state.ak.us/ocs/Publications/pdf/20100528_103428_0615.pdf

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