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

3-year-old prescribed six psychotropic drugs in CPS' care

Published on May 24, 2012

HOUSTON (FOX 26) -
Updated: May 16, 2012 9:39 PM CDT
Randy Wallace, Investigative Reporter

Here's 4-year-old Rachel Harrison before Child Protective Services took her away from her parents.

Once CPS takes over, you can see the drastic changes for yourself.

"And as a parent it's very hard to deal with because your baby's in trouble and you can't do anything to help," said Rachel's mother Christina Harrison.

Watch as the bubbly little girl starts looking more like some neglected waif while under CPS's care.

"She was never abused or neglected in any way except by CPS," said Debbie Flores, Rachel's grandmother.

In numerous court hearings CPS caseworkers would admit they had no reason to think Rachel's parents ever neglected or abused her.

The only reason CPS took custody was the young parent's recreational drug use.

Something they admitted to and lived to regret.

But ironically Rachel would be the one hooked on drugs while under CPS's watch including Risperdal, a drug used to treat Schizophrenia and Bi-Polar disorder and according to the FDA, should not be given to a child under 10.

"3-years-old, given psychotropic drugs, there's no reason for it none at all," said David Harrison, Rachel's father.

It was 2007 when CPS first entered the family's life.

The state agency took Rachel into protective custody soon after her birth because her mom tested positive for marijuana.

This 2007 home video shows a horrific case of diaper rash Rachel had while in foster care. The baby's awful condition is pointed out to 2 CPS caseworkers but neither decides to seek immediate medical attention.

Even after a judge ordered the foster mom to get Rachel to a doctor A.S.A.P., CPS failed to make sure that happened. Later CPS admitted to making big mistakes.

Fast forward to July 2010.

"I went to the hospital to get my appendix out and tested positive for cocaine," Rachel's mother said.

That was enough for CPS to take Rachel again and spend over a year trying to terminate David and Christina's parental rights.

CPS wouldn't allow the family to see Rachel for two months. What they say they saw was a drooling, lethargic emaciated looking little girl who wanted to play a very strange game.

"She was also writing prescriptions, Rachel which is not normal," her mother said. "They might play doctor but she was writing prescriptions on paper, here take your medicine."

The family spent months asking CPS if Rachel was on drugs.

"We kept asking but they kept denying," Christina Harrison said.

"You could just tell there was a physical change between when she was with us and the time they had her at that point." David Harrison said.

CPS's own policy dictates parents must be told within 24 hours about their child needing or receiving medical treatment.

But these parents didn't know for 6 months until it finally came out in a court hearing.

"You're completely powerless," Rachel's mother said.

You're powerless against these people, they hold all the cards and do whatever they want," said Rachel's father.

After the judge started questioning CPS about the little girl's declining condition, CPS gave up trying to terminate the couple's parental right's and gave them their daughter back.

According to court testimony Dr. Owen Osagie is the psychiatrist who prescribed psychotropic drugs to a then 3-year-old.

"He testified he had seen Rachel for approximately 15 minutes," Flores said.

According to the Texas Medical Board, Dr. Osagie prescribed Clonidine to Rachel in excess of the dosing guidelines, while simultaneously increasing her dose of Risperdal, then failed to properly monitor the little girl.

"There's paperwork saying she was screaming for mommy and daddy," Rachel's mother said.

"And the easiest way to handle her acting up was to medicate her," said Rachel's father.

Osagie ignored our attempts to contact him for a response.

According to an agreed order with the medical board Osagie must complete at least 24 hours of continuing medical education and pay a 5 thousand dollar administrative fee.

"I know a lot of other families and a lot of other parents who are going through the same thing," said Rachel's grandmother.

Late last year the United States Government Accountability Office reported these disturbing findings:

"Texas is one of 5 states where children in foster care were prescribed psychotropic drugs 2.7 to 4.5 times more often than children who were not in foster care, with children in Texas foster care being the most likely to receive psychotropic drugs."

CPS wouldn't discuss the Rachael Harrison case with us. According to the Texas Department of Health and Human Services, Dr. Osagie has treated 755 children in CPS foster care and continues to do so.

http://www.myfoxhouston.com/story/184...

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

New foster care law in effect

New foster care law in effect
 By Staff Report / newsroom@newsminer.com Fairbanks Daily News-Miner | Posted: Monday, September 24, 2012 12:03 am

FAIRBANKS — The Alaska Foster Family Protection Act went into effect earlier this month, providing new legal and practice provisions for youths in the custody of the Office of Children’s Services, according to a notice from the agency. The act, sponsored by Anchorage legislators Sen. Bettye Davis and Rep. Les Gara, was supported by Facing Foster Care in Alaska, an advocacy group made up of foster care youth and foster care alumni. The act contains several provisions, among them providing the option for youths to extend custody until their 21st birthday and a requirement that reasonable efforts must be made to place siblings together. Gov. Sean Parnell signed the legislation, Senate Bill 82, into law in June. The act went into effect Sept. 9.

*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

Homeschool parents have 1 shot to see son again

Swedish parents Annie and Christer Johansson have launched what may be their last hope to see their son again – with an appeal to the Supreme Court of Sweden to overturn a lower court’s decision to end their parental rights over homeschooling.
Michael Farris, the chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, says it’s among the most brutal cases he’s ever seen.
His parents haven’t seen Domenic Johansson for almost three years. He was abducted by armed Swedish police officers operating on the orders of social services agencies from on board Turkish Air Flight 990 on June 25, 2009.
He was seven at the time.
The family was in the process of moving permanently to India, Annie’s home country, but the armed officers were ordered to board the jet and seize the boy – because he was being homeschooled.
The seizure took place even though school was out of session.
WND reported last December that an appeals court panel in Sweden had imposed the “death penalty” on the homeschooling family, granting the state full custody of Domenic.
The appeals panel reversed a lower court ruling that granted Annie and Christer Johansson custody of their son.
The HSLDA has been working on Domenic’s case, along with officials from the Alliance Defending Freedom.
During the first months following his seizure, the parents were only permitted to visit Domenic once every two weeks. The visits soon became every five weeks, and in 2010, all visitations were cut off, HSLDA said.
“The United States Supreme Court has written that terminating parental rights is the family court equivalent of the death penalty,” HSLDA said.
The Johansson case in Sweden, the group said, “demonstrates what can happen when the family is not respected as an integral unit of society.”
In American courts, HSLDA explained, clear and convincing evidence, the civil equivalent of “beyond a reasonable doubt,” is necessary before parental rights are terminated.
It was last June when a Swedish district court had said the parental rights would not be terminated. In a 23-page opinion, the court said it could not ignore the unanimous and extensive testimony of firsthand accounts of friends, family and others that Domenic Johansson was being properly cared for by his parents prior to Swedish authorities seizing him in 2009.
The HSLDA said, “The strain of the forced separation is inflicting unbearable pain and pressure on the family who still live on the same island just miles from where their son lives – yet they are not permitted to have any contact with him whatsoever.”
HSLDA said it is asking homeschooling and concerned parents from all over the world to join in a letter-writing campaign to plead with the Swedish Supreme Court to take the case and to return Domenic to his parents.
Ruby Harrold-Claesson, the attorney for the family, told HSLDA that it is important that the Swedish government know that they are being watched.

“Let them know the world is watching,” Harrold-Claesson told HSLDA. “I think that it is positive that the justices at the Supreme Court should know that the world is watching them. Shower them with emails, inundate their fax with letters. Everything – email or fax – that is sent to the court has to be registered and made available for public scrutiny.”
Michael Donnelly, HSLDA’s director for international affairs, has been working with the family since 2009 and says this may be their last hope.
“If the Swedish Supreme Court does not intervene it is likely they will never see their son again. It is like a death sentence, except that Domenic is alive and just a few miles away from his mother. The strain on her is becoming unbearable. She is having increasingly frequent physical and mental breakdowns. I fear for her life,” Donnelly said.
Farris said the actions by Swedish officials cannot be explained.
“The taking of this child for homeschooling and while the family was moving out of the country is an egregious violation of basic human rights and international law standards. Sweden is a party to numerous treaties that require them to respect the rights of parents to make education decisions and to leave the country if they choose. This is a dangerous precedent if permitted to stand.”
HSLDA’s President J. Michael Smith said that there is no known reason for Sweden’s behavior in the case.

“Based on the review of available documentation of this case, we don’t know of anything that would justify either the long-term separation of the family or the termination of their parental rights. There is no doubt that this family needs help,” he said.
Harrold-Claesson is a noted international human rights attorney who has dedicated her life to fighting what she describes as the brutal Swedish social services system.
“The evidence was overwhelming in favor of the Johanssons, and that is why the district court found in their favor,” she said. “These are good parents who were taking good care of their son. This is an unbelievable case of overreaching on the part of Gotland’s politicians. It is despicable that the Swedish courts – with the exception of the district court – have been willing to back up the social workers in this case.”
The attorney said the Swedish system is tilted so that social workers and foster care professionals gain financially when children are removed from their homes.
“They take children to feed a bureaucratic machine of foster homes based on subsidies. They impose their will on vulnerable families who don’t have the resources to fight back, and most lawyers don’t dare to challenge the system for fear of their career,” she said.
HSLDA said it hopes a letter-writing campaign will get the court’s attention and help them distinguish this case from the thousands they receive.
HSLDA’s involvement in the case has involved financial and emotional support to the beleaguered mother and father. Among other efforts, it has set up a donation procedure for those who wish to help.




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

$$ Foster Care in Alaska $$

Foster Care in Alaska
By Matt Jackson   May 09, 2009
Saturday

Today, I learned what really makes the "youth treatment system" go 'round in Alaska. It's not love, it is not about the kids, and no one cares about us. It is the money. I won't go into the many grievances Residential Youth Care and foster care have committed against me. Rather, today I will only talk about the numbers.
For the month of May, my foster parents will receive $3,900 in state money to care for one child. Me. I was never told this, I never knew, I only found out because they left their budget out on the computer desk. I never would have guessed. Admittedly, I eat and sleep in their house, but is that amount of money justified? When asking friends and teachers at school how much they thought foster parents received to care for one child for one month, the highest guess was 2,000, most were closer to 1,000. But even given generous estimates including food, utilities, gas and allowance ($15 a week), there is no way I cost them more than $1500 monthly. Where does the other $2400 go? I sure don't know.
Yesterday I bought a mother's day card for my real mother, $3. Last week I paid $150 in court fees for my emancipation case. Later today I will pay the enrollment fee to a prestigious college on the East Coast to the tune of $500. All $653 is coming out of my pocket. In about an hour I will be broke. Where did that extra $2400 for foster children go? I wish I knew.
When I asked Jack Duckworth, director of Residential Youth Care and the foster program, if he knew, he had an interesting point of view. "I'm not even putting this on the table. The state pays me to do them a service. I make shitloads of money." Mr. Duckworth, does indeed make lots of money, more than 1 million from Medicare and Medicaid alone. That doesn't include the money he makes of his four foster children. I've learned that he receives as much money for them as my foster parent's receive for me, about $130 per day. With four foster children that calculates out to $15,600 a month or $187,200 annually. I wish my mother, parent to four children, received half as much. Doesn't everyone wish they could get $3900 a month for having a kid?
Over the last 5 months I've been in treatment, (for one minor consuming alcohol) Mr. Duckworth, went a long way to convince me that it really was about the kids. However, yesterday he revealed what it is really all about. Mr. Duckworth, still remembers that he does a service to the State of Alaska. Unfortunately, he has forgotten that the State of Alaska is supposed to provide services to the People of Alaska. He is not supposed to be doing a service to the state, or to his budget. He is supposed to be doing a service to the children of Alaska.
But in a system which provides an extravagant amount of money for the control of children, there is only one eventual outcome. People, who care only about money, not kids, are being drawn into the system. I witness and experience it every day.
Matt Jackson
Ketchikan, AK

Received May 07, 2008 - Published May 09, 2009

Sitnews,Stories In The News, Ketchikan, Alaska


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