Child Protective Services aka CPS, Everything you ever wanted to know. The Good, The bad, and The Ugly.


Federal

U.S. federal laws that govern CPS agencies include:

History

In 1690, in what is now the United States, there were criminal court cases involving child abuse.[1] In 1692, states and municipalities identified care for abused and neglected children as the responsibility of local government and private institutions.[2]In 1696, The Kingdom of England first used the legal principle of parens patriae, which gave the royal crown care of “charities, infants, idiots, and lunatics returned to the chancery.” This principal of parens patriae has been identified as the statutory basis for U.S. governmental intervention in families’ child rearing practices.[3]

In 1825, states enacted laws giving social-welfare agencies the right to remove neglected children from their parents and from the streets. These children were placed in almshouses, in orphanages and with other families. In 1835, the Humane Society founded the National Federation of Child Rescue agencies to investigate child maltreatment. In the late-19th century, private child protection agencies – modeled after existing animal protection organizations – developed to investigate reports of child maltreatment, present cases in court and advocate for child welfare legislation.[4]

In 1853, the Children’s Aid Society was founded in response to the problem of orphaned or abandoned children living in New York.[5] Rather than allow these children to become institutionalized or continue to live on the streets, the children were placed in the first “foster” homes, typically with the intention of helping these families work their farms.[6][7]

In 1874, the first case of child abuse was criminally prosecuted in what has come to be known as the “case of Mary Ellen.” Outrage over this case started an organized effort against child maltreatment[8] In 1909, President Theodore Roosevelt convened the White House Conference on Child Dependency, which created a publicly funded volunteer organization to “establish and publicize standards of child care.”[6] By 1926, 18 states had some version of county child welfare boards whose purpose was to coordinate public and private child related work.[7] Issues of abuse and neglect were addressed in the Social Security Act in 1930, which provided funding for intervention for “neglected and dependent children in danger of becoming delinquent.” [8]

In 1912, the federal Children’s Bureau was established to manage federal child welfare efforts, including services related to child maltreatment. In 1958, amendments to the Social Security Act mandated that states fund child protection efforts.[9] In 1962, professional and media interest in child maltreatment was sparked by the publication of C. Henry Kempe and associates’ “The battered child syndrome” in JAMA. By the mid-1960s, in response to public concern that resulted from this article, 49 U.S. states passed child-abuse reporting laws.[10] In 1974, these efforts by the states culminated in the passage of the federal “Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act” (CAPTA; Public Law 93-247) providing federal funding for wide-ranging federal and state child-maltreatment research and services.[11] In 1980, Congress passed the first comprehensive federal child protective services act, the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-272), which focused on state economic incentives to substantially decrease the length and number of foster care placements.[12]

Partly funded by the federal government, Child Protective Services (CPS) agencies were first established in response to the 1974CAPTA which mandated that all states establish procedures to investigate suspected incidents of child maltreatment.[13]

In the 1940s and 1950s, due to improved technology in diagnostic radiology, the medical profession began to take notice of what they believed to be intentional injuries.[14] In 1961, C. Henry Kempe began to further research this issue, eventually identifying and coining the term battered child syndrome.[14] At this same time, there were also changing views about the role of the child in society, fueled in part by the civil rights movement.[7]

In 1973, Congress took the first steps toward enacting federal legislature to address the issue of child abuse. The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act[15] was passed in 1974, which required states “to prevent, identify and treat child abuse and neglect.”[8]

Shortly thereafter, in 1978, the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) was passed in response to concerns that large numbers of Native American children were being separated from their tribes and placed in foster care.[16] This legislation not only opened the door for consideration of cultural issues while stressing ideas that children should be with their families, leading to the beginnings offamily preservation programs.[17] In 1980, the Adoption Assistance Act[18] was introduced as a way to manage the high numbers of children in placement.[7] Although this legislation addressed some of the complaints from earlier pieces of legislation around ensuring due process for parents, these changes did not alleviate the high numbers of children in placement or continuing delays in permanence.[17] This led to the introduction of the home visitation models, which provided funding to private agencies to provide intensive family preservation services.[7]

In addition to family preservation services, the focus of federal child welfare policy changed to try to address permanence for the large numbers of foster children care.[17] Several pieces of federal legislation attempted to ease the process of adoption including Adoption Assistance Act;[18] the 1988 Child Abuse Prevention, Adoption, and Family Services Act; and the 1992 Child Abuse, Domestic Violence, Adoption, and Family Services Act.[19] The 1994 Multi-Ethnic Placement Act, which was revised in 1996 to add the Interethnic Placement Provisions, also attempted to promote permanency through adoption, creating regulations that adoptions could not be delayed or denied due to issues of race, color, or national origin of the child or the adoptive parent.[20]

All of these policies led up to the 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), much of which guides current practice. Changes in the Adoptions and Safe Families Act showed an interest in both protecting children’s safety and developing permanency.[20]This law requires counties to provide “reasonable efforts” (treatment) to preserve or reunify families, but also shortened time lines required for permanence, leading to termination of parental rights should these efforts fail.[7][20] ASFA introduced the idea of “concurrent planning” which demonstrated attempts to reunify families as the first plan, but to have a back-up plan so as not to delay permanency for children.[21]

Comparison to other similar systems

United Kingdom

The United Kingdom has a comprehensive child welfare system under which Local Authorities have duties and responsibilities towards children in need in their area. This covers provision of advice and services, accommodation and care of children who become uncared for, and also the capacity to initiate proceedings for the removal of children from their parents care/care proceedings. The criteria for the latter is ‘significant harm’ which covers physical, sexual and emotional abuse and neglect. In appropriate cases the Care Plan before the Court will be for adoption. The Local Authorities also run adoption services both for children put up for adoption voluntarily and those becoming available for adoption through Court proceedings. The basic legal principle in all public and private proceedings concerning children, under the Children Act 1989, is that the welfare of the child is paramount. In recognition of attachment issues, social work good practice requires a minimal number of moves and the 1989 Children Act enshrines the principle that delay is inimical to a child’s welfare. Care proceedings have a time frame of 40 weeks and concurrent planning is required. The final Care Plan put forward by the Local Authority is required to provide a plan for permanence, whether with parents, family members, long-term foster parents or adopters. Nevertheless, ‘drift’ and multiple placements still occur as many older children are difficult to place or maintain in placements. The role of Independent Visitor, a voluntary post, was created in the United Kingdom under the 1989 Children Act to befriend and assist children and young people in care.

In England, Wales and Scotland, there never has been a statutory obligation to report alleged child abuse to the Police. However both the Children Act 1989 and 2004 makes clear a statutory obligation on all professionals to report suspected child abuse.

The statutory guidance Working Together to Safeguard Children 2006 created the role of Local Authority Designated Officer, This officer is responsible for managing allegations of abuse against adults who work with children (Teachers, Social Workers,Church leaders, Youth Workers etc.).

Local Safeguarding Children Boards (LSCB’s) are responsible ensuring agencies and professionals,in their area,effectively safeguard and promote the welfare of children. In the event of the death or serious injury of a child, LSCB’s can initiate a ‘Serious Case Review’ aimed at identifying agency failings and improving future practice.

The planned ContactPoint database, under which information on children is shared between professionals, has been halted by the newly elected coalition government (May 2010). The database was aimed at improving information sharing across agencies. Lack of information sharing had been identified as a failing in numerous high profile child death cases. Critics of the scheme claimed it was evidence of a ‘big brother state’ and too expensive to introduce.

Working Together to Safeguard Children 2006 (updated in 2010) and the subsequent ‘The Protection of Children in England: A Progress Report’ (Laming, 2009) continue to promote the sharing of data between those working with vulnerable children.[22]

A child in suitable cases can be made a ward of court and no decisions about the child or changes in its life can be made without the leave of the High Court.

In England the Murder of Victoria Climbié was largely responsible for various changes in child protection in England, including the formation of the Every Child Matters programme in 2003. A similar programme – Getting it Right for Every Child – GIRFEC was established in Scotland in 2008.

Canada

In Ontario, services are provided by independent Children’s Aid Societies.[23] The societies receive funding from, and are under the supervision of the Ontario Ministry of Children and Youth Services.[24] However, they are regarded as a Non-governmental organization (NGO) which allows the CAS a large degree of autonomy from interference or direction in the day to day running of CAS by the Ministry. The Child and Family Services Review Board exists to investigate complaints against CAS and maintains authority to act against the societies.[25]

Costa Rica

The Patronato Nacional de la Infancia (PANI) is responsible for Child Protection in Costa Rica.[26]

The agency was founded in 1930 by Dr. Luis Felipe Gonzalez Flores, a Costa Rican magnate at the time. It was founded to combat infant mortality, that at the time, was rampant in Costa Rica. The idea was to put infants up for adoption that the mother could not afford to support (abortion is a crime in Costa Rica).[26]

In 1949, after the Costa Rican Civil War, a new constitution was written, it called for the agency to be an autonomous institution in the government, autonomous from any ministry.[26]

Today the focus is on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The agency still favors adoption, since abortion is illegal in Costa Rica.

Effects of early maltreatment on children in child welfare

Children with histories of maltreatment, such as physical and psychological neglect, physical abuse, and sexual abuse, are at risk of developing psychiatric problems.[27][28] Such children are at risk of developing a disorganized attachment.[29][30][31]Disorganized attachment is associated with a number of developmental problems, including dissociative symptoms,[32] as well as depressive, anxiety, and acting-out symptoms.[33][34]

Standards for Reporting

Generally speaking, a report must be made when an individual knows or has reasonable cause to believe or suspect that a child has been subjected to abuse or neglect. These standards guide mandatory reporters in deciding whether to make a report to child protective services.[35]

Persons Responsible for the Child

In addition to defining acts or omissions that constitute child abuse or neglect, several states’ statutes provide specific definitions of persons who can get reported to child protective services as perpetrators of abuse or neglect. These are persons who have some relationship or regular responsibility for the child. This generally includes parents, guardians, foster parents, relatives, or legal guardians. Once taken away from home, the stated goal of CPS is to reunite the child with their family. In some cases, due to the nature of abuse children are not able to see or converse with the abusers. If parents fail to complete Court Ordered terms and conditions, the children in care may never return home.[35]

Child Protective Services Statistics

The United States government’s Administration for Children and Families reported that in 2004 approximately 3.5 million children were involved in investigations of alleged abuse or neglect in the US, while an estimated 872,000 children were determined to have been abused or neglected, and an estimated 1,490 children died that year because of abuse or neglect. In 2007, 1,760 children died as the result of child abuse and neglect.[36] Child abuse impacts the most vulnerable populations, with children under age five years accounting for 76% of fatalities.[37] In 2008, 8.3 children per 1000 were victims of child abuse and neglect and 10.2 children per 1000 were in out of home placement.[38]

On September 30, 2010, there were approximately 400,000 children in foster care in the U.S. of which 36% percent were ages 5 and under. During that same period, almost 120,000 birth to five year-olds entered foster care and a little under 100,000 exited foster care.[39] U.S. Child Protective Services (CPS) received a little over 2.5 million reports of child maltreatment in 2009 of which 61.9% were assigned to an investigation.[40] Research using national data on recidivism indicates that 22% of children were rereported within a 2-year period and that 7% of these rereports were substantiated.[41]

Child Protective Services Recidivism in the United States

In order to understand CPS recidivism in the U.S., there are several terms that readers must familiarize themselves with. Two often-used terms in CPS recidivism are rereport (also known as rereferral) and recurrence. Either of the two can occur after an initial report of child abuse or neglect called an index report. Although the definition of rereport and recurrence is not consistent, the general difference is that a rereport is a subsequent report of child abuse or neglect after an initial report (also known as an index report) whereas recurrence refers to a confirmed (also known as substantiated) rereport after an initial report of child abuse and neglect. Borrowing from the definition used by Pecora et al. (2000),[42] recidivism is defined as, “Recurring child abuse and neglect, the subsequent or repeated maltreatment of a child after identification to public authorities.” It is important to highlight that this definition is not all-inclusive because it does not include abused children who are not reported to authorities.[42]

Recidivism Statistics

There are three main sources of recidivism data in the U.S.—the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS), the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW), and the National Incidence Study (NIS)—and they all have their own respective strengths and weaknesses. NCANDS was established in 1974, and it consists of administrative data of all reports of suspected child abuse and neglect investigated by CPS. NSCAW was established in 1996 and is similar to NCANDS in that it only includes reports of child abuse and neglect investigated by CPS, but it adds clinical measures related to child and family well-being that NCANDS is lacking. NIS was established in 1974, and it consists of data collected from CPS as well. However, it attempts to gather a more comprehensive picture of the incidence of child abuse and neglect by collecting data from other reporting sources called community sentinels.[43]

Criticism

Brenda Scott, in her 1994 book Out of Control: Who’s Watching Our Child Protection Agencies, criticizes CPS, stating, “Child Protective Services is out of control. The system, as it operates today, should be scrapped. If children are to be protected in their homes and in the system, radical new guidelines must be adopted. At the core of the problem is the antifamily mindset of CPS. Removal is the first resort, not the last. With insufficient checks and balances, the system that was designed to protect children has become the greatest perpetrator of harm.”[44]

An ongoing case about the Nastić family living in U.S. has received an intervention from the Serbian government. Children were taken away from their parents after their naked photos were found on the father’s computer. Such photos are common in Serbia culture. Furthermore, parents claim that their ethnic and religious rights have been violated – children are not permitted to speak Serbian, nor to meet with their parents for orthodox Christmas. They can meet only mother once a week. Children have suffered psychological traumas due to their separation from parents. Polygraph showed that father did not abuse children. Trial is set for January 26. Psychologists from Serbia stated that few hours of conversation with children are enough to see whether they have been abused. Children were taken from their family 7 months ago. FBI started an investigation against the CPS.[45][46][47]

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

The NCCAN report on “Perpetrators of Maltreatment”provides the following figures
Maltreatment per 100,000 US children CPS Parents
Physical Abuse 160 59
Sexual Abuse 112 13
Neglect 410 241
Medical Neglect 14 12
Fatalities 6.4 1.5

Senator Schaefer also stated

  • “that poor parents very often are targeted to lose their children because they do not have the where-with-all to hire lawyers and fight the system. Being poor does not mean you are not a good parent or that you do not love your child, or that your child should be removed and placed with strangers;
  • that all parents are capable of making mistakes and that making a mistake does not mean your children are to be removed from the home. Even if the home is not perfect, it is home; and that’s where a child is the safest and where he or she wants to be, with family;
  • that parenting classes, anger management classes, counseling referrals, therapy classes and on and on are demanded of parents with no compassion by the system even while the parents are at work and while their children are separated from them. (some times parents are required to pay for the programs) This can take months or even years and it emotionally devastates both children and parents. Parents are victimized by “the system” that makes a profit for holding children longer and “bonuses” for not returning children to their parents;
  • that caseworkers and social workers are very often guilty of fraud. They withhold and destroy evidence. They fabricate evidence and they seek to terminate parental rights unnecessarily. However, when charges are made against Child Protective Services, the charges are ignored;
  • that the separation of families and the “snatching of children” is growing as a business because local governments have grown accustomed to having these taxpayer dollars to balance their ever-expanding budgets;
  • that Child Protective Services and Juvenile Court can always hide behind a confidentiality clause in order to protect their decisions and keep the funds flowing. There should be open records and “court watches”! Look who is being paid!

There are state employees, lawyers, court investigators, guardian ad litems, court personnel, and judges. There are psychologists, and psychiatrists, counselors, caseworkers, therapists, foster parents, adoptive parents, and on and on. All are looking to the children in state custody to provide job security. Parents do not realize that the social workers are the glue that hold “the system” together that funds the court, funds the court appointed attorneys, and the multiple other jobs including the “system’s” psychiatrists, therapists, their own attorneys and others.

  • that The Adoption and the Safe Families Act, set in motion first in 1974 by Walter Mondale and later in 1997 by President Bill Clinton, offered cash “bonuses” to the states for every child they adopted out of foster care. In order to receive the “adoption incentive bonuses” local child protective services need more children. They must have merchandise (children) that sells and you must have plenty so the buyer can choose. Some counties are known to give a $4,000 to $6,000 bonus for each child adopted out to strangers and an additional $2,000 for a “special needs” child. Employees work to keep the federal dollars flowing;
  • State Departments of Human Resources (DHR) and affiliates are given a baseline number of expected adoptions based on population. For every child DHR and CPS can get adopted, there is the bonus of $4,000 or maybe $6,000. But that is only the beginning figure in the formula in which each bonus is multiplied by the percentage that the State has managed to exceed its baseline adoption number. Therefore States and local communities work hard to reach their goals for increased numbers of adoptions for children in foster care.
  • that there is double dipping. The funding continues as long as the child is out of the home. There is funding for foster care then when a child is placed with a new family, then “adoption bonus funds” are available. When a child is placed in a mental health facility and is on 16 drugs per day, like two children of a constituent of mine, more funds are involved and so is Medicaid;
  • As you can see this program is ordered from the very top and run by Health and Human Resources. This is why victims of CPS get no help from their legislators. It explains why my bill, SB 415 suffered such defeat in the Judicial Committee, why I was cut off at every juncture. Legislators and Governors must remember who funds their paychecks.
  • that there are no financial resources and no real drive to unite a family and help keep them together or provide effective care;
  • that the incentive for social workers to return children to their parents quickly after taking them has disappeared and who in protective services will step up to the plate and say, “This must end! No one, because they are all in the system together and a system with no leader and no clear policies will always fail the children. Just look at the waste in government that is forced upon the tax payer;
  • that the “Policy Manuel” is considered “the last word” for CPS/DFCS. However, it is too long, too confusing, poorly written and does not take the law into consideration;
  • that if the lives of children were improved by removing them from their homes, there might be a greater need for protective services, but today children are not safer. Children, of whom I am aware, have been raped and impregnated in foster care;
  • It is a known fact that children are in much more danger in foster care than they are in their own home even though home may not be perfect.
  • that some parents are even told if they want to see their children or grandchildren, they must divorce their spouse. Many, who are under privileged, feeling they have no option, will divorce and then just continue to live together. This is an anti-family policy, but parents will do anything to get their children home with them. However, when the parents cooperate with Child Protective Services, their behavior is interpreted as guilt when nothing could be further from the truth.
  • Fathers, (non-custodial parents) I must add, are often treated as criminals without access to visit or even see their own children and have child support payments strangling the very life out of them;
  • that the Foster Parents Bill of Rights does not stress that a foster parent is there temporarily to care for a child until the child can be returned home. Many foster parents today use the Foster Parent Bill of Rights as a means to hire a lawyer and seek to adopt the child placed in their care from the real parents, who are desperately trying to get their child home and out of the system. Recently in Atlanta, a young couple learning to be new parents and loving it, were told that because of an anonymous complaint, their daughter would be taken into custody by the State DFCS. The couple was devastated and then was required by DFCS to take parenting classes, alcohol counseling and psychological evaluations if they wanted to get their child back. All of the courses cost money for which most parents are required to pay. While in their anxiety and turmoil to get their child home, the baby was left for hours in a car to die in the heat in her car seat by a foster parent who forgot about the child. This should never have happened. It is tragic. In many cases after the parents have jumped through all the hoops, they still do not get their child. As long as the child is not returned, there is money for the agency, for foster parents, for adoptive parents, and for the State.
  • that tax dollars are being used to keep this gigantic system afloat, yet the victims, parents, grandparents, guardians and especially the children, are charged for the system’s services.
  • that grandparents have called from all over the State of Georgia and from other states trying to get custody of their grandchildren. CPS claims relatives are contacted, but there are many many cases that prove differently. Grandparents who lose their grandchildren to strangers have lost their own flesh and blood. The children lose their family heritage and grandparents, and parents too, lose all connections to their heirs.
  • that The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect in 1998 reported that six times as many children died in foster care than in the general public and that once removed to official “safety”, these children are far more likely to suffer abuse, including sexual molestation than in the general population. Think what that number is today ten years later!
  • That according to the California Little Hoover Commission Report in 2003, 30% to 70% of the children in California group homes do not belong there and should not have been removed from their homes.” [48]

Texas

The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services had itself been an object of reports of unusual numbers of poisonings, death, rapes and pregnancies of children under its care since 2004. The Texas Family and Protective Services Crisis Management Team was created by executive order after the critical report Forgotten Children of 2004.

Texas Child Protective Services was hit with a rare if not unprecedented legal sanction for a “groundless cause of action” and ordered to pay $32,000 of the Spring family’s attorney fees. Judge Schneider wrote in a 13-page order, “The offensive conduct by (CPS) has significantly interfered with the legitimate exercise of the traditional core functions of this court.”[49]

2008 Raid of YFZ Ranch

Main article: YFZ Ranch

In April 2008, the largest child protection action in American history raised questions as the CPS in Texas removed hundreds of minor children, infants, and women incorrectly believed to be children from the YFZ Ranch polygamist community, with the assistance of heavily armed police with an armored personnel carrier. Investigators, including supervisor Angie Voss convinced a judge that all of the children were at risk of child abuse because they were all being groomed for under-age marriage. The state supreme court disagreed, releasing most children back to their families. Investigations would result in criminal charges against some men in the community.

Gene Grounds of Victim Relief Ministries commended CPS workers in the Texas operation as exhibiting compassion, professionalism and caring concern.[50] However, CPS performance was questioned by workers from the Hill Country Community Mental Health-Mental Retardation Center. One wrote “I have never seen women and children treated this poorly, not to mention their civil rights being disregarded in this manner” after assisting at the emergency shelter. Others who were previously forbidden to discuss conditions working with CPS later produced unsigned written reports expressed anger at the CPS traumatizing the children, and disregarding rights of mothers who appeared to be good parents of healthy, well-behaved children. CPS threatened some MHMR workers with arrest, and the entire mental health support was dismissed the second week due to being “too compassionate.” Workers believed poor sanitary conditions at the shelter allowed respiratory infections and chicken pox to spread.[51]

CPS problem reports

The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, as with other states, had itself been an object of reports of unusual numbers of poisonings, death, rapes and pregnancies of children under its care since 2004. The Texas Family and Protective Services Crisis Management Team was created by executive order after the critical report Forgotten Children[52] of 2004. Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn made a statement in 2006 about the Texas foster care system.[53] In Fiscal 2003, 2004 and 2005, respectively 30, 38 and 48 foster children died in the state’s care. The number of foster children in the state’s care increased 24 percent to 32,474 in Fiscal 2005, while the number of deaths increased 60 percent. Compared to the general population, a child is four times more likely to die in the Texas foster care system. In 2004, about 100 children were treated for poisoning from medications; 63 were treated for rape that occurred while under state care including four-year old twin boys, and 142 children gave birth, though others believe Ms. Strayhorn’s report was not scientifically researched, and that major reforms need to be put in place to assure that children in the conservatorship of the state get as much attention as those at risk in their homes.

Disproportionality & Disparity in the Child Welfare System

In the United States, data suggests that a disproportionate number of minority children, particularly African American and Native American children, enter the foster care system.[54] National data in the United States provides evidence that disproportionality may vary throughout the course of a child’s involvement with the child welfare system. Differing rates of disproportionality are seen at key decision points including the reporting of abuse, substantiation of abuse, and placement into foster care.[55] Additionally, once they enter foster care, research suggests that they are likely to remain in care longer.[56] Research has shown that there is no difference in the rate of abuse and neglect among minority populations when compared to Caucasian children that would account for the disparity.[57] The Juvenile Justice system has also been challenged by disproportionate negative contact of minority children.[58] Because of the overlap in these systems, it is likely that this phenomenon within multiple systems may be related.

Constitutional issues

In May 2007, the United States 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found in Rogers v. County of San Joaquin, No. 05-16071[59] that a CPS social worker who removed children from their natural parents into foster care without obtaining judicial authorization was acting without due process and without exigency (emergency conditions) violated the 14th Amendment and Title 42 United State Code Section 1983. The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution says that a state may not make a law that abridges “… the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” and no state may “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Title 42 United States Code Section 1983[60] states that citizens can sue in federal courts any person who acting under a color of law to deprive the citizens of their civil rights under the pretext of a regulation of a state, See.[61]

In case of Santosky v. Kramer, 455 US 745, Supreme Court reviewed a case when Department of Social Services removed two younger children from their natural parents only because the parents had been previously found negligent toward their oldest daughter.[62] When the third child was only three days old, DSS transferred him to a foster home on the ground that immediate removal was necessary to avoid imminent danger to his life or health. The Supreme Court vacated previous judgment and stated: “Before a State may sever completely and irrevocably the rights of parents in their natural child, due process requires that the State support its allegations by at least clear and convincing evidence. But until the State proves parental unfitness, the child and his parents share a vital interest in preventing erroneous termination of their natural relationship”.[62]

A District of Columbia Court of Appeals concluded that the lower trial court erred in rejecting the relative custodial arrangement selected by the natural mother who tried to preserve her relationship with the child.[63] The previous judgment granting the foster mother’s adoption petition was reversed, the case remanded to the trial court to vacate the orders granting adoption and denying custody, and to enter an order granting custody to the child’s relative.[63]

Notable lawsuits

In 2010 an ex-foster child was awarded $30 million by jury trial in California (Santa Clara County) for sexual abuse damages that happened to him in foster home from 1995 to 1999.[64][65] The foster parent, John Jackson, was licensed by state despite the fact that he abused his own wife and son, overdosed on drugs and was arrested for drunken driving. In 2006, Jackson was convicted in Santa Clara County of nine counts of lewd or lascivious acts on a child by force, violence, duress, menace and fear and seven counts of lewd or lascivious acts on a child under 14, according to the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office.[64] The sex acts he forced the children in his foster care to perform sent him to prison for 220 years. Later in 2010, Giarretto Institute, the private foster family agency responsible for licensing and monitoring Jackson’s foster home and others, also was found to be negligent and liable for 75 percent of the abuse that was inflicted on the victim, and Jackson was liable for the rest.[64]

In 2009 Oregon Department of Human Services has agreed to pay $2 million into a fund for the future care of twins who were allegedly abused by their foster parents; it was the largest such settlement in the agency’s history.[66] According to the civil rightssuit filed on request of twins’ adoptive mother in December 2007 in U.S. Federal Court, kids were kept in makeshift cages—cribs covered with chicken wire secured by duct tape—in a darkened bedroom known as “the dungeon.” The brother and sister often went without food, water or human touch. The boy, who had a shunt put into his head at birth to drain fluid, didn’t receive medical attention, so when police rescued the twins he was nearly comatose. The same foster family previously took in their care hundreds of other children over nearly four decades.[67] DHS said the foster parents deceived child welfare workers during the checkup visits.[66]

Several lawsuits were brought in 2008 against the Florida Department of Children & Families (DCF), accusing it of mishandling reports that Thomas Ferrara, 79, a foster parent, was molesting girls.[68][69] The suits claimed that though there were records of sexual misconduct allegations against Ferrara in 1992, 1996, and 1999, the DCF continued to place foster children with Ferrara and his then-wife until 2000.[68] Ferrara was arrested in 2001 after a 9-year-old girl told detectives he regularly molested her over two years and threatened to hurt her mother if she told anyone. Records show that Ferrara had as many as 400 children go through his home during his 16 years as a licensed foster parent from 1984 to 2000.[68] Officials stated that the lawsuits over Ferrara end up costing the DCF almost $2.26 million.[69] Similarly, in 2007 Florida‘s DCF paid $1.2 million to settle a lawsuit that alleged DCF ignored complaints that another mentally challenged Immokalee girl was being raped by her foster father, Bonifacio Velazquez, until the 15-year-old gave birth to a child.[70][71][72]

In a class action lawsuit Charlie and Nadine H. v. McGreevey[73] was filed in federal court by “Children’s Rights” New York organization on behalf of children in the custody of the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS).[74][75] The complaint alleged violations of the children’s constitutional rights and their rights under Title IV-E of the Social Security Act, theChild Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, Early Periodic Screening Diagnosis and Treatment, 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, theAmericans with Disabilities Act, and the Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA).[76] In July 2002, the federal court granted plaintiffs’ experts access to 500 children’s case files, allowing plaintiffs to collect information concerning harm to children in foster care through a case record review.[74] These files revealed numerous cases in which foster children were abused, and DYFS failed to take proper action. On June 9, 2004, the child welfare panel appointed by the parties approved the NJ State’s Reform Plan. The court accepted the plan on June 17, 2004.[75] The same organization filed similar lawsuits against other states in recent years that caused some of the states to start child welfare reforms.[77]

In 2007 Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick obtained a jury verdict against Orange County (California) and two of its social workers for violating her Fourteenth Amendment rights to familial association.[78] The $4.9 million verdict grew to a $9.5 million judgment as the County lost each of its successive appeals.[78] The case finally ended in 2011 when the United States Supreme Court denied Orange County’s request to overturn the verdict.[79]

California

In April 2013, Child Protective Services in Sacramento sent in police to forcibly remove a 5-month-old baby from the care of parents.

Alex and Anna Nikolayev took their baby Sammy out of Sutter Memorial Hospital and sought a second opinion at Kaiser Permanente, a competing hospital, for Sammy’s flu-like symptoms.[80] Police arrived at Kaiser and questioned the couple and doctors. Once Sammy had been fully cleared to leave the hospital, the couple went home, but the following day police arrived and took Sammy. On June 25, 2013 the case against the family was dismissed adn the family filed a lawsuit against CPS and the Sacramento Police Department.[81]

Effectiveness

In a nationwide study, researchers examined children in 595 families over a period of 9 years. They discovered that in the households where child abuse was substantiated by evidence, risk factors remained unchanged during interviews with the families.[82]

See also

Similar organizations in other countries

References

  1. Pecora et al. (1992), p. 231.
  2. Ibid., pp. 230-1.
  3. Ibid., p. 230.
  4. Pecora et al. (1992), pp. 230-31; Petr (1998), p. 126.
  5. Children’s Aid Society. “History”.
  6. Axinn, June; Levin,Herman (1997). Social Welfare: a history of the American response to need (4th ed.). White Plains, New York: Longman. ISBN 9780801317002.
  7. Ellett, Alberta J.; Leighninger, Leslie (10 August 2006). “What Happened? An historical perspective of the de-professionalization of child welfare practice with implications for policy and practice”. Journal of Public Child Welfare 1 (1): 3–34.doi:10.1300/J479v01n01_02.
  8. Crosson-Tower, Cynthia (1999). Understanding child abuse and neglect (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.ISBN 9780205287802.
  9. Laird & Michael (2006).
  10. Pecora et al. (1992), p. 232; Petr (1998), p. 126.
  11. Pecora et al. (1992), pp. 232-3; Petr (1998), pp. 126-7.
  12. “Child Protective Services – HISTORICAL OVERVIEW, CURRENT SYSTEM”.
  13. “Reporting Child Abuse – Child Protective Services”.
  14. Antler, S (1978). “Child Abuse: An emerging social priority”. Social Work 23: 58–61.
  15. Administration for Children & Families. “Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) of 1974 P.L. 93-247”. Child Welfare Information Gateway. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.
  16. Limb, GE; Chance, T; Brown, EF (December 2004). “An empirical examination of the Indian Child Welfare Act and its impact on cultural and familial preservation for American Indian children”. Child Abuse & Neglect 28 (12): 1279–89.doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.06.012. PMID 15607770.
  17. Mitchell, LB; Barth, RP; Green, R; Wall, A; Biemer, P; Berrick, JD; Webb, MB (Jan–Feb 2005). “Child welfare reform in the United States: findings from a local agency survey.”. Child Welfare 84 (1): 5–24. PMID 15717771.
  18. Administration for Children & Families. “Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 P.L. 96-272”. Child Welfare Information Gateway. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.
  19. Administration for Children & Families (2011). “Major Federal Legislation Concerned with Child Protection, Child Welfare, and Adoption”. Child Welfare Information Gateway. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.
  20. Lincroft, Y.; Resher, J. (2006). “Undercounted and Underserved: Immigrant and refugee families in the child welfare system”. Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
  21. Mitchell, Lorelei B.; Barth, Richard P.; Green, Rebecca; Wall, Ariana; Biemer, Paul; Berrick, Jill Duerr; Webb, Mary Bruce. “Child Welfare Reform in the United States: Findings from a Local Agency Survey”. Child Welfare 84 (1): 5–24 [20]. ISSN 0009-4021.
  22. DCSF.gov.uk
  23. “About Ontario’s children’s aid societies”. Ontario Ministry of Children and Youth Services. Retrieved 19 April 2011.
  24. “Child and Family Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.11”. E-laws.gov.on.ca. Retrieved 2013-11-15.
  25. “Complaints Against a Children’s Aid Society”. Child and Family Services Review Board. Retrieved 17 April 2011.
  26. http://www.pani.go.cr
  27. Gauthier, L., Stollak, G., Messe, L., & Arnoff, J. (1996). Recall of childhood neglect and physical abuse as differential predictors of current psychological functioning. Child Abuse and Neglect 20, 549-559
  28. Malinosky-Rummell, R. & Hansen, D.J. (1993) Long term consequences of childhood physical abuse. Psychological Bulletin114, 68-69
  29. Lyons-Ruth K. & Jacobvitz, D. (1999) Attachment disorganization: unresolved loss, relational violence and lapses in behavioral and attentional strategies. In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.) Handbook of Attachment. (pp. 520-554). NY: Guilford Press
  30. Solomon, J. & George, C. (Eds.) (1999). Attachment Disorganization. NY: Guilford Press
  31. Main, M. & Hesse, E. (1990) Parents’ Unresolved Traumatic Experiences are related to infant disorganized attachment status. In M. T. Greenberg, D. Ciccehetti, & E. M. Cummings (Eds), Attachment in the Preschool Years: Theory, Research, and Intervention (pp161-184). Chicago: University of Chicago Press
  32. Carlson, E. A. (1988). A prospective longitudinal study of disorganized/disoriented attachment. Child Development 69, 1107-1128
  33. Lyons-Ruth, K. (1996). Attachment relationships among children with aggressive behavior problems: The role of disorganized early attachment patterns. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 64, 64-73
  34. Lyons-Ruth, K., Alpern, L., & Repacholi, B. (1993). Disorganized infant attachment classification and maternal psychosocial problems as predictors of hostile-aggressive behavior in the preschool classroom. Child Development 64, 572-585
  35. “Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect”. Childwelfare.gov. Retrieved 2010-08-21.
  36. Prevent Child Abuse New York. “2007 Child Abuse and Neglect Fact Sheet”.
  37. American Humane Association. “Emotional Abuse”. Stop Child Abuse.
  38. “Kids Count Data Center”. The Annie E. Casey Foundation.[citation not found]
  39. “The AFCARS Report Preliminary FY 2010 Estimates as of June 2011”. http://www.acf.hhs.gov. Retrieved 2011-10-06.
  40. “Child Maltreatment 2009”. http://www.acf.hhs.gov. Retrieved 2011-10-06.
  41. Fluke, J. D.; Shusterman, G. R., Hollinshead, D. M., & Yuan, Y.-Y. (2008). “Longitudinal analysis of repeated child abuse reporting and victimization: multistate analysis of associated factors”. Child Maltreatment: 76–88.
  42. Pecora, P. J., Whittaker, J., Maluccio, A., & Barth, R. (2000). The child welfare challenge: Policy, practice, and research. Aldine de Gruyter.
  43. Wulczyn, F. (2009). “Epidemiological Perspectives on Maltreatment Prevention”. The Future of Children: 39–66.
  44. Scott, Brenda (1994) Out of Control: Who’s Watching Our Child Protection Agencies? p. 179
  45. “United States: Serbian Couple Struggles to Get Children Back · Global Voices”. Globalvoicesonline.org. 2011-01-04. Retrieved 2013-11-15.
  46. “News – U.S.: Serbian couple fights to get children back”. B92. Retrieved 2013-11-15.
  47. “Press Online :: Press Green”. Pressonline.rs. Retrieved 2013-11-15.
  48. “The Corrupt Business of Child Protective Services – report by Senator Nancy Schaefer, September 25, 2008”.
  49. State agency hit with rare sanction for taking custody of Spring infants
  50. KVUE.com, Richardson group: Polygamists’ children are OK April 18, 2008 by Janet St. James / WFAA-TV
  51. Crotea, Roger (10 May 2008). “Mental health workers rip CPS over sect”. San Antonio Express-news .
  52. Window.state.tx.us
  53. Comptroller Strayhorn Statement On Foster Care Abuse June 23, 2006
  54. Hill R.B. (2004) Institutional racism in child welfare. In J. Everett, S. Chipungu & B. Leashore (Eds.) Child welfare revisited (pp. 57-76). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
  55. Hill, R. B (2006) Synthesis of research on disproportionality in child welfare: An update. Casey-CSSP Alliance for Racial Equity in Child Welfare.
  56. Wulczyn, F. Lery, B., Haight, J., (2006) Entry and Exit Disparities in the Tennessee Foster Care System. Chapin Hall Discussion Paper.
  57. National Incidence Study (NIS), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Administration for Children & Families, (1996)
  58. Pope, C.E. & Feyerherm, W. (1995) Minorities and the Juvenile Justice System Research Symmary. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
  59. Rogers v. County of San Joaquin, No. 05-16071
  60. Title 42 United States Code Section 1983
  61. “Civil Rights Complaint Guide”.
  62. “Santosky v. Kramer, 455 US 745 – Supreme Court 1982”.
  63. “In re TJ, 666 A. 2d 1 – DC: Court of Appeals 1995”.
  64. “South Bay sex-abuse lawsuit: Ex-foster child awarded $30 million”.
  65. “Estey & Bomberger announces Jury Awards $30 Million in San Jose Molestation Case”.
  66. “Gresham foster kids abused despite DHS checks”. The Oregonian. 2009-04-04.
  67. “Abuse in children’s foster care: State officials call for outside review”. The Oregonian. 2009-09-02.
  68. “Florida Foster Care Child Molestation”.
  69. “Foster parent, 79, accused of molesting girls in his care”.
  70. “Child of rape now 9, yet DCF settlement held up”.
  71. “Florida Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 60”.
  72. “Florida Senate – 2010”.
  73. Charlie and Nadine H. v. McGreevey
  74. “New Jersey (Charlie and Nadine H. v. Corzine)”.
  75. “Charlie and Nadine H. v. Corzine”.
  76. “Legal Documents (Charlie and Nadine H. v. Corzine)”.
  77. “Results of Reform”.
  78. “Order Granting Fees Incurred on Appeal”.
  79. “U.S. Supreme Court Denies Orange County’s (California) Request”.
  80. “News10 – Couple still unclear why CPS took their baby”.
  81. http://archive.news10.net/news/local/article/248770/476/CPS-case-against-Nikolayev-family-dismissed
  82. Bakalar, Nicholas (2010-10-11). “Doubts Rise Over Child Protective Service Inquiries”. The New York Times.

Notes

  • Drake, B. & Jonson-Reid, M. (2007). A response to Melton based on the Best Available Data. Published in: Child Abuse & Neglect, Volume 31, Issue 4, April 2007, Pages 343-360.
  • Laird, David and Jennifer Michael (2006). “Budgeting Child Welfare: How will millions cut from the federal budget affect the child welfare system?” Published in: Child Welfare League of America, Children’s Voice, Vol. 15, No. 4 (July/August 2006). Available on-line at: http://www.cwla.org/voice/0607budgeting.htm.
  • Pecora, Peter J., James K. Whittaker, Anthony N. Maluccio, with Richard P. Barth and Robert D. Plotnick (1992). The Child Welfare Challenge: Policy, Practice, and Research. NY:Aldine de Gruyter. ISBN .
  • Petr, Christopher G. (1998). Social Work with Children and their Families: Pragmatic Foundations. NY:Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-510607-5.
  • Scott, Brenda (1994), “Out of Control. Who’s Watching Our Child Protection Agencies?”. Huntington House Publishers. ISBN paper. ISBN hardback.

External links

WARRANT TRAINING FOR SOCIAL WORKERS


https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_PlDs4d_B_lNDRJVWNiMXFOYW8/edit?usp=sharingWarrantsCPS

NO MALTREATMENT IN FOSTER CARE: CALIFORNIA COUNTIES ARE NOT REPORTING ABUSE


If your child is hurt while in foster care or you believe there is a “substantial risk” that your child will be hurt in foster care (AS THEY HAVE APPLIED IT TO YOU being a PREPONDERANCE of evidence) MAKE A REPORT TO THE HOTLINE, REPORT TO LOCAL POLICE, REPORT TO THE DA’S OFFICE and to the Foster Family Agency. IF THEY DO NOTHING make ABSOLUTELY SURE YOU FILE COMPLAINTS WITH SECRETARY OF STATE,  ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND TO HHS (Health and Human Services). After researching the number of children maltreated in foster care, it is obvious that the injuries and maltreatment in foster care ARE NOT being reported anymore and swept under the rug as a part of their “Improvement Plan”. We parents and family members know that our kids are being hurt and mistreated in foster care so we also know that their reported “No maltreatment in foster care” numbers are bullshit. We all need to report the abuses so they stop lying, making themselves out to be better than us. If, during a visit, your child has a bruise, a cut, a lump, lock of hair missing, is dirty, is wearing the same clothes to every visit, has lost weight, acts differently, winches at sudden movements, tells you about being hit or yelled at all the time, or screams when it is time for them to leave with the foster person, MAKE A REPORT. Remember, FOSTER HOMES ARE SUPPOSEDLY PERFECT AND BETTER THAN YOU. We all know that no one is perfect but they are claiming to be, DO NOT MAKE EXCUSES FOR THE FOSTER PARENTS BECAUSE YOU MAY UNDERSTAND BEING A PARENT MEANS THAT CHILDREN FALL OR GET PICKED ON BY OTHER CHILDREN, do not believe anything they say as the reason your child has that bruise or cut or chunk of hair missing, assume that they are being abused. That’s how parents are treated right?

File these reports with anyone who will listen.  This county has been falsifying reports of treatment in foster care basically glorifying foster care and anyone of us can tell you nightmares about foster care by people who just get paid to be a babysitter.  The last person these courts would ever consider listening to is the victims of CPS and these CPS workers know it and abuse it to get as much federal funding to the county as possible.

If anyone is truly representing children and FAMILIES you can’t tell by the wealth of information which is given out for foster parents and people looking to adopt children from the system. If you read all the appellate decisions you will find that 98% of the appeals in California do not rule in favor of the parents. Dependency cases are so class bias with evidence in support of parent completely ignored.

 For those parents and original caregivers who have recently been intimidated by CPS and they removed your child(ren), and if I were to experience that again knowing what I know now, I would object to everything untrue said in the reports, provide evidence to the contrary and file it with the clerk. When doing so, you must serve all parties with it and then file a Proof of Service with the clerk.  Nothing you have to say will ever get on record unless you do this AND YOUR ATTORNEY WILL NOT DO IT EITHER. If I could do it all over again, I will drill this into my head and NEVER UNDERESTIMATE DPSS’s creativity when it comes to making shit up about you. They are very sick people out to get you so don’t let them get away with ruining your reputation along with ruining your family. PARENTS DO NOT RECEIVE PROPER REPRESENTATION. EVER. It is up to you to be put on record to have any chance at beating them. BUT UNDERSTAND THAT they will coerce you into ‘submitting’ to the allegations and cooperating with the ‘case plan’. If you are fighting them tooth and nail they will ‘amend’ the petition but only slightly. Then they will bring up all the issues that were stricken from it and use it against you again. Appealable issues must be raised at each hearing. We will post more about that soon. Even if you lose getting your self on record with a good argument has a much higher chance of ruining their self-esteem which comes from in part by the arrogance they get from railroading the parents on the record without a fight. Look for our article, “Hit ‘Em Where it Hurts” which explains how to remove the funding they receive in your case. This will weaken them and end the tyranny of the JV court.

Should You Talk to CPS?


NO. NO. NO. NO. NO. NO. Did everyone get that? NO!!!  DO NOT SPEAK TO CPS IF YOU DO NOT ALREADY HAVE A “CASE”. THEY HAVE NO POWER UNTIL YOU GIVE IT TO THEM. Even if you think you have done nothing wrong and speak to them to “clear up any misunderstandings” THAT WILL BE THE MISTAKE and you WILL BE PUTTING YOUR CHILDREN AT RISK OF IMMINENT HARM. You DO NOT HAVE TO SPEAK TO THEM, BY LAW. Exercise your 4th Amendment RIGHT, CPS is not out to respect it, in fact, they laugh when you are intimidated and think that you HAVE to speak to them or let them in your home. You don’t have to be rude, in fact, kill them with kindness. Tell them how sweet they are for caring so much about your child but that neither you nor your child need their services and to have a nice day. Tell your children to NEVER EVER speak to a CPS worker at school. Make sure that you draft a NON-AUTHORIZATION prohibiting CPS from being able to speak to your child at school. GEt it NOTARIZED and give copies to the school, one to the office clerk, one to your child’s counselor and one to the Principal. Make them sign a Receipt of Non-Authorization so you have proof that they know about it. 

Once again, if CPS wants to talk to you, do not open your door, talk to them through the window or crack open the doorImage and give them a note telling them that you are not aware of any criminal investigations so they have no reasonable cause to be there. Tell them if any criminal charges are filed to let your attorney know immediately and give the CPS workers the name of the most prestigious criminal attorney in your area.  When they leave, go ahead and give that guy (or woman) a call and see if they give free consultations over the phone. Most attorneys do. Just tell them that CPS came to your door and you told them that you don’t speak to social workers and if any criminal charges are filed that you told CPS to contact him (attorney). Most likely, if you have not abused your child, they will send you a letter in about a week or so letting you know that they closed their investigation. Hopefully, you have those Non-Authorizations at the school and have educated your children to not speak to social workers, or the school nurse, teacher, counselor, or even the principal IF THEY are asking questions about home OR YOU or anything that could be misrepresented against your

 

 

family. 

There are times when 

Image

 

CPS appears to be reasonable and normal. However, do not be fooled, this is their way of keeping up the illusion that they are “public servants”. Some people they encounter must still believe that they do good. Another trick they use is the one where a home is clearly a hazard yet they leave the children there. You’ve seen plenty of those cases, CPS is constantly being sued for “failing to act” despite receiving numerous prior referrals, and a child dies because they didn’t remove them. THIS is so they can claim that they are still “needed in the community because so many children are dying at the hands of parents!”  Someone I know has known a social worker for a long time who was aware of an incident where that worker was told to place 3 children back into a home known for manufacturing methamphetamine. The worker was distraught about doing this but she felt that she had to even though the Department knew something was going to happen to those children. She returned the children on Friday and they were all dead by Monday morning. That case received a lot of attention and the Department was able to use it to get more funding. Coincidence? Me thinks not. These are very wicked people pretending to be saviors. 

And I’M THE BAD GUY. SAY GOODNIGHT TO THE BAD GUY.

The Evidence is In: Foster Care vs. Keeping Families Together: The Definitive Studies


From the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform:Capture

PROOF THAT YOU DON’T HAVE TO SIGN THE CASE PLAN


In California: According to CPS’s Manual of Policies and Procedures you do not have to sign the case plan in order to receive services. All it does is contractually bind you to it,

No Signature Required for Case Plan

 CPS/JUVENILE DEPENDENCY COURT IS CIVIL. NOT CRIMINAL AND NOT FAMILY LAW. The rules of evidence are the same as in Civil Court and disobeying an “order” is merely a contempt of court issue.

I got this clip from CA Policy Revision Update which clearly states the Department’s PRIORITIES AND VALUES. IS it just me or is it obvious that the welfare of children is not their main concern?

(if this image is not clear, click on it and it will pop up in a new window and it will be readable)

CPS's 'STATED VALUES

SAFETY:

OF WHO? THE SOCIAL WORKERS!

TIMELY PERMANENCY:

SO THEY CAN GET THE ADOPTION INCENTIVE MONEY SOONER

REDUCING RELIANCE ON OUT-OF-HOME-CARE:

AGAIN, THIS IS PART OF ‘PERMANENCY’ AS THEY GET MORE FUNDING FROM ADOPTIONS THAN FOR FOSTER CARE

REDUCING THE RISK OF ABUSE AND NEGLECT IN OUT-OF-HOME CARE:

WHY IS THIS EVEN AN ISSUE IF THE FOSTER HOMES ARE SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE PARENT’S HOME THAT THEY EVEN PLACE THEM THERE TO BEGIN WITH? “OK. LET’S TAKE THIS KID FROM THESE PARENTS BECAUSE FOSTER CARE IS SO PERFECT AND THE FOSTER PARENTS ARE SO MUCH BETTER THAT WE NEVER EVEN HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT CHILDREN GETTING HURT THERE”

OBVIOUSLY THERE IS AT LEAST ENOUGH ABUSE IN FOSTER CARE TO MAKE THIS  PRIORITY RIGHT????

CHILD  WELL-BEING:

THIS IS LISTED LAST, ALMOST LIKE SOMEONE ALMOST FORGOT TO WRITE IT! DOES THIS NOT SHOW THAT THEY REALLY DON’T CARE ABOUT KIDS? I FIND SO MANY THINGS LIKE THIS. I AM PUTTING TOGETHER A COLLECTION OF THEM.

Abuse in out of home care

Coming Soon to a Blog near you: CPS “PRIORS” THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY. Lawsuits against CPS, social workers gone worse, foster parents who are criminally charged for abuse and murder, CPS’s failures and Judges gone wild.

When CPS Gives You a “Color’


I was going over our site’s search hits and found that many people are wondering about being given a “color’ by CPS for drug testing. I can tell you about this.

When I had a color and called the 800 number every single day for two years I found that you color is only called 2 times per month. THAT’S ALL. No more, no less. Once your color has been called 2 times in the same month, you can count on not testing again until the 1st of the next month. However, PLEASE BE AWARE THAT THIS COULD CHANGE AT ANY TIME so don’t stop calling that number and DON’T USE DRUGS because you know this, but you could use it to take long weekend away or just going out of town without having to worry about testing or missing a test. Also, no colors are called on the weekend in Riverside County. This is not for other program testing just the CPS assigned color testing. The assigned colors are primary colors, red, blue, black, yellow, brown, green, and maybe purple and pink. No testing days always call the odd colors like aqua, teal, mint, rose, lavender, but you’ll figure it out by just writing down the colors each day on a calendar. This  daily journal is also helpful to keep yourself from forgetting to call. 

BEWARE**** WHEN CPS WANTS YOU TO SUBMIT TO A HAIR FOLLICLE TEST***BEWARE

THEY CAN AND WILL FAKE THE RESULTS IF THEY WANT TO. Usually, they do this when they have no other evidence. So if they got nothing on you and they ask you to do a hair follicle, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, MAKE SURE THAT YOU PAY FOR YOUR OWN AT THE SAME TIME and use your first name initial, middle name and last name for the one you pay for this way the lab won’t confuse them or tell CDT that you are doing your own. If they end of faking it, you will have absolute proof and please get that to a lawyer ASAP.

Image

Social Workers Found Guilty GEt Promoted


Social Workers Found Guilty GEt Promoted

This is the Deanna Fogerty-Hardwick story. CPS illegally took her daughters and falsified documents but with the help of some very awesome attorneys, a verdict against the Department and the social workers individually still stands as a victory for parents. She also got some money but better than that she GOT AN INJUNCTION against CPS that stops them from targeting her again. (I am pretty sure, if that’s not correct, please let me know.)

CHILD WELFARE “INDUSTRY”: FOCUS ON ADOPTION


When PARENTS are caught in the unfair and bias system called CPS and Juvenile Dependency, information for  the PARENTS is extremely limited. It starts out with a folded 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper folded in half that is SOMETIMES handed out at the first hearing:

DEPENDENCY COURT

RIGHT CLICK (OPEN LINK IN NEW TAB OR WINDOW) HERE: Juvenile Dependency process info for parents

This might as well say: YOU’RE SCREWED! and would be more appropriate as it is the truth!

IF YOU OPENED UP THE LINK ABOVE, notice how the left side of the second sheet (“One of the goals of the dependency court…“) briefly does not explain things very well and then the right side immediately discusses ‘PERMANENCY’ (this is the word for terminating parental rights and adopting your child out) Back to the left side, “One of the goals...” is to reunify, ok, back over to the right side, “How does the court make a permanent plan for my child?” and the first numbered item is terminating your parental rights. So, this is obviously another one of the goals of dependency court, correct? Tell me now, am I misinterpreting this thing or what? On the third sheet this leaflet specifically says, in bold, “In order for the court to consider returning your child to you, you must follow the orders of the court without delay”.  Now tell me doesn’t this sound like coercion? This “information” NEVER talks about the possibility of false allegations, or about misunderstandings between the parents and the social workers, doesn’t even hint that if the court determines that there was really no reasonable cause or need for detention that they could dismiss the issue. THAT NEVER EVER HAPPENS as far as I know. But hey, they could accidently grab a Judge’s kid or grandkid and when the Judge sees the name it gets dismissed. Could happen I guess.

DID YOU KNOW THAT SOCIAL WORKERS ARE ALWAYS AFRAID TO MAKE ENEMIES AT WORK OR GET FIRED BECAUSE THEY ARE PETRIFIED THAT THEIR FAMILY WILL BE TARGETED? DID YOU KNOW THAT FOSTER PARENTS WHO WILLFULLY DISOBEY A SOCIAL WORKER OR SIMPLY NOT GET ALONG WITH THEM THAT THEY WILL LOSE THEIR FOSTER KIDS AND HAVE TO DO THE SAME STINKING PROGRAMS THAT PARENTS DO? THESE ARE FACTS!

Back to my point which is that most of the information available is all about ‘PERMANENCY’ and ADOPTION, not about resolving FALSE ALLEGATIONS, REUNIFICATION, AVOIDING THE TERMINATION OF YOUR PARENTAL RIGHTS AND NOTHING SUBSTANTIAL ABOUT THE BENEFITS OF BIRTH PARENT CONTACT.

More links that focus on funding, foster care, permanency, budget, system improvements, NOT reunification or addressing anything supportive for PARENTS:

http://www.cdss.ca.gov/cdssweb/PG164.htm  (most of this “information” is outdated)

http://cwda.org/publications/cws.php

A few clips showing that the focus is adoption and permanency:(click on these and they will automatically open in a new tab)

permanency2

permanenc3

To those of you who do not have any particular interest or need to research CPS’s practices and procedures or the Juvenile Dependency court scam, I GUARANTEE that there are countless clues that substantiate our claims that the system is designed to railroad parents for FEDERAL FUNDING.

fostercare

Even this report data collected to assess how effective parent’s attorneys are says that there is not enough supportive resources to properly represent parents against CPS and that their salaries are lower than regular attorneys:

parentsattorneys

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About FUNDING for keeping families together:

http://www.nccpr.org/reports/12Financial.pdf

I have been trying to snip clips here and there to post, to PROVE to you, that the system is NOT FAIR, NOT LEGAL (no it is NOT legal despite what other Judges and LAWYERS may say. I believe that they may actually know about it but DO NOT HAVE THE GUTS TO ADMIT IT). I have offered to show proof in person, which would have been much easier, but not too many people are brave enough to get within 100 feet of me because I have been publicly humiliated by misrepresentation via media propaganda, slander, libel and defamation of character. Although it is true that I have been arrested and incarcerated for a few months (twice) and those convictions are “felonies”. But I blame those things on others and refuse to take responsibility for them because I just don’t feel like it. Why take responsibility for my own actions when I can easily blame my husband’s psycho ex-wife or those evil CPS workers or the corrupt judges and DA’s? Yes, creating this website and several other websites, typing a civil complaint for Supreme Court, and advocating for other parents caught in the system is MUCH EASIER than admitting that I might have made a better choice or two if I had the opportunity to make those choices again (like move far far away from the ex when I was pregnant or not get pregnant at all even though he is a wonderful little boy, other people get to be blessed). But blaming others is, again, much easier however, time consuming but what the heck, I have nothing better to do anyway, its not like I have any kids to take care of right?

Social Workers Socializing


A woman I know with a current open CPS case recently sent a complaint letter to her social imagesworker’s supervisor. She also sent copies to: the Director of DPSS, Deputy Director, her attorney, the state DPSS, the FFA, her child’s counselor, the Attorney General and the FBI. She didn’t send one to the worker. The first call she got was from the Deputy Director. The second was from the worker who left a voicemail TELLING HER THAT SHE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO GO SEE ______ (A DOCTOR) AND GET ON MEDICATION AS IT WAS REQUIRED!  My friend has had two psychological evaluations and has been seeing two separate counselors for many months now. None of these professionals feel my friend has any mental illness or condition let alone need medication. The social worker who told my friend that she “had no choice” to go get on medication is Sonia Correa. I put her name out there because she is absolutely wretched! Not just due to this incident but because she is a sociopath liar and perpetrating malicious and intentional emotional distress upon my friend and her daughter. Maybe Sonia Correa is not even human, she speaks in monotone and forgets how to use a telephone for months on end.

images (1)

This prompted me to look into the possibility that there are mentally hazardous conditions in the field of social work that turns people’s brains into a psychosis-malfunctioning blob. I found some socializing sites that all parents with CPS cases should check out,  just to know how these people think and get some insight into why social workers are such jerks and act like they hate you. I am not saying that we should sympathize with these people or have any respect for the ones that are sociopaths. Just remember, my strategy is that being able to think “like” the enemy will eventually beat your enemy. Please feel free to comment on our site rather than the social worker’s site if you have any anti-social worker comments. If you have any suggestions or know of other sites that give insight to the mind of a social worker, please email me at: cpshatersclub@gmail.com.

  [Correa is not in the picture above, I got it from Google Images. If you are one of these people and you object to your picture being posted herein, contact me at the email below and I will gladly remove it)                                        

                                                    LINK TO SOCIAL WORKER SOCIAL SITE:

                                                                     http://socialjerk.wordpress.com/

UPDATE: MORE SOCIAL WORKER BLOGS:

http://socialworkburnout.blogspot.ca/                                  http://interestsofchildren.wordpress.com/

http://blog.socialworker.com/2010/02/online-child-welfare-training.html

http://www.socialworker.com/home/Feature_Articles/Professional_Development_%26_Advancement/Compassion_Fatigue_in_Child_Welfare/

http://photos.denverpost.com/2012/11/12/photo-failed-to-death-an-investigation-into-colorados-child-welfare-system/

images (3)

Collaborative Cohorts Kidnapping Kids? That’s CRAZY!


DonnellyJustice and sjb4djustice write:

MAY I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE?

STAKEHOLDERS IN THE CHILD ABUSE INDUSTRY: We have been waiting for you to notice us. And now that we have your attention, please be advised that this blog is about you and the things you do and did to us. That’s right, we are exposing you. We have a very good following of others who have been victimized by your collaborative efforts to fund your counties.You SOLD our son through what is called “forced adoption”. You ARE kidnapping our children AND GETTING PAID TO DO IT! We are dedicating our lives to exposing you and every other county’s secrets. You claim that we are “crazy conspiracy theorists”. Well, you are partly correct. You did manage to make us a bit CRAZY, you do CONSPIRE to ruin families and the only thing THEORETICAL about it is your true concern for “the children’s best interests”. The power you have over families is purely an ability to BULLY, INTIMIDATE, COERCE, EXTORT, FALSIFY, AND LIE. You even made it so my wife and daughter were completely railroaded in court by taking a DA to lunch. You are holding other children against their will and drugging them and telling the parents that their children hate them and do not want anything to do with them all because you have NO EVIDENCE. Parents are HELPLESS and YOU KNOW IT. This is the only thing we can legally do: PROTEST. Amanda Spratley and Antoine Coley JUMPED UP FOR JOY, SMILING AND HUGGING when the judge terminated our rights!! EXPLAIN THAT TO DONNELLY!!! EXPLAIN HOW MUCH MONEY THE STATE AND COUNTY RECEIVED FOR TAKING HIM AWAY FROM HIS MOMMY AND DADDDY, SISSY KAYLA, SISSY ALEX, BROTHERS STEPHEN, BILLY AND CHRISTOPHER, POP-POP, AUNT CINDY, AUNT KATIE, UNCLE HUGO, COUSINS KAITLYN AND MIKEY, FRIENDS MICHELLE AND MELISSA, RACHAEL, KRISTINA,  AND JAMES. But knowing you he will be told untrue and awful things about us, isn’t that right Sue and (your best friend) Jamila?

TO OUR SUPPORTIVE AND CONTINUED VIEWERS: Thank you for your continued support. If you have anything you would like us to post or research email us at: cpshatersclub@gmail.com.

We are busy putting together a PROTEST SCHEDULE for Riverside, Moreno Valley and Murrieta for later this month.

TO CURRENT VICTIMS OF THIS CHILD STEALING RING: We have a link to The Dependency Quick Guide, a.k.a. the DOGBOOK, this could be a family-saver, it will help you ensure your attorney performs their duties competently but you have to assert your rights as they will NOT tell you what they are and they WILL force you to “buy-in” and submit to an Amended Petition by striking a few of the lies which are in the original. Learn what Welfare & Institutions Code § 300 (a)-(j) are as well as the Rules of Civil Procedure. We have links for those too. Go to our Self-Help site,  there is a document library there. New information is added several times a week. Email us if you have any questions and we can possibly direct you to the answers. We are NOT lawyers but I bet we would be better than the JuvDP except that we would probably be fired for not being favorably bias towards CPS. Regardless, we do not give legal advice, we only explain what we experienced and what we have seen happen to others.

God Bless

Child Welfare Information Gateway-Endless Information


Here is a link to a site for so much information that it is almost overwhelming. If the information you are looking for isn’t here, they provide a link to it. Keep in mind a lot of this information is based on some non-sense, meaning the information that they want you to think and believe however, if you understand how they think, you can use their thinking against them. Hopefully that makes sense. I will post my findings sometime soon hopefully, as I am trying to decipher what is real and what is not. Click “Like” if you understand.

 

https://www.childwelfare.gov/

99.6 % of Children in Foster Care are Mistreated


I found an interesting report straight from the Riverside County Clerk of the  Board of Supervisors that proves that more children are mistreated in FOSTER CARE than with their parents! What is the point of CPS then? . CPS is all about the individuals having job security, increasing government interference with our lives and just down right control of the population. People don’t know this, how do we get this information out there?

The practices of CPS: Funded by the Federal Government, This Agency Fails The Family


by: donnellyjustice

The taking of our children has become more common than people realize. According to some of the most recent reports by HHS, the family possesses a threat to the government. I don’t understand that thinking and it makes no sense.  Sounds like a way to continue destroying families for money.  The family is the cornerstone of America. Children need their parents, siblings, aunts, uncles, cousins, you know, the FAMILY. The government already has proof that parents do a much better job raising children. We should not allow this to continue. I am going to start posting the actual reports, with the social worker’s names on it, and the alleged drug test results from my case that prove the social workers lie and fabricate evidence.

The State of California and the federal government are allowing CPS to abuse children and inflict terrorism on families. Accepting false allegations from a known child abuser on the Child Abuse Hotline place innocent parent and families at risk of being railroaded by this unfair and bias system. Parents are never allowed to face the accuser in a court of law. All evidence allowing this to take place is based on an allegation not proof. CPS comes out like a Nazi organization using coercion and threatens the parents with lies of losing your children and saying they have proof. Scaring the parents until they feel insane, just to get them to sign a case plan, as CPS steals your children.  Our government is giving incentives for social workers to manipulate the family into taking services even though everything is just a lie. School teachers are pushing children to speak badly of their parent’s actions at home so they can call CPS. The court takes the opinion of CPS over top of the parents who are losing all rights to protect their children. We have to stop this. I love my children; we can’t live this way or continue to except this treatment. We need to change things today.

Our nation’s children are no longer safe in their homes, schools, or anywhere they go. Far too often, the threat is not from traditional trouble makers such as school bullies, class-cutters, and neighborhood drug-dealers but rather from the adults entrusted with the care of our children. Social workers, unlicensed social workers, intolerant and extremist teachers, school administrators, police officers, district attorneys, and judges are a serious and growing threat to our children. They believe that children who make a minor mistake or dare to express an opinion or personal preference that is not in compliance with government thought control and anti-free-speech policies should be treated like felons. Even having to attend to basic bodily functions like using the bathroom and eating in schools controlled by these extremists can be a threat to the safety of our children.

Our friendly faced uncaring government goons have made up euphemisms for their agendas. Given their limited intelligence, their choice phrases must be succinct. We end up with a school administration that tries to force children on medication for reasons like he has too much energy. This was my fight when my son was in the first grade. His teacher, and I will call her  Mrs. Pain, called CPS because she insisted my son was hyperactive and needs Ritalin. I told her no, what he needs is a teacher who spends time with her students. CPS was called into the school and told me if I did not get my son put on this Ritalin hey would take him and the rest of my children.

I refused to get my son put on speed to make the teacher happy. So the doctor tried my son on other drugs to get the desired affect Mrs. Pain was after. After watching my son go through all kinds of side effects for a week, I took him off the medicine. CPS ordered me to see a judge so I could be served a court order to continue to give my son drugs. I told the judge my son is not hyper he is a very intelligent and just wants the teacher to like him. He is nervous because she is always upset with him for standing at his desk, he does the work, gets good grades, and he is a very good boy. I am concerned about all the side effects these drugs have on him. I refuse to continue to treat my son like this. I told the judge that if I was allowed to go to school with my son every day, I will show the school how wonderful of a child he is and help out for free every day. The teacher and the social worker both battled me on my offer, but the judge said that was never offered before and he would be willing to give it a shot. If it did not work then I would be forced to give him the Meds or risk losing him.

The following Monday I went to school with my son. I was shocked and disappointed in the location the teacher had my son sitting which was in the far corner on the other side of the class, away from everyone. The teacher said to me as soon as my son stood up for the first time while I was there, “See, he is doing it again. He is out of control!” Then she yelled at him to sit down. I explained to her how he suffers from chronic leg spasms and that is why he stands, to alleviate the pain. I then brought his desk back over to the group of 6 desks he was in before he had been moved. I continued to work with my son everyday for the rest of that school year. I took off of work to do that and he improved so much because I was concerned about his feelings and what he was going through. That year he won just about every award that teacher had to offer. To this day he is a well-adjusted very hard working young man. I couldn’t be more proud. Don’t be so quick to judge children and place them on drugs for something that is just a failure to communicate and a lack of parental attention. If he would have been put on that drug he could have been addicted for life. Because, you know, when the kids on Ritalin grow up, they take them off of it and then what do they do? They score speed on the street. They are allowed to take it when they are kids but not when they are adults. That is so stupid.  Children are not experiments for doctors and teachers. They are our children and parents know what is best for our children. Government doesn’t need to be in every child’s life because a teacher makes a call to CPS. These schools seem to have completely lost the concept of being an inspiration to young children. Rather the mentality is: “Oh an active child, oh no! Calm them down, give them medication and blame the parents.

One of the new things I hear around schools is “zero tolerance” and I believe that this is one catch-phrase invented by “safety minded” school officials. No tolerance for creativity so they feel they must suppress individuality, ban freedom of speech, enforce dogmatic thinking, and criminalize  opinions that are counter to the teachers nerves is what it basically means. Coming from a more sensible age in which I could chose the color of my clothes and a pocket knife was not a weapon of mass destruction but rather a basic tool that many kids carried to school, it seems to me that kids today should be raising civil disobedience groups and learning guerrilla warfare tactics after they have been exposed to this extremism. But oddly it seems to be gradually zapping many of them into mind-numbed drones. Or maybe they are too busy playing Grand Theft Auto and Halo to know that sometimes criminals and conflicts are real.

The corruption in government knowing everything because we know how to get money for kids is perverse. “Kids for Cash” is another catch-phrase invented by somebody in the government, quite possibly by thousands of them at about the same time. Social workers realized that when they see smiling little kids, they think of vacation money, large bonuses in their pockets, so it was a natural expression of their intent to use other people’s children for their own economic security. Although it’s not clear which government agency invented it first, many of them, from the courts to “CPS” to schools, are living by it. Seldom is anything done to distract the government from viewing our children as money sources and pawns for profit except in the most bizarre and extreme cases that even the goons are embarrassed by it. I suspect when something is done to temporarily divert the greedy goons from monetizing our children, it is only because these extreme.

This is becoming so hurtful to take control over parents and destructive to the children as well as the rest of the family. Parents treat their kids with much more love and care, even according to National statistics, than CPS but they keep saying they are out to help children, when they take them from homes. When are we as Americans going to get sick of government taking control over our lives and doing what money commands? Their motives are so clear; CPS doesn’t care about my child, your child or any children, just as long as they get their money. If you knew your child would be molested in CPS care, would you let your child be taken still? This happens way too often. No, you would fight to protect your child. What happened to that stand up and fight for what’s right America used to have? Our children are getting hurt by the people pay to protect them.