These are funny cartoons that include references to actual cases in Riverside County, CA.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY DONNELLY!!! FROM YOUR REAL MOMMY AND DADDY!!!!
We are not REALLY OLD nor are we DEAD. This is what you believe. I wonder how you will feel when you find out that your adoptive parents have KNOWN FOR YEARS EXACTLY WHERE YOUR REAL MOMMY AND DADDY ARE but they simply lie to you either directly or by omission of the truth. They will tell you that they are “protecting” you but from WHAT EXACTLY?
They will try to tell you that we were drug addicts and criminals, this iS NOT true!!! We are for the most part RESPONSIBLE people. I say this because losing you has taken its toll on us emotionally and that also affects us physically. There is a lack of motivation sometimes when this loss overwhelms us, we do fight with each other a great deal, but not about you, you are the one thing we agree about. Donnelly, you unite your father and I because you were made with all the love in the world that two people could have for each other. We want you to know this on this special day, the day you were born.
I wish people weren’t so jealous and insecure with themselves so that they go out of their way to hurt other people. This is the main reason our family was ripped apart and why it continues to be ripped apart. People do not understand, they do not sympathize, they harshly judge, and hypocritically I might add! I want the BEST for you and I believe, as well as NORMAL person would, that the BEST thing you could have in your life are your REAL parents, even if only occasionally. I know my brothers went out of their way to ensure that we don’t get to see you any time soon and that they only strengthened the hatred your adoptive mother has for us but I have this hope, still, in my heart and soul that your adoptive parents will come around sooner than later but REALITY is that they are closed-minded and refuse to make their OWN ASSESSMENT. This is very sad for me to think about.
I hope you are having a birthday party, or already had one, like I would do for your birthday. I hope you went somewhere fun, like we would take you for your birthday. I hope you got presents and the one thing you wanted more than anything. Maybe someday that wish will be to meet your real parents.
We love you and miss you with all our hearts and souls. Happy Birthday baby boy! (I’m sobbing now.) xxooxoxoxoxoxoxox Love, Mommy and Daddy
If I dedicated my life to Christ and converted to an acceptable religion, would anyone’s views and opinions of me change? Would I then be “accepted”? I doubt it. You know why? Because I don’t need to do those things to be a good or better person. I am a good decent person who made some poor decisions because I MADE THOSE DECISIONS WITH MY HEART. I am trying to change that but it is hard. To become cold and heartless is not in my nature. To look out for only myself is very difficult. But if I promise to try, will I be given a reprieve? Can I pass go and collect the love from people who now despise me based on lies they were told about me? 951-295-6854 If anyone has anything to say to me please call, ask me anything you want. I am an open book. Oops, that is not a good way to “cover my butt” is it? I am thinking with my heart again.
We have said before, this can happen to ANYONE. Want to know why? Because the Supreme Courts do not recognize YOUR right to be a parent or your CHILD’S right to be raised by you. The Supreme Court’s opinion includes the notion that losing your child in no way compares to losing your freedom of movement (being in jail). This sets the standard for all lower courts.
Well, maybe for a person who does not give a hoot about their child it would be no comparison but I will tell you what, for the rest of us, who adore their children, losing the right to even SEE your child is like a DEATH SENTENCE!
According to the Supreme Court, a parent or child’s right to counsel is not guaranteed by the 6th Amendment in the Constitution because it is not a “criminal” case. So giving this theory a fair shot, in all criminal cases, even for misdemeanors where the maximum sentence is a mere 6 months in jail or even a fine, a person has a right to counsel. I don’t think a few months in jail or merely a fine compares to losing your child forever do you? But in misdemeanor cases you have a right to counsel but in dependency proceedings you do not have a constitutional right to counsel and neither does your child. They attempt to “explain” it saying that the dependency and termination of parental rights process is to “protect” children but that is just the cover for what is really going on..
“ONLY MARGINAL OR QUESTIONABLE BENEFIT TO THE PARENT”???
“THE GOD-GIVEN-RIGHT OF PARENTS TO THE CARE CUSTODY AND COMPANIONSHIP OF THEIR CHILDREN….IS NOT ABSOLUTE BUT IS SUBJECT TO THE OVERRIDING PRINCIPLE THAT IS THE ULTIMATE WELFARE OR BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD WHICH MUST PREVAIL”
MAYBE, ONLY MAYBE, in cases where a child has been tortured by their parent should this apply.
THIS IS WHY AND HOW IT CAN HAPPEN TO ANYONE! EVEN YOU! Do NOT say that you don’t have anything to worry about because someone can call the hotline at ANY GIVEN MOMENT and say anything they want about you and not have to prove it at all. GOD WILL NOT PROTECT YOU either. If He wants you to SUFFER HE will MAKE you suffer and all the praying in the world will NOT help you. YOU ARE VULNERABLE EVERY SINGLE SECOND, OF EVERY SINGLE DAY UNTIL YOUR CHILD TURNS 18.
And then all you have to worry about is APS-Adult Protective Services where they do the SAME THING to people only they do it to the children when they are caring for their parents.
The reason why child protection agencies have taken a turn for the worse after public cries for reform in the late 1990’s is due to ASFA (American Safe Families Act) which was passed by Bill Clinton. ASFA rewards the agencies for promptly adopting out children so they don’t “linger in foster care”, with adoption incentives which is money. Due to the economy and budget cutbacks, Title IV-E Social Security funds limit the number of programs and services which the agencies have been required to extend to the families. Now they offer them for a significantly shorter amount of time as their goal is to qualify for the adoption incentives which have not been affected by budgets. In the top three goals of these agencies is that the agency’s best interests are paramount.
In today’s day and age, people blindly expect that the people in government are looking out for every human being’s best interest and that our children are paramount. Reality is that today’s “day and age” is just as screwed up as ever. The only difference is that the blasphemy is hidden in a two-way mirrored glass bowl of ice cream topped with whipped cream and a cherry. You all know this about such issues like the IRS targeting Tea Party’ers, killing American’s with drones overseas AND killing the CHILD of that person shortly thereafter, or how we claim we are “helping” other countries meanwhile we are robbing them or have our their agenda for power and control over natural resources. The list goes on and on.
In every U.S. state and county, child protective service agencies are needlessly removing children from homes in which they are not really at risk of dying or being physically abused in and giving them to strangers who don’t really care about kids, just money. So, in every state and county, children are dying BECAUSE THEY WERE TAKEN FROM THEIR HOME AND PLACED AT RISK IN FOSTER CARE. Social workers are trained to lie, fabricate, exaggerate and to take every maneuver to obstruct the parents from completing case plans all in the name of “keeping children safe”. CPS is the true down fall of America, destroying the family unit and severing bonds. This is already having a significant impact on society. If it continues, no one will loyal, no one will feel truly loved, no one will be able to trust, and everyone is going to have abandonment issues. The following is an article which was found on the internet:
Family Preservation and Adoption
Critics of family preservation claim that it makes it harder to free children f or adoption. Once again, they are wrong.
Not only does family preservation not impede adoption, family preservation can speed the process of terminating parental rights when even clearly wrong. The fraud by social services has increased dramatically showing up in falsified reports and statements pushing to remove parental rights much faster. Studies have shown that 80% of the children removed from their homes should not have been. For social services to say they a siding with caution is criminal neglect.
The federal law that effectively abolished the reasonable efforts requirement, with the so-called Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), also requires states to seek termination of parental rights for many children in foster care for 15 of the most recent 22 months. Yet in many jurisdictions it can take at least 12 months for a judge to decide if the initial placement was justified in the first place.
Thus, while some children in foster care do indeed need to be adopted, ASFA encourages the indiscriminate adoption of children without regard to whether they could have remained safely in their own, loving homes.
And this influx of new termination cases comes despite increasing evidence that the system can’t cope with the thousands of children legally free for adoption right now.
After three years of modest increases in the raw number of annual adoptions, the number has remained stagnant at about 50,000 per year.
This is all states can manage, even though the federal government offers them a huge financial incentive � bounties of $4,000 to $8,000 or more for every adoption over the total number of adoptions the year before — and political and media pressure for adoption is enormous. In contrast, since 1983 the foster care population has more than doubled. And today, there still are only 2,000 fewer children trapped in foster care on any given day than there were when ASFA was passed. The real message from the so-called surge in adoptions is that the problems of foster care can never be solved through adoption alone.
Furthermore, the figures include only finalized adoptions, not the number of cases in which parental rights were terminated, but no adoptive home was found.
In the early 1990s, NCCPR’s President, Prof. Martin Guggenheim of New York University Law School, examined two states which expedited termination proceedings. He found that as the number of children freed for adoption soared, the number of actual adoptions increased far more slowly. The result: A generation of legal orphans, who have no ties whatsoever to their birth parents, but aren’t being placed for adoption either. Guggenheim found that, contrary to the unsupported rhetoric of critics of family preservation, the one reform taken most seriously since the 1970s has been termination of parental rights.
Furthermore, although abuse in adoptive homes is rare � like abuse in birth parent homes � ASFA’s encouragement of quick-and-dirty, slipshod placements increases the risk of abuse.
Even Children’s Rights, Inc., a group which favors ASFA and has been hostile to family preservation, says “… Congress should realize that far too many states … when they do, for example, raise their adoption numbers, are doing so by including many clearly inadequate families … along with the genuinely committed, loving families who want to make a home for these children, just to ‘succeed’ by boosting their numbers.”.
Even if all the children now awaiting adoption could be placed, that doesn’t mean the placements will last. Current efforts to plunge headlong into adoption are being undertaken in the absence of any reliable data about how often placements “disrupt” when parents who adopt a child – especially a “special needs” child – change their minds.
But the evidence we do have is alarming. Even before the effects of the new law were felt, it was estimated that 10 to 25 percent of so-called “forever families” don’t turn out to be forever after all � the adoptive parents change their minds.
That number is only likely to increase as workers feel pressure to cash in on the bounties for adoptive placements handed out under ASFA – bounties which are paid whether the adoption actually lasts or not.
As adoptions level off, the pressure to increase them again � and cash in on the bounties � is likely to have another pernicious effect. It is likely to prompt agencies to target the children most in demand by prospective adoptive parents: healthy infants from poor families. Agencies will rationalize that the parents really are “unfit” even as they continue to turn their child welfare systems into the ultimate middle-class entitlement: Step right up, and take a poor person’s child for your very own.
For an example of such targeting, see The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette series, “When The Bough Breaks,” available online.
Says the head of Los Angeles County’s child welfare system: “What you have now is an incentive to initially remove the child, and an incentive to adopt them out. I think when you put those two together, there is a problem.”
Family preservation not only does not impede adoption, it can expedite the process of termination of parental rights by allowing workers to find out more quickly when a family can’t be preserved � and giving judges the confidence to make a termination decision knowing that the agency really did try to keep the family together.
The argument that there are children trapped in foster care who should be adopted and the argument that there are children trapped in foster care who should be in their own homes are not mutually exclusive. There are children in foster care who should be exiting in both directions.
But the claim that family preservation impedes adoption is nonsense. So is the claim that it was extremely difficult to terminate parental rights before the law was changed. All that is needed is minimal competence on the part of child protective workers.
This was demonstrated by an American Bar Association project in Upstate New York. The ABA’s National Center for Children and the Law taught lawyers and workers how to present a decent case in court. Without offering one iota of additional help to families before moving to terminate, the termination rate soared.
We have always believed there is a place for efforts to increase the number of adoptions as part of child welfare reform. But long as the rush to cash in on adoption bounties causes a further neglect of efforts to keep families in their own homes, it will only make things worse.
Contrary to critics’ claims, most people in child protection work are almost obsessed with a substitute care fantasy, in which children are rescued from their “evil” birth parents and placed in substitute settings, which, in the imagination of the workers, are always ideal. For most workers and most agencies termination of parental rights is the dessert in the child welfare meal, family preservation is the broccoli. ASFA gives workers and agencies all the dessert they want without ensuring that they eat their broccoli first.
Updated January 1, 2006
- Between 1997 and 2000 adoptions of foster children increased from 31,030 to 51,000. They’ve stayed at about 50,000 per year ever since. (1997 to 2003: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Adoptions of Children with Public Child Welfare Agency Involvement By State FY 1995-FY 2003, available online at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/adoptchild03b.htm , 2004: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Trends in Foster Care and Adoption, chart available online at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/trends.htm).
- As of March, 1998, four months after ASFA became law, there were 520,000 children in foster care, (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, AFCARS Report #1, available online at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/dis/afcars/publications/afcars.htm) by September 30, 2004, the most recent data available, that figure was 518,000 (HHS chart, note 1, Supra).
- Martin Guggenheim, “The Effects of Recent Trends to Accelerate the Termination of parental Rights of Children in Foster Care – An Empirical Analysis in Two States,” Family Law Quarterly, p.139.
- Statement of Marcia Robinson Lowry, Executive Director, Children’s Rights, Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the House Committee on Ways and Means, November 06, 2003.
- National Adoption Information Clearinghouse Disruption and Dissolution, http://naic.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/s_disrup.cfm
- Troy Anderson, “Government Bonuses Accelerate Adoptions,” Daily News of Los Angeles, December 8, 2003.
- Debra Ratterman of the ABA’s National Legal Resource Center for Child Advocacy and Protection described the project at the 1991 Annual Conference of the New York State Citizens Coalition for Children.