The following link details a case where a mother was awarded a substantial award against CPS for abuse of power in her case. If this mother won a case against a social services agency, there are many thousands more mothers out there who can do the same thing because the circumstances in all of the cases are similar if not identical. The only difference in most cases is the names of the people involved and the location of the cases.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/Fogarty-Hardwick/social_services/prweb4157254.htm
Monday, September 26, 2011
Mom wins substantial award against CPS abuse of power
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 3:56 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS abuse of power, CPS horror stories, CPS legal kidnapping, cps reform, Family court judges withhold due process, foster-adopt industry
Article describing the coercive nature of CPS
The following link will lead you to an article that explains the coercive nature of CPS. They use coercion and intimidation tactics to get parents to relinquish their parental rights so the child can be adopted out to strangers for profit. The article is authored by Jan Smith on Facebook.
http://washingtonstateextendedfamilies.com/COERSION.htm
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 3:24 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS abuse of power, CPS fraudulent adoptions, CPS horror stories, CPS legal kidnapping, Family court judges withhold due process, foster-adopt industry
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
CPS Live Buzz Interviews Doctor About Psych Evaluations
Is this an accurate depiction of CPS or what?! So very many parents are railroaded by CPS social workers by way of their contracted parrots-- I mean 'treatment providers'.
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 10:49 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, corrupt social workers, CPS abuse of power, CPS legal kidnapping, Family court judges withhold due process, foster-adopt industry
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Railroad: The road traveled most by parents involved with CPS
Nothing can be more heart-wrenching than the loss of a child. For that reason, kidnappings mobilize entire communities to search for the missing and comfort the victimized families. In high-profile cases, such as that of Elizabeth Smart, the entire nation watches. Amber Alert systems notify police and private citizens to watch for the perpetrators. Yet, when CPS is the culprit/criminal, nothing is done to rescue the child from its kidnappers. It is merely assumed that the parent has committed some kind of abuse or neglect toward their children. If that can't be proven or even asserted, CPS and its cohorts just assert what they refer to as "risk of harm" by the parent/caregiver of the child. Then, its Department contracted 'treatment providers' parrot what CPS wants to accomplish. The parent is generally 'diagnosed' with a fake mental or personality disorder. Given the fact that they are allowed to drag the innocent parents into a fake court that provides nearly zero Due Process, the parents are afforded no justice.
The fact of the matter is that child abuse or purposeful neglect is a crime, however, parents are often times not charged with a crime because they are truly innocent of wrongdoing and there is no evidence of such a charge. CPS and family courts get away with bringing a civil case against the parent and drumming up the hanky defense: that the child is at risk of harm due to allegations that he/she has mental health problems severe enough to warrant the permanent termination of parental rights. They bring the civil case because it requires considerably less evidence or reason to separate parents from their children. That is all it takes in order for CPS to accomplish the permanent traumatizing of an entire family... all for the sake of the almighty dollar. (and generally with the assistance of Court Appointed lawyers that do NOT aggressively defend their clients against the abuses committed by CPS and judges.) Most of the 'professionals' within the CPS and family court system make their living by processing children like cattle. Doctors, therapists, social workers, supervisors, lawyers, AAG's, Gaurdian ad litems, visitation note takers, visitation transporters, judges, court commissioners, even foster parents seeking to adopt the children they are paid to care for while the parents desperately try to rescue their children from foster-incarceration. It is the foster-adopt industry. Yes, I said industry, because that is exactly what it is. The list seems never ending. The bureaucratic bully CPS will never cease this horrific and criminal behavior if they are never held accountable for their deeds. Listen people... kidnapping and fraudulent testimony are criminal. Why are state agents and fake court commissioners and judges allowed to commit such crimes and escape punishment? They are criminals. This needs to be remedied. Parents everywhere need to wake up and yell until we are heard. CPS is an unconstitutional financial empire built on separating loving, non abusive families in order to receive government financial bonuses and to sell the children like merchandise to foster-adopt couples desiring to adopt. CPS even has its own state contracted lawyers specifically to represent and facilitate these adoptions directly out of the foster care pool. Thus, it is much less expensive if not free to the perspective adoptive parents to file for the adoptions. Certainly less expensive than applying to a private adoption agency.
Please view the following videos of former Senator Nancy Schaefer regarding the corrupt business of Child Protective Services.
Below are the links to the videos on YouTube...
Part 1 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOx5Q5ekPxk&feature=player_embedded
Part 2 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfWEQEm9GJk&feature=player_embedded
Part 3 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1HnWqy_0yM&feature=player_embedded
Part 4 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg-N9tT6OtY&feature=player_embedded
Feel free to pass along - we need to get the word out!!!!
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 7:59 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS abuse of power, CPS horror stories, CPS legal kidnapping, Family court judges withhold due process, foster care industry
Monday, February 7, 2011
CPS: A FINANCIAL EMPIRE
Sunday Reading: The Money Behind State Adoptions
POLITICS
Adoption Bonuses: The Money Behind the Madness...DSS and affiliates rewarded for breaking up families
By Nev Moore
Massachusetts News
Child "protection" is one of the biggest businesses in the country. We spend $12 billion a year on it.
The money goes to tens of thousands of a) state employees, b) collateral professionals, such as lawyers, court personnel, court investigators, evaluators and guardians, judges, and c) DSS contracted vendors such as counselors, therapists, more "evaluators" , junk psychologists, residential facilities, foster parents, adoptive parents, MSPCC, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, YMCA, etc. This newspaper is not big enough to list all of the people in this state who have a job, draw a paycheck, or make their profits off the kids in DSS custody.
In this article I explain the financial infrastructure that provides the motivation for DSS to take people’s children – and not give them back.
In 1974 Walter Mondale promoted the Child Abuse and Prevention Act which began feeding massive amounts of federal funding to states to set up programs to combat child abuse and neglect. From that came Child "Protective" Services, as we know it today. After the bill passed, Mondale himself expressed concerns that it could be misused. He worried that it could lead states to create a "business" in dealing with children.
Then in 1997 President Clinton passed the "Adoption and Safe Families Act." The public relations campaign promoted it as a way to help abused and neglected children who languished in foster care for years, often being shuffled among dozens of foster homes, never having a real home and family. In a press release from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services dated November 24, 1999, it refers to "President Clinton’s initiative to double by 2002 the number of children in foster care who are adopted or otherwise permanently placed."
It all sounded so heartwarming. We, the American public, are so easily led. We love to buy stereotypes; we just eat them up, no questions asked. But, my mother, bless her heart, taught me from the time I was young to "consider the source." In the stereotype that we’ve been sold about kids in foster care, we picture a forlorn, hollow-eyed child, thin and pale, looking up at us beseechingly through a dirt streaked face. Unconsciously, we pull up old pictures from Life magazine of children in Appalachia in the 1930s. We think of orphans and children abandoned by parents who look like Manson family members. We play a nostalgic movie in our heads of the little fellow shyly walking across an emerald green, manicured lawn to meet Ward and June Cleaver, his new adoptive parents, who lead him into their lovely suburban home. We imagine the little tyke’s eyes growing as big as saucers as the Cleavers show him his very own room, full of toys and sports gear. And we just feel so gosh darn good about ourselves.
Now it’s time to wake up to the reality of the adoption business.
Very few children who are being used to supply the adoption market are hollow-eyed tykes from Appalachia. Very few are crack babies from the projects. [Oh… you thought those were the children they were saving? Think again]. When you are marketing a product you have to provide a desirable product that sells. In the adoption business that would be nice kids with reasonably good genetics who clean up good. An interesting point is that the Cape Cod & Islands office leads the state in terms of processing kids into the system and having them adopted out. More than the inner city areas, the projects, Mission Hill, Brockton, Lynn, etc. Interesting…
With the implementation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act, President Clinton tried to make himself look like a humanitarian who is responsible for saving the abused and neglected children. The drive of this initiative is to offer cash "bonuses" to states for every child they have adopted out of foster care, with the goal of doubling their adoptions by 2002, and sustaining that for each subsequent year. They actually call them "adoption incentive bonuses," to promote the adoption of children.
Where to Find the Children
A whole new industry was put into motion. A sweet marketing scheme that even Bill Gates could envy. Now, if you have a basket of apples, and people start giving you $100 per apple, what are you going to do? Make sure that you have an unlimited supply of apples, right?
The United States Department of Health & Human Services administers Child Protective Services. To accompany the ASF Act, the President requested, by executive memorandum, an initiative entitled Adoption 2002, to be implemented and managed by Health & Human Services. The initiative not only gives the cash adoption bonuses to the states, it also provides cash adoption subsidies to adoptive parents until the children turn eighteen.
Everybody makes money. If anyone really believes that these people are doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, then I’ve got some bad news for you. The fact that this program is run by HHS, ordered from the very top, explains why the citizens who are victims of DSS get no response from their legislators. It explains why no one in the Administration cares about the abuse and fatalities of children in the "care" of DSS, and no one wants to hear about the broken arms, verbal abuse, or rapes. They are just business casualties. It explains why the legislators I’ve talked to for the past three years look at me with pity. Because I’m preaching to the already damned.
The legislators have forgotten who funds their paychecks and who they need to account to, as has the Governor. Because it isn’t the President. It’s us.
How DSS Is Helped
The way that the adoption bonuses work is that each state is given a baseline number of expected adoptions based on population.
For every child that DSS can get adopted, there is a bonus of $4,000 to $6,000.
But that is just the starting figure in a complex mathematical formula in which each bonus is multiplied by the percentage that the state has managed to exceed its baseline adoption number. The states must maintain this increase in each successive year. [Like compound interest.] The bill reads: "$4,000 to $6,000 will be multiplied by the amount (if any) by which the number of foster child adoptions in the State exceeds the base number of foster child adoptions for the State for the fiscal year." In the "technical assistance" section of the bill it states that, "the Secretary [of HHS] may, directly or through grants or contracts, provide technical assistance to assist states and local communities to reach their targets for increased numbers of adoptions for children in foster care." The technical assistance is to support "the goal of encouraging more adoptions out of the foster care system; the development of best practice guidelines for expediting the termination of parental rights; the development of special units and expertise in moving children toward adoption as a permanent goal; models to encourage the fast tracking of children who have not attained 1 year of age into pre-adoptive placements; and the development of programs that place children into pre-adoptive placements without waiting for termination of parental rights."
In the November press release from HHS it continues, " HHS awarded the first ever adoption bonuses to States for increases in the adoption of children from the public foster care system." Some of the other incentives offered are "innovative grants" to reduce barriers to adoption [i.e., parents], more State support for adoptive families, making adoption affordable for families by providing cash subsides and tax credits.
A report from a private think tank, the National Center for Policy Analysis, reads: "The way the federal government reimburses States rewards a growth in the size of the program instead of the effective care of children." Another incentive being promoted is the use of the Internet to make adoption easier. Clinton directed HHS to develop an Internet site to "link children in foster care with adoptive families." So we will be able to window shop for children on a government web site. If you don’t find anything you like there, you can surf on over to the "Adopt Shoppe."
If you prefer to actually be able to kick tires instead of just looking at pictures you could attend one of DSS’s quaint "Adoption Fairs," where live children are put on display and you can walk around and browse. Like a flea market to sell kids. If one of them begs you to take him home you can always say, "Sorry. Just looking." The incentives for government child snatching are so good that I’m surprised we don’t have government agents breaking down people’s doors and just shooting the parents in the heads and grabbing the kids. But then, if you need more apples you don’t chop down your apple trees.
Benefits for Foster Parents
That covers the goodies the State gets. Now let’s have a look at how the Cleavers make out financially after the adoption is finalized.
After the adoption is finalized, the State and federal subsidies continue. The adoptive parents may collect cash subsidies until the child is 18. If the child stays in school, subsidies continue to the age of 22. There are State funded subsidies as well as federal funds through the Title IV-E section of the Social Security Act. The daily rate for State funds is the same as the foster care payments, which range from $410-$486 per month per child. Unless the child can be designated "special needs," which of course, they all can.
According to the NAATRIN State Subsidy profile from DSS, "special needs" may be defined as: "Physical disability, mental disability, emotional disturbance; a significant emotional tie with the foster parents where the child has resided with the foster parents for one or more years and separation would adversely affect the child’s development if not adopted by them." [But their significant emotional ties with their parents, since birth, never enter the equation.]
Additional "special needs" designations are: a child twelve years of age or older; racial or ethnic factors; child having siblings or half-siblings. In their report on the State of the Children, Boston’s Institute for Children says: "In part because the States can garner extra federal funds for special needs children the designation has been broadened so far as to become meaningless. " "Special needs" children may also get an additional Social Security check.
The adoptive parents also receive Medicaid for the child, a clothing allowance and reimbursement for adoption costs such as adoption fees, court and attorney fees, cost of adoption home study, and "reasonable costs of food and lodging for the child and adoptive parents when necessary to complete the adoption process." Under Title XX of the Social Security Act adoptive parents are also entitled to post adoption services "that may be helpful in keeping the family intact," including "daycare, specialized daycare, respite care, in-house support services such as housekeeping, and personal care, counseling, and other child welfare services". [Wow! Everything short of being knighted by the Queen!]
The subsidy profile actually states that it does not include money to remodel the home to accommodate the child. But, as subsidies can be negotiated, remodeling could possibly be accomplished under the "innovative incentives to remove barriers to adoption" section. The subsidy regulations read that "adoption assistance is based solely on the needs of the child without regard to the income of the family." What an interesting government policy when compared to the welfare program that the same child’s mother may have been on before losing her children, and in which she may not own anything, must prove that she has no money in the bank; no boats, real estate, stocks or bonds; and cannot even own a car that is safe to drive worth over $1000. This is all so she can collect $539 per month for herself and two children. The foster parent who gets her children gets $820 plus. We spit on the mother on welfare as a parasite who is bleeding the taxpayers, yet we hold the foster and adoptive parents [who are bleeding ten times as much from the taxpayers] up as saints. The adoptive and foster parents aren’t subjected to psychological evaluations, ink blot tests, MMPI’s, drug & alcohol evaluations, or urine screens as the parents are.
Adoption subsidies may be negotiated on a case by case basis. [Anyone ever tried to "negotiate" with the Welfare Department?] There are many e-mail lists and books published to teach adoptive parents how to negotiate to maximize their subsidies. As one pro writes on an e-mail list: "We receive a subsidy for our kids of $1,900 per month plus another $500 from the State of Florida. We are trying to adopt three more teens and we will get subsidies for them, too. It sure helps out with the bills."
I can’t help but wonder why we don’t give this same level of support to the children’s parents in the first place? According to Cornell University, about 68% of all child protective cases "do not involve child maltreatment. " The largest percentage of CPS/DSS cases are for "deprivation of necessities" due to poverty. So, if the natural parents were given the incredible incentives and services listed above that are provided to the adoptive parents, wouldn’t it stand to reason that the causes for removing children in the first place would be eliminated? How many less children would enter foster care in the first place? The child protective budget would be reduced from $12 billion to around $4 billion. Granted, tens of thousands of social workers, administrators, lawyers, juvenile court personnel, therapists, and foster parents would be out of business, but we would have safe, healthy, intact families, which are the foundation of any society.
That’s just a fantasy, of course. The reality is that maybe we will see Kathleen Crowley’s children on the government home-shopping- for-children web site and some one out there can buy them.
Posted by State Senator Pam Roach
This blogs author Denise Dopkins says "Thank you Mrs. Roach for providing the above article. How abundantly truthful it really is! The Foster Adopt industry continues to thrive due to the fact that DCFS/CPS continues to be allowed to destroy innocent loving families simply in order to receive funding. The funding that pays foster parents and adoptive parents alike. The funding also continues to go to CPS contracted providers (therapists, doctors, visitation monitors, lawyers, commissioners, judges, social workers and the list goes on and on."
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 5:24 PM 1 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS abuse of power, CPS horror stories, cps reform, Family court judges withhold due process, foster care industry, untruthful state agents
Friday, January 7, 2011
Just another child protection racket (scheme)
The following article was authored by Pam Roach and can be located on her own blog as well. Just click on her name above and it will take you to her blog. Lots of wonderful and eye opening information there too.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
CPS: Escapes Budget Cuts
Citing the need to protect children, Gov. Gregoire recently told the press that CPS would not take budget cuts. I am the first to agree that not enough is being done to protect children. Just read the headlines to see how many cases are gone neglected by the department. (CPS) But, on the other end of the spectrum, children are being taken without cause. No budget cuts means the system of taking children for adoption will continue, unabated, during the budget shortage. Here is a grandma comment just posted. This story is one repeated often.
Loving Grandma Writes:
"The job of the CPS worker is to build the most damning report she can to justify the removal of the children. I have read the report on my son and his wife, who were not allowed to bring their newborn home from the hospital because of the alleged possibility of neglect. The descriptions in the CPS report bear only a vague resemblance to my real-life son and daughter-in-law. The report paints such a misleading picture of the situation that it would be no help to Senator Roach or to anyone who wanted to know the true story."
Senator Pam Roach states the following:
"Today in Olympia I received two calls from CPS involved families. All were pleading for help from a government that has lied to take children. I am sure there are some cases where the department is correct in their actions....I wonder if Secretary Denise Revels Robinson has gotten the "taking rate" down like she said she would."
"Session starts Janurary 10th. I will be ready."
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 6:45 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS incompetency, CPS legal kidnapping, Family court judges withhold due process, foster care industry, untruthful state agents
Monday, November 29, 2010
Methodology of CPS social workers
Though done in a rather sarcastic tone...this video very accurately portrays the way CPS operates when 'investigating' alleged reports of abuse or neglect of children. It happened in precisely the same manner to this blog's author Denise Dopkins. Spokane social worker Melly Keith jumped me in the hospital room only 12 hours after I gave cesarean birth to my son and while I was still very affected by the medicines the doctor administered during and following the birth. (The doctor and nurses will claim that I was not still affected by the medication from the cesarean birth, however, I know better. After all-- I was the one taking the medicines and I know how I felt.) There was also the issue of the post birth pain medicines that made me dileriously sleepy. I was in no condition to be so suddenly confronted with this emotional and psychological attack, and still-- the social worker could not stand to wait another day for me to better recover in the hospital. I was in the hospital for another two days after Ms. Keith left the room on March 15, 2005.
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 12:53 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, corrupt social workers, CPS abuse of power, Family court judges withhold due process, legal kidnapping
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Just another cover up effort by DSHS/DCFS/CPS
A Must Read: Click on the following highlighted link
http://www.washingtonstatewire.com/home/5270-how_to_compound_the_problems_within_dshs_privatize_children_s_services.htm
Posted by State Senator Pam Roach at 10:46 AM 0 comments
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 7:18 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS abuse of power, CPS legal kidnapping, Family court judges withhold due process, Lying social workers, Washington State DCFS corruption
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
How to deal with CPS invasion of your family
November 8, 2010
Authored by Linda Martin
CPS Problems? Here Are 7 Ways to Fight CPS…
If you’re appalled by the actions of CPS, here are some ideas for correcting the injustices:
1. Write a letter to each and every member of your county board of supervisors detailing actions that show illegal activities or injustice on the part of local caseworkers. Suggest that they cut the CPS budget if caseworkers are taking children who shouldn’t be separated from their parents. Suggest that these illegal and unjust activities could cause the county to have to deal with expensive lawsuits. Follow this up by regularly attending meetings of the county board of supervisors and by getting up to share during community participation time; use your three minutes to tell people what’s going on.
2. Write a letter to your state legislators (don’t bother with the federal legislators – they’re usually worthless and corrupt unless they’re Ron Paul or someone exactly like him.) Go for the state level legislators. Tell them that child welfare is mismanaged in your county. Then follow up by going to the capitol to try to have a face to face encounter with these legislators. Take with you a gift-offering of a folder you’ve prepared with lots of information about how corrupt and evil CPS is. Tell them you support the State Sovereignty Movement and that federal child welfare laws are a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Tenth Amendment.
3. Study your state’s social services regulations. You should be able to find a copy at your local county law library. Ask the librarian there for help finding them. If you have an open CPS case take notes on every regulation that’s being violated by your caseworker. Get photocopies of the regulations that are violated. Next, review your court order to see what orders may be violated by the caseworker. If you find discrepancies you can file for a state administrative hearing.
4. Does your county have a Grand Jury? If so, write them a letter, not about your personal case so much as about the problems of CPS injustice in general. Ask them to investigate CPS in your county.
5. If you haven’t already, write a Legal Declaration to clarify each point of malfeasance by caseworkers and others involved in your case. As when writing any letter or legal document, NEVER include any self-incriminating type of statement. Give this to your attorney. If he won’t see you in person, mail it to him and request (1) a response, and (2) that it be presented to the judge for the next hearing.
6. If your caseworker’s report to the court contains inaccurate statements, misrepresentations, or lies, create a legal document called “Objections and Corrections to the Report of the Social Worker” and as with the Legal Declaration, send it to your lawyer to be presented to the court.
Links to legal documents samples are here: Legal Document and Information Library.
7. If your caseworker is violating your court order or state social service regulations, treating you disrespectfully, or in any other way doing something you believe is wrong, write a letter to the county personnel department with a detailed complaint about the person. This will probably keep the caseworker from ever getting a promotion in that county. He or she might also get demoted, or fired.
I hope you find some solutions that will work for you.
cps child protective services social workers
Filed under: http://www.fightcps.com/
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 9:34 AM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS abuse of power, CPS legal kidnapping, Family court judges withhold due process, untruthful state agents
Thursday, November 11, 2010
CPS corruption
The Corrupt Business of Child Protective Services
By Nancy Schaefer
Georgia State Senate, 50th District
revised September 25, 2008
My introduction into Child Protective Service cases was due to a grandmother in an adjoining state who called me with her tragic story. Her two granddaughters had been taken from her daughter who lived in my district. Her daughter was told wrongly that if she wanted to see her children again she should sign a paper and give up her children. Frightened and young, the daughter did. I have since discovered that parents are often threatened into cooperation of permanent separation of their children.
The children were taken to another county and placed in foster care. The foster parents were told wrongly that they could adopt the children. The grandmother then jumped through every hoop known to man in order to get her granddaughters. When the case finally came to court it was made evident by one of the foster parent’s children that the foster parents had, at any given time, 18 foster children and that the foster mother had an inappropriate relationship with a caseworker. In the courtroom, the juvenile judge acted as though she was shocked and said the two girls would be removed quickly. They were not removed. Finally, after much pressure being applied to the Department of Family and Children Services of Georgia (DFCS), the children were driven to South Georgia to meet their grandmother who gladly drove to meet them.
After being with their grandmother two or three days, the judge, quite out of the blue, wrote up a new order to send the girls to their father, who previously had no interest in the case and who lived on the West Coast. The father was in “adult entertainment”. His girlfriend worked as an “escort” and his brother, who also worked in the business, had a sexual charge brought against him.
Within a couple of days the father was knocking on the grandmother’s door and took the girls kicking and screaming to California.
The father developed an unusual relationship with the former foster parents and soon moved to the southeast. The foster parents began driving to the father’s residence and picking up the little girls for visits. The oldest child had told her mother and grandmother on two different occasions that the foster father molested her.
To this day after five years, this loving, caring blood relative grandmother does not even have visitation privileges with the children. The little girls are, in my opinion, permanently traumatized and the young mother of the girls was so traumatized with shock when the girls were first removed from her that she has never completely recovered. The mother has rights but the father still has custody of the children.
Throughout this case and through the process of dealing with multiple other mismanaged cases of the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS), I have worked with other desperate parents across the state of Georgia and in many other States because their children were taken for no cause and they have no one with whom to turn. I have witnessed ruthless behavior from many caseworkers, social workers, investigators, lawyers, judges, therapists, and others such as those who “pick up” the children. I have been stunned by what I have seen and heard from victims all across this land.
In this report, I have focused mainly on the Georgia Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS). However, I believe Child Protective Services nationwide has become corrupt and that the entire system is broken beyond repair. I am convinced parents and families should be warned of the dangers.
The Department of Child Protective Services, known as the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS) in Georgia and other titles in other states, has become a “protected empire” built on taking children and separating families. This is not to say that there are not those children who do need to be removed from wretched situations and need protection.
However, this report is concerned with the children and parents caught up in “legal kidnapping,” ineffective policies, and an agency that on certain occasions would not remove a child (or children) when the child was enduring torment and abuse.
In one county in my District, I arranged a meeting for thirty-seven families to speak freely and without fear. These poor parents and grandparents spoke of their painful, heart wrenching encounters with DFCS. Their suffering was overwhelming. They wept and cried. Some did not know where their children were and had not seen them in years. I had witnessed the “Gestapo” at work and I witnessed the deceitful conditions under which children were taken in the middle of the night, out of hospitals, off of school buses, and out of homes. In one county a private drug testing business was operating within the agency’s department that required many, many drug tests from parents and individuals for profit. It has already made over $100,000.
Due to being exposed, several employees in this particular office were fired. However, they have now been rehired either in neighboring counties or in the same county again. According to the calls I am now receiving, the conditions in that county are returning to the same practices that they had before the light was shown on their evil deeds.
Having worked with probably 300 cases statewide, and now hundreds and hundreds across this nation and in nearly every state, I am convinced there is no responsibility and no accountability in Child Protective Services system.
I have come to the conclusion:
· 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 Manual” 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 oftentimes 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.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Call for an independent audit of all State Child Protective Services (CPS) and for a Federal Congressional hearing on Child Protective Services nationwide.
2. Activate immediate change. Every day that passes means more families and children are subject to being held hostage and their lives destroyed.
3. Abolish the Federal and State financial incentives that have turned Child Protective Services into a business that separate families for money.
4. Grant to parents their rights verbally and in writing.
5. Mandate a search for family members to be given the opportunity to adopt their own relatives if children need to be removed permanently.
6. Mandate a jury trial where every piece of evidence is presented before permanently removing a child from his or her parents. Open family court. Remove the secrecy. Allow the press and family members access. Give parents the opportunity in court to speak and be a part of their children’s future.
7. Require a warrant or a positive emergency circumstance before removing children from their parents. (Judge Arthur G. Christean, Utah Bar Journal, January, 1997 reported that “except in emergency circumstances, including the need for immediate medical care, require warrants upon affidavits of probable cause before entry upon private property is permitted for the forcible removal of children from their parents.”)
8. Uphold the laws when someone fabricates or presents false evidence. If a parent alleges fraud, hold a hearing with the right to discovery of all evidence made available to parents.
FINAL REMARKS
On my desk are scores of cases of exhausted families and terrified children. It has been beyond me to turn my back on these suffering, crying, and beaten down individuals. We are mistreating the most innocent. Child Protective Services have become an adult centered business to the detriment of children. No longer is judgment based on what the child needs or who the child wants to be or with whom, or what is really best for the whole family; it is some adult or bureaucrat who makes the decisions, based often on just hearsay, without ever consulting a family member, or just what is convenient, profitable, or less troublesome for the social workers.
I have witnessed such injustice and harm brought to so many families that I am not sure if I even believe reform of the system is possible! The system cannot be trusted. It does not serve the people. It obliterates families and children simply because it has the power to do so.
Children deserve better. Families deserve better. It’s time to pull back the curtain and set our children and families free.
“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute.
Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and the needy” Proverbs 31:8-9
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 12:16 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, Corrupt family court judges, corrupt social workers, CPS abuse of power, Family court judges withhold due process, legal kidnapping
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Prosecute CPS and CASA agents for perjury!
Lies Should Be Prosecuted
Posted by State Senator Pam Roach
This whole thing reminds me of an Ibsen novel.
Here is a letter from a family that I have been following. PRR Readers are like all true Americans...we want our government telling the truth in court and we think people in agencies (CPS or CASAs) who lie in court should lose their jobs and be punished through perjury laws. Right now, in CPS, agents are not being held accountable and, therefore, they continue the lying. I have been told by the highest levels at DSHS that people who lie will not be tolerated. I took that to mean that they would be held accountable. I have yet to see that that has been the case. The lies continue.
Dear Senator,
I get so frustrated reading on your blog because more
horrible things are being brought to the forefront about cps. It makes my
husband and I want so much more for things to change with cps. I am hoping for some help to try for a bill to stop the perjury, which I am seeing mentioned more and more. With us and others that was our main problem. No matter what the state said in court, it was believed without any facts having been
presented. If they had to present any evidence of anything said in our case, Ariel
would never have been taken in the first place. I am so grateful she is coming
home but other families will suffer if it continues to be allowed. We had a
lot of people backing us on our case and because of that, no matter how
many times we felt like giving up someone was always there to remind us what we were fighting for. Please let me know if you can help us to become a part
of stopping the evil system tearing the families apart. I can still picture
the day Ariel was taken and that caseworker walking away with her and smiling
an evil smile at us. I think rather than going after the state in general,
it would be a good thing to be able to hold individuals accountable for the
emotional abuse they themselves are causing for these tiny children.
Posted by State Senator Pam Roach at 3:25 AM
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 4:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS abuse of power, CPS horror stories, CPS incompetency, Family court judges withhold due process, legal kidnapping, Lying social workers
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Senator Nancy Schaefer's death
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Child Exploitation (Nancy Shaefer) Found Killed in Home
Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Posts: 1118 Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 8:28 am Post subject: Child Exploitation Investigator Found Killed in Home
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/child_exploitation_investigato.html
Child Exploitation Investigator Found Killed in Home
By Victor Thorn
Child trafficking, pedophile rings, sexual exploitation, teenage pornography and even organ harvesting: These types of crimes make Washington politicians recoil in horror. But when these terrible acts involve some of their own, it also drives the elites to silence those who attempt to expose their dirty deeds.
Nancy Schaefer served two terms as a Georgia state senator, in addition to being a highly respected family rights advocate, founder of the Eagle Forum and Sunday school teacher. Mrs. Schaefer spoke out against abortion and sought legislation to display the Ten Commandments in public buildings.
On March 26, a sleeping Mrs. Schaefer was found shot to death from behind in her bed, along with her husband, who also perished after receiving a gunshot wound to the chest.
Local authorities immediately ruled it a “murder-suicide” instigated by her husband of 52 years, but there is much more to the story than law enforcement is telling. Initially, Georgia’s Bureau of Investigation claimed the couple formed a death pact due to poor health and financial woes.
However, family members fervently disagreed with these attempts to create a motive by floating fabricated stories. Neither of the deceased had a terminal illness, their bank accounts were sound, and, as committed Christians, they opposed suicide.
During an April 22 interview with this writer, Ohio radio talk show host Paul Drockton presented a shocking alternative to the official version.
“I heard from a couple of different sources that Mrs. Schaefer was working on a documentary, and intended to go public by exposing a high-level pedophilia ring,” said Drockton.
When asked if people would be familiar with the politicians named, Drockton replied in the affirmative, although he wouldn’t divulge their identities. This writer assumed they were nationally known figures.
Drockton added, “Mrs. Schaefer was extremely nervous about being assassinated. On a recent trip to Washington, she booked three rooms at her hotel—one on each side of her own, for security purposes. Mrs. Schaefer also started using disposable cell phones because she felt her lines were being tapped.”
In hindsight, these concerns most certainly appear justified. Over the past few years, Mrs. Schaefer engaged in a high-profile campaign against Georgia’s Child Protective Services (CPS). During an April 14, 2009, presentation, Mrs. Schaefer called CPS “a protected empire built on taking children and separating families. It is one of the most evil and corrupt branches of government in America.”
She also accused them of “legally kidnapping” the children of poor families who couldn’t afford attorneys in order to fill bureaucratic quotas under Bill Clinton’s Adoption and Safe Families Act.
Mrs. Schaefer provided the grisly details. “Cash bonuses are paid to the state for every child that is adopted out of foster care. Oftentimes, the amount is $4,000 to $6,000, with an extra $2,000 for special-needs children.”
Mrs. Schaefer continued: “To make more money, they need more merchandise; and children equal merchandise. They also need a large selection of children for potential adoptions so that buyers have more to choose from.”
CPS therefore acts as a facilitator, using the court system to snatch children from their parents, then feeding them into foster care for eventual adoption. Mrs. Schaefer cited numerous dangers to this corrupt arrangement. A 1998 study by the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect stated that six times more youths die in foster care than in the general public. They are also more prone to sexual molestation by pedophiles in the foster care system. Many children simply disappear.
Considering the monetary incentives surrounding a business of trafficking in children by converting them into cash, did CPS open the floodgates to even more widespread wrong doing—one that resembled the notorious “Franklin Affair”?
Did powerful politicians operating a high-level child pedophilia ring clean house to prevent Mrs. Schaefer’s film from seeing the light of day?
Online commentator Steven Erickson offered this response on April 2, noting that Mrs. Schaefer attended a special hearing in the Netherlands.
“Nancy was recently the victim of murder,” wrote Erickson. “Her husband is said to have been the killer in a murder-suicide. Some may think it is a murder-for-hire, paid for by police or insiders in Georgia government allegedly involved in official kidnapping for federal tax dollars. Are children being trafficked for white slavery, sex exploitation, for bogus adoption, and to give political insiders six-figure salaries paid for with taxes? Are the police in some states involved in drug dealing, prostitution, racketeering, obstruction of justice, murder, rape, extortion and other crimes? Are American courts a scam? Nancy was pretty high profile, making serious allegations, and she ends up dead. Do the math.”
The broader question remains: Did corruption end at the Georgia state level, or were Mrs. Schaefer’s sights set even higher?
During her Netherlands World Congress of Families speech last year, Mrs. Schaefer specifically described U.S. government involvement in human trafficking.
Considering the huge amounts of bloodstained dollars at stake, not to mention the lengthy prison sentences awaiting each guilty party, it’s clear she may have been a prime target for retaliation.
Washington politicians have long concealed a cesspool of child “call boys.” A few names that come to mind include Paul Bonacci, who was kidnapped and sold as a sex slave; Barney Frank’s homosexual lover, who operated a prostitution service, Larry King of the Franklin Cover-Up; and Jeff Gannon, a planted White House “reporter” who operated a homosexual escort service. Then, of course, The Washington Times ran the following headline on June 29, 1989: “Homosexual Prostitution Inquiry Ensnares VIPs with Reagan, Bush.”
Former Nebraska state patrolman Gary Caradori, during an investigation of the Franklin Cover-Up case, was murdered on June 11, 1990, after having his airplane sabotaged. Mrs. Schaefer seems to have suffered the same fate, except her cowardly killers used a bullet in her back to ensure her silence.
http://www.ajc.com/news/what-really-took-2-430563.html
What really took 2 lives in Schaefer case? The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
8:32 a.m. Sunday, April 4, 2010
By Mark Davis
mrdavis@ajc.com
TOCCOA — It is a mystery that may never get a satisfactory answer.
It will be discussed a while longer at kitchen tables, in chat rooms and other places where people ask questions. The names of the dead will resurface when cops discuss cases that stick with them. The funeral programs will be tucked away for someone else to find.
And when they turn up, so will the old questions. What happened? Why did he kill his wife of 52 years? What did the notes say?
Here’s what police say:
On March 26, Bruce Schaefer, 74, a longtime Atlanta stockbroker who’d retired to his boyhood mountain haunts, shot his sleeping wife, Nancy Schaefer, 73, a former state senator and a conservative political activist. Then he turned the .38-caliber handgun on himself.
The Schaefers were dead when their daughter found them in the bedroom of their Habersham County home. Investigators discovered a suicide note, as well as notes to each of the couple’s five children.
The Georgia Bureau of Investigation, which is investigating the case, is emphatic.
“This is as clear-cut a case of murder-suicide as you’ll see,” said spokesman John Bankhead. The state agency will close out its investigation after doing a few more interviews and running some toxicology tests — standard procedure in death cases, said Bankhead.
So case closed — or nearly.
And yet, people talk. They talk about a twosome that was rarely apart, about a woman who achieved renown for her unapologetic stands against abortion and overzealous child protective services. They talk about her husband, who tried, but never managed, to ignore his wife’s critics as effectively as she.
People talk, and they wonder.
A conservative voice
Nancy Schaefer was a multitasker before the term was coined. Married and living in Buckhead, she was busy with five children. But activism tugged.
In 1985, she organized an Atlanta rally for constitutional liberties. A year later, she created the nonprofit Family Concerns Inc., a foundation that champions display of the Ten Commandments, fights abortion and opposes what it considers overly aggressive child-custody agencies.
In 1988, she worked for Jack Kemp’s failed bid for the GOP presidential nomination. In subsequent years, she ran, unsuccessfully, for mayor of Atlanta and lieutenant governor and governor of Georgia.
Those campaigns raised her profile as a conservative capable of an elegant reply. In 2002, she was a regular in “Woman to Woman,” a weekly feature representing views from the left and right in the Sunday Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Bruce retired in 1996. Like so many other well-heeled Atlantans, he and his wife left Georgia’s capital for the mountains. There, her political tenacity paid off.
In 2004, Nancy Schaefer won the first of two elections to the state Senate. In 2008, she lost to Jim Butterworth, who holds that seat now. In between, she remained active in other causes. She represented the Southern Baptist Convention at United Nations conferences. She started more nonprofit organizations and became a trustee at Toccoa Falls College. She sang in the choir at the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Toccoa. She made devoted friends, and some bitter enemies.
Bruce? He was her amiable shadow. Photos depict a tall man with an athlete’s build — he played football at Clemson, then served in the Army — with a smile nearly as big as he.
“You hardly ever saw one without the other,” said Robert “Buster” Smith, whom Bruce often visited when Nancy came to town from their Clarkesville home to get her hair done.
A Toccoa native, Smith saw Bruce Schaefer on the last Tuesday of his life when he stopped by Smith’s furniture store. “He seemed like his old self,” said Smith. “I have a hard time believing it happened like it happened.”
‘Life happened’
The Schaefers lived in The Orchard, a gated country club community about 15 miles northwest of Toccoa in Habersham County. It’s located off a twisty road where ancient wooden barns silver in the sun.
Their home served as headquarters for some of Nancy’s activities. There she wrote frequent online articles on topics as diverse as the Obama administration’s health care program to the possible biblical significance of solar eclipses. Her last, decrying implanting microchips in humans, appeared Feb. 17.
Cleaning out the house won’t be easy for the Schaefers’ children, said Habersham Sheriff Joey Terrell, whose officers were first on the scene after the shootings. “There’s a house that’s full of stuff to take care of,” he said.
Full of memories, too.
“They were a part of life,” said Terrell, “and life happened to them.”
Mourners, memories
Ushers counted more than 800 people at the couple’s funeral service Wednesday afternoon. Mourners filled Ebenezer Baptist’s sanctuary, two choir rooms and an adjacent building. Thirty state senators came on a chartered bus from Atlanta.
They watched a slide show of family photos that highlighted happy times: Bruce in his Army uniform; Bruce and Nancy swirling across a dance floor; children; grandchildren. The images bestowed on her a calm dignity that comes from decades of living; he got a little wider, his hair a little whiter, but the smile remained the same.
The Rev. Andy Childs urged people to focus on how the Schaefers lived, not how they died.
“The tragedy of the last several days ... does not erase the testimony of their lives,” he said.
Charlie Wysong, a family friend, drove three hours from Chattanooga to attend the 70-minute service. “When I heard about it, I couldn’t believe it at first,” he said. “I said, ‘How out of character.’”
The news also brought the business of state lawmaking to a temporary stop.
“It’s just a terrible tragedy,” said Rep. Rick Austin, a Republican from Demorest. “I don’t think anybody will ever really understand what happened.”
Not what it seems?
That doesn’t stop people from trying. Rev. Childs, speaking during the funeral service, mentioned Bruce taking medication. Others talk about possible financial misfortune.
Conspiracy-mongers have been busy, too. The Schaefers, they suggest, paid the price for their conservative convictions and were silenced by shadowy forces. Whoever shot Nancy, they maintain, also shot Bruce.
Web sites buzz with comments about a reputed cover-up. A Facebook page, “We Demand An Extensive Investigation On The Death of Senator Nancy Schaefer,” had 988 fans Thursday afternoon. Friday morning, it had 1,116.
The people who may have the best idea of what happened, the couple’s children, are remaining quiet. Police won’t say much, either.
So people wonder, and talk. Mysteries with no satisfactory answers, like empty rooms, attract odd things.
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 7:04 PM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS abuse of power, CPS horror stories, Family court judges withhold due process, legal kidnapping, untruthful state agents
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
CPS defined
(From Dictionary.com)
OPPRESSIVE
op·pres·sive /əˈprɛsɪv/ Show Spelled
[uh-pres-iv] Show IPA
–adjective
1. burdensome, unjustly harsh, or tyrannical: an oppressive king; oppressive laws.
2. causing discomfort by being excessive, intense, elaborate, etc.: oppressive heat.
3. distressing or grievous: oppressive sorrows.
Opposites of oppressive: cool, mild, temperate
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(From Yourdictionary.com)
Definition of COERCE
COERCE (coercive)
co·erce vt \kō-ˈərs\
co·ercedco·erc·ing
1: to restrain or dominate by force
2: to compel to an act or choice
3: to achieve by force or threat
— co·erc·ible\-ˈər-sə-bəl\ adjective
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TERRORIZE
ter·ror·ize (ter′ər īz′)
transitive verb terrorized -·ized′, terrorizing -·iz′·ing
1.to fill with terror; terrify
2.to coerce, make submit, etc. by filling with terror, as by the use or threat of violence
Related Forms:
•terrorization ter′·rori·za′·tion noun
Opposites of Terrorize: assuage, calm, help, please, encourage, hearten, inspirit
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(From Yourdictionary.com)
TYRANNICAL
ty·ran·ni·cal (tə ran′i kəl, ti-, tī-)
adjective
1.of or suited to a tyrant; arbitrary; despotic
2.harsh, cruel, unjust, oppressive, etc.
Origin: L tyrannicus < Gr tyrannikos
Also tyrannic ty·ran′·nic
Related Forms:
•tyrannically ty·ran′·ni·cally adverb
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(From Yourdictionary.com)
ABUSE (abusive)
transitive verb abused abused′, abusing abus′·ing
1.to use wrongly; misuse: to abuse a privilege
2.a.to hurt by treating badly; mistreat
b.to inflict physical, sexual, or psychological harm upon
3.to use insulting, coarse, or bad language about or to; revile
Origin: ME abusen < OFr abuser < L abusus, pp. of abuti, misuse < ab-, away, from + uti, to use
noun
1.wrong, bad, or excessive use
2.mistreatment, esp. by the infliction of physical, sexual, or psychological harm; injury
3.a bad, unjust, or corrupt custom or practice
4.insulting or coarse language
5.Obsolete deception
Abuse antonyms: aid, help, preservation, respect
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRAUD (fraudulent)
World English Dictionary
fraud (frɔːd)
— n
1. deliberate deception, trickery, or cheating intended to gain an advantage
2. an act or instance of such deception
3. something false or spurious: his explanation was a fraud
4. informal a person who acts in a false or deceitful way
[C14: from Old French fraude , from Latin fraus deception]
Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition
2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins
Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009
Cite This Source
Word Origin; History
fraud
"criminal deception," mid-14c., from O.Fr. fraude , from L. fraudem (nom. fraus ) "deceit, injury." The noun meaning "impostor, humbug" is attested from 1850. Pious fraud "deception practiced for the sake of what is deemed a good purpose" is from 1560s.
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper
Cite This Source
Legal Dictionary
Main Entry: fraud
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin fraud - fraus
1 a : any act, expression, omission, or concealment calculated to deceive another to his or her disadvantage; specifically : a misrepresentation or concealment with reference to some fact material to a transaction that is made with knowledge of its falsity or in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity and with the intent to deceive another and that is reasonably relied on by the other who is injured thereby b : the affirmative defense of having acted in response to a fraud
2 : the crime or tort of committing fraud fraud > —see also MISREPRESENTATION
NOTE: A tort action based on fraud is also referred to as an action of deceit.
actual fraud
fraud committed with the actual intent to deceive and thereby injure another called also fraud in fact —compare CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD in this entry
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISHONEST
dis·hon·est (ds-nst)
adj.
1. Disposed to lie, cheat, defraud, or deceive.
2. Resulting from or marked by a lack of honesty.
[Middle English dishoneste, dishonorable, from Old French deshoneste, probably from Medieval Latin *dishonestus : Latin dis-, dis- + Latin honestus, honorable; see honest.]
dis·honest·ly adv.
Synonyms: dishonest, lying, untruthful, deceitful, mendacious
These adjectives mean lacking honesty or truthfulness. Dishonest is the least specific: a dishonest business executive.
Lying conveys a blunt accusation of untruth: a lying witness giving inconsistent testimony.
Untruthful is a softer term and suggests lack of veracity and divergence from fact: made an untruthful statement.
Deceitful implies misleading by falsehood or by concealment of the truth: deceitful advertising.
Mendacious is more formal than lying, and suggests a chronic inclination toward untruth: a mendacious and troublesome employee.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(From Dictionary.com)
KIDNAPPERS
kid·nap /ˈkɪdnæp/ Show Spelled
[kid-nap] Show IPA
–verb (used with object), -napped or -naped, -nap·ping or -nap·ing.
to steal, carry off, or abduct by force or fraud, esp. for use as a hostage or to extract ransom.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(From Dictionary.com)
CRUEL
/ˈkruəl/ Show Spelled
[kroo-uhl] Show IPA
–adjective, -er, -est.
1. willfully or knowingly causing pain or distress to others.
2. enjoying the pain or distress of others: the cruel spectators of the gladiatorial contests.
3. causing or marked by great pain or distress: a cruel remark; a cruel affliction.
4. rigid; stern; strict; unrelentingly severe.
Origin:
1175–1225; ME < AF, OF < L crūdēlis, equiv. to crūd ( us ) ( see crude) + -ēlis adj. suffix
—Related forms
cru·el·ly, adverb
cru·el·ness, noun
un·cru·el, adjective
un·cru·el·ly, adverb
un·cru·el·ness, noun
—Synonyms
1. bloodthirsty, ferocious, merciless, relentless. Cruel, pitiless, ruthless, brutal, savage imply readiness to cause pain to others. Cruel implies willingness to cause pain, and indifference to suffering: a cruel stepfather. Pitiless adds the idea of refusal to show compassion: pitiless to captives. Ruthless implies cruelty and unscrupulousness, letting nothing stand in one's way: ruthless greed. Brutal implies cruelty that takes the form of physical violence: a brutal master. Savage suggests fierceness and brutality: savage battles.
Antonym: Kind or kindness
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(From Yourdictionary.com)
DESTROY (destructive)
de·stroy (di stro̵i′)
transitive verb
1.to tear down; demolish
2.to break up or spoil completely; ruin
3.to bring to total defeat; crush
4.to put an end to; do away with
5.to kill
6.to neutralize the effect of
7.to make useless
Origin: ME destroien < OFr destruire < L destruere < de-, down + struere, to build: see structure
Antonyms: Build, conserve, sustain
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 9:16 AM 0 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS abuse of power, CPS horror stories, CPS legal kidnapping, Family court judges withhold due process
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Denise Dopkins' legal battle with her son's adoptive parents
LEGALITIES RE MY SON’S ADOPTIVE PARENTS DEMANDS
by Denise Dopkins on Saturday, October 23, 2010 at 2:15pm
I received a letter from my son's adoptive parents via their attorney. Meegan and James Ware are threatening me with legal action if I do not comply with their demands. My son's natural father receives letters and photos from the adoptive parents as per an Open Adoption Agreement they entered into. I refused to write my son off to the state, so I am not offered any visits, photos or letters. However, I receive copies of photos and letters from Micah's natural father. The adoptive parents are demanding that I remove said photos from any website I am connected with. They are also demanding that I stop using my son's legal name in any of my Internet writings. They inform me that if I do not comply with their demands, they will seek a court's order to force me to comply. They also say they will seek a restraining order against me for 'invasion of privacy'. The fact of the matter is-- I have not invaded anyone's privacy. I learned the last name of the adoptive family because it was not deleted from the DSHS social file when it was given to me. I have merely granted my son the common decency of referring to him by his legal name. I also claim him as my own flesh and blood because I am his natural mother and nobody can change that fact. Even the law states that it is the right of all children to know who their natural parents are. It occurs to me that the adoptive parents wish to hide my identity from my son. (Birth name Micah Barrett-- adopted name Austin Ware.) Oddly enough, though... the adoptive parents clearly informed the natural father that they would not hide from Micah the fact that he is adopted. Hmmm.
I have never approached, called or emailed the adoptive family. I have not attempted any form of contact with them or my son. Furthermore, Micah is only 5 years of age, so likely does not see any of the Internet sites that I am connected with.
I must point out the fact that the adoptive parents, Meegan and James Ware began coaching Micah to refer to himself as Austin prior to the initiation of the adoption procedure. I know this to be a fact because during my last visit with Micah, he informed me in no uncertain terms that "No, I not Micah... I Austin!" There was about two weeks that passed between the end of the termination trial and my last visit with my son. Therefore, the coaching may have started directly after my rights were terminated, however, I believe it began the very day my trial started. It occurs to me that CPS authorized the changing of my son's name prior to the initiation of the adoption... and likely at least 6 weeks prior to my last visit with him. (At the start of my "trial" and prior to the termination of my parental rights.) The very fact that the adoptive parents would not wait until after my last visit with Micah shows (a) unbelievable cruelty and (b) they participated in illegal activity. How hurtful it was to see my son for the last time and have him inform me that his name was not the name I gave him at birth. It caught me completely off gaurd-- which I suspect was part of the adoptive parents agenda. It was very alarming to me, however, I let it slide for the remainder of the visit, so as not to upset Micah.
Following is the email correspondene between the adoptive parent's attorney and me. Note the fact that Mr. Iverson changed his mind about speaking or corresponding with me only when he received my list of questions. I have to wonder if the adoptive mother's threats are even legally enforceable.
Tue, June 8, 2010 3:02:09 PM Letter from Wares From: Denise Dopkins
Dear Mr. Iverson,
I am contacting you to make a request regarding the letter I received from Meegan Ware. Is there any chance you could send me a copy of that letter via email attachment? I'd sure appreciate it if you could do that for me. Please let me know one way or the other whether or not you can fulfill this request.
Thank you in advance,Denise Dopkins
dd4066@yahoo.com
Thu, June 10, 2010 1:16:28 PM Letter From: Mark R. Iverson
Ms. Dopkins:
You sent an email to Mr. Iverson regarding a letter you received from Meegan Ware. That letter was not sent through this office and therefore we do not have a copy of it.
Sincerely,
LeAnn F. BlairLegal Assistant to:
Mark R. Iverson, P.S.921 West Broadway, Suite 301Spokane, WA 99201
1-509-462-3678 1-509-462-3700 (Fax)
http://www.adoptionwa.com/
Fri, June 11, 2010 2:55:09 PM Re: Letter From: Denise Dopkins
Dear Ms. Blair, Thank you for your response to my email. I am though confused at your answer-- given that Mr. Iverson is the adoption attorney for the Wares and that Mrs. Ware instructed me to contact Mr. Iverson with any questions regarding the letter in question. Also, the letter was sent from Mr. Iverson's law office address, so I assumed he was aware of its content. Should I assume that Mr. Iverson is not open to communications with me regarding Mrs. Ware's letter? Please respond at your soonest convenience and I thank you in advance. Sincerely,Denise Dopkins dd4066@yahoo.com
Sat, June 12, 2010 6:13:42 AM Re: Letter From: Mark R. Iverson
I am out of the office until early July. I will speak with you then. You do not have an open adoption agreement with the adoptive parents. They will not be sending you any communication or pictures.
Mark Iverson
Sat, June 12, 2010 5:13:47 PM Re: Letter From: Denise Dopkins
Dear Mr. Iverson, Thank you for your email. Just to clarify-- regarding your comment, I have always been with the understanding that the adoptive parents do not communicate with me or send me photos. This has never been a misunderstanding on my part... so I am confused as to why you make the comment regarding it. I have further never attempted contact with the adoptive family or my son in any way, form or matter, so the comment is really misplaced on your part. My intent in contacting you was in regards to the letter I received from Mrs. Ware. She contacted me. Interestingly enough, she has personal contact information. I wonder how she located it. Your assistant, LeAnn F. Blair informed me that the letter Mrs. Ware sent me did not come from your office, even though the return address indicates that it did. I look forward to speaking with you. Please contact me upon your return to your office. I actually just need to clarify a few points regarding Mrs. Ware's letter. I will not respond directly to her. Sincerely,Denise Dopkins dd4066@yahoo.com 509-216-8885
Sun, June 13, 2010 6:52:33 AM Fw: Letter From: Denise Dopkins
Dear Mr. Iverson, Regarding my most recent email to you, I must correct a statement I made. I stated that "I have always been with the understanding that the adoptive parents do not communicate with me or send me photos." What I meant to say was "I have always been with the understanding that the adoptive parents do not have to communicate with me or send me photos." It is a fact that I have asked them to reconsider sending me photos. That, however, was quite some time ago. I believe the last time I requested photos from the adoptive parents was November 2008. I now receive copies of photos and letters from my son's natural father, so it is no longer a desperate request. Just as I stated in the email I have forwarded to you today... I have never attempted direct contact with the adoptive family in the sense of visiting, calling or emailing them. I asked the social workers to communicate with the adoptive family for me by passing along the request for photos. I felt I had the right to ask-- even though I refused to write my son off to the state prior to receiving what I was led to believe was a fair trial. I received my answer and have not since asked the adoptive parents for anything. Sincerely,Denise Dopkins dd4066@yahoo.com 509-216-8885
Tue, June 29, 2010 1:06:49 PM Legal questions re the Ware's letter From: Denise Dopkins
Dear Mr. Iverson, Given the fact that July is fast approaching, I opted to compose this letter to you. I thought it might be simpler to compile my questions and send them to you for your consideration. Please reply to this email with the answers to my questions. I can then simply keep the email in my personal file and refer to it-- should I again need to refresh my memory regarding the correspondence about the adoptive parent's demands.
1. Regarding the accusation of Meegan Ware, how have I 'invaded the privacy' of the adoptive family?
2. Is it illegal for me to have the common decency to acknowledge my son by his legal name?
3. Is it illegal for me to post photographs of my son and me on my blogs, Facebook, Twitter, etc.?
4. How exactly do the adoptive parents intend to punish Mr. Barrett for something he is not responsible for?
5. Isn't it true that there has to be a valid reason to persuade a judge to amend a court order?
6. Do I not have any rights to the freedom of speech, expression and press?
7. As my son's natural mother, do I not have the right to claim his as my own flesh and blood? Please reply to this email with answers to my very legitimate questions and concerns within 10 working days of the date of this email if at all possible. Thank you in advance.Denise Dopkins dd4066@yahoo.com
Tue, August 17, 2010 8:45:43 AM Re: Legal questions re the Ware's letter From: Mark R Iverson
You may want to seek the advice of an attorney. I do not believe that any answers I give will be sufficient for you. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
Tue, August 17, 2010 4:57:07 PM Re: Legal questions re the Ware's letter From: Denise Dopkins
Dear Mr. Iverson, Thank you for your response to my email. In response to your comment, I am under the impression that you are an attorney. Furthermore, as I previously informed you, Mrs. Ware directed me to contact you with any questions I have concerning her letter. I further do not understand what you mean when you say that any answers you give wouldn't be sufficient for me. I am merely contacting you because you are an attorney and would of course have the legal answers to the questions I presented to you. Whether or not the answers please me is not the issue here. I am merely seeking the accurate answers... period. I will assume Mrs. Ware was mistaken when she informed me that you would be the appropriate person to contact concerning her letter, unless of course, you proceed to assist her as your client. I will also proceed to contact several other attorneys who offer consultations-- in order to present the same questions to them. I would then compare notes and decide how to proceed. I am not necessarily convinced that it is mandatory that I abide by the adoptive parents demands. Mr. Iverson, I still encourage you to come forth with the answers to my very legitimate questions. (Regardless of whether or not those answers would make me happy.) After all, there are often things in life that do not make people particularly happy. Sincerely, Denise Dopkins dd4066@yahoo.com
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 2:13 PM 0 comments
Labels: abolish foster care, children for profit, civil rights violations, CPS horror stories, Dishonest CPS agents, Family court judges withhold due process, legal kidnapping
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Governmental tyranny
GOD GUNS AND GUTS
Protecting your family under tyranny
By Jan Smith
I can’t think of a more violent government act against residents, then to send in government agents to take one’s children and place them in stranger’s homes and for all kinds of erroneous reasons determined by the psychiatric and legislative professions. Once removed those in power have devised a system so overwhelmingly corrupt and expansive, the average person is crippled under its auspices. From start to finish, the child protection system under a concept called Parens Patriae ensures that all involved parents and relatives are void of any rights. Most rights presented are nothing more than an illusion and the targets are usually very vulnerable.
The concept of Parens Patriae (government control of vulnerable children) came from English/British legal schools of thought and was implemented by the judicial system here in the US. However, this concept has gone way past the judiciary and encompasses the federal government and agencies, state government and agencies, contracted agencies and mandated reporters. Then there are all the “volunteer” agents (neighbors, friends, relatives, etc.) whose perception of a person’s parenting leads to government intervention. These too, are a part of the Parens Patriae system by choice. What they don’t realize is what they are subjecting the whole family to (including extended) when they pick up that phone and begin the process of removal.
So, what are they being subjected to? Poorly trained attorneys who are part of a “team” and may or may not represent their clients but the state. Then there is a massive Attorney General’s office and assigned assistant AGs who represent each government stakeholder at significant tax payer expense. The courts aren’t really courts at all, but a devised method of child removal and adoption with supportive rules, regulations and laws designed to give Parens the ability to make any type of decision – right or wrong – without consequence. Then there are the case workers and their big ideas of how to save the world through removal and adoption, leaving the entire lineage devastated with their mouths hanging open at the experience.
The targets are anyone whose income is at the poverty level. This includes those families who do not accept any type of government assistance but could if they applied. Most are having babies like crazy and completely unaware they are under government radar and gun scopes of medical, educational, and social worker opinion. Those who fall under ADA categories are disproportionately attacked to include the blind and disabled in wheel chairs. People with diagnosed mental health problems are a “shoe in” for removal and adoption for government agents. Depression is the government’s weapon of choice. They will use this diagnose to divide families and seek out any information that would suggest a parent or extended family has depression issues. Quietly, the government is taking children away from family after family under these categories and only recently, is there becoming an awareness of the plot.
There are several things families need to start doing. The first and most important is practicing the 2nd Amendment rights of gun ownership. All families at or below poverty levels need to own a gun and know how to use it safely by taking the required courses. If this means buying a gun on time payments then do it. Many hand guns are below $200 used. Nine millimeters have the cheapest ammo for practice. Talk to local gun firing ranges about developing a system of affordable shooting. They need to start supporting ALL Americans so they can practice their gun owner rights, not just those of higher incomes. The NRA should start allowing membership based on income because their membership fee is too high. Attend gun shows. Most are only about $5 to get in. You need to get a gun before international law goes into place with the Obama administration who would like to take the guns away from every American.
The second is educating yourself if you are going to have a child. Know who are mandatory reporters and under what circumstances your state allows removal. Know what the evidence standards are and how to dispute accusations. Families need to educate themselves on family law if they are going to have children. Know that marriage, holding down a job, and maintaining a stable environment are important factors in a court room setting. So are fighting in front of children, domestic violence, failing to show up for medical appointments, drug/alcohol abuse and a messy house will get agents involved with court support. Spanking with objects (belt, switch, etc.) is never allowed. Know what your rights are when agents show up at the door investigating your family and how to state those rights.
For activist/system victims who want to know what to do, consider developing groups in your area to do the following:
Develop fliers to hand out at maternity wards in hospitals to vulnerable parents and clinics who take government medical
Find out about all HUD housing apartment complexes and give community lectures on family law and child protection on site. If they won’t let you do that, hand out fliers and set up community meetings. Find a free place to have community meetings. Libraries are one source.
Go to your local ADA and express your concern about their lack of support regarding families. Picket if necessary to get your point across.
Develop a solid volunteer base. Memberships in family rights organizations fail if there is a fee. Most people won’t pay to have advocacy.
Educate those with money like foundations. This is important because they are funding foster care systems but don’t realize what is happening to families in the legal system. We need backers to help.
Work at night if you can, so that your schedule is free during the day to attend court hearings and public legislation. Get to know all the legislators in your state.
Pool resources with others to get training. Pick out members in your groups to attend important functions and meetings then collect the funds to get them that training. Once trained the trainees can come back and train the group.
Hand out fliers at DSHS offices where families are signing up for money/food/medical.
Organize parent groups in school systems that may be a little too excited about government involvement with families. There is safety in numbers.
Make lists of doctors and forensic experts where families are losing their rights because of their testimonies and examine the validity of their arguments. Some of these quacks go for years with false testimony before getting discovered.
Own a gun and practice good safety.
I could continue listing, but if these items get accomplished, great gains will be made. People lack power because of isolation and an absence of critical thinking. It will take some time and effort in the beginning, but once you become an established entity, the ripple effect will take over and have some impact.
Posted by Denise Dopkins at 1:32 PM 1 comments
Labels: children for profit, civil rights violations, corrupt social workers, CPS abuse of power, cps reform, Discrimination, Family court judges withhold due process, legal kidnapping