Kids for profit...

[JaneyS4]

Just because I want everyone to understand what CPS REALLY is...

It's not the whole article. If you'd like to read the rest you can find it at:

http://www.justiceforfamilies.com


Did you know that the Child Protective Services industry in America is worth $12 BILLION A YEAR?


What is the Problem?

All across the USA the system mandated to protect children from abuse/neglect is snatching thousands of children a day from decent, loving homes and parents innocent of maltreating their children. (Child "Protective" Services is known by different initials in different states, e.g., DSS=Dept. of Social Services, DCFS=Dept. of Child & Family Services, etc.). Both state and federal laws have clear guidelines that children are only to be taken out of their homes as a last resort, and after repeated substantiated ACTUAL acts of abuse/neglect, when the child is at "imminent risk of serious harm" and when "reasonable efforts" have been made to ameliorate conditions that led to abuse/neglect.
However, what is actually happening is that this agency is arbitrarily, and illegally, seizing children from their homes based on the most tenuous and frivolous of reasons: e.g., poverty issues, head lice, spanking, poor housekeeping, "parents argue in front of child," normal/common injuries incurred in the normal course of childhood play. If a normal, concerned parent takes their child to the E.R. too often, or appears "overly 'involved/interested' " in the child's treatment (and who wouldn't be?!) they are now being reported for "Munchausens-by-proxy Syndrome." Almost all cases of Brittlebone disease (OI) are reported as child abuse, as are SIDS. A little girl with yeast, urinary tract infections, or bedwetting, will most likely result in a sexual abuse allegation—as do those cute "nudie" pictures that EVERY parent takes of the kids in the tub or playing in the sprinkler. (Nev's note: They show them on America's Funniest Home Videos for crying out loud!)



Did you know that Children's Hospital in Boston turns in an average of 400 parents a year for child abuse?


No verification, marks, injuries or bruises are needed. Children are not examined by independent medical personnel to document evidence of abuse or neglect. Children are isolated and questioned alone by caseworkers who employ the tactics of leading questioning, pressure and manipulation. Caseworkers may strip children and examine them in a state of nudity.

OUR CHILDREN DON'T NEED THIS KIND OF PROTECTION.

Without warning, children are whisked away from their homes and schools, their parents, families, friends, toys, pets, neighborhoods—everything that is safe, comforting and familiar to the child. Uniformed police officers (who must submit to the whims of CPS) may accompany caseworkers and children may be physically dragged, hysterical, out of their homes, and babies are literally pulled screaming from their mothers' arms. (We do not make this up. Scenarios represented are from actual cases. We have numerous cases where mothers hid in closets holding their babies protectively, only to have the above scenario ensue.)


THIS IS AN ACT OF TERRORISM AGAINST OUR CHILDREN!

This type of behavior by government agents is intolerable and unconscionable. The abrupt and brutal severance of parental bonds in this manner is extremely terrorizing and traumatizing to children. It is cruel and inhumane and leaves lifelong scars. Every vestige of security and comfort within the child is shattered forever. The child's belief in their parents' ability to protect them is broken forever. Small children believe their parents to be all-powerful, so when parents are not able to stop the strangers from abducting the child, a fundamental belief system within the child is broken forever. As parents stand by placidly—under threat of arrest and never seeing their children again—small children may believe their parents "gave them away" because they were "bad." This is hideous psychological abuse.

WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?

The majority of parents are never alleged to have committed, nor are they charged with any ACTUAL specific acts of child abuse or neglect; rather, case files are built upon vague, obscure insinuations, innuendo; bizarre pseudo-psychological babble; and fabrications, distortions and inaccuracies. Court proceedings deteriorate into an exercise in character assassination of the parents, perjury, gross violation of law and due process, and obstruction of justice. Judges should be taking control of their own courtrooms; objecting and striking testimony based on relevance, and upholding their judicial canons by ensuring that the laws and Constitution are upheld, and procedural error is not occurring. But CPS rules the courtroom and the entire process is a sham.



Did you know that by law in Massachusetts, judges CANNOT overrule DSS?


Reports are written, and life-altering judgments are made based on case files and service plans that read like the ramblings of a paranoid schizophrenic and have all the credibility of an Elvis sighting, often written by social workers whose qualifications and sound judgment is questionable; who are not objective, not factual, not professional; who often have serious personal issues of their own, and whose credibility should be seriously examined.






Did you know that in Massachusetts, 20-25 CHILDREN ARE SEIZED EVERY DAY to uphold the $500 million annual budget?





Many people are baffled by the bizarre allegations by CPS, particularly when they involve “psychological” allegations. In other words, rather than claiming specific, actual acts of child abuse or neglect, CPS will claim that the behaviors of the child are indications that there is some sort of obscure, hidden abuse in the home, and the child’s behavior is a result of some kind of trauma from the environment within the home.

Welcome to Junk Psychology for Dollars

The children are “acting out their inability to verbalize their trauma”. This is called the ”Clinical Model”. CPS workers consider themselves “clinicians”. This is a marvelous concept for them because they can conveniently stretch the boundaries of definition to include ANY human behavior. (I call it an ingenious marketing scheme). Using the clinical model they can claim that any or all behaviors have some obscure meaning. If your child is outgoing, active, quiet, placid, obedient, disobedient, neat, messy, loud, temperamental, or easy-going...EVERYTHING has some deep, dark, bizarre “meaning”, nothing can just be normal, predictable human behavior as it has been for the past five million years that the human race has, somehow, managed to birth & raise children without socialist workers in our homes telling us how to do it. And, amazingly, we have managed to evolve. However, the clinical model is necessary to support the CPS theory that ALL parents are inadequate and abusive, therefore children must be raised by the State.

The problems with the clinical model are many:

1) Human behavior may have many different causes, i.e.: genetic, bio-chemical, neurological, emotional/psychological. Other than physiological damage to the brain as a result of physical trauma (which does not necessarily mean it was inflicted), there is no expert in the world who can determine cause.

2) Human behaviors encompass a wide spectrum - both positive and negative. Conflict is part of the human condition. Everything doesn’t have to have a “reason” or “meaning”, most is, well...just human behavior.

3) Psychology is a SOFT SCIENCE, meaning it is comprised of theory and interpretation, as opposed to a HARD SCIENCE, like medicine or forensics, which can be proven by concrete means (like an x-ray), cat scan, or DNA. With a soft science we are using subjective opinions, rather than material facts that can be proven with concrete evidence. Interpretation can be whatever the interpreter wants it do be, which could be influenced by their motives. In CPS cases the “experts” usually are from agencies which hold multi- million dollar contracts with CPS, and are raping Medicaid by enforcing unnecessary, inappropriate, and excessive services which they fraudulently triple bill Medicaid for. Many of these places exist SOLELY on their CPS referrals. So, their motive is PROFIT. CPS dictates to their contracted vendors what they want their reports/testimony to say.

4) CPS workers are not trained, licensed psychologists. However, even if they were, see above.

5) A soft science, being subjective opinion and interpretation, cannot be either proven or disproven, and therefore cannot be used as a basis for the removal of children from their homes



Adoption Bonuses: The Money Behind the Madness
DSS and affiliates rewarded for breaking up families
By Nev Moore

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.

Continued next post....

 

[JaneyS4]

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.

continued next post...

 

[JaneyS4]

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.

May is national adoption month. To support "Adoption 2002," the U.S. Postal Service is issuing special adoption stamps. Let us hope they don’t feature pictures of kids who are for sale. I urge everyone to boycott these stamps and register complaints with the post office.

I know that I’m feeling pretty smug and superior about being part of such a socially advanced and compassionate society. How about you?

 

[lizfriz38]

Everyone has this misconception that the state is just taking children from "good" homes. I have two children in my home from 2 different families. , the FIA has bent over backwards for these families. They have to contact the family give them the telephone numbers and pay for the counseling they need. These people are not even responsible enough to get the numbers themselves let alone they can't afford the counseling. What is wrong with the system that they work so hard on these people and they feel they can change them with a couple classes when it takes the average adult their lifetime to learn to be a responsible adult. Shame on these people that take for granted the miracle of life and produce like rabbits. They don't want their children until someone comes along and would like to give them a better life. Quit crying and get your lives together so your children can stay at home, THINK of the children, it is not their fault you are selfish people. Let them have a future.

 

[JaneyS4]

Wait just a darn minute...

Don't come at me with the quit crying crap. We've been trying for months now to get my niece home and out of foster care and damn DFCS is the one that is keeping her from BEING at home. She wasn't taken from us, she was taken from her MOTHER, and her dad has done everything but stand on his head for the freakin caseworker (and would do that if the B*tch asked him to) and still she hems and haws around. My brother is classified as an "Unoffending parent" Know what that means? He hasn't done a damn thing wrong. No criminal records, no records with ANY DFCS agency, and he passed the ICPC homestudy with flying colors. The only possible reason they have to keep my niece is because they MAKE MONEY off of her. He's her father, if their job is to keep kids with their families, then why the hell do we have to go to court tomorrow with an attorney we can't afford to get her home when he has passed every test they gave him and climbed every obstacle they put in his way??? I got several issues in the matter of the way they handled my nieces case, not one of which being the fact that they failed to even notify him that his daughter was IN foster care for seven MONTHS! Let me assure you that NO ONE in the system has bent over backwards for my brother or my family in working to get my niece home with us. The only bending over that seems to be being done is my brother.

Now, you may be a fine foster parent, and not out to milk the system in any way. You may be genuinely there to help the kids and not just to collect the money. But my niece doesn't need a foster family. She has a real family ready and willing to take her IF THEY"D JUST LET HER GO! You or anyone else has no right to take a child from its natural family without good reason, and you damn sure got no right to keep it.

You'll have to excuse me if I got a problem with someone telling my brother and my family "No, you may not have your child. Not because you have done something wrong, not because you can't provide for her, but just because I say so!"

Now, if you'd like to have a reasonable and logical discussion on the good vs. the bad in the foster care system, I'd be happy to discuss with you, but don't come on here blasting away about crying and being a selfish person. You don't know me, and you have no idea of the lengths I go to or sacrifices my whole family has made in order to get OUR child home with us.

 

[stephenk]

where did your brother think his daughter was living for the seven months she was in foster care?

 

[Grace_Adler]

Stephen, you should go back and read some of Janey's posts. I believe she addressed that before, but I don't remember exactly what happened.

Liz, I don't know what you're story is but unless you know the families that you have children from, then you shouldn't believe the line of crap CPS is feeding you. Not saying you don't know them or what's going on, just saying IF.

I'm sure CPS does take children away from bad homes but the statistics speak for themselves.

Also it was kind of rude to jump on Janey and assume anything about her when you don't know her story. You know what they say about assuming don't you? It kind of made you look bad when you assumed it was her child as well. Janey has her facts together, I can assure you of that. There are several others on here that can back her up.

I'm not an advocate of CPS and foster homes. While I'm not directing this at you, and I'm sure there are some good homes out there, I believe they are few and far between. I know at least 5 people who were in foster care and everyone of them was molested and abused. I think that's pretty bad.

 

[Grace_Adler]

OK sorry, I haven't read the whole thread yet but I see it was continued. My bad! Sorry about that! Yes I'm a dork!!

I do want to know one thing though. Why do foster parents who sometimes much better off than the bio parents get so many "benifits" I guess you would call them, that the bio parents can't even get?

Also in reference to money, if a parent is struggling to pay bills and put food on the table, I agree, that is not a good enough reason to take someone's child away. Money can never replace a parent's connection and bond with their child, not to mention the rest of the family and all their love.

 

[stealth2]

I do want to know one thing though. Why do foster parents who sometimes much better off than the bio parents get so many "benifits" I guess you would call them, that the bio parents can't even get?

I know several foster parents here in NJ, as well as several adoptive ones who've done foster care. They have all told me that it is nearly impossible to adopt a child from the system in NJ unless the child has severe problems - all the "good" kids are kept in the system for the $$. So they all go to PA to adopt.

They have also told me that - in NJ - being a foster parent is a lucrative business. I know families that have had additions built to their home - at the expense of NJ taxpayers - to accomodate foster kids. This is not to say that all parents who foster aren't loving and care well for the children. But there *are* incentives for those who are less scrupulous to get involved.

 

[droper]

i know this lady who has a daughter thats adopted , she also has 3 other kids,who are adopted also. they have always went on unreal vacations, they all go to the doc. at the least little thing.. when she goes to walmart she comes back with a car load. i have always wondered how they afford to do these things, it is not unusual for them to take 5 to 6 vacations a year... the mom and dad work for the school system in n.c. so they cant make that much money. my daughter is friends with her daughter, she has went on vacations with them, anyway i am just saying a normal family could never afford to do the things they do... i dont know how much money she gets, but it must be a lot...

 

[CMSC]

The big foster family here in town lives high off the hog too! Nice cars, clothes etc. But I really think it depends on your state. I have a friend in North Dakota who is taken every month to buy new clothes because of her allowance. But here it is every couple of months.

I am a little hurt by people who think that most foster parents are bad. There are alot of them in my town and for good reasons! 99% of them are terrific and would NEVER harm a child! I for one know of several foster kids who have accused the foster families of stuff! It is horrible,. and it goes both ways. The state provides foster families with a $1 million dollar attorney fund, and they repair any damage done to your house by foster children. It is not an easy job because alot of times you are suppose to put back together broken homes that are unstable! The problem with the system is no one believes in it anymore.

You have got two people on here, me and Janey, who have had some serious dealings with CPS. I, being the one who added a worker in taking away a child. Janey being the one who had a relative child in CPS care for no good reason! Let me tell you, if you had seen what i saw four years ago, you wouldn't believe in the system either, but for a different reason than Janeys story.

I have a problem giving children back to parents time and time again! Four years ago I went to a hospital with a friend of mine, she worked for CPS and I was going to school to become a social woker, she was trying to convince me to change my mind and it worked! We went and pick up a 2 year old from the hospital. Baby x had lacerations all over her face and her forhead was swollen from banging it against a crib all day while her crack addicted parents slept! They woke up every now and then to beat her malnurished bottom, which by the way was completely raw from not being changed maybe once a day. They would give her a bottle of fermented milk and go back to sleep to get ready for their night out while the baby finally cried herself to sleep. Do you know what being in a crib ALL DAY LONG does to a two year old? We evaluated her and she had the motor skills of a 6 month old. She weighed 11 pounds and could not sit up or crawl. But the kicker was these two little marks on each side of her chin, THEY WERE FINGERMARKS FROM WHERE SOMEONE HAD PICKED HER UP BY HER CHIN WITH THEIR THUMB AND MIDDLE FINGER AND SLAMMED HER DOWN ONTO THE CRIB!

Even worse, there had already been 3 children taken away from this family and mom was pregnant! This is not a rare thing. It is all too common. In one state like FL you got people being paid to lose children in the system, then in another state you have people being paid to reunite them with families who aren't fit to have a pet rock let alone a child!

What hapened to babyX? Well she like so many others (18 kids the year she was taken away) died. She was given back to mom and dad and 4 hours later my friend was called to come over to the house and identify the body.


p.s. I do want to say that in order to have foster children, you need to give bank statements, credit statements etc. to show that you can take them in on your own income. Another thing is that many foster parents encourage the older children to allow them to adopt because you get money for it! I believe it is around $5000 plus tax breaks etc. I guess it is screwed up no matter which side of the fence you are on!

 

[stealth2]

ryry's mom..... Funny - I was just going to post that I hoped noone took my post to mean that I thought a lot of foster parents are bad. I *greatly* admire people who open their homes to kids who need them - and I think that they *should* be helped with the expense. My point was simply that sometimes the system goes out of control in ways that do attract a less selfless type of person... The problem is way too many parents who should not be permitted to raise their children and - on the flip side - too many people who are perhaps not screened as well as they could be being allowed to foster. It's a serious problem no matter which way you look at it. I hope that's a little clearer.

 

[droper]

the lady i know is a wonderful mom to all the kids, gives them everything they want, if anything she gives too much, and in return they appreciate nothing, thats the case with the 15 yr old that my daughter is friends with,,, she has had all her kids for yrs. ever since they were small... but i have always wondered how they could afford all the things they do... i also work with a girl that went to some classes for adoption.. she said they are not at all picky in n.c. anybody that wants to stick through all the classes can be a foster parent, even if you are single... i think they should be more picky, a lot of times kids could end up in worse shape that they were to begin with...

 

[Norsewife]

I was given permissiion to post this.
www.cpswatch.com

Wednesday, November 6, 2002, 7:37 AM




FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Cheryl Barnes, National Director, CPS Watch, Inc., 1-800-277-9282
Chart Attached.
Children are Killed in State Care at an Exceptionally High Rate



CALIFORNIA -- March 17, 2001 -- Children in state care were killed at a rate 35 times higher than children outside the state's reach according to a national watchdog agency.
"That makes state care the worst place in the world for California children to be," said Cheryl Barnes, National Director of CPS Watch, Inc., a citizen's watchdog agency monitoring the activities of Child Protective Services.

Barnes said that her organization relies upon data published by the federal government in analyzing the state's fatality rate. The US Department of Health and Human Services maintains NCANDS, which publishes the data annually. The latest available data was published last year in "Child Maltreatment 1998: Reports from the States to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System."



Although California failed to report any state care fatalities, a review of several news articles that year show at least 8 children were killed while in the state's care.


"The fact that the state failed to report accurate data is intolerable," Barnes said. "Several public and private agencies rely on that data and we expect it to be accurate and truthful."


Data that was reported shows 26 fatalities, a rate of 0.3 per one hundred thousand. But for the state care population, there were at least 8 fatalities, a rate of 7.0 per one hundred thousand.


Barnes said her organization is also wondering why the verdict against state caregiver, Brenda Craney in the scalding death of a 3-year-old boy was thrown out.


"Why bother having juries if the Judge is just going to thrown their verdicts out?" Barnes asked.


Brenda Craney, 38, of Los Angeles, was charged with misdemeanor child abuse in connection with the scalding death of a 3-year-old boy placed in her care by state officials. Craney called her social worker, rather than calling 911, then waited for the social worker to arrive. The child later died. Craney was convicted by a jury for the crime, but Judge Robert J. Perry later threw the verdict out.


"The woman should've been charged with murder," Barnes said. "A misdemeanor conviction was letting her off easy, and now the Judge throws that out too? What message does this send to children abused by the very agency mandated to protect them?"


Barnes believes the Judge's ruling will allow the state to classify the child's death as an accident rather than a state care fatality.


"The astronomical rate of state care fatalities is bad enough, but to classify them as accidents in order to keep the numbers down is like salt in an open wound," said Barnes.


In addition to the 8 fatalities, California reported abusing or neglecting 343 children in state care.


"Is this what we call child protection?" Barnes asks. "If not through the courts, where will these abused children find justice?"


CPS Watch, Inc. monitors child welfare practice nationwide. Families with information to share can contact the organization at its toll-free number, 1-800-CPS-WATCH.


--30--
Chart Attached.
CPS Watch, Inc.
Cheryl Barnes, [email protected]
Doug Quirmbach, [email protected]
(417) 339-9192 / fax (417) 332-1790


Return to Press Releases


CPSWatch® is a registered trademark. All images and content of this website are © copyright CPS Watch, Inc.

 

[Grace_Adler]

I hope I didn't come across that I'm totally against some foster homes or think they didn't take away children from bad homes sometimes because I tried to say I do believe they do that and yes it should be done.

I'm just basing my opinion about how CPS functions overall. I hope that makes sense. From everything I've read, seen on the news and based on people I know were in foster care,so I have little faith in the system. Especially after a case that's going to the NC Supreme Court.

I just wish more people were like ryry's mom and wanted to take care of these kids and help them out. Not do it for the wrong reasons and I wish there were more CPS workers who were doing it for the right reasons as well.

I just don't agree with how they have it set up now. CPS gets paid to take these kids and they have way too much power. They should have to answer to someone just like every other govt. agency and the same laws should apply to them.

I just think there are less people out there doing it for the right reasons and doing what they are supposed to then there should be.

I hope no one takes offense to that, because I don't mean it to be offensive.