CPS workers committing perjury and conspired to remove children...

[TJ007]

When you "self-identify" as a particular race or ethnicity, you can be required to prove what you claim.
And while you very well are Native American, it seems as if that is an afterthought, and only of value when it gets you something or gets you what you want.

Until you have a tribal roll number, you are NOT considered Native American---even if you are the spitting image of Chief Sitting Bull!

I only choose to enroll to protect my children. My great-grandparents thought they were protecting their children by not enrolling them. Now times have changed.
Why shouldn't every other race or ethnicity have to prove or have a roll number to be the race or ethnicity they are? There are many Native Americans whom can not sanction into a tribe because records were not kept or permanently lost. This does not make them any less Native American. Those issues are for another time and very well could be raised as a racial issue.
Chief Sitting Bull-HA! HA! I"m so glad I look more like Chief Pontiac!

 

[Ladyback1]

Cite, please.

If one is looking for benefits from the tribe/actively participate in the tribe, then yes.

Otherwise? No, not seeing any requirement. Anywhere.

Sorry....I was thinking employment preference law. You can be required to prove your affiliation to a tribe if you are claiming preference. It's been a morning already! My mistake.

 

[Ohiogal]

We are eligible by blood. My great-grandparents are members and from there decided not to enroll their children, give them one name at birth and use a different first name all their life. They had their reasons I suppose. We already received some benefits such as Indian education. It was never important to me to sanction into tribe until a lying cps worker showed up and I learned it makes a difference. I did the application of enrollment, then tribe needed records such as birth, death and marriage. Those records are a little pricey and I had to learn where everyone was born or got married. We have it all now and should be receiving our enrollment ID's.
CPS still was required to submit properly a dhs 120 to tribe or at the very least the Bureau of Indian Affairs. CPS failed to do that, then determines what race we are. I have known my entire life what race I am and where I come from. I don't believe cps has the authority to determine that.

Until you are enrolled, you don't have those protections. YOU NEED TO ENROLL AND BECOME A MEMBER.

 

[Ohiogal]

Cite, please.

If one is looking for benefits from the tribe/actively participate in the tribe, then yes.

Otherwise? No, not seeing any requirement. Anywhere.

Protection under the Indian Child Welfare Act requires membership by a family member. That is the issue.

 

[quincy]

There was, perhaps interestingly, a suit filed against CPS involving members of a Native American family whose children were removed. I don't have the case in front of me but I will see if I can locate it.

 

[Ohiogal]

There was, perhaps interestingly, a suit filed against CPS involving members of a Native American family whose children were removed for questionable reasons. I don't have the case in front of me but I will see if I can locate it.

Technically, however, this is NOT a Native American family.

 

[quincy]

The CPS case out of Michigan that I was thinking of is: In the Matter of K. Thibeault, Minor, No. 313295, Court of Appeals, Michigan, June 25, 2013.

Because there was some question as to whether Thibeault could be considered a Native American, there was discussion by the Court on this. The Court said: "As defined by ICWA, an 'Indian child' is any unmarried person who is under age eighteen and is either (a) a member of an Indian tribe or (b) is eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe."

The case provides some good case cites that TJ007 may find useful and want to research.

In the Matter of K. Thibeault, Minor can be accessed through the following link:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17216713328838606525&hl=en&as_sdt=80000006

 

[TheGeekess]

Protection under the Indian Child Welfare Act requires membership by a family member. That is the issue.

I believed that was covered under the sentence:

If one is looking for benefits from the tribe/actively participate in the tribe, then yes.

 

[CJane]

The Court said: "As defined by ICWA, an 'Indian child' is any unmarried person who is under age eighteen and is either (a) a member of an Indian tribe or (b) is eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe."

None of the children under discussion in OPs thread meet those requirements.

 

[quincy]

None of the children under discussion in OPs thread meet those requirements.

Right. The child didn't in the case I cited, either.

What the case provides, though, is not only information on ICWA eligibility as determined by a Michigan court, but it also can provide TJ007 with some additional cases to research, if he is sincere about continuing his fight against CPS.

It stands to be a difficult fight, as both of the cases I gave links to show. In much of what CPS workers do, the workers will be protected by a qualified immunity, as was mentioned earlier by Ohiogal. It is not easy to defeat this immunity.

 

[TJ007]

The CPS case out of Michigan that I was thinking of is: In the Matter of K. Thibeault, Minor, No. 313295, Court of Appeals, Michigan, June 25, 2013.

Because there was some question as to whether Thibeault could be considered a Native American, there was discussion by the Court on this. The Court said: "As defined by ICWA, an 'Indian child' is any unmarried person who is under age eighteen and is either (a) a member of an Indian tribe or (b) is eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe."

The case provides some good case cites that TJ007 may find useful and want to research.

In the Matter of K. Thibeault, Minor can be accessed through the following link:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17216713328838606525&hl=en&as_sdt=80000006

This is great, thank you! Sad case though, but the child in this case only did not qualify because the tribe was not federal recognized for ICWA protections correct?

 

[TJ007]

Right. The child didn't in the case I cited, either.

What the case provides, though, is not only information on ICWA eligibility as determined by a Michigan court, but it also can provide TJ007 with some additional cases to research, if he is sincere about continuing his fight against CPS.

It stands to be a difficult fight, as both of the cases I gave links to show. In much of what CPS workers do, the workers will be protected by a qualified immunity, as was mentioned earlier by Ohiogal. It is not easy to defeat this immunity.

*I did speak to the bureau of Indian Affairs yesterday. They stated we did qualify for membership and our tribe is federally recognized, CPS was required to submit properly, ICWA did apply to my children only. How they explained it is the form for my children would list myself, my parents, my grandparents and then my great-grandparents. If anyone listed was a member of the tribe then ICWA would apply and we would then be required to start enrollment. For daughters 1 and 2's children my great grand-parents (the only tribe members) would have been omitted from the form therefor ICWA would not apply until enrollment. In all cases CPS was required to submit the forms properly whether ICWA applied or not. Bureau of Indian Affairs is sending me some more information along with places to make complaints.

I was threatened by the CPS worker to leave it alone and she would make statements such as "It will be worse for you if tribe steps in.", " The tribe never takes over, they always leave it to us." and " It will take longer for your children to go home.". The last statement was stated to me continuously before trial. From what I have learned an ICWA case is unheard of in my county.

I understand the immunity CPS workers have. There is a loophole to everything. I will make sure I get all the information and not make the same mistakes as others. I am a proactive client for my attorney. I am the client whom understands the attorney is busy with many cases. This was one reason we were successful at trial. For right now, any cases the attorney has with the two CPS workers, i'm right there to give a statement or testify to ruin their credibility. I will be a thorn in their side until they are moved to another county. Then I will be there as well, to ruin their credibility until the 2 cps workers are punished to my satisfaction. They did have to have their supervisors by their side, that's a plus. I will make the effort for change. One person can make a difference!

 

[Ladyback1]

*For right now, any cases the attorney has with the two CPS workers, i'm right there to give a statement or testify to ruin their credibility. I will be a thorn in their side until they are moved to another county. Then I will be there as well, to ruin their credibility until the 2 cps workers are punished to my satisfaction. They did have to have their supervisors by their side, that's a plus. I will make the effort for change. One person can make a difference!

Vendetta much?

I understand CPS can be horrible to deal with...but at one point do you let go of the anger and move on with your life?

 

[TJ007]

Vendetta much?

I understand CPS can be horrible to deal with...but at one point do you let go of the anger and move on with your life?

I just don't want another family or better yet children to suffer the lies of these 2 CPS workers. Perhaps they can be compelled to be truthful. I believe what they are doing is child abuse. It takes one person to step up and say "No-more!", this will lead others to stand up. A CPS worker deliberately lies because they have gotten away with it far to long. Something has to be done and if this is one way to do it, then it shall be done. My children were abused in those foster care homes. Its time for change!

 

[Ladyback1]

I just don't want another family or better yet children to suffer the lies of these 2 CPS workers. Perhaps they can be compelled to be truthful. I believe what they are doing is child abuse. It takes one person to step up and say "No-more!", this will lead others to stand up. A CPS worker deliberately lies because they have gotten away with it far to long. Something has to be done and if this is one way to do it, then it shall be done. My children were abused in those foster care homes. Its time for change!

There are better ways to effect change.

Going into a battle half-c*cked, angry and seeking revenge usually does not end well.

Was the fact that your children were abused mentioned in this thread before now???