Here's an interesting editorial:
http://newsregister.com/article?articleTitle=sometimes%2C+secrecy+isn%27t+best+for+children--1330726709--2846
CPS corruption hurts and destroys families worldwide. Please use caution posting about CPS here or anyplace on the internet. For your protection, using your full, real name and precise location is not advised. CPS has eyes everywhere and CPS is notorious for taking what people say, twisting it, embellishing on it and then using it against them in CPS "investigations" and at court proceedings.
Showing posts with label child dcfs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label child dcfs. Show all posts
Monday, March 5, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Children removed from home of ACLU director after dispute - South Dakota
Written by John Hult
The stepchildren of the director of the South Dakota chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union were placed in protective custody last week after a family dispute call at his address.
Robert Doody, 31, was asked to leave a closed child protection hearing Tuesday morning at the Minnehaha County Courthouse. A judge decided at the hearing to keep the children in protective custody during a Department of Social Services investigation.
The inquiry was sparked by a report of physical abuse given to the Department of Social Services by the biological father of two of the children. By law, Social Services can place children in protective custody for 10 days while it investigates claims against parents.
Minnehaha County State’s Attorney Aaron McGowan confirmed Tuesday that he was aware of allegations, but said no charges have been filed against the mother or stepfather.
“We’ll have to wait for the investigating agency’s report,” McGowan said.
Doody said the removal of his Native American stepchildren, as well as his absence from the courtroom, constitute violations of the Indian Child Welfare Act.
The welfare act bars the foster care placement of Native children under most circumstances and gives Native parents additional rights during custody hearings.
“This is a disgrace. It goes to show that the state does not give due process to Indians or non-Indians,” Doody said after the hearing. “It’s a sham.”
Doody and the children’s maternal grandmother initially walked into the hearing Tuesday morning but were asked to leave, he said.
Doody denied any wrongdoing.
The only family members inside the courtroom were the children’s biological parents: Doody’s wife, Kimberly St. John, and their father, David Knorr.
After the hearing, Knorr said the judge determined that the children would remain in protective custody while the Social Services investigation proceeds. Doody and his wife objected to a placement in Knorr’s home.
The report appears on the Sioux Falls Police Department’s daily call log as a “family dispute” Friday morning, although Knorr said the incident in question took place Wednesday.
Police spokesman Sam Clemens confirmed only that the call came in as a Department of Social Services referral.
Doody has been the director of South Dakota’s chapter of the civil rights organization since 2008.
The organization has offered support to Native Americans suing the Department of Corrections and displaced voters on Indian reservations.
A spokesperson for the national ACLU declined to comment on the matter Tuesday.
“Robert Doody is an ACLU employee and as this is a personal matter,” Marsha Zeesman said.
Doody’s lawyer, Debra Voight, did not return calls seeking comment Tuesday night.
St. John is director of Mita Maske Ti Ki, a shelter for victims of domestic violence.
Source http://www.argusleader.com/article/20120222/NEWS/302210043/Children-removed-from-home-of-ACLU-director-after-dispute?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Home
The stepchildren of the director of the South Dakota chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union were placed in protective custody last week after a family dispute call at his address.
Robert Doody, 31, was asked to leave a closed child protection hearing Tuesday morning at the Minnehaha County Courthouse. A judge decided at the hearing to keep the children in protective custody during a Department of Social Services investigation.
The inquiry was sparked by a report of physical abuse given to the Department of Social Services by the biological father of two of the children. By law, Social Services can place children in protective custody for 10 days while it investigates claims against parents.
Minnehaha County State’s Attorney Aaron McGowan confirmed Tuesday that he was aware of allegations, but said no charges have been filed against the mother or stepfather.
“We’ll have to wait for the investigating agency’s report,” McGowan said.
Doody said the removal of his Native American stepchildren, as well as his absence from the courtroom, constitute violations of the Indian Child Welfare Act.
The welfare act bars the foster care placement of Native children under most circumstances and gives Native parents additional rights during custody hearings.
“This is a disgrace. It goes to show that the state does not give due process to Indians or non-Indians,” Doody said after the hearing. “It’s a sham.”
Doody and the children’s maternal grandmother initially walked into the hearing Tuesday morning but were asked to leave, he said.
Doody denied any wrongdoing.
The only family members inside the courtroom were the children’s biological parents: Doody’s wife, Kimberly St. John, and their father, David Knorr.
After the hearing, Knorr said the judge determined that the children would remain in protective custody while the Social Services investigation proceeds. Doody and his wife objected to a placement in Knorr’s home.
The report appears on the Sioux Falls Police Department’s daily call log as a “family dispute” Friday morning, although Knorr said the incident in question took place Wednesday.
Police spokesman Sam Clemens confirmed only that the call came in as a Department of Social Services referral.
Doody has been the director of South Dakota’s chapter of the civil rights organization since 2008.
The organization has offered support to Native Americans suing the Department of Corrections and displaced voters on Indian reservations.
A spokesperson for the national ACLU declined to comment on the matter Tuesday.
“Robert Doody is an ACLU employee and as this is a personal matter,” Marsha Zeesman said.
Doody’s lawyer, Debra Voight, did not return calls seeking comment Tuesday night.
St. John is director of Mita Maske Ti Ki, a shelter for victims of domestic violence.
Source http://www.argusleader.com/article/20120222/NEWS/302210043/Children-removed-from-home-of-ACLU-director-after-dispute?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Home
Saturday, January 14, 2012
State failing to spur kinship custody - Virginia
4.6% of foster kids stay with relatives in 2010 - lowest in the nation
Virginia ranks last in the nation when it comes to asking relatives to become foster parents, even though promoting such so-called "kinship care" is official state policy.
Only 4.6 percent of kids in foster care were with relatives in 2010, well below the national average of 24 percent, the Virginia Commission on Youth reported to the General Assembly this week.
For one Staunton family, the Simms, who have been trying to win custody of a cousin's infant, the finding is no surprise.
"I really don't know what to say," added Sylvia Simms. Licensed as a day care provider and as a treatment foster parent, she and her husband, Army veteran William Simms, say they've been rebuffed and misled by local social workers in their efforts to care for the infant.
The infant's foster care plan, prepared by the social workers, contradicts findings by the infant's court-appointed guardian ad litem, who had recommended placing the infant with the Simms. The social services department has declined to comment, beyond saying there are two sides to every story and saying the state's policy is to encourage kinship care.
The commission reported "the negative perception held by child welfare workers 'that the apple does not fall far from the tree,'" was one reason why kinship care lagged in Virginia.
In addition, it said, many Virginians object to the idea that people be paid to care for relatives who need foster care.
But the commission also reported caregivers looking after relatives find it is tough to get help with health care, child care, housing and mental health services that children in foster care are supposed to get.
In many cases, such caregivers don't know, or aren't told, they are entitled to welfare, help with health care coverage or for a wide range of other support services intended for children in foster care, the commission said.
It recommended the state Department of Social Services move forward with its previously announced plans to create an assistance program to help people providing foster care to relatives.
It also asked the state Department of Education to ensure school systems understood they could not assume children in foster care with relatives were not local residents and therefore not entitled to free schooling.
The commission also suggested Virginia re-examine its list of crimes that permanently bars people from taking relatives into foster care, noting these can include single instances of misdemeanor drug possession.
Source http://www.newsleader.com/article/20120114/NEWS01/201140323
Virginia ranks last in the nation when it comes to asking relatives to become foster parents, even though promoting such so-called "kinship care" is official state policy.
Only 4.6 percent of kids in foster care were with relatives in 2010, well below the national average of 24 percent, the Virginia Commission on Youth reported to the General Assembly this week.
For one Staunton family, the Simms, who have been trying to win custody of a cousin's infant, the finding is no surprise.
"I really don't know what to say," added Sylvia Simms. Licensed as a day care provider and as a treatment foster parent, she and her husband, Army veteran William Simms, say they've been rebuffed and misled by local social workers in their efforts to care for the infant.
The infant's foster care plan, prepared by the social workers, contradicts findings by the infant's court-appointed guardian ad litem, who had recommended placing the infant with the Simms. The social services department has declined to comment, beyond saying there are two sides to every story and saying the state's policy is to encourage kinship care.
The commission reported "the negative perception held by child welfare workers 'that the apple does not fall far from the tree,'" was one reason why kinship care lagged in Virginia.
In addition, it said, many Virginians object to the idea that people be paid to care for relatives who need foster care.
But the commission also reported caregivers looking after relatives find it is tough to get help with health care, child care, housing and mental health services that children in foster care are supposed to get.
In many cases, such caregivers don't know, or aren't told, they are entitled to welfare, help with health care coverage or for a wide range of other support services intended for children in foster care, the commission said.
It recommended the state Department of Social Services move forward with its previously announced plans to create an assistance program to help people providing foster care to relatives.
It also asked the state Department of Education to ensure school systems understood they could not assume children in foster care with relatives were not local residents and therefore not entitled to free schooling.
The commission also suggested Virginia re-examine its list of crimes that permanently bars people from taking relatives into foster care, noting these can include single instances of misdemeanor drug possession.
Source http://www.newsleader.com/article/20120114/NEWS01/201140323
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Professor who helped youths in foster care systems charged with rape and sexual child abuse
Dwain Pellebon, 54, arrested for rape and lewd acts
Denies charges but admitted being 'affectionate and sensual'
Admitted watching child porn
By Rachel Quigley
A social work professor accused of rape and performing other lewd acts on teenage girls has been formally charged.
Dwain Pellebon, 54, of the University of Oklahoma, was arraigned on two counts of rape, two counts of lewd acts with a child and two counts of sexual child abuse.
The professor was arrested last week after authorities received allegations from a child welfare worker he had sexually abused two teenage girls in the past two years. He denies all the allegations.
A state Department of Human Services worker told Norman police that a 13-year-old reported seeing Pellebon fondle another 13-year-old during a sleepover at the suspect's Norman home, according to a search warrant affidavit.
The girl was interviewed by police last week, according to NewsOk, and told them she woke up in his home on at least two occasions with Pellebon lying beside her touching her 'from her hair to her ankles'.
The alleged abuse started when she was 11.
The social worker also said Pellebon sexually abused a mentally disabled 15-year-old at least twice.
The girl also told police the suspect would remove her from bed, take her clothes off and 'display her on a bed for viewing'.
Court documents also revealed the girl said Pellebon kept track of her menstrual cycle and showed her 'parts of the body you weren't supposed to see'.
The social work professor admitted taking off the girl's clothes but said he did it to apply cream to her 'chest, back and butt' while they were alone in his bedroom.
NewsOk reported that though Pellebon denies any sexual contact, he described himself to investigators as an 'affectionate, sensual man who liked to hug, kiss, cuddle and stroke young girls that he felt close to'.
He also told police that he had viewed child pornography once but did not download it.
In 2001, Pellebon was investigated by DHS under similar circumstances but no charges were filed because the alleged victim — the daughter of a former Norman police officer — failed to give investigators a statement, documents show.
He has been placed on administrative leave without pay and is free on $75,000 bail.
The 54-year-old was a director on a local board for Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA), which helps children in juvenile court and foster systems.
He took a leave of absence from the board earlier this year, a Cleveland County CASA spokesman told The Oklahoman.
Pellebon teaches a course on human sexuality that looks at ‘sexual behaviour, gender differences and sexual values’, reported CNN.
After he was arrested a university spokesman said they 'acted swiftly to suspend Pellebon from any contact with students and from use of any university facilities'.
Source http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2076602/Dwain-Pellebon-University-Oklahoma-social-work-professor-charged-rape-sexual-child-abuse.html
Denies charges but admitted being 'affectionate and sensual'
Admitted watching child porn
By Rachel Quigley
A social work professor accused of rape and performing other lewd acts on teenage girls has been formally charged.
Dwain Pellebon, 54, of the University of Oklahoma, was arraigned on two counts of rape, two counts of lewd acts with a child and two counts of sexual child abuse.
The professor was arrested last week after authorities received allegations from a child welfare worker he had sexually abused two teenage girls in the past two years. He denies all the allegations.
A state Department of Human Services worker told Norman police that a 13-year-old reported seeing Pellebon fondle another 13-year-old during a sleepover at the suspect's Norman home, according to a search warrant affidavit.
The girl was interviewed by police last week, according to NewsOk, and told them she woke up in his home on at least two occasions with Pellebon lying beside her touching her 'from her hair to her ankles'.
The alleged abuse started when she was 11.
The social worker also said Pellebon sexually abused a mentally disabled 15-year-old at least twice.
The girl also told police the suspect would remove her from bed, take her clothes off and 'display her on a bed for viewing'.
Court documents also revealed the girl said Pellebon kept track of her menstrual cycle and showed her 'parts of the body you weren't supposed to see'.
The social work professor admitted taking off the girl's clothes but said he did it to apply cream to her 'chest, back and butt' while they were alone in his bedroom.
NewsOk reported that though Pellebon denies any sexual contact, he described himself to investigators as an 'affectionate, sensual man who liked to hug, kiss, cuddle and stroke young girls that he felt close to'.
He also told police that he had viewed child pornography once but did not download it.
In 2001, Pellebon was investigated by DHS under similar circumstances but no charges were filed because the alleged victim — the daughter of a former Norman police officer — failed to give investigators a statement, documents show.
He has been placed on administrative leave without pay and is free on $75,000 bail.
The 54-year-old was a director on a local board for Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA), which helps children in juvenile court and foster systems.
He took a leave of absence from the board earlier this year, a Cleveland County CASA spokesman told The Oklahoman.
Pellebon teaches a course on human sexuality that looks at ‘sexual behaviour, gender differences and sexual values’, reported CNN.
After he was arrested a university spokesman said they 'acted swiftly to suspend Pellebon from any contact with students and from use of any university facilities'.
Source http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2076602/Dwain-Pellebon-University-Oklahoma-social-work-professor-charged-rape-sexual-child-abuse.html
Monday, December 19, 2011
Iraq War Veteran, Fit Father Has Parental Rights Terminated
by Robert Franklin, Esq.
A veteran of the Iraq war has had his parental rights terminated despite having in no way wronged his child or its mother. Read about it here (Booneville Democrat, 12/8/11).
The facts of the case are straightforward. Edward Glover served in the U.S. armed services. He was deployed to Iraq. His wife, Michelle gave birth to a child, E.G. in November of 2008. While Edward was serving abroad, Michelle took up with one Maliki Raheem who had a history of domestic violence. In April, 2009, it came to the attention of the Arkansas Department of Human Services that E.G. had been severely abused by Raheem. Here is how the dissenting judge of the Arkansas Court of Appeals described the child’s injuries.
The abuse was severe: E.G. had scalding on his chest and abdomen, bruising, blood inside his eyes, head injuries, perforation of his stomach, a liver contusion, three rib fractures, bilateral retinal hemorrhages, bruising around the eyes and scalp consistent with trauma, a possible lung contusion, and burns to the abdomen, shoulder, right thigh, and left scrotum.
Edward Glover obtained emergency leave and returned home, but was sent back to Iraq 10 days later. Glover remained deployed oversees while legal proceedings played out. The ADHS of course took his son into foster care and eventually succeeded in terminating Michelle’s parental rights. At all but two hearings, Glover was neither present in person nor represented by counsel.
Irrespective of the fact that Glover had done nothing wrong and was never accused of any form of wrongdoing toward anyone, the trial court, at the request of ADHS, terminated Glover’s parental rights and the Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling. Indeed, if there was a claim by anyone at any time that Glover had ever in his life done anything to indicate unfitness as a parent, neither the trial nor the appellate court mentioned it.
So how is it possible for a father, who has not a single black mark by his name, to entirely lose his rights to a child, born during his marriage and therefore presumptively his? The cogent dissent from the Appellate Court’s decision says he can’t, but more about that in a bit.
Apparently the reason the trial judge terminated Glover’s rights is that he didn’t follow the court’s orders to avail himself of certain “services” of the ADHS. Now, remember, that ADHS is an agency of the State of Arkansas, but during most of the court proceedings, Glover was nowhere near Arkansas and therefore could not be ”served” by ADHS. More importantly, the “services” ordered are transparently aimed at a parent who has abused his/her child. Here they are:
-provide complete medical history for juvenile
-parenting classes
-anger management classes
-forensic psychological evaluation – follow recommendations
-random drug screens
-remain drug free
-remain alcohol free
-provide vital info for fetal alcohol syndrome assessment
-drug and alcohol assessment – follow recommendations
-medication assessment and follow recommendations
-maintain stable and suitable housing
-attend staffings at DHS
-cooperate with Department
-maintain contact with Department
-attend visitation with juvenile
-demonstrate improved parenting
-maintain reliable transportation or seek reasonable assistance from DHS
-complete affidavit of Financial Means
-refrain from criminal or illegal activity
So what we have is a state agency and four separate judges who couldn’t quite grasp the fact that, although there was an abused child and although there was a father in court, the father hadn’t abused the child. Glover didn’t need any of the “services” ADHS said he needed.
Likewise, the fact that he was out of the country most of the time and in the hospital part of the time when he returned from abroad and was honorably discharged from military service, and therefore unable to avail himself of the “services” never sank in on the judges or ADHS.
Late in the game, the court appointed counsel to “represent” Glover. I use quotation marks around the word “represent” because the dissenting justice at the appellate court described that representation this way:
The quality of the appointed counsel’s representation at this late stage of the case supports an inference that the purpose of the appointment was not to assist Mr. Glover in negotiating his way through the juvenile courts to gain custody of E.G., but rather to facilitate his exit by terminating his parental rights.
The dissent’s description is given considerably more weight by the fact that Glover’s lawyer made no effort to assert at trial any of the very obvious legal issues presented by the termination of a fit father’s parental rights. Having failed to assert them at trial, they couldn’t be asserted on appeal. To make her malpractice still more obvious, Glover’s attorney filed his appeal but under a “no-merit” procedure. That’s one in which the lawyer files the appeal because her client demands it, but tells the court it has no merit. This was “zealous representation” by an attorney? It’s more like a bad joke.
In short, the lawyer worked hand-in-glove with ADHS and the judges to cut the father out of his child’s life. My strong belief is that ADHS wanted that all along. That’s why its counsel convinced the judges to order the long list of “services” for Glover to comply with. ADHS hoped that Glover wouldn’t comply due to his deployment overseas and failure to comply would lose him his parental rights. And that’s just what happened. Some people may call that justice. I call it a conspiracy.
Not surprisingly, Glover lost his appeal. The appellate majority said he hadn’t raised any of his issues on appeal, so there was no way he could win. Fair enough. Or was it?
On the contrary, the dissenting judge, Josephine Hart, completely destroyed the majority’s summary dismissal of Glover’s appeal. She points out that, due to a case decided by the Arkansas Supreme Court (the Mahone case) during the pendency of Glover’s case, the state cannot interfere with the parenting rights of a fit parent.
The Mahone court overruled Judkins and held that custody of a child taken from a custodial parent should result in first shifting custody to the nonoffending, noncustodial parent.
Importantly, the Mahone court relied on U.S. Supreme Court precedent in so ruling.
The United States Supreme Court has stated that it is a fundamental right to parent a child without interference by the state. Accordingly, there first must be a showing of unfitness before the state may intervene. The fact that one parent is unfit does not alter the state’s burden to prove that the other parent is also unable to care for the child before it may interfere in the family… Without a finding of unfitness, the state has no constitutional authority to exercise that power. Under current Supreme Court authority, the existence of a single fit parent, regardless of the acts of the other parent, negates the state’s ability to interfere in the family unit.
Those are, once again, Judge Josephine Hart’s. She was writing at the appellate level in Mahone and, when the case got to it, the Arkansas Supreme Court agreed.
More importantly still, the trial court in Glover’s case had no jurisdiction. In order to exercise any authority over his rights, it had to first find that he was unfit. It didn’t because he wasn’t. Therefore, the matter could be raised for the first time on appeal.
It can therefore be raised before the Arkansas Supreme Court. From here, it looks like a slam-dunk win.
To date, however, the lesson Edward Glover’s case teaches us is just how determined child welfare agencies are to cut fathers out of the lives of their children and how willing courts are to comply.
Source http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=22391
A veteran of the Iraq war has had his parental rights terminated despite having in no way wronged his child or its mother. Read about it here (Booneville Democrat, 12/8/11).
The facts of the case are straightforward. Edward Glover served in the U.S. armed services. He was deployed to Iraq. His wife, Michelle gave birth to a child, E.G. in November of 2008. While Edward was serving abroad, Michelle took up with one Maliki Raheem who had a history of domestic violence. In April, 2009, it came to the attention of the Arkansas Department of Human Services that E.G. had been severely abused by Raheem. Here is how the dissenting judge of the Arkansas Court of Appeals described the child’s injuries.
The abuse was severe: E.G. had scalding on his chest and abdomen, bruising, blood inside his eyes, head injuries, perforation of his stomach, a liver contusion, three rib fractures, bilateral retinal hemorrhages, bruising around the eyes and scalp consistent with trauma, a possible lung contusion, and burns to the abdomen, shoulder, right thigh, and left scrotum.
Edward Glover obtained emergency leave and returned home, but was sent back to Iraq 10 days later. Glover remained deployed oversees while legal proceedings played out. The ADHS of course took his son into foster care and eventually succeeded in terminating Michelle’s parental rights. At all but two hearings, Glover was neither present in person nor represented by counsel.
Irrespective of the fact that Glover had done nothing wrong and was never accused of any form of wrongdoing toward anyone, the trial court, at the request of ADHS, terminated Glover’s parental rights and the Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling. Indeed, if there was a claim by anyone at any time that Glover had ever in his life done anything to indicate unfitness as a parent, neither the trial nor the appellate court mentioned it.
So how is it possible for a father, who has not a single black mark by his name, to entirely lose his rights to a child, born during his marriage and therefore presumptively his? The cogent dissent from the Appellate Court’s decision says he can’t, but more about that in a bit.
Apparently the reason the trial judge terminated Glover’s rights is that he didn’t follow the court’s orders to avail himself of certain “services” of the ADHS. Now, remember, that ADHS is an agency of the State of Arkansas, but during most of the court proceedings, Glover was nowhere near Arkansas and therefore could not be ”served” by ADHS. More importantly, the “services” ordered are transparently aimed at a parent who has abused his/her child. Here they are:
-provide complete medical history for juvenile
-parenting classes
-anger management classes
-forensic psychological evaluation – follow recommendations
-random drug screens
-remain drug free
-remain alcohol free
-provide vital info for fetal alcohol syndrome assessment
-drug and alcohol assessment – follow recommendations
-medication assessment and follow recommendations
-maintain stable and suitable housing
-attend staffings at DHS
-cooperate with Department
-maintain contact with Department
-attend visitation with juvenile
-demonstrate improved parenting
-maintain reliable transportation or seek reasonable assistance from DHS
-complete affidavit of Financial Means
-refrain from criminal or illegal activity
So what we have is a state agency and four separate judges who couldn’t quite grasp the fact that, although there was an abused child and although there was a father in court, the father hadn’t abused the child. Glover didn’t need any of the “services” ADHS said he needed.
Likewise, the fact that he was out of the country most of the time and in the hospital part of the time when he returned from abroad and was honorably discharged from military service, and therefore unable to avail himself of the “services” never sank in on the judges or ADHS.
Late in the game, the court appointed counsel to “represent” Glover. I use quotation marks around the word “represent” because the dissenting justice at the appellate court described that representation this way:
The quality of the appointed counsel’s representation at this late stage of the case supports an inference that the purpose of the appointment was not to assist Mr. Glover in negotiating his way through the juvenile courts to gain custody of E.G., but rather to facilitate his exit by terminating his parental rights.
The dissent’s description is given considerably more weight by the fact that Glover’s lawyer made no effort to assert at trial any of the very obvious legal issues presented by the termination of a fit father’s parental rights. Having failed to assert them at trial, they couldn’t be asserted on appeal. To make her malpractice still more obvious, Glover’s attorney filed his appeal but under a “no-merit” procedure. That’s one in which the lawyer files the appeal because her client demands it, but tells the court it has no merit. This was “zealous representation” by an attorney? It’s more like a bad joke.
In short, the lawyer worked hand-in-glove with ADHS and the judges to cut the father out of his child’s life. My strong belief is that ADHS wanted that all along. That’s why its counsel convinced the judges to order the long list of “services” for Glover to comply with. ADHS hoped that Glover wouldn’t comply due to his deployment overseas and failure to comply would lose him his parental rights. And that’s just what happened. Some people may call that justice. I call it a conspiracy.
Not surprisingly, Glover lost his appeal. The appellate majority said he hadn’t raised any of his issues on appeal, so there was no way he could win. Fair enough. Or was it?
On the contrary, the dissenting judge, Josephine Hart, completely destroyed the majority’s summary dismissal of Glover’s appeal. She points out that, due to a case decided by the Arkansas Supreme Court (the Mahone case) during the pendency of Glover’s case, the state cannot interfere with the parenting rights of a fit parent.
The Mahone court overruled Judkins and held that custody of a child taken from a custodial parent should result in first shifting custody to the nonoffending, noncustodial parent.
Importantly, the Mahone court relied on U.S. Supreme Court precedent in so ruling.
The United States Supreme Court has stated that it is a fundamental right to parent a child without interference by the state. Accordingly, there first must be a showing of unfitness before the state may intervene. The fact that one parent is unfit does not alter the state’s burden to prove that the other parent is also unable to care for the child before it may interfere in the family… Without a finding of unfitness, the state has no constitutional authority to exercise that power. Under current Supreme Court authority, the existence of a single fit parent, regardless of the acts of the other parent, negates the state’s ability to interfere in the family unit.
Those are, once again, Judge Josephine Hart’s. She was writing at the appellate level in Mahone and, when the case got to it, the Arkansas Supreme Court agreed.
More importantly still, the trial court in Glover’s case had no jurisdiction. In order to exercise any authority over his rights, it had to first find that he was unfit. It didn’t because he wasn’t. Therefore, the matter could be raised for the first time on appeal.
It can therefore be raised before the Arkansas Supreme Court. From here, it looks like a slam-dunk win.
To date, however, the lesson Edward Glover’s case teaches us is just how determined child welfare agencies are to cut fathers out of the lives of their children and how willing courts are to comply.
Source http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=22391
Monday, December 12, 2011
Judge sides with Godboldo, won't reinstate criminal charges
by Doug Guthrie
Detroit— Two judges in different Wayne County courtrooms sided Monday with a mother who resisted police forcing their way into her home last March to take her teenage daughter during a dispute with a Child Protective Services worker over medications.
A Family Court judge Monday afternoon accepted positive medical and education reports, and over the objections of an assistant state attorney general representing the Department of Health and Human Services, dismissed jurisdiction that had for nine months come between now 14-year-old Arianna Godboldo and her family.
Earlier Monday, a Wayne County Circuit judge refused to reinstate criminal charges, dismissed in August by a 36th District Court judge, that alleged the mother, Maryanne Godboldo, illegally resisted and assaulted police by allegedly firing a shot at them.
Family members hugged and issued thanks to the judges in both courtrooms, but authorities aren't done pursuing the Godboldos.
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy's office issued a statement Monday, vowing to make a third appeal to reinstate criminal charges.
And, Family Court Judge Lynne Pierce told Assistant Attorney General Deborah Carley, who complained it appears the girl has never received anything other than homeschooling her entire life, she is not barred from pursuing criminal truancy charges if she feels the parents are flouting state law that required the education of children.
"There may be some more evaluation to be done, but I don't see any more need of this court's continued involvement," Pierce said.
Wayne County Circuit Judge Gregory Bill ruled in the morning against claims by the prosecutor that 36th District Judge Ronald Giles committed judicial error in August when he threw out the criminal charges. Bill said Giles was correct in concluding there was insufficient evidence to order Godboldo to trial.
"It is clear to me that he (Giles) doesn't think the defendant shot at anybody," Bill said, concluding if a shot was fired inside the house, it was fired at the ceiling and perhaps not by the mother.
"Did the child get a hold of the gun? I don't know," Bill said. "There are so many statements that are conflicting evidence, and Judge Giles went out of his way to allow the prosecutor to clear this up."
Godboldo's lawyers have said all along this was about parental rights to make medical decisions on behalf of their children, and the government abused its authority in obtaining an order to take the child without a court hearing. They also said the improper action created a conflict with police that resulted in criminal charges.
"It is absurd," Godboldo lawyer Byron Pitts said about the possibility of another appeal. "Four different judges have said they believe this family did nothing wrong. This includes another District Court judge, Judge (Paula) Humphries, who ruled earlier on some matters. It has been clear to these judges that this all stems from one overzealous caseworker, and continued appeals now border on persecution."
Acting on a call from Wayne County Child Protective Services worker Mia Wenk — who told police she had obtained an order to remove the child on a claim of medical neglect — Detroit police officers on March 24 accused her of firing a handgun at them through a plaster wall after she refused to let them inside. It took hours to talk Godboldo out of the house. She was jailed for several days until her release on bond, and her daughter was held in a state psychiatric facility for almost two months.
Godboldo was charged with resisting and assaulting police, as well as use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. Giles tossed out the charges because he said the order used by police as authority to enter the house was invalid. It was never authorized by a judge, but had a rubber stamp signature. Police also testified they don't normally enforce civil court orders, but they had been told by the protective services worker it was a criminal warrant.
Bill said his opinion should not be considered as a criticism of Detroit police, but he raised questions about the behavior of the social worker, whom he described as "young." Bill hinted Wenk was impatient, filled out a legal order that was woefully inadequate, broke with established policy by calling 911 to have Detroit police enforce it rather then confront the woman herself, and then misrepresented the meaning of the order to police.
Pierce had ruled in September against the government's claims the mother had committed medical abuse by withholding a controversial anti-psychotic medication. The girl was being treated for a sudden onset of psychotic behavior the mother believes was caused by a bad reaction to immunizations.
Pierce determined Godboldo was within her rights to terminate the voluntary treatment program. The judge ordered the girl returned to the mother's home Sept. 29. A hearing to finalize the juvenile case also is scheduled for later Monday.
Godboldo said Monday she and her daughter had a difficult Sunday night because of heightened anxiety over the coming hearing. She said she hopes authorities will this time accept a judge's assessment of the situation and not appeal again.
"I hope they understand they are affecting people's lives," she said. "They should know of the damage they have done to my daughter because they broke the law."
Godboldo said her daughter had been doing better, but she was continuing to be home schooled because psychiatric troubles continue that she attributes to "effects from the immunizations." She said the girl, who wears a prosthetic leg, continues to enjoy studying dance and music, and playing her conga drums.
"She is coming along," Godboldo said. "She is doing better because she is at home where she belongs."
Source http://www.detnews.com/article/20111212/METRO01/112120383/1409/metro08
Detroit— Two judges in different Wayne County courtrooms sided Monday with a mother who resisted police forcing their way into her home last March to take her teenage daughter during a dispute with a Child Protective Services worker over medications.
A Family Court judge Monday afternoon accepted positive medical and education reports, and over the objections of an assistant state attorney general representing the Department of Health and Human Services, dismissed jurisdiction that had for nine months come between now 14-year-old Arianna Godboldo and her family.
Earlier Monday, a Wayne County Circuit judge refused to reinstate criminal charges, dismissed in August by a 36th District Court judge, that alleged the mother, Maryanne Godboldo, illegally resisted and assaulted police by allegedly firing a shot at them.
Family members hugged and issued thanks to the judges in both courtrooms, but authorities aren't done pursuing the Godboldos.
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy's office issued a statement Monday, vowing to make a third appeal to reinstate criminal charges.
And, Family Court Judge Lynne Pierce told Assistant Attorney General Deborah Carley, who complained it appears the girl has never received anything other than homeschooling her entire life, she is not barred from pursuing criminal truancy charges if she feels the parents are flouting state law that required the education of children.
"There may be some more evaluation to be done, but I don't see any more need of this court's continued involvement," Pierce said.
Wayne County Circuit Judge Gregory Bill ruled in the morning against claims by the prosecutor that 36th District Judge Ronald Giles committed judicial error in August when he threw out the criminal charges. Bill said Giles was correct in concluding there was insufficient evidence to order Godboldo to trial.
"It is clear to me that he (Giles) doesn't think the defendant shot at anybody," Bill said, concluding if a shot was fired inside the house, it was fired at the ceiling and perhaps not by the mother.
"Did the child get a hold of the gun? I don't know," Bill said. "There are so many statements that are conflicting evidence, and Judge Giles went out of his way to allow the prosecutor to clear this up."
Godboldo's lawyers have said all along this was about parental rights to make medical decisions on behalf of their children, and the government abused its authority in obtaining an order to take the child without a court hearing. They also said the improper action created a conflict with police that resulted in criminal charges.
"It is absurd," Godboldo lawyer Byron Pitts said about the possibility of another appeal. "Four different judges have said they believe this family did nothing wrong. This includes another District Court judge, Judge (Paula) Humphries, who ruled earlier on some matters. It has been clear to these judges that this all stems from one overzealous caseworker, and continued appeals now border on persecution."
Acting on a call from Wayne County Child Protective Services worker Mia Wenk — who told police she had obtained an order to remove the child on a claim of medical neglect — Detroit police officers on March 24 accused her of firing a handgun at them through a plaster wall after she refused to let them inside. It took hours to talk Godboldo out of the house. She was jailed for several days until her release on bond, and her daughter was held in a state psychiatric facility for almost two months.
Godboldo was charged with resisting and assaulting police, as well as use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. Giles tossed out the charges because he said the order used by police as authority to enter the house was invalid. It was never authorized by a judge, but had a rubber stamp signature. Police also testified they don't normally enforce civil court orders, but they had been told by the protective services worker it was a criminal warrant.
Bill said his opinion should not be considered as a criticism of Detroit police, but he raised questions about the behavior of the social worker, whom he described as "young." Bill hinted Wenk was impatient, filled out a legal order that was woefully inadequate, broke with established policy by calling 911 to have Detroit police enforce it rather then confront the woman herself, and then misrepresented the meaning of the order to police.
Pierce had ruled in September against the government's claims the mother had committed medical abuse by withholding a controversial anti-psychotic medication. The girl was being treated for a sudden onset of psychotic behavior the mother believes was caused by a bad reaction to immunizations.
Pierce determined Godboldo was within her rights to terminate the voluntary treatment program. The judge ordered the girl returned to the mother's home Sept. 29. A hearing to finalize the juvenile case also is scheduled for later Monday.
Godboldo said Monday she and her daughter had a difficult Sunday night because of heightened anxiety over the coming hearing. She said she hopes authorities will this time accept a judge's assessment of the situation and not appeal again.
"I hope they understand they are affecting people's lives," she said. "They should know of the damage they have done to my daughter because they broke the law."
Godboldo said her daughter had been doing better, but she was continuing to be home schooled because psychiatric troubles continue that she attributes to "effects from the immunizations." She said the girl, who wears a prosthetic leg, continues to enjoy studying dance and music, and playing her conga drums.
"She is coming along," Godboldo said. "She is doing better because she is at home where she belongs."
Source http://www.detnews.com/article/20111212/METRO01/112120383/1409/metro08
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Mother who won't give up faces prison - California
By JON CASSIDY
SANTA ANA – The state took Niveen Ismail's son and gave him to somebody else.
Now authorities are trying to lock her up, charging her with going too far to get him back.
Ismail, of Newport Beach, went to trial in Orange County Superior Court this week on a single charge of solicitation to kidnap - the result of a December 2009 meeting with a private investigator and an undercover police officer who was wearing a wire. The charge carries three years.
In the meantime, she is waging her own battle in federal court with civil rights lawsuits that question why California is the only state not to follow a Supreme Court ruling on how to terminate parental rights.
In the criminal case, the prosecution says Ismail asked the investigator to kidnap her then 7-year-old son, Anthony, from his foster family and take him to Mexico or France, where Ismail would pick him up and return to her native Egypt.
But in a videotape of the meeting played in court Thursday, Ismail never appeared to instruct anyone to kidnap her son, although the audio is garbled at times. A potential kidnapping plan is discussed, but Ismail says on tape at least seven times that she just wants to go with another plan: surveillance on her son's foster family in hopes of digging up or manufacturing dirt.
After she insists on Plan A – surveillance – the undercover officer encourages her to give him $2,000 to get a fake passport for Anthony, so that they can at least get started with Plan B, kidnapping, according to the tape. She agrees and emails him a photo of Anthony to use, but then backs out, agreeing only to give him $500 to start surveillance, according to the tape.
As she left that December meeting to go to the bank, she was arrested by Newport Beach police, who had been listening in, according to court records.
The meeting with the private investigator and undercover officer came just a few weeks after Ismail got word that the U.S. Supreme Court had denied her appeal of the legal proceedings that took her son away. (Later, in 2010 and 2011, she filed civil rights lawsuits against most of the agencies involved, which are pending.)
Deputy District Attorney Beth Costello said that Ismail "resorted to the illegal" after her appeals over the adoption case were exhausted.
Ismail's son was taken by the Orange County Social Services Agency in 2005 after she left him home alone, according to court records. Huntington Beach police found her preschool-age son alone in his crib after a neighbor heard him crying.
Social workers came in to take the boy. Ismail, a single mother, had gone to work even though her child care arrangement fell through that day, her attorney, Ann Cunningham said.
In supervised visits, Ismail failed to set boundaries – not giving Anthony time-outs, allowing him a cookie when he didn't finish his meal, social workers reported, court records said.
A fair-haired boy with almond eyes and a winsome smile, Anthony was placed with a "fost-adopt" family in Lake Forest, three months after he was taken from Ismail, and has been with them ever since.
In her lawsuit, Ismail accuses the social workers of deciding early on to adopt her son out to another family and thwart any chance at reunification by incessant fault-finding, such as:
She fed him a tuna fish sandwich during a bowling outing, and tuna got on the ball return.
Her toilet water was blue.
She ordered him an IHOP International Breakfast meal rather than something from the Kids Menu.
At Dave and Busters, on a mid-week afternoon, she allowed her son to use the men's room by himself, while she and a social worker waited by the door.
That last incident was cited by the judge in deciding to terminate reunification efforts, according to Ismail and Cunningham. Taking her son to an establishment with a bar was said to be evidence of bad judgment.
Ismail is arguing that the way California severs parental rights is unconstitutional.
In California, a parent's rights can be effectively terminated before anyone has to present "clear and convincing" evidence that they should be, according to a law journal article that she cites in her lawsuits.
The other 49 states follow a Supreme Court precedent that requires a court to find "clear and convincing evidence" of a parent's unfitness before terminating his or her rights. California follows a looser "preponderance of the evidence" standard. That means a mother loses her child if the court rules it's more likely than not she's a bad one.
The California Supreme Court has decided that the U.S. Supreme Court standard doesn't apply here. By the time a California court considers a mother's rights, they are outweighed by the child's bonds with a new family.
Ismail argues that point in her lawsuits, but first she has her kidnapping case, which continues on Monday.
In November 2009, Ismail called several private investigators, prosecutors allege. One of them, Robert Young, had a history as a police informant.
Young testified Thursday that Ismail approached him with a plan either to dig up dirt on the foster couple or to plant something incriminating. At the end of the meeting, she mentioned a Plan B: kidnapping her son and taking him abroad, he said. Young said he'd have to talk to his partner. Then he called the police, and set up another meeting with Ismail, bringing Newport Beach police officer Neal Schuster, who was posing as his partner.
On tape, the "investigators" say they'd be willing to help her get her son back.
"It's not like we haven't done stuff like this in the past," one says.
"Seriously, can you do Plan B," Ismail asks early on. "What if I ask you to fly him to Libya, or France," she asks later.
Otherwise, she continually steers the conversation back to Plan A, saying she'd need a few more weeks to decide about Plan B.
"I think we're going to go with the first one," Ismail tells him. "If A fails.... I was hoping to do A.... Go with A.... I was hoping A would work.... You don't think A would work?.... Maybe you can work on A for a couple weeks.... Why don't you think about Plan A first.... If you want B, that would take at least a month of preparation for me.... I'm really thinking I want to go with A.... We'll start off with A and if that doesn't work out for you.... A would be good.... I'm still debating what to do."
The prosecution needs to prove that kidnapping was actually requested, not just discussed, according to the state's jury instructions for the charge she is facing.
Source http://www.ocregister.com/news/ismail-330857-court-son.html
SANTA ANA – The state took Niveen Ismail's son and gave him to somebody else.
Now authorities are trying to lock her up, charging her with going too far to get him back.
Ismail, of Newport Beach, went to trial in Orange County Superior Court this week on a single charge of solicitation to kidnap - the result of a December 2009 meeting with a private investigator and an undercover police officer who was wearing a wire. The charge carries three years.
In the meantime, she is waging her own battle in federal court with civil rights lawsuits that question why California is the only state not to follow a Supreme Court ruling on how to terminate parental rights.
In the criminal case, the prosecution says Ismail asked the investigator to kidnap her then 7-year-old son, Anthony, from his foster family and take him to Mexico or France, where Ismail would pick him up and return to her native Egypt.
But in a videotape of the meeting played in court Thursday, Ismail never appeared to instruct anyone to kidnap her son, although the audio is garbled at times. A potential kidnapping plan is discussed, but Ismail says on tape at least seven times that she just wants to go with another plan: surveillance on her son's foster family in hopes of digging up or manufacturing dirt.
After she insists on Plan A – surveillance – the undercover officer encourages her to give him $2,000 to get a fake passport for Anthony, so that they can at least get started with Plan B, kidnapping, according to the tape. She agrees and emails him a photo of Anthony to use, but then backs out, agreeing only to give him $500 to start surveillance, according to the tape.
As she left that December meeting to go to the bank, she was arrested by Newport Beach police, who had been listening in, according to court records.
The meeting with the private investigator and undercover officer came just a few weeks after Ismail got word that the U.S. Supreme Court had denied her appeal of the legal proceedings that took her son away. (Later, in 2010 and 2011, she filed civil rights lawsuits against most of the agencies involved, which are pending.)
Deputy District Attorney Beth Costello said that Ismail "resorted to the illegal" after her appeals over the adoption case were exhausted.
Ismail's son was taken by the Orange County Social Services Agency in 2005 after she left him home alone, according to court records. Huntington Beach police found her preschool-age son alone in his crib after a neighbor heard him crying.
Social workers came in to take the boy. Ismail, a single mother, had gone to work even though her child care arrangement fell through that day, her attorney, Ann Cunningham said.
In supervised visits, Ismail failed to set boundaries – not giving Anthony time-outs, allowing him a cookie when he didn't finish his meal, social workers reported, court records said.
A fair-haired boy with almond eyes and a winsome smile, Anthony was placed with a "fost-adopt" family in Lake Forest, three months after he was taken from Ismail, and has been with them ever since.
In her lawsuit, Ismail accuses the social workers of deciding early on to adopt her son out to another family and thwart any chance at reunification by incessant fault-finding, such as:
She fed him a tuna fish sandwich during a bowling outing, and tuna got on the ball return.
Her toilet water was blue.
She ordered him an IHOP International Breakfast meal rather than something from the Kids Menu.
At Dave and Busters, on a mid-week afternoon, she allowed her son to use the men's room by himself, while she and a social worker waited by the door.
That last incident was cited by the judge in deciding to terminate reunification efforts, according to Ismail and Cunningham. Taking her son to an establishment with a bar was said to be evidence of bad judgment.
Ismail is arguing that the way California severs parental rights is unconstitutional.
In California, a parent's rights can be effectively terminated before anyone has to present "clear and convincing" evidence that they should be, according to a law journal article that she cites in her lawsuits.
The other 49 states follow a Supreme Court precedent that requires a court to find "clear and convincing evidence" of a parent's unfitness before terminating his or her rights. California follows a looser "preponderance of the evidence" standard. That means a mother loses her child if the court rules it's more likely than not she's a bad one.
The California Supreme Court has decided that the U.S. Supreme Court standard doesn't apply here. By the time a California court considers a mother's rights, they are outweighed by the child's bonds with a new family.
Ismail argues that point in her lawsuits, but first she has her kidnapping case, which continues on Monday.
In November 2009, Ismail called several private investigators, prosecutors allege. One of them, Robert Young, had a history as a police informant.
Young testified Thursday that Ismail approached him with a plan either to dig up dirt on the foster couple or to plant something incriminating. At the end of the meeting, she mentioned a Plan B: kidnapping her son and taking him abroad, he said. Young said he'd have to talk to his partner. Then he called the police, and set up another meeting with Ismail, bringing Newport Beach police officer Neal Schuster, who was posing as his partner.
On tape, the "investigators" say they'd be willing to help her get her son back.
"It's not like we haven't done stuff like this in the past," one says.
"Seriously, can you do Plan B," Ismail asks early on. "What if I ask you to fly him to Libya, or France," she asks later.
Otherwise, she continually steers the conversation back to Plan A, saying she'd need a few more weeks to decide about Plan B.
"I think we're going to go with the first one," Ismail tells him. "If A fails.... I was hoping to do A.... Go with A.... I was hoping A would work.... You don't think A would work?.... Maybe you can work on A for a couple weeks.... Why don't you think about Plan A first.... If you want B, that would take at least a month of preparation for me.... I'm really thinking I want to go with A.... We'll start off with A and if that doesn't work out for you.... A would be good.... I'm still debating what to do."
The prosecution needs to prove that kidnapping was actually requested, not just discussed, according to the state's jury instructions for the charge she is facing.
Source http://www.ocregister.com/news/ismail-330857-court-son.html
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Denver Human Services defends two caseworkers sued child Chandler Grafner's starvation death
By Felisa Cardona
Two social workers who were supervising 7-year-old Chandler Grafner's case before he starved to death are still working for Denver Human Services.
Margaret Booker and Mary Peagler are supervisors with the child welfare division of DHS, said agency spokeswoman Revekka Balancier.
Booker supervises the foster care and adoptive family recruitment and support efforts, and Peagler supervises interns and the family visitation program.
On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge William J. Martinez denied a motion to dismiss a wrongful-death lawsuit filed against them by Chandler's estate and his biological parents.
The judge noted that the neglect of Chandler by social services was "conscience-shocking" and that a complaint of child abuse made by a teacher's aide a month before the boy's May 6, 2007, death wasn't thoroughly explored by DHS.
Balancier defended the caseworkers, saying DHS is made up of hundreds of caseworkers and support staff who make it their life's work to help keep children safe.
"The death of a child at the hands of an abuser is a terrible and tragic loss for our community and is deeply felt by every member of our staff," she wrote in an e-mail. "We have confidence that each of our workers performs their duties with grave attention to the safety needs of children, compassion for families who are in crisis and experienced decision making in the complex task of making sure our children's needs are being met."
At the time of Chandler's death, Booker was responsible for investigating claims related to child maltreatment and deciding whether further investigation was warranted. Peagler was in charge of Chandler's case file.
In their motion to dismiss, they claimed that the Jefferson County Department of Human Services was legally responsible for Chandler's care because that agency initially placed him with stepfather Jon Phillips, who abused him.
Martinez disagreed that DHS caseworkers were not directly responsible for Chandler's care.
The judge cited a previous 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling regarding a wrongful-death lawsuit against a caseworker in New Mexico who was in charge of overseeing the adoption of a girl with severe spina bifida.
The 3-year-old girl, Grace Bogey, was beaten to death weeks after her adoption and complaints raised by her nurse, who suspected she was being abused.
In that case, the 10th Circuit overturned a lower court's decision to dismiss a lawsuit against the girl's caseworker who failed to conduct a home visit when the girl's grandfather moved in and the living situation changed.
Martinez said that case was "remarkably similar" to Chandler's case, though he noted that in his view the Denver case was even more egregious in that DHS received complaints from Chandler's school and failed to investigate.
"Chandler died from starvation and dehydration and, at the time of his death was twenty pounds underweight for his age," Martinez wrote in his opinion. "These injuries, by their nature, occur over a period of time. Had Defendants property exercised their professional judgement in response to the April 17, 2007, referral, these injuries may well have been avoided."
Though Martinez paved the way for a jury trial against the caseworkers, a previous ruling dismissed the case against Denver Human Services and the Jefferson County Department of Human Services, based on government immunity.
Chandler was living with Phillips and his girlfriend, Sarah Berry, at the time of his death. Phillips was sentenced to life without parole for first-degree murder, and Berry is serving a 48-year prison sentence for second-degree murder.
Source http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19502308
Two social workers who were supervising 7-year-old Chandler Grafner's case before he starved to death are still working for Denver Human Services.
Margaret Booker and Mary Peagler are supervisors with the child welfare division of DHS, said agency spokeswoman Revekka Balancier.
Booker supervises the foster care and adoptive family recruitment and support efforts, and Peagler supervises interns and the family visitation program.
On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge William J. Martinez denied a motion to dismiss a wrongful-death lawsuit filed against them by Chandler's estate and his biological parents.
The judge noted that the neglect of Chandler by social services was "conscience-shocking" and that a complaint of child abuse made by a teacher's aide a month before the boy's May 6, 2007, death wasn't thoroughly explored by DHS.
Balancier defended the caseworkers, saying DHS is made up of hundreds of caseworkers and support staff who make it their life's work to help keep children safe.
"The death of a child at the hands of an abuser is a terrible and tragic loss for our community and is deeply felt by every member of our staff," she wrote in an e-mail. "We have confidence that each of our workers performs their duties with grave attention to the safety needs of children, compassion for families who are in crisis and experienced decision making in the complex task of making sure our children's needs are being met."
At the time of Chandler's death, Booker was responsible for investigating claims related to child maltreatment and deciding whether further investigation was warranted. Peagler was in charge of Chandler's case file.
In their motion to dismiss, they claimed that the Jefferson County Department of Human Services was legally responsible for Chandler's care because that agency initially placed him with stepfather Jon Phillips, who abused him.
Martinez disagreed that DHS caseworkers were not directly responsible for Chandler's care.
The judge cited a previous 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling regarding a wrongful-death lawsuit against a caseworker in New Mexico who was in charge of overseeing the adoption of a girl with severe spina bifida.
The 3-year-old girl, Grace Bogey, was beaten to death weeks after her adoption and complaints raised by her nurse, who suspected she was being abused.
In that case, the 10th Circuit overturned a lower court's decision to dismiss a lawsuit against the girl's caseworker who failed to conduct a home visit when the girl's grandfather moved in and the living situation changed.
Martinez said that case was "remarkably similar" to Chandler's case, though he noted that in his view the Denver case was even more egregious in that DHS received complaints from Chandler's school and failed to investigate.
"Chandler died from starvation and dehydration and, at the time of his death was twenty pounds underweight for his age," Martinez wrote in his opinion. "These injuries, by their nature, occur over a period of time. Had Defendants property exercised their professional judgement in response to the April 17, 2007, referral, these injuries may well have been avoided."
Though Martinez paved the way for a jury trial against the caseworkers, a previous ruling dismissed the case against Denver Human Services and the Jefferson County Department of Human Services, based on government immunity.
Chandler was living with Phillips and his girlfriend, Sarah Berry, at the time of his death. Phillips was sentenced to life without parole for first-degree murder, and Berry is serving a 48-year prison sentence for second-degree murder.
Source http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19502308
Ohio AG calls for foster care review
Mike DeWine wants to know why kids are not being adopted or reunited with their families.
(Cincinnati) — Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine today called for a complete review of the foster care system in Ohio. DeWine's call for action was made at a Child Safety Summit he hosted in Cincinnati.
"I convened this child safety summit today, the first of many I intend to hold across Ohio, because we need to conduct a comprehensive, holistic review of the entire foster care system in this state," said Attorney General DeWine. "Too many of these children are languishing in foster care with no real hope of ever having a permanent loving home."
About 40 representatives from foster care agencies, law enforcement, advocacy groups, prosecutors' offices, and adoption agencies attended the summit, including Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters, Rita Soronen of the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption, and Moira Weir, director of the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services.
The Summit discussed several issues facing the foster care system, including recent deaths of foster children after being reunified with relatives.
According to data from the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, 33 children died (not necessarily from abuse or neglect) after being in foster care and being reunified with their biological parents from 2005-2010.
Hamilton County has had three deaths of foster children reunified with their biological parents in 2010. In the U.S. Senate, DeWine authored language in the 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act clarifying laws that in issues of family reunification, the best interests of the child always have to come first.
However, DeWine noted today that his call for review is not limited to family reunification.
"There are children in the Ohio child welfare system who are dying, but there are also children dying who have been abused and neglected who have never been in foster care," said Attorney General DeWine. "There are also children in foster care who spend their entire lives in the system, never being adopted into a safe and loving home."
Many of Ohio's foster care children end up "aging out of foster care," DeWine noted. The percentage of children aging out in Ohio is greater than the national average of 11 percent in 2010. In 2009, Ohio emancipated 1,453 foster children, which represented 15 percent of the foster care population.
DeWine also noted the alarming amount of psychiatric medications apparently being prescribed to foster children. A recently released federal Government Accountability Office report said foster children can be prescribed these drugs at doses higher than the maximum levels approved by the FDA, and many foster children received five or more psychiatric drugs at the same time.
Source http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=122520&article=9493889
(Cincinnati) — Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine today called for a complete review of the foster care system in Ohio. DeWine's call for action was made at a Child Safety Summit he hosted in Cincinnati.
"I convened this child safety summit today, the first of many I intend to hold across Ohio, because we need to conduct a comprehensive, holistic review of the entire foster care system in this state," said Attorney General DeWine. "Too many of these children are languishing in foster care with no real hope of ever having a permanent loving home."
About 40 representatives from foster care agencies, law enforcement, advocacy groups, prosecutors' offices, and adoption agencies attended the summit, including Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters, Rita Soronen of the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption, and Moira Weir, director of the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services.
The Summit discussed several issues facing the foster care system, including recent deaths of foster children after being reunified with relatives.
According to data from the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, 33 children died (not necessarily from abuse or neglect) after being in foster care and being reunified with their biological parents from 2005-2010.
Hamilton County has had three deaths of foster children reunified with their biological parents in 2010. In the U.S. Senate, DeWine authored language in the 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act clarifying laws that in issues of family reunification, the best interests of the child always have to come first.
However, DeWine noted today that his call for review is not limited to family reunification.
"There are children in the Ohio child welfare system who are dying, but there are also children dying who have been abused and neglected who have never been in foster care," said Attorney General DeWine. "There are also children in foster care who spend their entire lives in the system, never being adopted into a safe and loving home."
Many of Ohio's foster care children end up "aging out of foster care," DeWine noted. The percentage of children aging out in Ohio is greater than the national average of 11 percent in 2010. In 2009, Ohio emancipated 1,453 foster children, which represented 15 percent of the foster care population.
DeWine also noted the alarming amount of psychiatric medications apparently being prescribed to foster children. A recently released federal Government Accountability Office report said foster children can be prescribed these drugs at doses higher than the maximum levels approved by the FDA, and many foster children received five or more psychiatric drugs at the same time.
Source http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=122520&article=9493889
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Court upholds termination of soldier’s parental rights - Arkansas
By John Lyon
LITTLE ROCK — The Arkansas Court of Appeals today upheld the state Department of Human Services’ decision to terminate the parental rights of an Arkansas man who was serving in the Army in Iraq when his wife’s boyfriend severely injured his 5-month-old son.
A six-judge panel of the court ruled 5-1 that Edward Glover’s appeal of the ruling was without merit. The dissenting judge said the appeal did have merit because Pulaski County circuit judges exceeded their authority in requiring Glover to “jump through various hoops” to retain custody of his son even though he had done nothing wrong.
According to the judges’ opinions, it was discovered in April 2009 that Glover’s son had been the victim of severe abuse. The boy had bruising to his scalp and around his eyes, retinal hemorrhages, perforation of his stomach, a liver contusion, a possible lung contusion, three rib fractures and burns in several places.
Glover was serving in Iraq at the time. DHS and the circuit court determined that the abuser was Glover’s wife’s lover and that Glover’s wife knew that her boyfriend had a history of domestic violence but chose to discount it. The parental rights of Glover’s wife were terminated.
Glover obtained emergency leave and returned to Arkansas in May 2009. He attended a series of hearings, presided over by a series of judges, and was given a long list of orders to comply with, including obtaining a psychological examination, attending parenting classes, attending anger-management classes and submitting to DNA tests and random drug and alcohol screenings, among other things.
Glover’s parental rights were terminated in February of this year for failing to comply with the orders. His lawyer filed a “no merit” appeal — meaning the lawyer believed the appeal was without merit but filed it at Glover’s insistence — and asked to be allowed to withdraw from the case.
Today, the Court of Appeals granted the lawyer’s request and affirmed the order terminating Glover’s parental rights, finding that the appeal was “wholly without merit.”
Judge John Pittman wrote the majority opinion, with Judges Robert Gladwin, John Robbins, Robin Wynne and David Glover concurring.
Judge Josephine Hart wrote in the dissent that the circuit judges had no authority to impose the requirements on Glover.
“The reason (for the judges’ orders) was the criminal battery of the child by a person who was engaged in an adulterous relationship with the child’s mother while Mr. Glover was deployed more than 4,000 miles away in the armed forces of his country,” Hart wrote.
Pittman said in the majority opinion that “the dissenting judge’s passionate outrage is noteworthy,” but he said the issues she raised were not raised in any of the circuit court hearings and could not be considered for the first time on appeal.
Source http://arkansasnews.com/2011/12/07/court-upholds-termination-of-soldier%E2%80%99s-parental-rights/
LITTLE ROCK — The Arkansas Court of Appeals today upheld the state Department of Human Services’ decision to terminate the parental rights of an Arkansas man who was serving in the Army in Iraq when his wife’s boyfriend severely injured his 5-month-old son.
A six-judge panel of the court ruled 5-1 that Edward Glover’s appeal of the ruling was without merit. The dissenting judge said the appeal did have merit because Pulaski County circuit judges exceeded their authority in requiring Glover to “jump through various hoops” to retain custody of his son even though he had done nothing wrong.
According to the judges’ opinions, it was discovered in April 2009 that Glover’s son had been the victim of severe abuse. The boy had bruising to his scalp and around his eyes, retinal hemorrhages, perforation of his stomach, a liver contusion, a possible lung contusion, three rib fractures and burns in several places.
Glover was serving in Iraq at the time. DHS and the circuit court determined that the abuser was Glover’s wife’s lover and that Glover’s wife knew that her boyfriend had a history of domestic violence but chose to discount it. The parental rights of Glover’s wife were terminated.
Glover obtained emergency leave and returned to Arkansas in May 2009. He attended a series of hearings, presided over by a series of judges, and was given a long list of orders to comply with, including obtaining a psychological examination, attending parenting classes, attending anger-management classes and submitting to DNA tests and random drug and alcohol screenings, among other things.
Glover’s parental rights were terminated in February of this year for failing to comply with the orders. His lawyer filed a “no merit” appeal — meaning the lawyer believed the appeal was without merit but filed it at Glover’s insistence — and asked to be allowed to withdraw from the case.
Today, the Court of Appeals granted the lawyer’s request and affirmed the order terminating Glover’s parental rights, finding that the appeal was “wholly without merit.”
Judge John Pittman wrote the majority opinion, with Judges Robert Gladwin, John Robbins, Robin Wynne and David Glover concurring.
Judge Josephine Hart wrote in the dissent that the circuit judges had no authority to impose the requirements on Glover.
“The reason (for the judges’ orders) was the criminal battery of the child by a person who was engaged in an adulterous relationship with the child’s mother while Mr. Glover was deployed more than 4,000 miles away in the armed forces of his country,” Hart wrote.
Pittman said in the majority opinion that “the dissenting judge’s passionate outrage is noteworthy,” but he said the issues she raised were not raised in any of the circuit court hearings and could not be considered for the first time on appeal.
Source http://arkansasnews.com/2011/12/07/court-upholds-termination-of-soldier%E2%80%99s-parental-rights/
Woman sues DYFS after her adopted child was allegedly sexually, physically abused under institution's watch - New Jersey
By Megan DeMarco/Statehouse Bureau
TRENTON — While under the care of the state’s child protection agency, a Monmouth county baby was burned, beaten, and sexually abused, then ignored as doctor after doctor recommended therapy for anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder, a lawyer for her adopted mother says.
Three different caseworkers at the state’s Division of Youth and Family Services could have stopped the abuse several times, attorney David Mazie contends, but none did.
Now the girl is 13, and her adopted mother is suing the state Division of Youth and Family Services and three caseworkers for damages in a trial that kicked off Monday with impassioned opening arguments in Trenton.
Child advocates say it is rare for civil cases against DYFS to reach a full trial, where the actions of caseworkers in charge of protecting children can be put on full display.
The case also comes amid an ongoing overhaul of the child welfare system that was in its early stage when the allegations were first raised.
Some child welfare advocates say the case indicates problems that exist in DYFS to this day, but others say reports of a federal monitor appointed in 2003 show the child protection system is improving. The state has spent more than $1 billion on the reforms.
"To the extent that there is any good news in all this it is only that this case is part of the legacy of DYFS’ failed past," said Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform. He added the federal monitor’s reports show, "this is a much better agency now than it was before, and such tragedies are a lot less likely."
Richard Gelles, a dean at the University of Pennsylvania who provided expert testimony for the woman suing DYFS, said the case exposes "a severe systemic dysfunction" that still exists, noting that some of those who handled the girl’s case continued to work for the division. One of the three caseworkers named in the case worked for the Department of Children and Families as of Sept. 30, according to public payroll records.
During opening arguments, Mazie outlined alleged negligence by DYFS from 2000 to 2005, when the girl, identified as S.A., was placed with the woman who would adopt her.
"They failed in this case, they failed miserably. They turned a blind eye on this child," Mazie said. "This is going to be with her for the rest of her life."
As a 2-year-old, she was given to her biological father in 2000, without proper vetting, Mazie said. While in his care and under DYFS supervision, the toddler suffered sexual and physical abuse.
She was brought to the emergency room twice, and a neighbor reported she had burns on her body and a belt mark on her chest, the attorney said. She was removed when the father’s girlfriend reported she was bound, beaten and hanging from a hook in the wall, he added.
Mazie said after she was removed from the home, doctors recommended therapy for post traumatic stress disorder. It took DYFS two years to provide it, and escalated the girl’s anxiety by allowing visits with her father, he said.
He added that a caseworker was supposed to visit with the girl once a month, but there were several months when no one appeared at the home, or checked on her in foster care.
Elliott Abrutyn, a lawyer hired by the state to represent DYFS, said children under the state’s care also have a legal guardian independent of DYFS, and often the caseworkers were following court orders.
"What happened to (her) of course is tragic," he said, telling the jury that it was "paramount" to understand DYFS caseworkers "were always absolutely looking out for the best interest of the child."
Abrutyn said doctors who treated the baby when she was brought into the emergency room could have reported suspected abuse to DYFS, and did not.
"Whatever our clients did, they did in good faith," he said.
Lauren Kidd, a spokeswoman for DYFS, said the division does not comment on pending litigation.
The adopted mother, identified only as L.A., is seeking monetary damages to assist in the care of her daughter. The case is expected to last two to three weeks.
Source http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/woman_sues_dyfs_after_her_adop.html
TRENTON — While under the care of the state’s child protection agency, a Monmouth county baby was burned, beaten, and sexually abused, then ignored as doctor after doctor recommended therapy for anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder, a lawyer for her adopted mother says.
Three different caseworkers at the state’s Division of Youth and Family Services could have stopped the abuse several times, attorney David Mazie contends, but none did.
Now the girl is 13, and her adopted mother is suing the state Division of Youth and Family Services and three caseworkers for damages in a trial that kicked off Monday with impassioned opening arguments in Trenton.
Child advocates say it is rare for civil cases against DYFS to reach a full trial, where the actions of caseworkers in charge of protecting children can be put on full display.
The case also comes amid an ongoing overhaul of the child welfare system that was in its early stage when the allegations were first raised.
Some child welfare advocates say the case indicates problems that exist in DYFS to this day, but others say reports of a federal monitor appointed in 2003 show the child protection system is improving. The state has spent more than $1 billion on the reforms.
"To the extent that there is any good news in all this it is only that this case is part of the legacy of DYFS’ failed past," said Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform. He added the federal monitor’s reports show, "this is a much better agency now than it was before, and such tragedies are a lot less likely."
Richard Gelles, a dean at the University of Pennsylvania who provided expert testimony for the woman suing DYFS, said the case exposes "a severe systemic dysfunction" that still exists, noting that some of those who handled the girl’s case continued to work for the division. One of the three caseworkers named in the case worked for the Department of Children and Families as of Sept. 30, according to public payroll records.
During opening arguments, Mazie outlined alleged negligence by DYFS from 2000 to 2005, when the girl, identified as S.A., was placed with the woman who would adopt her.
"They failed in this case, they failed miserably. They turned a blind eye on this child," Mazie said. "This is going to be with her for the rest of her life."
As a 2-year-old, she was given to her biological father in 2000, without proper vetting, Mazie said. While in his care and under DYFS supervision, the toddler suffered sexual and physical abuse.
She was brought to the emergency room twice, and a neighbor reported she had burns on her body and a belt mark on her chest, the attorney said. She was removed when the father’s girlfriend reported she was bound, beaten and hanging from a hook in the wall, he added.
Mazie said after she was removed from the home, doctors recommended therapy for post traumatic stress disorder. It took DYFS two years to provide it, and escalated the girl’s anxiety by allowing visits with her father, he said.
He added that a caseworker was supposed to visit with the girl once a month, but there were several months when no one appeared at the home, or checked on her in foster care.
Elliott Abrutyn, a lawyer hired by the state to represent DYFS, said children under the state’s care also have a legal guardian independent of DYFS, and often the caseworkers were following court orders.
"What happened to (her) of course is tragic," he said, telling the jury that it was "paramount" to understand DYFS caseworkers "were always absolutely looking out for the best interest of the child."
Abrutyn said doctors who treated the baby when she was brought into the emergency room could have reported suspected abuse to DYFS, and did not.
"Whatever our clients did, they did in good faith," he said.
Lauren Kidd, a spokeswoman for DYFS, said the division does not comment on pending litigation.
The adopted mother, identified only as L.A., is seeking monetary damages to assist in the care of her daughter. The case is expected to last two to three weeks.
Source http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/woman_sues_dyfs_after_her_adop.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)