By Jordan Steffen
Barely two weeks after state officials announced a plan to reduce the number of children who die after entering Colorado's child welfare program, the same agency began work Friday to relax rules dictating when caseworkers must investigate reports of abuse and neglect.
The Colorado Department of Human Services is proposing a change that would remove a rule requiring that county social workers automatically open an investigation if they receive three reports of child abuse or neglect within two years — and the first two referrals were not investigated. Instead, social workers would examine prior contacts with the child — such as any actions taken and services provided — to determine whether an investigation is warranted.
Julie Krow, head of the department's Office of Children, Youth and Families, and Judy Rodriguez, assistant director of the Division of Child Welfare, presented the proposal at Friday's meeting of the State Board of Human Services.
The rule change could help conserve limited resources and allow social workers to focus on cases that may be more severe, Rodriguez said.
"Supervisors look at each case and approve or disapprove a referral," Rodriguez said. "They are the ones who know their communities."
Opponents of the rule change said the proposal is based on anecdotes instead of data.
"In a time when we've had 43 child deaths, one would think that we would be trying to figure out how to address our own accountability," said Stephanie Villafuerte, executive director of the Rocky Mountain Children's Law Center. "We don't need to be worrying about giving discretion to the caseworkers, but we should figure out what went wrong in the discretion that was already given."
An investigation by The Denver Post in January showed that in the past five years, 43 children died after entering the state's child welfare system. In every one of the deaths — which occurred in 18 counties — social workers repeatedly failed to complete basic functions, according to a review of state investigative reports.
In 17 of those cases, county social workers failed to start an investigation after a report of abuse or neglect warranted one.
Friday's discussion occurred less than a month after the department opened its second child fatality review this year — an Adams County boy allegedly killed by his grandmother.
Such an investigation is opened whenever a child's death is a result of abuse or neglect and there was contact with the child welfare system during the two previous years.
Board members are selected by Gov. John Hickenlooper and operate outside of the department. The board holds public hearings on the first Friday of every month to discuss proposed changes to the rules that regulate county child welfare departments.
Friday, board members expressed mixed responses to the proposed rule changes. Some said they worried that changing the rule could result in children falling through the cracks, while others advocated for more county control.
"We're trusting people to make the first judgment, we're trusting them to make the second, but for some reason we're not trusting them to make the third," said Stephen Johnson, board member and county commissioner for Larimer County.
REAL Colorado, an initiative of Colorado Counties Inc., suggested the rule change to the state department last fall.
The board approved the proposal to go forward to a final adoption hearing, scheduled for April 6. Before then, the board requested data about who is making the referrals and how many each county receives.
Source http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_20092427
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 welfare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label child welfare. Show all posts
Monday, March 5, 2012
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
State Keeps Death Files of Abused Children Secret - New York
By JO CRAVEN McGINTY
When Elisa Izquierdo, a 6-year-old, was killed by her mother in 1995, she became a symbol of a dysfunctional bureaucracy, one that allowed a drug addict to retain custody of her daughter despite numerous reports of abuse.
The resulting outcry led to an overhaul of New York City’s child welfare system and the passage in Albany of Elisa’s Law, a measure loosening the secrecy regulations in child-abuse investigations. Among other reforms, the law required a public accounting of the events leading up to the death of any child in New York State who had been reported as abused or neglected.
But for the last five years, the state’s Office of Children and Family Services has been working quietly and persistently to limit access to those case reports, which in most instances are the only record of the circumstances leading up to the deaths.
In 2007, the office tried to have the law changed. When that failed, it made its own rule. According to a policy enacted by the office in September 2008, it will not release the fatality reports mandated by Elisa’s Law if there are siblings or other children in the home and officials decide that revealing the family’s abuse and investigative history is not in their “best interests.”
“This is like back to the future,” said Jeffrey Binder, who was press secretary for former State Senator Roy M. Goodman, Republican of Manhattan, when he sponsored Elisa’s Law. “We were trying very hard to remove the veil of secrecy.”
After The New York Times began asking about the policy on withholding reports, a spokesman for Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo said the governor’s office would review the change.
The fatality reports were intended to permit public scrutiny of the performance of child welfare authorities while protecting the privacy of those involved. The reports do not identify deceased children, their caseworkers or anyone else by name. But they do list every complaint of abuse or neglect involving the child, the child welfare agency’s response to the complaints, and an assessment of whether the response was adequate.
The state issues about 250 fatality reports each year. And in 2010, for example, two-thirds of the reports issued in New York City involved homes with multiple children, meaning that under its new policy, officials could withhold information about their deaths.
“The whole point of this was to insist we were going to have accountability,” said Martin Guggenheim, a professor of law at New York University and an expert in child welfare law. “What we’re now stuck with is delegating to the commissioner the discretion to refuse to disclose a report because of her conclusion that it wouldn’t be in a child’s best interest.”
The state agency says it changed the rule out of concern for the privacy of surviving children. Elisa’s Law included a provision allowing the office to withhold reports if someone requested to see a particular child’s case. But state officials said anyone could get around that provision by simply asking to see all the reports in a given year.
“Our primary focus is protecting the interests of surviving siblings and family members,” said Gladys Carrión, the commissioner of the Office of Children and Family Services.
Ms. Carrión said she could not provide an example of a child’s being harmed as a result of the release of a fatality report, but she said: “It is not far-fetched that releasing the information of a particular child would have an adverse impact on surviving siblings.”
Before her death, Elisa’s life seemed full of promise. She lived with her devoted father. Teachers described her as radiant. And a benefactor had agreed to pay for her education.
All of that changed when her father died of cancer and her mother, Awilda Lopez, was awarded custody. Ms. Lopez, whom acquaintances described as crazed by crack cocaine, said she saw the devil when she looked into her daughter’s face.
Ms. Lopez beat the girl, abused her sexually and subjected her to a barrage of hurt and humiliation. Finally, she smashed the girl’s head against concrete and left her lying slack-jawed and unconscious for two days until she died. Elisa was buried in Cypress Hills Cemetery in Queens, where the epitaph carved into her tombstone pleads, “World Please Watch Over the Children.”
Relatives, teachers and others who had seen evidence of Elisa’s abuse had complained to child welfare authorities at least seven times.
One major change after Elisa’s death was the creation by New York City of the Administration for Children’s Services, a separate agency devoted to child welfare and protection. Another was Elisa’s Law, which arose out of lawmakers’ frustration when city authorities, citing confidentiality, refused to answer questions about their role in the death.
So far, multiple bills drafted at the request of the Office of Children and Family Services to limit the public disclosure portion of Elisa’s Law have failed. The most recent was introduced in the Assembly in the current legislative session and in January was referred to committee.
The bill would require the state to release its recommendations for administrative or policy changes resulting from a child’s death. But in cases where there are surviving siblings or other children in the home, the bill would permit the state to withhold the details of the family’s case history and how the local child welfare agency responded if releasing those details was deemed to be against the other children’s “best interest.” The local agency, which in New York City is the Administration for Children’s Services, would have a say in the decision, even though that agency might have been responsible for any missteps.
The Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan Democrat who sponsored the Assembly version of Elisa’s Law, would not comment on the changes to public disclosure proposed by the Office of Children and Family Services. But a spokeswoman said on his behalf that any bill to amend Elisa’s Law would be vetted to determine whether the process protects “to the greatest extent possible” New York’s children and their families.
Marcia Robinson Lowry, a lawyer and the director of Children’s Rights Inc., a national watchdog group dedicated to reforming government child welfare services, said limiting access to reports would hurt efforts to make the system more responsive to children in dangerous homes.
“They are something a public advocacy group or a think tank or a responsible party can have available to understand the systemic failures that have led to these children’s deaths,” she said. “They are critically important.”
Source http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/nyregion/nys-evades-requirement-for-disclosure-on-childrens-deaths.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1
When Elisa Izquierdo, a 6-year-old, was killed by her mother in 1995, she became a symbol of a dysfunctional bureaucracy, one that allowed a drug addict to retain custody of her daughter despite numerous reports of abuse.
The resulting outcry led to an overhaul of New York City’s child welfare system and the passage in Albany of Elisa’s Law, a measure loosening the secrecy regulations in child-abuse investigations. Among other reforms, the law required a public accounting of the events leading up to the death of any child in New York State who had been reported as abused or neglected.
But for the last five years, the state’s Office of Children and Family Services has been working quietly and persistently to limit access to those case reports, which in most instances are the only record of the circumstances leading up to the deaths.
In 2007, the office tried to have the law changed. When that failed, it made its own rule. According to a policy enacted by the office in September 2008, it will not release the fatality reports mandated by Elisa’s Law if there are siblings or other children in the home and officials decide that revealing the family’s abuse and investigative history is not in their “best interests.”
“This is like back to the future,” said Jeffrey Binder, who was press secretary for former State Senator Roy M. Goodman, Republican of Manhattan, when he sponsored Elisa’s Law. “We were trying very hard to remove the veil of secrecy.”
After The New York Times began asking about the policy on withholding reports, a spokesman for Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo said the governor’s office would review the change.
The fatality reports were intended to permit public scrutiny of the performance of child welfare authorities while protecting the privacy of those involved. The reports do not identify deceased children, their caseworkers or anyone else by name. But they do list every complaint of abuse or neglect involving the child, the child welfare agency’s response to the complaints, and an assessment of whether the response was adequate.
The state issues about 250 fatality reports each year. And in 2010, for example, two-thirds of the reports issued in New York City involved homes with multiple children, meaning that under its new policy, officials could withhold information about their deaths.
“The whole point of this was to insist we were going to have accountability,” said Martin Guggenheim, a professor of law at New York University and an expert in child welfare law. “What we’re now stuck with is delegating to the commissioner the discretion to refuse to disclose a report because of her conclusion that it wouldn’t be in a child’s best interest.”
The state agency says it changed the rule out of concern for the privacy of surviving children. Elisa’s Law included a provision allowing the office to withhold reports if someone requested to see a particular child’s case. But state officials said anyone could get around that provision by simply asking to see all the reports in a given year.
“Our primary focus is protecting the interests of surviving siblings and family members,” said Gladys Carrión, the commissioner of the Office of Children and Family Services.
Ms. Carrión said she could not provide an example of a child’s being harmed as a result of the release of a fatality report, but she said: “It is not far-fetched that releasing the information of a particular child would have an adverse impact on surviving siblings.”
Before her death, Elisa’s life seemed full of promise. She lived with her devoted father. Teachers described her as radiant. And a benefactor had agreed to pay for her education.
All of that changed when her father died of cancer and her mother, Awilda Lopez, was awarded custody. Ms. Lopez, whom acquaintances described as crazed by crack cocaine, said she saw the devil when she looked into her daughter’s face.
Ms. Lopez beat the girl, abused her sexually and subjected her to a barrage of hurt and humiliation. Finally, she smashed the girl’s head against concrete and left her lying slack-jawed and unconscious for two days until she died. Elisa was buried in Cypress Hills Cemetery in Queens, where the epitaph carved into her tombstone pleads, “World Please Watch Over the Children.”
Relatives, teachers and others who had seen evidence of Elisa’s abuse had complained to child welfare authorities at least seven times.
One major change after Elisa’s death was the creation by New York City of the Administration for Children’s Services, a separate agency devoted to child welfare and protection. Another was Elisa’s Law, which arose out of lawmakers’ frustration when city authorities, citing confidentiality, refused to answer questions about their role in the death.
So far, multiple bills drafted at the request of the Office of Children and Family Services to limit the public disclosure portion of Elisa’s Law have failed. The most recent was introduced in the Assembly in the current legislative session and in January was referred to committee.
The bill would require the state to release its recommendations for administrative or policy changes resulting from a child’s death. But in cases where there are surviving siblings or other children in the home, the bill would permit the state to withhold the details of the family’s case history and how the local child welfare agency responded if releasing those details was deemed to be against the other children’s “best interest.” The local agency, which in New York City is the Administration for Children’s Services, would have a say in the decision, even though that agency might have been responsible for any missteps.
The Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan Democrat who sponsored the Assembly version of Elisa’s Law, would not comment on the changes to public disclosure proposed by the Office of Children and Family Services. But a spokeswoman said on his behalf that any bill to amend Elisa’s Law would be vetted to determine whether the process protects “to the greatest extent possible” New York’s children and their families.
Marcia Robinson Lowry, a lawyer and the director of Children’s Rights Inc., a national watchdog group dedicated to reforming government child welfare services, said limiting access to reports would hurt efforts to make the system more responsive to children in dangerous homes.
“They are something a public advocacy group or a think tank or a responsible party can have available to understand the systemic failures that have led to these children’s deaths,” she said. “They are critically important.”
Source http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/nyregion/nys-evades-requirement-for-disclosure-on-childrens-deaths.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Audit: Child-welfare checks uneven in Minnesota
Article by: JEREMY OLSON
Audit urges state to unify county and tribal standards in handling abuse and neglect allegations.
Minnesota's child welfare system needs stronger guidance to ensure that vulnerable children are treated consistently from one county to another, a legislative audit concluded Tuesday.
Testing county and tribal child-welfare agencies with 10 fictional cases of abuse and neglect, state auditors found wide variations in whether local officials deemed investigations necessary. It was a virtual 50-50 split, for example, on whether agencies would investigate a claim of a small child found wandering a block from home. And 64 percent said they wouldn't investigate as maltreatment a domestic abuse incident that occurred while a child was in another room.
Despite these so-called "gray area referrals," many of the state's child-welfare intake workers made reasonable and thoughtful deliberations, said Carrie Meyerhoff, the lead author of the report for the Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor.
Child welfare advocates sought the audit because of wide regional variations in screening decisions -- and because Minnesota is unique, nationally, for the low rate of child abuse complaints that it "screens in" -- or flags -- for investigation or intervention. In 2010, Minnesota screened in a third of abuse complaints for further action; nationally, the figure was two-thirds, according to a federal Child Maltreatment report. Minnesota had the nation's third-lowest screen-in rate.
The report encouraged the Legislature to clarify the legal definition of "risk of harm," and urged the Department of Human Services to increase its training for evaluating and screening child maltreatment allegations.
Counties, for example, varied in whether they accepted anonymous child-welfare complaints, the auditors found. Meyerhoff said some county officials thought that the statute might prohibit anonymous reports. Erin Sullivan Sutton, an assistant commissioner with the state Department of Human Services, said the State Supreme Court has determined that anonymous reports are valid if they meet all other legal requirements.
The audit didn't address the question of teen neglect or abuse, but Rich Gehrman of Safe Passage for Children of Minnesota said counties are inherently more protective of young children.
"Once you are above a certain age, at least some counties are not going to screen you in no matter what the circumstance," he said.
'Small boats'
Minnesota is one of 11 states that empower counties to manage and help finance child-welfare services. One lawmaker at the hearing questioned whether decisions on abuse allegations would be standardized by creating a single state-run system. Neither Gehrman or Sullivan Sutton endorsed such an approach. Sullivan Sutton said the 11 county-run states have enacted some of the nation's most promising child-welfare reforms.
"It's sometimes easier to move 84 small boats," she said, referring to the number of child-welfare agencies in Minnesota, "than one large ship."
The report did not address why the state screens out more child abuse claims than most other states. Meyerhoff said unreliable data made such a comparison too difficult.
At least one observer said he thinks Minnesota might be doing things right. For example, said Richard Wexler of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, only 15 percent of the screened-in reports in Minnesota are turned away.
About 17 percent are substantiated, which means they become official child-welfare cases -- and kids can potentially be removed from their homes -- while another 65 percent receive alternative services to train parents and stabilize families.
"Minnesota caseworkers spend far less time spinning their wheels and more time actually providing help," Wexler said.
Source http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/wellness/139921823.html
Audit urges state to unify county and tribal standards in handling abuse and neglect allegations.
Minnesota's child welfare system needs stronger guidance to ensure that vulnerable children are treated consistently from one county to another, a legislative audit concluded Tuesday.
Testing county and tribal child-welfare agencies with 10 fictional cases of abuse and neglect, state auditors found wide variations in whether local officials deemed investigations necessary. It was a virtual 50-50 split, for example, on whether agencies would investigate a claim of a small child found wandering a block from home. And 64 percent said they wouldn't investigate as maltreatment a domestic abuse incident that occurred while a child was in another room.
Despite these so-called "gray area referrals," many of the state's child-welfare intake workers made reasonable and thoughtful deliberations, said Carrie Meyerhoff, the lead author of the report for the Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor.
Child welfare advocates sought the audit because of wide regional variations in screening decisions -- and because Minnesota is unique, nationally, for the low rate of child abuse complaints that it "screens in" -- or flags -- for investigation or intervention. In 2010, Minnesota screened in a third of abuse complaints for further action; nationally, the figure was two-thirds, according to a federal Child Maltreatment report. Minnesota had the nation's third-lowest screen-in rate.
The report encouraged the Legislature to clarify the legal definition of "risk of harm," and urged the Department of Human Services to increase its training for evaluating and screening child maltreatment allegations.
Counties, for example, varied in whether they accepted anonymous child-welfare complaints, the auditors found. Meyerhoff said some county officials thought that the statute might prohibit anonymous reports. Erin Sullivan Sutton, an assistant commissioner with the state Department of Human Services, said the State Supreme Court has determined that anonymous reports are valid if they meet all other legal requirements.
The audit didn't address the question of teen neglect or abuse, but Rich Gehrman of Safe Passage for Children of Minnesota said counties are inherently more protective of young children.
"Once you are above a certain age, at least some counties are not going to screen you in no matter what the circumstance," he said.
'Small boats'
Minnesota is one of 11 states that empower counties to manage and help finance child-welfare services. One lawmaker at the hearing questioned whether decisions on abuse allegations would be standardized by creating a single state-run system. Neither Gehrman or Sullivan Sutton endorsed such an approach. Sullivan Sutton said the 11 county-run states have enacted some of the nation's most promising child-welfare reforms.
"It's sometimes easier to move 84 small boats," she said, referring to the number of child-welfare agencies in Minnesota, "than one large ship."
The report did not address why the state screens out more child abuse claims than most other states. Meyerhoff said unreliable data made such a comparison too difficult.
At least one observer said he thinks Minnesota might be doing things right. For example, said Richard Wexler of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, only 15 percent of the screened-in reports in Minnesota are turned away.
About 17 percent are substantiated, which means they become official child-welfare cases -- and kids can potentially be removed from their homes -- while another 65 percent receive alternative services to train parents and stabilize families.
"Minnesota caseworkers spend far less time spinning their wheels and more time actually providing help," Wexler said.
Source http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/wellness/139921823.html
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Child Deaths Up In Families Watched By Ga. Agency
ATLANTA (AP) — Georgia’s child welfare agency has confirmed that child deaths are higher than normal among families who have been under its watch.
The Division of Family and Children Services said that 35 children died in the 10-week period since Dec. 1, all of them from families that have a history with the agency that investigates reports of child abuse and neglect. That’s more than 1/3 the number of child deaths — 92 total — the agency saw in all of 2011 in families it had investigated or monitored.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported (http://bit.ly/yHpj7V) Saturday that officials cautioned that not all of the deaths were caused by abuse or neglect. Still, the child welfare agency’s deputy director, Kathy Herren, said that, “This is a mathematical number that is higher.”
Child advocates said they’re concerned the deaths may signal that the agency isn’t properly investigating homes where children could be in danger.
Georgia DFCS has been criticized for years for being short staffed and losing children’s records. The state settled a 2005 lawsuit that insisted on improving the state-run foster care systems in Fulton and DeKalb counties.
Atlanta attorney Don Keenan, a critic of Georgia’s child welfare system, called the recent deaths reported between Dec. 1 and Feb. 12 “an outrageous figure.”
“That’s a school bus full of kids,” Keenan said.
The Atlanta newspaper and WSB-TV jointly pushed state officials to release the death statistics. Each of the children who had died came from families that had been investigated or monitored by DFCS in the past five years, though the children may not have had open cases at the time of their deaths.
Officials said four of the deaths were attributed to abuse, while 10 were caused by medical problems. Six children died after a parent rolled on top of them while they slept in the same bed. Others were reported to have been killed in bathtub accidents, car wrecks, a house fire and an accidental shooting. Some deaths were listed as having unknown causes with no evidence of abuse.
The agency said three of its workers were fired over the handling of one case involving the Feb. 6 death of a 4-year-old Fulton County boy. DFCS section director Peggy Woodard said the boy apparently died from abuse and had an open case with the agency, but no caseworker had visited the family in about two months. Visits are supposed to happen monthly.
Officials said none of the other child deaths resulted in disciplinary actions.
Source http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2012/02/18/child-deaths-up-in-families-watched-by-ga-agency/
The Division of Family and Children Services said that 35 children died in the 10-week period since Dec. 1, all of them from families that have a history with the agency that investigates reports of child abuse and neglect. That’s more than 1/3 the number of child deaths — 92 total — the agency saw in all of 2011 in families it had investigated or monitored.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported (http://bit.ly/yHpj7V) Saturday that officials cautioned that not all of the deaths were caused by abuse or neglect. Still, the child welfare agency’s deputy director, Kathy Herren, said that, “This is a mathematical number that is higher.”
Child advocates said they’re concerned the deaths may signal that the agency isn’t properly investigating homes where children could be in danger.
Georgia DFCS has been criticized for years for being short staffed and losing children’s records. The state settled a 2005 lawsuit that insisted on improving the state-run foster care systems in Fulton and DeKalb counties.
Atlanta attorney Don Keenan, a critic of Georgia’s child welfare system, called the recent deaths reported between Dec. 1 and Feb. 12 “an outrageous figure.”
“That’s a school bus full of kids,” Keenan said.
The Atlanta newspaper and WSB-TV jointly pushed state officials to release the death statistics. Each of the children who had died came from families that had been investigated or monitored by DFCS in the past five years, though the children may not have had open cases at the time of their deaths.
Officials said four of the deaths were attributed to abuse, while 10 were caused by medical problems. Six children died after a parent rolled on top of them while they slept in the same bed. Others were reported to have been killed in bathtub accidents, car wrecks, a house fire and an accidental shooting. Some deaths were listed as having unknown causes with no evidence of abuse.
The agency said three of its workers were fired over the handling of one case involving the Feb. 6 death of a 4-year-old Fulton County boy. DFCS section director Peggy Woodard said the boy apparently died from abuse and had an open case with the agency, but no caseworker had visited the family in about two months. Visits are supposed to happen monthly.
Officials said none of the other child deaths resulted in disciplinary actions.
Source http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2012/02/18/child-deaths-up-in-families-watched-by-ga-agency/
Friday, February 10, 2012
NJ Child Welfare Officials Faulted In Handling Slain Toddler’s Case, Says DYFS Commissioner
TRENTON, N.J. (CBSNewYork/AP) – Child welfare officials in New Jersey failed to connect concerns of child abuse and domestic violence in the case of a 2-year-old whose father is accused of tossing her to her death still strapped in her car seat.
Children and Families Commissioner Allison Blake on Tuesday released a review over how the agency handled the case of Tierra Morgan-Glover.
The girl was found dead in a creek in Wall Township on Nov. 22. Prosecutors said the toddler’s father, Arthur Morgan III, killed her during a court-approved visit by attaching a tire iron to her car seat to weigh it down before throwing it into the creek from an overpass.
The cause of death was determined to be homicidal violence, including submersion in water.
Morgan was later arrested on Nov. 29 by U.S. Marshals in California after receiving a tip he was staying with friends in the San Diego area.
Child welfare officials investigated the turbulent relationship between Morgan and the child’s mother four times in 13 months before she was found dead.
In Dec., the toddler’s great grandfather blamed the court system for not doing enough to prevent Tierra’s death.
“My granddaughter pleaded with these people not to allow an unsupervised visit. Yet in spite of her request it was denied,” the man said.
The girl’s mother, Imani Benton, said a case worker told the courts there was no reason to deny Morgan unsupervised visitation.
“I reached out to the Department of Youth and Family Services when he hit her and he admitted to hitting her and they still deemed him fit as a parent,” Benton said.
Blake now says caseworkers never consulted with the agency’s domestic violence liaison. They and supervisors also failed to follow-up on recommendations made by the special response unit which first investigated child abuse claims.
Morgan is charged with murder.
Source http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/02/08/nj-child-welfare-officials-faulted-in-handling-slain-toddlers-case-says-dyfs-commissioner/
Children and Families Commissioner Allison Blake on Tuesday released a review over how the agency handled the case of Tierra Morgan-Glover.
The girl was found dead in a creek in Wall Township on Nov. 22. Prosecutors said the toddler’s father, Arthur Morgan III, killed her during a court-approved visit by attaching a tire iron to her car seat to weigh it down before throwing it into the creek from an overpass.
The cause of death was determined to be homicidal violence, including submersion in water.
Morgan was later arrested on Nov. 29 by U.S. Marshals in California after receiving a tip he was staying with friends in the San Diego area.
Child welfare officials investigated the turbulent relationship between Morgan and the child’s mother four times in 13 months before she was found dead.
In Dec., the toddler’s great grandfather blamed the court system for not doing enough to prevent Tierra’s death.
“My granddaughter pleaded with these people not to allow an unsupervised visit. Yet in spite of her request it was denied,” the man said.
The girl’s mother, Imani Benton, said a case worker told the courts there was no reason to deny Morgan unsupervised visitation.
“I reached out to the Department of Youth and Family Services when he hit her and he admitted to hitting her and they still deemed him fit as a parent,” Benton said.
Blake now says caseworkers never consulted with the agency’s domestic violence liaison. They and supervisors also failed to follow-up on recommendations made by the special response unit which first investigated child abuse claims.
Morgan is charged with murder.
Source http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/02/08/nj-child-welfare-officials-faulted-in-handling-slain-toddlers-case-says-dyfs-commissioner/
Child welfare officials saw no red flags from Josh Powell
Blogger Note:
The title of this article is the craziest title possible. It's been known to many of us caught up in the CPS Racket that CPS incapable of seeing REAL trouble when there is REAL reasons to suspect a parent my harm their children, now we have a public statement that they were blind to those very things.
CPS - Here's some hints:
When a suspect moves to another state shortly after his wife disappears, the wife is likely dead!
When a parent is suspected of murdering their wife, the suspects children are likely to be in danger!
When children are in CPS custody, it is your job to make sure that they are safe from harm at anyone's hands - including their father, the suspect in his wife's (the children's mother) disappearance and possible murder!
Questions for CPS:
Why were vistis allowed to take place at this suspected murderers home?
Don't you have supervised and monitored visitation facilities in Washington state?
If not - perhaps you should put some in place.
If you couldn't see the red flags in this case (which were waving high and wildly), how are you able to claim anyone may be abusing or neglecting their children or are a danger to their children in some way?
Whatever happened to your so-called risk assessment garbage?
Are you people blind?
#FAIL!
---
By Brooke Adams
Puyallup, Wash. • As Washington authorities revealed new details about how Josh Powell killed himself and his two young sons in his home, a child welfare spokesman on Monday said there were no red flags that would have barred the visit.
One caseworker from Foster Care Resource Network of Tacoma had supervised all of Powell’s visits with his sons Charlie, 7, and Braden, 5. Those visits initially took place at the network’s office and then, beginning in November, at Powell’s home.
"From the children’s administration point of view, Mr. Powell was not accused of any child abuse or neglect," said Thomas Shapley, senior director of public affairs for the Washington Department of Social and Health Services. "There was no indication of threats to the children or any suicide ideation. This caught everybody by surprise."
Chuck and Judy Cox — who received temporary custody of the boys last September — said Monday the system failed their grandsons and needs to be changed. In light of recent events, it would have been appropriate to suspend Powell’s court-ordered supervised visitation, Chuck Cox said.
Powell learned in a Feb. 1 custody hearing he would not get his boys, back until at least July. The judge also ordered him to submit to a psychosexual evaluation and polygraph test regarding sexually explicit images found on a computer in his West Valley City home in 2009.
"I thought visitation should have stopped until they got that sorted out," Chuck Cox told The Salt Lake Tribune. "We were very afraid something like this could happen, as were the social workers and police. There were too many warning signs that were known, but due to the legal limits [the signs] couldn’t be acted on."
Cox added: "It’s sad that visitation was at his house, which allowed him to set up this whole thing."
The boys were removed from Powell’s care after their paternal grandfather, Steve Powell, was arrested on voyeurism and child pornography charges. Prosecutors said they needed to determine what, if anything, Powell knew about his father’s activities. Powell and his sons had lived in Steve Powell’s Puyallup home since 2010.
Shapley said if his department had received any indication the children were in danger or that Powell was unstable, there are protocols the department could have gone through to postpone visits.
There was nothing, he said.
"We were always on course to have the children returned to him," Shapley said. And while a judge here ordered new tests for Powell, there was no interruption in visitation.
"We were proceeding as per court order," Shapley said.
Police have said Powell planned out a gasoline-fueled fire that took his own life and the lives of his sons Sunday as the boys came to his home for supervised visitation. Shapley said the boys ran into the home and Powell locked out the caseworker, who called 911.
Shapley said he agreed with Washington police that if Powell "was intent on committing this heinous crime, it’s hard to imagine how anyone could have stopped him" no matter who was there or where the visit took place.
One national child welfare expert agrees Washington authorities acted appropriately.
"Unless you expect a caseworker to have 20/20 hindsight or the ability to read minds, no, there was no way to see this coming," said Richard Wexler, director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform based in Virginia. "If they couldn’t imagine it, I don’t know how the court could."
And while the Coxes had fears about what Powell might do, they never imagined he might act during a supervised visit with his sons.
"I had no idea he would be able to get away with dousing the place. Who possibly would do that? Sure, we were concerned about it, but not to go out that way," said Chuck Cox.
The Coxes had felt okay about visits at Powell’s newly rented home for the sake of the boys.
"Anything that would make them feel better, have a better life, we were for it," Chuck Cox said. "We were just doing everything we could to make them happy and have as normal a life as we could with their mom gone."
Wexler called Sunday’s deaths a tragic anomaly and said the most important lesson to learn is "not to try to learn lessons from horror stories because it will then result in hundreds of kids being kept needlessly away from their parents."
The department is conducting an internal review and will also begin a child fatality review, which must be completed in six months or less, Shapley said.
"We do want to see if there are things that can educate our practice going forward," he said.
Source http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53458296-78/powell-child-shapley-cox.html.csp?page=1
The title of this article is the craziest title possible. It's been known to many of us caught up in the CPS Racket that CPS incapable of seeing REAL trouble when there is REAL reasons to suspect a parent my harm their children, now we have a public statement that they were blind to those very things.
CPS - Here's some hints:
When a suspect moves to another state shortly after his wife disappears, the wife is likely dead!
When a parent is suspected of murdering their wife, the suspects children are likely to be in danger!
When children are in CPS custody, it is your job to make sure that they are safe from harm at anyone's hands - including their father, the suspect in his wife's (the children's mother) disappearance and possible murder!
Questions for CPS:
Why were vistis allowed to take place at this suspected murderers home?
Don't you have supervised and monitored visitation facilities in Washington state?
If not - perhaps you should put some in place.
If you couldn't see the red flags in this case (which were waving high and wildly), how are you able to claim anyone may be abusing or neglecting their children or are a danger to their children in some way?
Whatever happened to your so-called risk assessment garbage?
Are you people blind?
#FAIL!
---
By Brooke Adams
Puyallup, Wash. • As Washington authorities revealed new details about how Josh Powell killed himself and his two young sons in his home, a child welfare spokesman on Monday said there were no red flags that would have barred the visit.
One caseworker from Foster Care Resource Network of Tacoma had supervised all of Powell’s visits with his sons Charlie, 7, and Braden, 5. Those visits initially took place at the network’s office and then, beginning in November, at Powell’s home.
"From the children’s administration point of view, Mr. Powell was not accused of any child abuse or neglect," said Thomas Shapley, senior director of public affairs for the Washington Department of Social and Health Services. "There was no indication of threats to the children or any suicide ideation. This caught everybody by surprise."
Chuck and Judy Cox — who received temporary custody of the boys last September — said Monday the system failed their grandsons and needs to be changed. In light of recent events, it would have been appropriate to suspend Powell’s court-ordered supervised visitation, Chuck Cox said.
Powell learned in a Feb. 1 custody hearing he would not get his boys, back until at least July. The judge also ordered him to submit to a psychosexual evaluation and polygraph test regarding sexually explicit images found on a computer in his West Valley City home in 2009.
"I thought visitation should have stopped until they got that sorted out," Chuck Cox told The Salt Lake Tribune. "We were very afraid something like this could happen, as were the social workers and police. There were too many warning signs that were known, but due to the legal limits [the signs] couldn’t be acted on."
Cox added: "It’s sad that visitation was at his house, which allowed him to set up this whole thing."
The boys were removed from Powell’s care after their paternal grandfather, Steve Powell, was arrested on voyeurism and child pornography charges. Prosecutors said they needed to determine what, if anything, Powell knew about his father’s activities. Powell and his sons had lived in Steve Powell’s Puyallup home since 2010.
Shapley said if his department had received any indication the children were in danger or that Powell was unstable, there are protocols the department could have gone through to postpone visits.
There was nothing, he said.
"We were always on course to have the children returned to him," Shapley said. And while a judge here ordered new tests for Powell, there was no interruption in visitation.
"We were proceeding as per court order," Shapley said.
Police have said Powell planned out a gasoline-fueled fire that took his own life and the lives of his sons Sunday as the boys came to his home for supervised visitation. Shapley said the boys ran into the home and Powell locked out the caseworker, who called 911.
Shapley said he agreed with Washington police that if Powell "was intent on committing this heinous crime, it’s hard to imagine how anyone could have stopped him" no matter who was there or where the visit took place.
One national child welfare expert agrees Washington authorities acted appropriately.
"Unless you expect a caseworker to have 20/20 hindsight or the ability to read minds, no, there was no way to see this coming," said Richard Wexler, director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform based in Virginia. "If they couldn’t imagine it, I don’t know how the court could."
And while the Coxes had fears about what Powell might do, they never imagined he might act during a supervised visit with his sons.
"I had no idea he would be able to get away with dousing the place. Who possibly would do that? Sure, we were concerned about it, but not to go out that way," said Chuck Cox.
The Coxes had felt okay about visits at Powell’s newly rented home for the sake of the boys.
"Anything that would make them feel better, have a better life, we were for it," Chuck Cox said. "We were just doing everything we could to make them happy and have as normal a life as we could with their mom gone."
Wexler called Sunday’s deaths a tragic anomaly and said the most important lesson to learn is "not to try to learn lessons from horror stories because it will then result in hundreds of kids being kept needlessly away from their parents."
The department is conducting an internal review and will also begin a child fatality review, which must be completed in six months or less, Shapley said.
"We do want to see if there are things that can educate our practice going forward," he said.
Source http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53458296-78/powell-child-shapley-cox.html.csp?page=1
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
State officials investigating several cases of abuse of adopted children
By Barbara LaBoe
An alleged child starvation case near Longview is one of more than a dozen cases — including one death — that have state officials reviewing how adopted children are placed and treated.
The number of abuse cases is small compared to all adoptions. But a string of high-profile child starvation cases last year — including one from May accusing Jeffrey and Rebecca Trebilcock of starving their five adopted children at their Bunker Hill-area home — has state officials alarmed.
"Starting in the beginning of 2011 we started seeing a cluster effect of these types of cases," said Mary Meinig, director of the state's Family and Children's Ombudsman office, who included a section about adoption abuse in her annual report, released last week.
Many of the cases include starvation. "We have so many great adoptive homes in the state, but then we also have these. ... I think it's apparent that it needs to be looked at."
"We want to jump start this as quickly as possible," said Denise Revels Robinson, assistant secretary of the state Department of Social and Health Services. "There's a sense of urgency here. Not crisis, but urgency, because these are very serious issues."
One adopted child, 13-year-old Hana Williams of Sedro Wooley, died in May from hypothermia and starvation after being left outside as punishment. The Trebilcock's adopted son, then 13, landed in emergency room in March so severely malnourished that he weighed just 49 pounds, according to court documents.
Officials are concerned at the severity of these cases, the apparent spike in them and that so many seem to involve adopted children. The adoption cases are particularly concerning because screening by the state or private adoption agencies should catch unfit parents before children are placed.
Dr. Frances Chalmers, a Mount Vernon pediatrician who consults with DSHS, began to get a "nagging feeling" that something was up and started tracking starvation cases herself. Meinig started doing the same, finding 15 adoption or guardianship cases since 2009 that involved starvation or severe abuse. Eleven of those cases were in 2011.
Not all the cases listed in Meinig's report became public because, unlike the Trebilcocks, not all the parents were criminally charged. All are horrific, though, including cases where children were beaten with wooden boards embedded with nails, sexually abused and severely malnourished.
While Hana Williams' death is the most serious and disturbing case, "even the kids who don't die are significantly traumatized," Chalmers, said.
Adoptions, concerns increasing
Officials aren't sure if the surge of cases in 2011 is the start of a disturbing new trend — but they're working to find out. A work group of child experts - ordered by Gov. Chris Gregoire — will look at adoptions, including foreign adoptions, as well as abuse by withholding food.
Among other topics, they'll investigate:
• Are neglect and abuse — including withholding food — on the rise and are they more prevalent in adoptive homes?
The state hasn't tracked withholding food cases before. Anecdotally, though, the number of cases seems to be rising. Of the five criminal withholding food cases statewide in 2011, four involved adoptions.
It's also possible that increased social worker training — and publicity about the most horrific cases — may have led to more cases being reported last year, said DSHS Spokeswoman Sherry Hill.
• Did a rapid increase in adoptions let some unfit parents slip through the cracks?
In recent years, state and federal law encouraged quicker adoptions to move children out of foster care and into permanent homes. Meinig said they need to examine if it's also lead to unfit parents being approved for adoption.
In 2002, there were 1,074 adoptions of Washington children in foster care or other child welfare programs. By 2009 that number nearly doubled to 2,091. The increase from 2008 to 2009 alone was 66 percent. Nationally, the increase from 2002 to 2009 was only 12 percent.
• Does the adoption process itself need to be reworked?
Child welfare officials screen parents adopting through the state foster care system and license private adoption agencies, but state workers do not screen private adoptions or adoptions in other states or countries. Some of the cases highlighted by Meinig included non-Washington adoptions or families who had no prior contact with state Child Protective Services. The state group will investigate if more oversight is needed.
• Does age, race or gender play a role in abuse of adopted children?
Some of the cases highlighted by Meinig involved foreign and/or cross-race adoptions. Officials don't know if that played a role in these cases, but want to examine it further. Three of the Trebilcock's five adopted were from Haiti.
There isn't one simple answer, though, because abuse itself is so complex.
"Nobody's going to say during screening that ‘If I don't like them, I'm not going to feed them,' " Meinig said. "And I don't think anyone actually envisions that they're going to do this. I think it's a progression thing that happens."
Local case, common threads
The Trebilcocks deny they starved their children and are fighting the charges in both the criminal and child dependency courts. (See related story.)
But Meinig said the allegations in the case bear several of the hallmarks common in all the cases she reviewed.
The five adopted Trebilcock children, ages 8 to 14, told investigators they were denied food. Kitchen cabinets had alarms on them and the children were punished for "stealing food," they said. Other family members, though, appeared well-fed, according to investigators.
"There was plenty of food" in all the cases, Meinig said. "These were really purposeful withholding and punishment and control. ... Food is kind of the ultimate control."
The Trebilcock children also told investigators they were beaten and made to stand outside, isolated from the rest of the family - another commonality Meinig found in many of the cases. The Trebilcocks also were home-schooled, which some officials say can be a way hiding the signs of starvation.
"Food withholding as a form of abuse has been around forever, from its mildest form of a misbehaving child being sent to bed without dinner to really severe cases of withholding that lead to medical problems," said Dr. Chalmers, who helps train social workers to look for signs of abuse. "So I've been trying to think about ways we could identify these kids before they die or end up in the hospital for malnutrition."
Reluctance to call
State officials hope the group of child experts can meet by early February and complete its work by May.
Any recommendations will be forwarded to DSHS, which will brief the governor's office as well as the Legislature, Revels Robinson said.
The state's budget crunch doesn't leave much extra money for new programs or enforcement, but Revels Robinson said she believes many of the recommendations could be relatively inexpensive. Some of the changes could be a change of emphasis in screenings, for example. Additional or substitute training also could provided to social workers at little cost, she said.
Officials also stress one of the best defenses against child abuse is for people to speak up when they suspect it. Too often people are afraid to "cause trouble" and then live to regret it, they said. And while there may not be immediate action from one report or call, that doesn't mean the calls are ignored, they said.
"We really do rely on the eyes and ears of the community to alert us," Revels Robinson said.
Hana Williams — the 13-year-old who died in May — "had a number of friends and family who now say ‘I wish I'd called earlier,'" Chalmers said. "We really need to encourage people to be less reluctant to make those calls."
Source http://tdn.com/news/local/state-officials-investigating-several-cases-of-abuse-of-adopted-children/article_7fac29c2-3f25-11e1-b980-0019bb2963f4.html
An alleged child starvation case near Longview is one of more than a dozen cases — including one death — that have state officials reviewing how adopted children are placed and treated.
The number of abuse cases is small compared to all adoptions. But a string of high-profile child starvation cases last year — including one from May accusing Jeffrey and Rebecca Trebilcock of starving their five adopted children at their Bunker Hill-area home — has state officials alarmed.
"Starting in the beginning of 2011 we started seeing a cluster effect of these types of cases," said Mary Meinig, director of the state's Family and Children's Ombudsman office, who included a section about adoption abuse in her annual report, released last week.
Many of the cases include starvation. "We have so many great adoptive homes in the state, but then we also have these. ... I think it's apparent that it needs to be looked at."
"We want to jump start this as quickly as possible," said Denise Revels Robinson, assistant secretary of the state Department of Social and Health Services. "There's a sense of urgency here. Not crisis, but urgency, because these are very serious issues."
One adopted child, 13-year-old Hana Williams of Sedro Wooley, died in May from hypothermia and starvation after being left outside as punishment. The Trebilcock's adopted son, then 13, landed in emergency room in March so severely malnourished that he weighed just 49 pounds, according to court documents.
Officials are concerned at the severity of these cases, the apparent spike in them and that so many seem to involve adopted children. The adoption cases are particularly concerning because screening by the state or private adoption agencies should catch unfit parents before children are placed.
Dr. Frances Chalmers, a Mount Vernon pediatrician who consults with DSHS, began to get a "nagging feeling" that something was up and started tracking starvation cases herself. Meinig started doing the same, finding 15 adoption or guardianship cases since 2009 that involved starvation or severe abuse. Eleven of those cases were in 2011.
Not all the cases listed in Meinig's report became public because, unlike the Trebilcocks, not all the parents were criminally charged. All are horrific, though, including cases where children were beaten with wooden boards embedded with nails, sexually abused and severely malnourished.
While Hana Williams' death is the most serious and disturbing case, "even the kids who don't die are significantly traumatized," Chalmers, said.
Adoptions, concerns increasing
Officials aren't sure if the surge of cases in 2011 is the start of a disturbing new trend — but they're working to find out. A work group of child experts - ordered by Gov. Chris Gregoire — will look at adoptions, including foreign adoptions, as well as abuse by withholding food.
Among other topics, they'll investigate:
• Are neglect and abuse — including withholding food — on the rise and are they more prevalent in adoptive homes?
The state hasn't tracked withholding food cases before. Anecdotally, though, the number of cases seems to be rising. Of the five criminal withholding food cases statewide in 2011, four involved adoptions.
It's also possible that increased social worker training — and publicity about the most horrific cases — may have led to more cases being reported last year, said DSHS Spokeswoman Sherry Hill.
• Did a rapid increase in adoptions let some unfit parents slip through the cracks?
In recent years, state and federal law encouraged quicker adoptions to move children out of foster care and into permanent homes. Meinig said they need to examine if it's also lead to unfit parents being approved for adoption.
In 2002, there were 1,074 adoptions of Washington children in foster care or other child welfare programs. By 2009 that number nearly doubled to 2,091. The increase from 2008 to 2009 alone was 66 percent. Nationally, the increase from 2002 to 2009 was only 12 percent.
• Does the adoption process itself need to be reworked?
Child welfare officials screen parents adopting through the state foster care system and license private adoption agencies, but state workers do not screen private adoptions or adoptions in other states or countries. Some of the cases highlighted by Meinig included non-Washington adoptions or families who had no prior contact with state Child Protective Services. The state group will investigate if more oversight is needed.
• Does age, race or gender play a role in abuse of adopted children?
Some of the cases highlighted by Meinig involved foreign and/or cross-race adoptions. Officials don't know if that played a role in these cases, but want to examine it further. Three of the Trebilcock's five adopted were from Haiti.
There isn't one simple answer, though, because abuse itself is so complex.
"Nobody's going to say during screening that ‘If I don't like them, I'm not going to feed them,' " Meinig said. "And I don't think anyone actually envisions that they're going to do this. I think it's a progression thing that happens."
Local case, common threads
The Trebilcocks deny they starved their children and are fighting the charges in both the criminal and child dependency courts. (See related story.)
But Meinig said the allegations in the case bear several of the hallmarks common in all the cases she reviewed.
The five adopted Trebilcock children, ages 8 to 14, told investigators they were denied food. Kitchen cabinets had alarms on them and the children were punished for "stealing food," they said. Other family members, though, appeared well-fed, according to investigators.
"There was plenty of food" in all the cases, Meinig said. "These were really purposeful withholding and punishment and control. ... Food is kind of the ultimate control."
The Trebilcock children also told investigators they were beaten and made to stand outside, isolated from the rest of the family - another commonality Meinig found in many of the cases. The Trebilcocks also were home-schooled, which some officials say can be a way hiding the signs of starvation.
"Food withholding as a form of abuse has been around forever, from its mildest form of a misbehaving child being sent to bed without dinner to really severe cases of withholding that lead to medical problems," said Dr. Chalmers, who helps train social workers to look for signs of abuse. "So I've been trying to think about ways we could identify these kids before they die or end up in the hospital for malnutrition."
Reluctance to call
State officials hope the group of child experts can meet by early February and complete its work by May.
Any recommendations will be forwarded to DSHS, which will brief the governor's office as well as the Legislature, Revels Robinson said.
The state's budget crunch doesn't leave much extra money for new programs or enforcement, but Revels Robinson said she believes many of the recommendations could be relatively inexpensive. Some of the changes could be a change of emphasis in screenings, for example. Additional or substitute training also could provided to social workers at little cost, she said.
Officials also stress one of the best defenses against child abuse is for people to speak up when they suspect it. Too often people are afraid to "cause trouble" and then live to regret it, they said. And while there may not be immediate action from one report or call, that doesn't mean the calls are ignored, they said.
"We really do rely on the eyes and ears of the community to alert us," Revels Robinson said.
Hana Williams — the 13-year-old who died in May — "had a number of friends and family who now say ‘I wish I'd called earlier,'" Chalmers said. "We really need to encourage people to be less reluctant to make those calls."
Source http://tdn.com/news/local/state-officials-investigating-several-cases-of-abuse-of-adopted-children/article_7fac29c2-3f25-11e1-b980-0019bb2963f4.html
Saturday, January 14, 2012
More Missouri babies die as laws, oversight lag
BY NANCY CAMBRIA
After their first child was born prematurely and died, Lily Rieger's parents wanted to be as cautious as possible with their second baby girl.
Lily's parents checked out 11 child care facilities, six of them licensed.
The centers felt too antiseptic and institutional. So they focused on home day care providers and interviewed five.
They went with Jennifer Winkler of Eureka. She was warm and friendly and had two young children. She didn't have a child care license, but that didn't seem to be important in a home day care. The parents felt further assured because two St. Louis County police officers sent their children to her house for care. "They looked like a normal, typical family," said Lily's father, Bill Weishaar, of their decision to hire Winkler. "But nobody ever told me you take a great risk in putting a baby in somebody's hands when there is no second adult around."
Last year, Lily's parents joined a growing list of those whose young children died from violence or preventable accidents in Missouri's vast array of unregulated home day cares.
In October, the Post-Dispatch profiled more than 40 deaths from 2007 through 2010, pointing to what many child advocates now regard as one of the greatest safety issues facing children in the state: lax standards and oversight of home day cares.
Now, state records show that even as momentum to address the problem builds among legislators and prosecutors, the deaths continue. Preliminary statistics for the first seven months of 2011 indicate Lily was one of at least nine children to die last year in child care for reasons not clearly linked to an illness.
On July 29, Lily's father dropped off his happy 13-month-old with Winkler. Lily was airlifted that afternoon to Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center in need of emergency surgery to control swelling and bleeding in her brain. She was taken off life support two days later.
Though doctors never told the parents they suspected Lily had been shaken, her mother, Kara Rieger, said they didn't have to. Doctors explained that Lily's brain had been torn from the tissue that anchored it to her skull, causing it to slosh from side to side.
Winkler, who is in jail awaiting trial, has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder and fatal abuse of a child. Her attorney could not be reached for comment.
A CALL TO ACTION
The nine deaths reported in child care in 2011 are an incomplete tally. The state's child fatality review system may not have a final report until next year.
But the latest deaths continue a pattern the Post-Dispatch uncovered in a six-month investigation last year. Seven of the nine reported deaths in 2011 were in unlicensed home day cares, where caregivers are not required to have any training, need not adhere to safety standards and have little or no oversight.
The Post-Dispatch previously reported that 41 of 45 deaths in child care in the prior four years occurred in unlicensed home day cares. The newspaper's investigation showed Missouri has some of the weakest child care regulations in the nation, allowing the bulk of Missouri children to enroll in unregulated day cares.
In the most egregious cases, the investigation found children died in day cares where providers repeatedly defied enrollment laws. In one of those fatality cases, a provider was attempting to care for eight children under the age of 2.
After years of inaction on legislation seeking to deter deaths in child care, this year may be different.
"It's starting to generate more discussion among the constituencies that drive what we do," said Sen. Scott Rupp, R-Wentzville, the 2012 Senate sponsor of Nathan's Law and Sam Pratt's Law — two child care safety bills that have languished in past sessions. "I've had the president of the Senate ask if someone was dealing with this, and we said we were."
In a final report released this month, the new bipartisan House Interim Committee on Strengthening Missouri Families also recommended to House Speaker Steven Tilley the passage of Sam Pratt's Law and Nathan's Law in light of testimony that cited the Post-Dispatch investigation.
Those bills aim to tighten enrollment limits in unlicensed day cares, increase fines for rogue providers and give the state power to shutter unlicensed day cares that may be dangerous.
A St. Louis consortium of five child welfare and day care agencies has declared day care safety a top agenda item.
"Protecting the lives of kids is essentially the bottom line, and the state of Missouri needs to be compelled to ensure the basic safety and well-being of kids in child care," said Richard Patton, director of Vision for Children at Risk, the umbrella agency for the coalition. Patton said the Missouri Children's Leadership Council, a statewide coalition of child service agencies, also had made child care safety a top agenda issue this year.
SIMILAR ACCIDENTS
The latest deaths also point to an ongoing crisis centered on sleep safety in unlicensed care.
The Post-Dispatch investigation found that more than three-fourths of the deaths from 2007 through 2010 were sleep-related, most often in unregulated care where children were put down for a nap in unsafe conditions. Similarly, four of five suspected accidental suffocations last year occurred in unregulated homes.
Among them was Jordan Brooks, 4 months. He slept overnight at his unlicensed care providers' home in Ferguson in February because of inclement weather. Police and medical examiner records show that on Feb. 1, about 1:30 a.m., Jordan was placed on his abdomen on a couch by one of the caregivers.
Safe sleep experts say babies should always be placed in a crib on their backs for sleep.
The caregiver then fell asleep on the sofa with the baby. When the caregiver awoke three hours later, Jordan was not breathing. An official with the St. Louis County Medical Examiner's Office said the man rolled onto Jordan in his sleep, causing the baby to suffocate.
"I had no idea they weren't using a crib, and I definitely didn't know they were co-sleeping with him," said Jordan's mother, Ashley Brooks. She said she felt as if her son's death had been ignored.
Because reports on most deaths in unlicensed child care remain sealed from the public, parents seeking child care cannot find out whether a child has died in a specific provider's care.
Police records indicate Jordan's caregivers were investigated afterward by state regulators for possibly caring for too many children without a required license. But because no rule violation was found, the regulatory file was sealed. Under state law, unsubstantiated investigations of rule violations are not open to the public.
Brooks said the couple continued to run an unlicensed day care out of their home. They are still not subject to inspections or state safety standards.
MORE PUNISHMENT
The 2011 child care deaths — like those from prior years — show that the most dangerous day cares for children are homes in which providers defy rules by caring for too many children. Those rules require a license when caregivers care for more than four children who are not related to them.
The Post-Dispatch investigation found that prosecutors rarely charged providers operating without a license with a crime, even after a child died in their care, because the punishment was so lenient. State law currently allows a maximum $200 fine for a crime that's classified on the same level as a traffic ticket.
But in 2011, with increased scrutiny on illegal day cares, at least two such deaths led to criminal charges.
In one case, caregiver Cherie Kohenskey of Troy, Mo., was charged with second-degree involuntary manslaughter — the first time a serious felony charge has been brought against a provider in Missouri regarding an accidental sleep suffocation. The charges carry a maximum four-year jail term and $5,000 fine.
Parent Jody Haggard said Kohenskey assured her she would watch only four children for pay on July 21 when Haggard dropped her infant off at the home day care. Haggard's son, Levi, 2 months, suffocated later that day after being put down for a nap on his abdomen in an adult bed. State documents allege the caregiver was watching eight children unrelated to her, as well as two of her own.
Lincoln County Prosecutor Leah Askey said she didn't want to charge Kohenskey, but a grand jury did.
"The parents lost their infant son who was otherwise healthy because the day care provider had too many children in her care and wasn't adequately able to provide supervision," she said. "I certainly don't think she was malicious, but at the same time I do believe that child's life was lost and it didn't have to be."
Kohenskey pleaded not guilty. Her attorney declined to comment on the case, which is still pending.
In another case, caregiver Michelle Brown was charged with false impersonation, after Macie Barton, 3 months, died in her home day care in Lee's Summit. The day Macie died, police and regulators documented six children, all under 2, in Brown's home. Court and regulatory documents also suggest Brown lied to police and parents about being licensed.
Brown could not be reached through her attorney. She pleaded guilty in September and was given two years' unsupervised probation.
The official cause of Macie's death was pneumonia, yet she had been to the pediatrician that morning for a follow-up on an ear infection and there were no health concerns. Experts in sleep deaths have said that traces of pneumonia in the lungs too often lead pathologists to rule the illness a cause of death when accidental suffocation is probably the cause. Macie died while napping for a long period in a swing, a sleep practice that experts in infant sleep death consider hazardous.
Barton said she was pleased that Brown must now serve two years of probation. But she's offended by the other part of the sentence: a $10 fine.
"Ten dollars, seriously? What's the point of even fining her then?" she said. "That is extremely insulting to me."
TRAGEDY INTO LIGHT
Lily Rieger's parents are waiting for justice for their daughter.
They think that Lily would be alive today had her caregiver received mandatory training that included information on the dangers of shaking a baby.
The parents said they came forward about Lily to remind others that much of what happens in unregulated home child care is seen only by the eyes of very young children.
Even after Winkler was formally charged and the death was reported in the media, Winkler was described by police as a "baby sitter," and not a day care provider. Weishaar said parents should know Winkler cared for at least three other children part time, in addition to her two young children.
But in Missouri, the distinction between who is an occasional baby sitter and who is a regular, home-based child care provider is often difficult to determine in state records, even in cases in which a crime against a child may have taken place.
There are no public files on Winkler with child care regulators. Under state law, Winkler was not required to register her child care with the state.
So it has fallen to Lily's parents to let the public know.
Source http://www.stltoday.com/news/special-reports/daycares/more-missouri-babies-die-as-laws-oversight-lag/article_086e3cb5-1d44-5512-a038-4d4c2ff70eed.html
After their first child was born prematurely and died, Lily Rieger's parents wanted to be as cautious as possible with their second baby girl.
Lily's parents checked out 11 child care facilities, six of them licensed.
The centers felt too antiseptic and institutional. So they focused on home day care providers and interviewed five.
They went with Jennifer Winkler of Eureka. She was warm and friendly and had two young children. She didn't have a child care license, but that didn't seem to be important in a home day care. The parents felt further assured because two St. Louis County police officers sent their children to her house for care. "They looked like a normal, typical family," said Lily's father, Bill Weishaar, of their decision to hire Winkler. "But nobody ever told me you take a great risk in putting a baby in somebody's hands when there is no second adult around."
Last year, Lily's parents joined a growing list of those whose young children died from violence or preventable accidents in Missouri's vast array of unregulated home day cares.
In October, the Post-Dispatch profiled more than 40 deaths from 2007 through 2010, pointing to what many child advocates now regard as one of the greatest safety issues facing children in the state: lax standards and oversight of home day cares.
Now, state records show that even as momentum to address the problem builds among legislators and prosecutors, the deaths continue. Preliminary statistics for the first seven months of 2011 indicate Lily was one of at least nine children to die last year in child care for reasons not clearly linked to an illness.
On July 29, Lily's father dropped off his happy 13-month-old with Winkler. Lily was airlifted that afternoon to Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center in need of emergency surgery to control swelling and bleeding in her brain. She was taken off life support two days later.
Though doctors never told the parents they suspected Lily had been shaken, her mother, Kara Rieger, said they didn't have to. Doctors explained that Lily's brain had been torn from the tissue that anchored it to her skull, causing it to slosh from side to side.
Winkler, who is in jail awaiting trial, has pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder and fatal abuse of a child. Her attorney could not be reached for comment.
A CALL TO ACTION
The nine deaths reported in child care in 2011 are an incomplete tally. The state's child fatality review system may not have a final report until next year.
But the latest deaths continue a pattern the Post-Dispatch uncovered in a six-month investigation last year. Seven of the nine reported deaths in 2011 were in unlicensed home day cares, where caregivers are not required to have any training, need not adhere to safety standards and have little or no oversight.
The Post-Dispatch previously reported that 41 of 45 deaths in child care in the prior four years occurred in unlicensed home day cares. The newspaper's investigation showed Missouri has some of the weakest child care regulations in the nation, allowing the bulk of Missouri children to enroll in unregulated day cares.
In the most egregious cases, the investigation found children died in day cares where providers repeatedly defied enrollment laws. In one of those fatality cases, a provider was attempting to care for eight children under the age of 2.
After years of inaction on legislation seeking to deter deaths in child care, this year may be different.
"It's starting to generate more discussion among the constituencies that drive what we do," said Sen. Scott Rupp, R-Wentzville, the 2012 Senate sponsor of Nathan's Law and Sam Pratt's Law — two child care safety bills that have languished in past sessions. "I've had the president of the Senate ask if someone was dealing with this, and we said we were."
In a final report released this month, the new bipartisan House Interim Committee on Strengthening Missouri Families also recommended to House Speaker Steven Tilley the passage of Sam Pratt's Law and Nathan's Law in light of testimony that cited the Post-Dispatch investigation.
Those bills aim to tighten enrollment limits in unlicensed day cares, increase fines for rogue providers and give the state power to shutter unlicensed day cares that may be dangerous.
A St. Louis consortium of five child welfare and day care agencies has declared day care safety a top agenda item.
"Protecting the lives of kids is essentially the bottom line, and the state of Missouri needs to be compelled to ensure the basic safety and well-being of kids in child care," said Richard Patton, director of Vision for Children at Risk, the umbrella agency for the coalition. Patton said the Missouri Children's Leadership Council, a statewide coalition of child service agencies, also had made child care safety a top agenda issue this year.
SIMILAR ACCIDENTS
The latest deaths also point to an ongoing crisis centered on sleep safety in unlicensed care.
The Post-Dispatch investigation found that more than three-fourths of the deaths from 2007 through 2010 were sleep-related, most often in unregulated care where children were put down for a nap in unsafe conditions. Similarly, four of five suspected accidental suffocations last year occurred in unregulated homes.
Among them was Jordan Brooks, 4 months. He slept overnight at his unlicensed care providers' home in Ferguson in February because of inclement weather. Police and medical examiner records show that on Feb. 1, about 1:30 a.m., Jordan was placed on his abdomen on a couch by one of the caregivers.
Safe sleep experts say babies should always be placed in a crib on their backs for sleep.
The caregiver then fell asleep on the sofa with the baby. When the caregiver awoke three hours later, Jordan was not breathing. An official with the St. Louis County Medical Examiner's Office said the man rolled onto Jordan in his sleep, causing the baby to suffocate.
"I had no idea they weren't using a crib, and I definitely didn't know they were co-sleeping with him," said Jordan's mother, Ashley Brooks. She said she felt as if her son's death had been ignored.
Because reports on most deaths in unlicensed child care remain sealed from the public, parents seeking child care cannot find out whether a child has died in a specific provider's care.
Police records indicate Jordan's caregivers were investigated afterward by state regulators for possibly caring for too many children without a required license. But because no rule violation was found, the regulatory file was sealed. Under state law, unsubstantiated investigations of rule violations are not open to the public.
Brooks said the couple continued to run an unlicensed day care out of their home. They are still not subject to inspections or state safety standards.
MORE PUNISHMENT
The 2011 child care deaths — like those from prior years — show that the most dangerous day cares for children are homes in which providers defy rules by caring for too many children. Those rules require a license when caregivers care for more than four children who are not related to them.
The Post-Dispatch investigation found that prosecutors rarely charged providers operating without a license with a crime, even after a child died in their care, because the punishment was so lenient. State law currently allows a maximum $200 fine for a crime that's classified on the same level as a traffic ticket.
But in 2011, with increased scrutiny on illegal day cares, at least two such deaths led to criminal charges.
In one case, caregiver Cherie Kohenskey of Troy, Mo., was charged with second-degree involuntary manslaughter — the first time a serious felony charge has been brought against a provider in Missouri regarding an accidental sleep suffocation. The charges carry a maximum four-year jail term and $5,000 fine.
Parent Jody Haggard said Kohenskey assured her she would watch only four children for pay on July 21 when Haggard dropped her infant off at the home day care. Haggard's son, Levi, 2 months, suffocated later that day after being put down for a nap on his abdomen in an adult bed. State documents allege the caregiver was watching eight children unrelated to her, as well as two of her own.
Lincoln County Prosecutor Leah Askey said she didn't want to charge Kohenskey, but a grand jury did.
"The parents lost their infant son who was otherwise healthy because the day care provider had too many children in her care and wasn't adequately able to provide supervision," she said. "I certainly don't think she was malicious, but at the same time I do believe that child's life was lost and it didn't have to be."
Kohenskey pleaded not guilty. Her attorney declined to comment on the case, which is still pending.
In another case, caregiver Michelle Brown was charged with false impersonation, after Macie Barton, 3 months, died in her home day care in Lee's Summit. The day Macie died, police and regulators documented six children, all under 2, in Brown's home. Court and regulatory documents also suggest Brown lied to police and parents about being licensed.
Brown could not be reached through her attorney. She pleaded guilty in September and was given two years' unsupervised probation.
The official cause of Macie's death was pneumonia, yet she had been to the pediatrician that morning for a follow-up on an ear infection and there were no health concerns. Experts in sleep deaths have said that traces of pneumonia in the lungs too often lead pathologists to rule the illness a cause of death when accidental suffocation is probably the cause. Macie died while napping for a long period in a swing, a sleep practice that experts in infant sleep death consider hazardous.
Barton said she was pleased that Brown must now serve two years of probation. But she's offended by the other part of the sentence: a $10 fine.
"Ten dollars, seriously? What's the point of even fining her then?" she said. "That is extremely insulting to me."
TRAGEDY INTO LIGHT
Lily Rieger's parents are waiting for justice for their daughter.
They think that Lily would be alive today had her caregiver received mandatory training that included information on the dangers of shaking a baby.
The parents said they came forward about Lily to remind others that much of what happens in unregulated home child care is seen only by the eyes of very young children.
Even after Winkler was formally charged and the death was reported in the media, Winkler was described by police as a "baby sitter," and not a day care provider. Weishaar said parents should know Winkler cared for at least three other children part time, in addition to her two young children.
But in Missouri, the distinction between who is an occasional baby sitter and who is a regular, home-based child care provider is often difficult to determine in state records, even in cases in which a crime against a child may have taken place.
There are no public files on Winkler with child care regulators. Under state law, Winkler was not required to register her child care with the state.
So it has fallen to Lily's parents to let the public know.
Source http://www.stltoday.com/news/special-reports/daycares/more-missouri-babies-die-as-laws-oversight-lag/article_086e3cb5-1d44-5512-a038-4d4c2ff70eed.html
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Colorado appeals court allows abused siblings to sue social workers
By Felisa Cardona
Three siblings severely abused in the home of their biological mother and later in foster care can pursue their lawsuit against Adams County social workers who allegedly failed to protect them and deceived their adoptive parents about the extent of their problems, the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled Thursday.
In the summer of 2002, the siblings — then ages 9, 6 and 3 — were adopted by a couple who only learned about the history of abuse on the eve of the adoption. The children were engaging in incestuous acts with each other, and one of them had to be removed from their home because she was suicidal.
The fallout of the abuse was so egregious that the adoptive parents installed alarms in the children's rooms to prevent them from abusing each other. The couple ended up divorcing, blaming the failure of the marriage on the stress caused by the children's emotional problems.
The names of the parents and siblings are being withheld by The Denver Post because the children are victims of sexual abuse and naming their adoptive parents would identify them.
The adoptive parents sued the Adams County Department of Social Services, asserting that social workers had a duty to fully disclose the background of the children. But the parents lost their case when a jury decided that the social workers were not "willful and wanton" in failing to inform them of the history of abuse.
Thursday's ruling allows lawyers for the children to proceed to trial with different claims — that the siblings' rights to be free from harm were violated by the workers entrusted to protect them.
"Evidence was presented at the first trial about the extraordinary challenges these children would face as a result of the defendants' conduct, and unfortunately it all seems to be coming to pass," said attorney Jordan Factor, who argued the case at the Colorado Court of Appeals.
Adams County argued that the social workers, Joan Forsmark, Cathy O'Donnell and Angela Lytle, were protected from the lawsuit by the state's governmental immunity law.
The court disagreed and concluded that Lytle, who as a division director of child welfare supervised O'Donnell and Forsmark, acted "recklessly."
"Lytle increased the children's vulnerability to the danger by not preparing the (adoptive parents) to deal with their extraordinary emotional needs, and by continuing to support the children's adoption as a sibling group, despite the revelations of incest, which distinguished them from the type of children the (adoptive parents) had indicated they were ready to adopt," the court's opinion reads. "This conduct put the children at substantial risk of serious, immediate, and proximate harm that was known to or suspected by Lytle at the time of the adoption. Such allegations show that Lytle acted recklessly in conscious disregard of that risk. And such conduct, when viewed in total, is conscience shocking."
Adams County Attorney Hal Warren declined to comment on the merits of the claims because the case is heading to trial.
Warren is reviewing the court's ruling to decide whether an appeal to the state Supreme Court is possible.
O'Donnell is still employed by the county. Forsmark has since retired. Lytle works for the Arapahoe County Department of Human Services.
The decision Thursday comes a month after a federal judge ruled that social workers in Denver were not immune from a lawsuit in the case of 7-year-old Chandler Grafner, who was starved to death by his foster parents.
In that case, the judge noted the neglect of Chandler by social services was also "conscious-shocking" and that a complaint of child abuse made by a teacher's aide a month before his death was not thoroughly investigated by Denver Human Services.
Factor, one of the siblings' lawyers in the Adams County case, said he hopes the rulings will have an impact on the quality of care for children.
"Each circumstance is a little different, and this adds to the mix of circumstances in which the courts consistently say that children in the custody of the state of Colorado have a right to be kept safe from harm," he said. "It is a case that has an opportunity to do real justice."
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19685387
Three siblings severely abused in the home of their biological mother and later in foster care can pursue their lawsuit against Adams County social workers who allegedly failed to protect them and deceived their adoptive parents about the extent of their problems, the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled Thursday.
In the summer of 2002, the siblings — then ages 9, 6 and 3 — were adopted by a couple who only learned about the history of abuse on the eve of the adoption. The children were engaging in incestuous acts with each other, and one of them had to be removed from their home because she was suicidal.
The fallout of the abuse was so egregious that the adoptive parents installed alarms in the children's rooms to prevent them from abusing each other. The couple ended up divorcing, blaming the failure of the marriage on the stress caused by the children's emotional problems.
The names of the parents and siblings are being withheld by The Denver Post because the children are victims of sexual abuse and naming their adoptive parents would identify them.
The adoptive parents sued the Adams County Department of Social Services, asserting that social workers had a duty to fully disclose the background of the children. But the parents lost their case when a jury decided that the social workers were not "willful and wanton" in failing to inform them of the history of abuse.
Thursday's ruling allows lawyers for the children to proceed to trial with different claims — that the siblings' rights to be free from harm were violated by the workers entrusted to protect them.
"Evidence was presented at the first trial about the extraordinary challenges these children would face as a result of the defendants' conduct, and unfortunately it all seems to be coming to pass," said attorney Jordan Factor, who argued the case at the Colorado Court of Appeals.
Adams County argued that the social workers, Joan Forsmark, Cathy O'Donnell and Angela Lytle, were protected from the lawsuit by the state's governmental immunity law.
The court disagreed and concluded that Lytle, who as a division director of child welfare supervised O'Donnell and Forsmark, acted "recklessly."
"Lytle increased the children's vulnerability to the danger by not preparing the (adoptive parents) to deal with their extraordinary emotional needs, and by continuing to support the children's adoption as a sibling group, despite the revelations of incest, which distinguished them from the type of children the (adoptive parents) had indicated they were ready to adopt," the court's opinion reads. "This conduct put the children at substantial risk of serious, immediate, and proximate harm that was known to or suspected by Lytle at the time of the adoption. Such allegations show that Lytle acted recklessly in conscious disregard of that risk. And such conduct, when viewed in total, is conscience shocking."
Adams County Attorney Hal Warren declined to comment on the merits of the claims because the case is heading to trial.
Warren is reviewing the court's ruling to decide whether an appeal to the state Supreme Court is possible.
O'Donnell is still employed by the county. Forsmark has since retired. Lytle works for the Arapahoe County Department of Human Services.
The decision Thursday comes a month after a federal judge ruled that social workers in Denver were not immune from a lawsuit in the case of 7-year-old Chandler Grafner, who was starved to death by his foster parents.
In that case, the judge noted the neglect of Chandler by social services was also "conscious-shocking" and that a complaint of child abuse made by a teacher's aide a month before his death was not thoroughly investigated by Denver Human Services.
Factor, one of the siblings' lawyers in the Adams County case, said he hopes the rulings will have an impact on the quality of care for children.
"Each circumstance is a little different, and this adds to the mix of circumstances in which the courts consistently say that children in the custody of the state of Colorado have a right to be kept safe from harm," he said. "It is a case that has an opportunity to do real justice."
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19685387
Sunday, January 1, 2012
Changing the Narrative of Child Welfare
by Matthew Fraidin
University of the District of Columbia David A. Clarke School of Law;
Visiting Professor (2011-12), Georgetown University Law Center
The nuclear secret of child welfare is that most of the children in foster care should not be there. Most children in foster care are harmed more than they are helped by being taken from their families, and by being kept in foster care for too long. Children in foster care are torn from their schools, separated from their siblings, over-prescribed psychotropic drugs, and housed in dangerous group homes rife with abuse -- and it all happens behind the iron curtain of secret court proceedings.
Things haven't improved since 1991, when the National Commission on Children wrote "If the nation had deliberately designed a system that would frustrate the professionals who staff it, anger the public who finance it, and abandon the children who depend on it, it could not have done a better job than the present child-welfare system."
What's going on here? We're reminded almost any time a politician gets up a head of steam -- about Social Security, the budget deficit, crime, even foreign policy -- that there is no lack of ardor for children's issues. Everyone is in favor of children.
But our good intentions are rechanneled destructively by a grand narrative that is equal parts pernicious, inaccurate, and pervasive. A false storyline suffuses child welfare in the press, public discourse, and even among the lawyers, social workers and judges responsible for children in the system. That narrative is one of brutal, deviant, monstrous parents, and children who are fruit that doesn't fall far from the tree. We can't escape it, but it just ain't true.
To give you an idea of the relentlessness of the messages drummed into our heads, more than 90 percent of news stories about children are about violence by and against children. One researcher found that 70 to 95% of stories about child welfare are "horror stories," about gruesome, brutal injuries inflicted on children by unfathomably beastly parents.
As a result, when we think of children and foster care, we imagine brutality, savagery, deviance, and abuse. We think of horrible, heinous misdeeds perpetrated by monstrous felons. We think of murders that scream from the headlines, and the vile tragedy of family sexual abuse perpetrated against children ruined for life. These are, to use Edgar Cahn's phrase, "throwaway people."
There is another story, however. In fact, more than 70% of the children in foster care are there because of allegations that they were neglected, not abused. And neglect -- lack of food, clothing, shelter, supervision, or other necessities of life -- is poverty by another name: more than one-third of children in foster care, for example, could be living with their parents if only their parents had better housing.
Harmful, unnecessary foster care placements are epidemic in D.C. and throughout the nation. The National Conference of State Legislatures recently found, "[m]any children who are in foster care do not need to be there." Locally, then-incoming Mayor Gray's human services transition team warned of the harms caused by the D.C. Child and Family Services Agency's "expensive and harmful current practice of unnecessarily removing children from their birth families." A report issued by the federally-mandated D.C. Citizens Review Panel indicates that hundreds of children annually are taken from their families unlawfully. And in 60% of my students' cases at the University of the District of Columbia, the children were returned home from foster homes or group homes -- and were never found to be abused or neglected. These are kids who were taken from their homes for a few days, or a few weeks, or three months -- but it turned out they weren't abused or neglected, so they were returned.
One of the children in our cases was Kevin. Kevin was only seven months old at the time he was separated from his mother. He was born HIV-positive. The state took custody of Kevin because test results showed that his viral load was elevated. According to the agency, the doctor who treated Kevin said that the enormous elevation could only have been due to maladministration of the medication by Kevin's mother. The problem was that the test results were a month old, and Kevin's viral load actually was normal on the day he was taken. The other problem is that the doctor later signed a sworn affidavit stating she had never said that there could have been only one cause for the spike in Kevin's viral load. Kevin was returned to his mother's custody.
And James, who was taken from both his mother and his father -- who did not live together -- because his uncle came to school and beat him up for stealing a video game. The uncle didn't live with either parent or the child! James lived with strangers in foster care for a month and a half.
And finally, Isaac, who was apart from his mother for three months. The government alleged that Isaac's grandfather had beaten him across the legs and that Isaac's mother knew about it and failed to stop it. The government also alleged that Isaac was "educationally neglected" because he had missed seven days of school in the first two months of the term. Three months later, at trial, it turned out that the government couldn't even prove that Isaac had been hit, let alone by his grandfather. And the educational neglect? One of the days they said Isaac was absent was the day the social worker went to the school and took Isaac to foster care!
The judge sent Isaac back home after three months.
We have a foster care system full of children who should be at home. Children and youth in foster care experience multiple moves from home to home and high levels of abuse in foster homes and group homes. Former foster youth have sky-high rates of homelessness, unemployment, poverty, arrest and incarceration, teen pregnancy, dating violence victimization, and low educational achievement.
How can we be part of the solution? How can we disrupt the status quo? How can we fight the narrative?
We need to challenge the tired, dangerous narrative. We need to tell new stories.
The low-income people who comprise virtually 100% of child welfare-involved families? Suspend disbelief for a moment, and convince yourself they're rich. The crummy neighborhoods the children come from and the communities breaking down all around us? Think of those as strong and healthful, instead of shabby and pathologized.
Here's how.
Imagining a challenge to our approach to legal services provides a roadmap. Anti-poverty programs in general, and legal service providers in particular, see clients as the sum of their needs. Clients and litigants come to us with their problem. Indeed they only get our attention because they have a problem. And the first thing we ask is "What is your problem? What do you need? How can I help you?" And we try to solve the problem. We fill the hole, apply a band-aid, put a finger in the dike, whatever. You've heard the metaphors.
Here is a different model. Instead of merely asking: "What is your problem? What is the disease, the defect that brought this mother and child into my life," we can ask a different question. Not what is she lacking, but what does she have? Not only "what can I do?" but we can also ask her, "What can you do?" What are her abilities, her strengths, her assets?
How can we re-envision her as rich, powerful, and capable?
Well, can the mother whose child is taken away braid hair? Can she cook a meal? Can she smile at an elderly person in a nursing home? And let's think about that person in the nursing home. Can she watch a child recite a poem and clap for the child? Can she read a story? Can she share her own story about life "in the old days"? Does she know by heart, perhaps, a recipe for the best fried turkey you've ever eaten?
We can see with different eyes, and look for successes. Did the child's mother pull her neighbor's weeds last week? Or change a light bulb? Or pick up litter? These are things she did, not things she didn't.
Can she shop for groceries? Can she throw a party, or drive a neighbor to the doctor? Can she paint a room or clean a house or walk a dog?
The answers will be yes, yes, and yes.
In Chicago, eighth-graders in special education tutor first-graders in math. In Washington, D.C., returned prisoners provide children safe passage to school.
In Washington, D.C., our Youth Court is run by kids we might call juvenile delinquents. Youth Court gives us a chance to call them judges and jurors. It is a diversion program, in which the very youth who come through the court as defendants sit as jurors, reviewing infractions of other youth. They hear facts, deliberate, and impose sentences of community service, restitution, counseling, or an apology.
So it turns out that delinquent youth also are judges!
Our clients can do the things professionals do. Research is clear, for example, that women in violent relationships are the very best judges of their own safety, better than police, lawyers, case workers, or even judges. In Washington, D.C., when our highest court ruled that there was no statutory right to custody for non-parents, low-income grandmothers descended on the city Council, submitting statements and testifying about the necessity that the law be amended. And it was. In Washington, D.C., a homeless homeless advocate led a campaign to restore funding for homeless services.
So our low-income clients have power. Si se puede. Yes we can!
Now, if the mother is a person with assets, wealth, power, and strength, we see her differently. We learn from her, we admire her, we grow from knowing her.
It turns out we don't have all of the answers. We don't have a preordained stereotype into which we can fit her any more. She has busted through the narrative. We have to take her for who she is, the real person, the complicated three-dimensional, real person. She isn't a stick figure -- the deviant, monstrous black hole of problems, needs, and pathologies.
Her strengths and powers and abilities unlock ours. If she can do, so can we.
And what we can do together is change the conversation about child welfare. Remember the Citizens Review Panel report I mentioned? The Panel echoed Mayor Gray's own transition report, finding that excessive foster care placements are widespread and systematic. But the Gray Administration circled the wagons, insisting that the distinguished panel had it all wrong and that CFSA, despite the chorus of detractors and 20+ years of federal-court oversight, is just plain humming along. It's high time for District of Columbia voters to push back against that kind of stonewalling. It's time for D.C. residents to insist that the Council pull back the curtain of secrecy shielding the adult who disrupt children's lives.
In child welfare, we can make a difference by preventing children from entering foster care unnecessarily. And we can end children's stays in foster care as quickly as possible. We can achieve our goals of limiting entries to foster care and speeding exits from it by looking for the strengths of the people involved in our cases, rather than their weaknesses. We can look for what they can do, rather than what they can't. We can focus on their abilities, not the shortcomings over which we often obsess -- like drug addiction, disability, illiteracy, poverty. We can start from a premise that families involved with child welfare are bundles of assets, rather than collections of problems.
If we can do all this, we can help families build, rather than watch them fall.
Reducing the scourge of unnecessary foster care placements and lengthy stays in foster care will save children's lives. Everyone who cares about kids has the opportunity to keep children from unnecessary, devastating disruption, fear, and pain.
Fortunately, to paraphrase Brendan Sullivan, Oliver North's lawyer, we are not potted plants. We can do something. Yes, we can.
This post was adapted from anarticle forthcoming in Georgetown Journal of Poverty Law and Policy, Volume XIX (2011).
Source http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-fraidin/changing-the-narrative-of_b_1177000.html
University of the District of Columbia David A. Clarke School of Law;
Visiting Professor (2011-12), Georgetown University Law Center
The nuclear secret of child welfare is that most of the children in foster care should not be there. Most children in foster care are harmed more than they are helped by being taken from their families, and by being kept in foster care for too long. Children in foster care are torn from their schools, separated from their siblings, over-prescribed psychotropic drugs, and housed in dangerous group homes rife with abuse -- and it all happens behind the iron curtain of secret court proceedings.
Things haven't improved since 1991, when the National Commission on Children wrote "If the nation had deliberately designed a system that would frustrate the professionals who staff it, anger the public who finance it, and abandon the children who depend on it, it could not have done a better job than the present child-welfare system."
What's going on here? We're reminded almost any time a politician gets up a head of steam -- about Social Security, the budget deficit, crime, even foreign policy -- that there is no lack of ardor for children's issues. Everyone is in favor of children.
But our good intentions are rechanneled destructively by a grand narrative that is equal parts pernicious, inaccurate, and pervasive. A false storyline suffuses child welfare in the press, public discourse, and even among the lawyers, social workers and judges responsible for children in the system. That narrative is one of brutal, deviant, monstrous parents, and children who are fruit that doesn't fall far from the tree. We can't escape it, but it just ain't true.
To give you an idea of the relentlessness of the messages drummed into our heads, more than 90 percent of news stories about children are about violence by and against children. One researcher found that 70 to 95% of stories about child welfare are "horror stories," about gruesome, brutal injuries inflicted on children by unfathomably beastly parents.
As a result, when we think of children and foster care, we imagine brutality, savagery, deviance, and abuse. We think of horrible, heinous misdeeds perpetrated by monstrous felons. We think of murders that scream from the headlines, and the vile tragedy of family sexual abuse perpetrated against children ruined for life. These are, to use Edgar Cahn's phrase, "throwaway people."
There is another story, however. In fact, more than 70% of the children in foster care are there because of allegations that they were neglected, not abused. And neglect -- lack of food, clothing, shelter, supervision, or other necessities of life -- is poverty by another name: more than one-third of children in foster care, for example, could be living with their parents if only their parents had better housing.
Harmful, unnecessary foster care placements are epidemic in D.C. and throughout the nation. The National Conference of State Legislatures recently found, "[m]any children who are in foster care do not need to be there." Locally, then-incoming Mayor Gray's human services transition team warned of the harms caused by the D.C. Child and Family Services Agency's "expensive and harmful current practice of unnecessarily removing children from their birth families." A report issued by the federally-mandated D.C. Citizens Review Panel indicates that hundreds of children annually are taken from their families unlawfully. And in 60% of my students' cases at the University of the District of Columbia, the children were returned home from foster homes or group homes -- and were never found to be abused or neglected. These are kids who were taken from their homes for a few days, or a few weeks, or three months -- but it turned out they weren't abused or neglected, so they were returned.
One of the children in our cases was Kevin. Kevin was only seven months old at the time he was separated from his mother. He was born HIV-positive. The state took custody of Kevin because test results showed that his viral load was elevated. According to the agency, the doctor who treated Kevin said that the enormous elevation could only have been due to maladministration of the medication by Kevin's mother. The problem was that the test results were a month old, and Kevin's viral load actually was normal on the day he was taken. The other problem is that the doctor later signed a sworn affidavit stating she had never said that there could have been only one cause for the spike in Kevin's viral load. Kevin was returned to his mother's custody.
And James, who was taken from both his mother and his father -- who did not live together -- because his uncle came to school and beat him up for stealing a video game. The uncle didn't live with either parent or the child! James lived with strangers in foster care for a month and a half.
And finally, Isaac, who was apart from his mother for three months. The government alleged that Isaac's grandfather had beaten him across the legs and that Isaac's mother knew about it and failed to stop it. The government also alleged that Isaac was "educationally neglected" because he had missed seven days of school in the first two months of the term. Three months later, at trial, it turned out that the government couldn't even prove that Isaac had been hit, let alone by his grandfather. And the educational neglect? One of the days they said Isaac was absent was the day the social worker went to the school and took Isaac to foster care!
The judge sent Isaac back home after three months.
We have a foster care system full of children who should be at home. Children and youth in foster care experience multiple moves from home to home and high levels of abuse in foster homes and group homes. Former foster youth have sky-high rates of homelessness, unemployment, poverty, arrest and incarceration, teen pregnancy, dating violence victimization, and low educational achievement.
How can we be part of the solution? How can we disrupt the status quo? How can we fight the narrative?
We need to challenge the tired, dangerous narrative. We need to tell new stories.
The low-income people who comprise virtually 100% of child welfare-involved families? Suspend disbelief for a moment, and convince yourself they're rich. The crummy neighborhoods the children come from and the communities breaking down all around us? Think of those as strong and healthful, instead of shabby and pathologized.
Here's how.
Imagining a challenge to our approach to legal services provides a roadmap. Anti-poverty programs in general, and legal service providers in particular, see clients as the sum of their needs. Clients and litigants come to us with their problem. Indeed they only get our attention because they have a problem. And the first thing we ask is "What is your problem? What do you need? How can I help you?" And we try to solve the problem. We fill the hole, apply a band-aid, put a finger in the dike, whatever. You've heard the metaphors.
Here is a different model. Instead of merely asking: "What is your problem? What is the disease, the defect that brought this mother and child into my life," we can ask a different question. Not what is she lacking, but what does she have? Not only "what can I do?" but we can also ask her, "What can you do?" What are her abilities, her strengths, her assets?
How can we re-envision her as rich, powerful, and capable?
Well, can the mother whose child is taken away braid hair? Can she cook a meal? Can she smile at an elderly person in a nursing home? And let's think about that person in the nursing home. Can she watch a child recite a poem and clap for the child? Can she read a story? Can she share her own story about life "in the old days"? Does she know by heart, perhaps, a recipe for the best fried turkey you've ever eaten?
We can see with different eyes, and look for successes. Did the child's mother pull her neighbor's weeds last week? Or change a light bulb? Or pick up litter? These are things she did, not things she didn't.
Can she shop for groceries? Can she throw a party, or drive a neighbor to the doctor? Can she paint a room or clean a house or walk a dog?
The answers will be yes, yes, and yes.
In Chicago, eighth-graders in special education tutor first-graders in math. In Washington, D.C., returned prisoners provide children safe passage to school.
In Washington, D.C., our Youth Court is run by kids we might call juvenile delinquents. Youth Court gives us a chance to call them judges and jurors. It is a diversion program, in which the very youth who come through the court as defendants sit as jurors, reviewing infractions of other youth. They hear facts, deliberate, and impose sentences of community service, restitution, counseling, or an apology.
So it turns out that delinquent youth also are judges!
Our clients can do the things professionals do. Research is clear, for example, that women in violent relationships are the very best judges of their own safety, better than police, lawyers, case workers, or even judges. In Washington, D.C., when our highest court ruled that there was no statutory right to custody for non-parents, low-income grandmothers descended on the city Council, submitting statements and testifying about the necessity that the law be amended. And it was. In Washington, D.C., a homeless homeless advocate led a campaign to restore funding for homeless services.
So our low-income clients have power. Si se puede. Yes we can!
Now, if the mother is a person with assets, wealth, power, and strength, we see her differently. We learn from her, we admire her, we grow from knowing her.
It turns out we don't have all of the answers. We don't have a preordained stereotype into which we can fit her any more. She has busted through the narrative. We have to take her for who she is, the real person, the complicated three-dimensional, real person. She isn't a stick figure -- the deviant, monstrous black hole of problems, needs, and pathologies.
Her strengths and powers and abilities unlock ours. If she can do, so can we.
And what we can do together is change the conversation about child welfare. Remember the Citizens Review Panel report I mentioned? The Panel echoed Mayor Gray's own transition report, finding that excessive foster care placements are widespread and systematic. But the Gray Administration circled the wagons, insisting that the distinguished panel had it all wrong and that CFSA, despite the chorus of detractors and 20+ years of federal-court oversight, is just plain humming along. It's high time for District of Columbia voters to push back against that kind of stonewalling. It's time for D.C. residents to insist that the Council pull back the curtain of secrecy shielding the adult who disrupt children's lives.
In child welfare, we can make a difference by preventing children from entering foster care unnecessarily. And we can end children's stays in foster care as quickly as possible. We can achieve our goals of limiting entries to foster care and speeding exits from it by looking for the strengths of the people involved in our cases, rather than their weaknesses. We can look for what they can do, rather than what they can't. We can focus on their abilities, not the shortcomings over which we often obsess -- like drug addiction, disability, illiteracy, poverty. We can start from a premise that families involved with child welfare are bundles of assets, rather than collections of problems.
If we can do all this, we can help families build, rather than watch them fall.
Reducing the scourge of unnecessary foster care placements and lengthy stays in foster care will save children's lives. Everyone who cares about kids has the opportunity to keep children from unnecessary, devastating disruption, fear, and pain.
Fortunately, to paraphrase Brendan Sullivan, Oliver North's lawyer, we are not potted plants. We can do something. Yes, we can.
This post was adapted from anarticle forthcoming in Georgetown Journal of Poverty Law and Policy, Volume XIX (2011).
Source http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-fraidin/changing-the-narrative-of_b_1177000.html
Monday, December 19, 2011
DYFS worker accused of child endangerment - New Jersey
ELIZABETH — Authorities say an adoption specialist with New Jersey’s child welfare agency sent sexually charged messages to a 15-year-old boy that he met through church.
Frednel Lambert also worked as a choir director at the church in Newark.
Authorities say the 34-year-old Union Township resident is charged with 3rd Degree Endangering the Welfare of a Child.
Union County Prosecutor Theodore Romankow says the boy’s mother contacted the Springfield Police Department in September. The prosecutor says the chats were conducted through Facebook over a two-week period.
Source http://www.app.com/article/20111217/NJNEWS10/312170032/DYFS-worker-accused-child-endangerment?odyssey=nav%7Chead
Frednel Lambert also worked as a choir director at the church in Newark.
Authorities say the 34-year-old Union Township resident is charged with 3rd Degree Endangering the Welfare of a Child.
Union County Prosecutor Theodore Romankow says the boy’s mother contacted the Springfield Police Department in September. The prosecutor says the chats were conducted through Facebook over a two-week period.
Source http://www.app.com/article/20111217/NJNEWS10/312170032/DYFS-worker-accused-child-endangerment?odyssey=nav%7Chead
Friday, December 16, 2011
Improvements suggested for Iowa's child abuse registry
Written by Lee Rood
A panel charged with making changes to Iowa’s controversial and confidential child abuse registry issued a series of suggested improvements Friday, some of which would require action by the Legislature next year.
In the short term, state officials are taking steps to expedite appeals of abuse findings, especially when people’s jobs are at stake.
“The timeframes and delays in getting hearings and decisions completed was a priority for me,” said Citizens Aide/Ombudsman Ruth Cooperrider, whose office receives several calls each year inquiring how to appeal or dispute abuse findings. “We have had cases that have languished for more than a year, and there are legal issues involved.”
One long-term recommendation from the mix of state officials and child-welfare professionals on the panel would give Iowa’s Department of Human Services more authority to remove people from the 10-year registry and seal abuse findings based on certain criteria.
Others ideas panel members thought should be explored: Allowing DHS to put only certain kinds of abuse on the registry, and varying the length of time names remain on the list based on the severity of the abuse.
Legislators and parents have complained for years that people whose names are placed on the registry have few due-process rights. It takes no conviction in court to end up on the registry - only a finding by DHS staff that it was "more likely than not" that the person neglected a child or, in a much smaller number of cases, abused a child.
The Legislature this year required the agency to work with other agencies and groups to address problems.
Currently, between 50,000 and 60,000 Iowans are on the registry, which is used to screen child-care workers and others who deal with children.
About 8,890 abuse reports were “founded” by social workers last year, meaning the individuals responsible were placed on the registry. Another 3,071 reported resulted in “confirmed” abuse, meaning there was evidence of abuse but not enough to place someone on the registry.
About 1,270 people filed appeals of abuse findings in 2011. Of those, 109 were from a finding of “not confirmed.”
The remaining 75 percent to 80 percent were settled. The most common finding is that the abuse is confirmed, but not placed on the registry. Settlements often involve those accused taking part in recommended services to reduce the risk of future abuse.
Source http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20111216/NEWS/111216023/-1/SPORTS09/Improvements-suggested-Iowa-s-child-abuse-registry
A panel charged with making changes to Iowa’s controversial and confidential child abuse registry issued a series of suggested improvements Friday, some of which would require action by the Legislature next year.
In the short term, state officials are taking steps to expedite appeals of abuse findings, especially when people’s jobs are at stake.
“The timeframes and delays in getting hearings and decisions completed was a priority for me,” said Citizens Aide/Ombudsman Ruth Cooperrider, whose office receives several calls each year inquiring how to appeal or dispute abuse findings. “We have had cases that have languished for more than a year, and there are legal issues involved.”
One long-term recommendation from the mix of state officials and child-welfare professionals on the panel would give Iowa’s Department of Human Services more authority to remove people from the 10-year registry and seal abuse findings based on certain criteria.
Others ideas panel members thought should be explored: Allowing DHS to put only certain kinds of abuse on the registry, and varying the length of time names remain on the list based on the severity of the abuse.
Legislators and parents have complained for years that people whose names are placed on the registry have few due-process rights. It takes no conviction in court to end up on the registry - only a finding by DHS staff that it was "more likely than not" that the person neglected a child or, in a much smaller number of cases, abused a child.
The Legislature this year required the agency to work with other agencies and groups to address problems.
Currently, between 50,000 and 60,000 Iowans are on the registry, which is used to screen child-care workers and others who deal with children.
About 8,890 abuse reports were “founded” by social workers last year, meaning the individuals responsible were placed on the registry. Another 3,071 reported resulted in “confirmed” abuse, meaning there was evidence of abuse but not enough to place someone on the registry.
About 1,270 people filed appeals of abuse findings in 2011. Of those, 109 were from a finding of “not confirmed.”
The remaining 75 percent to 80 percent were settled. The most common finding is that the abuse is confirmed, but not placed on the registry. Settlements often involve those accused taking part in recommended services to reduce the risk of future abuse.
Source http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20111216/NEWS/111216023/-1/SPORTS09/Improvements-suggested-Iowa-s-child-abuse-registry
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Lawsuit: Former deacon, prominent child welfare advocate accused of child sex abuse
by: Rose French
A Virginia man claims he was sexually abused nearly 40 years ago by a former deacon and prominent Minnesota child welfare advocate, according to his attorneys.
At a news conference on Tuesday in St. Paul, attorneys for the man who lived in St. Cloud as a child plan to announce a lawsuit against the Diocese of St. Cloud and Michael Weber.
The lawsuit, to be filed in Hennepin County District Court, addresses alleged sex abuse suffered when the man was 6 years old, while he vacationed with his family at a Minnesota lake, according to a statement from St. Paul attorney Jeff Anderson.
The victim, identified in the complaint as “John Doe HT," wishes to keep his identity confidential but will read a statement and answer questions by phone during the news conference.
It’s the first lawsuit to be filed against Weber, 67, since allegations emerged last month that he molested two boys around the same time he served as deacon at Church of the Holy Spirit in St. Cloud from 1969-70.
Two men, both of St. Cloud, were 11 years old at the time of the alleged abuse and reported the incidents to law enforcement authorities last month. Criminal charges are not likely because the statute of limitations has expired, authorities say.
Minneapolis attorney Francis Rondoni, who represents Weber, has said it’s “very difficult” for Weber to respond “to purported allegations that are more than 40 years old." Weber “has been a leader in the community here for many decades and has a spotless reputation. And this is very concerning to him.”
On Dec. 5, the St. Cloud diocese held a “listening session” at the church to air out the allegations and offer other potential abuse victims the opportunity to come forward.
Since the listening session was announced in mid-November, Weber has resigned from the board of the Greater Twin Cities United Way and stepped down from other prominent positions.
Four alleged victims attended the listening session (which was not open to the media) and recounted abuse by Weber, according to Jane Marrin, a spokeswoman for the diocese. A fifth purported victim was represented by someone else at the meeting and a sixth wrote a letter claiming abuse that was noted at the meeting.
Source http://www.startribune.com/local/blogs/135469628.html
A Virginia man claims he was sexually abused nearly 40 years ago by a former deacon and prominent Minnesota child welfare advocate, according to his attorneys.
At a news conference on Tuesday in St. Paul, attorneys for the man who lived in St. Cloud as a child plan to announce a lawsuit against the Diocese of St. Cloud and Michael Weber.
The lawsuit, to be filed in Hennepin County District Court, addresses alleged sex abuse suffered when the man was 6 years old, while he vacationed with his family at a Minnesota lake, according to a statement from St. Paul attorney Jeff Anderson.
The victim, identified in the complaint as “John Doe HT," wishes to keep his identity confidential but will read a statement and answer questions by phone during the news conference.
It’s the first lawsuit to be filed against Weber, 67, since allegations emerged last month that he molested two boys around the same time he served as deacon at Church of the Holy Spirit in St. Cloud from 1969-70.
Two men, both of St. Cloud, were 11 years old at the time of the alleged abuse and reported the incidents to law enforcement authorities last month. Criminal charges are not likely because the statute of limitations has expired, authorities say.
Minneapolis attorney Francis Rondoni, who represents Weber, has said it’s “very difficult” for Weber to respond “to purported allegations that are more than 40 years old." Weber “has been a leader in the community here for many decades and has a spotless reputation. And this is very concerning to him.”
On Dec. 5, the St. Cloud diocese held a “listening session” at the church to air out the allegations and offer other potential abuse victims the opportunity to come forward.
Since the listening session was announced in mid-November, Weber has resigned from the board of the Greater Twin Cities United Way and stepped down from other prominent positions.
Four alleged victims attended the listening session (which was not open to the media) and recounted abuse by Weber, according to Jane Marrin, a spokeswoman for the diocese. A fifth purported victim was represented by someone else at the meeting and a sixth wrote a letter claiming abuse that was noted at the meeting.
Source http://www.startribune.com/local/blogs/135469628.html
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Child Welfare Agencies Nationwide Traffic ‘Adoptable’ Children Into Foster Care
Here's a very good article about the truth of CPS and children being removed and placed into foster care. It touches on a little bit of everything involved.
http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-san-jose/child-welfare-agencies-nationwide-traffic-adoptable-children-into-foster-care
http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-san-jose/child-welfare-agencies-nationwide-traffic-adoptable-children-into-foster-care
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
Monday, December 5, 2011
Georgia Keeps Kids Languishing in Foster Care Because Their Parents Are Undocumented
By Marie Diamond
A custody fight in Georgia is illustrating the biases of a foster care system that some say routinely subverts the parental rights of undocumented and non-English speaking mothers and fathers:
Ovidio and Domitina Mendez’s lost their five children to foster care when the Georgia Department of Family and Children Services arrived at their home claimed the kids were malnourished. The couple, who are both undocumented immigrants from Guatemala, says they did everything the child welfare agency asked them to do to get their kids back. But three years later, the children are still in foster care with strangers. Why? Because they are undocumented immigrants who speak Spanish, according to advocates.
A recent study by the Applied Research Center revealed that at least 5,100 children are languishing in America’s foster care system because their immigrant parents were detained or deported. But the report also found that even when undocumented parents are not detained or deported, they face bias in the child welfare system as a result of cultural and language discrimination.
For instance, at the June hearing that terminated the Mendez’s parental rights, they were peppered with seemingly irrelevant questions about their English-speaking ability and immigration status. “Describe for the court why even three years after [the children went into the state’s custody] you cannot speak English without an interpreter,” asked Bruce Kling, special assistant attorney general for Whitfield County Department of Family and Children’s Service.
The state also argued that the Mendezes’ should not regain custody because, as undocumented immigrants, they could not attain driver’s licenses and therefore couldn’t transport their children. ARC found that many county child welfare departments give this justification for why undocumented parents can’t be trusted as caregivers.
The suggestion that undocumented immigrants are unfit parents (usually for reasons related to their poverty) is often used to separate them from their children. But children then remain in foster care because of the barriers that undocumented mothers and fathers face in trying to regain custody. Parents’ undocumented status also works against them by preventing them from accessing state services that would enable them to better provide for their children.
Source http://www.alternet.org/immigration/153309/georgia_keeps_kids_languishing_in_foster_care_because_their_parents_are_undocumented
A custody fight in Georgia is illustrating the biases of a foster care system that some say routinely subverts the parental rights of undocumented and non-English speaking mothers and fathers:
Ovidio and Domitina Mendez’s lost their five children to foster care when the Georgia Department of Family and Children Services arrived at their home claimed the kids were malnourished. The couple, who are both undocumented immigrants from Guatemala, says they did everything the child welfare agency asked them to do to get their kids back. But three years later, the children are still in foster care with strangers. Why? Because they are undocumented immigrants who speak Spanish, according to advocates.
A recent study by the Applied Research Center revealed that at least 5,100 children are languishing in America’s foster care system because their immigrant parents were detained or deported. But the report also found that even when undocumented parents are not detained or deported, they face bias in the child welfare system as a result of cultural and language discrimination.
For instance, at the June hearing that terminated the Mendez’s parental rights, they were peppered with seemingly irrelevant questions about their English-speaking ability and immigration status. “Describe for the court why even three years after [the children went into the state’s custody] you cannot speak English without an interpreter,” asked Bruce Kling, special assistant attorney general for Whitfield County Department of Family and Children’s Service.
The state also argued that the Mendezes’ should not regain custody because, as undocumented immigrants, they could not attain driver’s licenses and therefore couldn’t transport their children. ARC found that many county child welfare departments give this justification for why undocumented parents can’t be trusted as caregivers.
The suggestion that undocumented immigrants are unfit parents (usually for reasons related to their poverty) is often used to separate them from their children. But children then remain in foster care because of the barriers that undocumented mothers and fathers face in trying to regain custody. Parents’ undocumented status also works against them by preventing them from accessing state services that would enable them to better provide for their children.
Source http://www.alternet.org/immigration/153309/georgia_keeps_kids_languishing_in_foster_care_because_their_parents_are_undocumented
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Panel: Lack of trained investigators at Office of Guardian ad Litem a concern - Utah
By brooke adams
A legislative panel on Tuesday declined to approve the Office of Guardian ad Litem’s request for more money to hire an additional attorney and increase wages, saying it was more concerned the office has no trained investigators to assist staff in reviewing child welfare cases.
Director Rick Smith told the Child Welfare Legislative Oversight Panel that the office’s 41 attorneys, appointed by judges to represent the best interests of children in court proceedings, are currently averaging about 200 clients — twice as many as recommended by national standards. The lone attorney assigned to Uintah, Duchesne and Daggett counties currently has nearly 400 clients, Smith said.
"The concern at this point is we have an attorney out there who may be committing malpractice simply because he has too many clients to represent in an appropriate way," Smith told the lawmakers.
He asked the panel to approve $202,000 in ongoing funds to add an attorney and a support staff member. He also asked the panel to consider addressing inadequate staff wages in next year’s budget. Smith said staff turnover was 21 percent last year, but has been as high as 25 percent in recent years as staff seek higher salaries elsewhere — including the Utah Attorney General’s Office.
"Our attorneys are paid 34 percent less than other attorneys in state government," Smith said. "That’s a problem."
The panel was particularly disturbed, however, that the office has no investigators, as required by statute, to do independent casework.
"We’ve never had funding to hire those investigators," Smith said. "Our attorneys do a lot of it; our support staff do a lot."
As a result, the office uses a lot of investigative work done by the Division of Child and Family Services, he said.
That, combined with heavy case loads, means the office’s attorneys work "a minimum of 40 hours a week," Smith said. But because the state is exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act, "we can work them a lot of hours and they don’t get paid overtime for it, so that is a very common practice."
A motion to approve the office’s budget request was withdrawn after one lawmaker requested more information and two others expressed concerns with the office’s operations.
"I have some real concerns about what the Guardian ad Litem is supposed to do and not supposed to do. So when you’re asking for more money, I’m not too sympathetic," said Rep. Christine F. Watkins, D-Price.
Watkins said her view stemmed from conversations with constituents and first-hand observations of cases in which she felt a Guardian ad Litem stepped "out of what I would consider normal boundaries." She described one attorney who told a child’s parent she had a personality disorder. There was no such diagnosis in the mother’s case, she added.
Watkins said that highlighted the need for trained investigators because "you’re relying on people who shouldn’t be investigating."
Rep. Merlynn T. Newbold, R-South Jordan and the panel’s co-chairwoman, said the Guardian ad Litem’s role is to "advocate for the child and not for the state, and if you’re relying on information from [DCFS] and haven’t done anything on your own, that gives me concern."
Source http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53014054-78/office-smith-panel-attorney.html.csp
A legislative panel on Tuesday declined to approve the Office of Guardian ad Litem’s request for more money to hire an additional attorney and increase wages, saying it was more concerned the office has no trained investigators to assist staff in reviewing child welfare cases.
Director Rick Smith told the Child Welfare Legislative Oversight Panel that the office’s 41 attorneys, appointed by judges to represent the best interests of children in court proceedings, are currently averaging about 200 clients — twice as many as recommended by national standards. The lone attorney assigned to Uintah, Duchesne and Daggett counties currently has nearly 400 clients, Smith said.
"The concern at this point is we have an attorney out there who may be committing malpractice simply because he has too many clients to represent in an appropriate way," Smith told the lawmakers.
He asked the panel to approve $202,000 in ongoing funds to add an attorney and a support staff member. He also asked the panel to consider addressing inadequate staff wages in next year’s budget. Smith said staff turnover was 21 percent last year, but has been as high as 25 percent in recent years as staff seek higher salaries elsewhere — including the Utah Attorney General’s Office.
"Our attorneys are paid 34 percent less than other attorneys in state government," Smith said. "That’s a problem."
The panel was particularly disturbed, however, that the office has no investigators, as required by statute, to do independent casework.
"We’ve never had funding to hire those investigators," Smith said. "Our attorneys do a lot of it; our support staff do a lot."
As a result, the office uses a lot of investigative work done by the Division of Child and Family Services, he said.
That, combined with heavy case loads, means the office’s attorneys work "a minimum of 40 hours a week," Smith said. But because the state is exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act, "we can work them a lot of hours and they don’t get paid overtime for it, so that is a very common practice."
A motion to approve the office’s budget request was withdrawn after one lawmaker requested more information and two others expressed concerns with the office’s operations.
"I have some real concerns about what the Guardian ad Litem is supposed to do and not supposed to do. So when you’re asking for more money, I’m not too sympathetic," said Rep. Christine F. Watkins, D-Price.
Watkins said her view stemmed from conversations with constituents and first-hand observations of cases in which she felt a Guardian ad Litem stepped "out of what I would consider normal boundaries." She described one attorney who told a child’s parent she had a personality disorder. There was no such diagnosis in the mother’s case, she added.
Watkins said that highlighted the need for trained investigators because "you’re relying on people who shouldn’t be investigating."
Rep. Merlynn T. Newbold, R-South Jordan and the panel’s co-chairwoman, said the Guardian ad Litem’s role is to "advocate for the child and not for the state, and if you’re relying on information from [DCFS] and haven’t done anything on your own, that gives me concern."
Source http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53014054-78/office-smith-panel-attorney.html.csp
Administration Concerned About Psych Meds and Foster Youths
by John Kelly
No regulation from feds yet; just information sharing
Starting this summer, states will have to provide the federal government with details about how they control the use of psychotropic medications on youth in foster care.
The Obama administration said in a letter to state officials last week that it was concerned about the “safe, appropriate and effective use” of the drugs, which are most often prescribed to adolescents in connection with a diagnosis for mood or conduct disorders, though many child advocates believe they are frequently used as chemical restraints because of their numbing effect on kids.
“As we strengthen child welfare systems’ ability to safely and appropriately manage psychotropic medication use, it is necessary to recognize the corresponding need to…implement effective, non-pharmaceutical interventions,” says the letter, sent jointly by three different divisions of HHS.
States must present the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families (ACF) with an Annual Progress and Services Report in June 2012. That report must now include “comprehensive descriptions of procedures and protocols planned or in place to ensure the safe and appropriate use of psychotropic medications,” the letter says.
The letter is signed by George Sheldon, acting assistant secretary for ACF; Donald Berwick, director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS); and Pamela Hyde, administrator of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration (SAMHSA).
Sheldon presided over Florida’s Department of Children and Families when it became the lightning rod for this issue in 2009, the year that 7-year-old foster youth Gabriel Myers hung himself. Myers had been prescribed psychotropic drugs without informed parental consent or a judge's order while in the foster care system.
A DCF review of Myers death found that doctors, judges, lawyers and social workers are often poorly-informed and need education and training when it comes to giving psychotropic drugs to children. But state legislation aimed at better regulating use of the drugs on foster children was killed the following summer.
The HHS letter suggests particular alarm at the fact that nearly half of foster youth in group or residential homes “are taking at least one psychotropic,” and that the “majority of children in foster care receiving psychotropic medications have multiple prescriptions.”
There is a dearth of information about how effective psychotropics are for kids, the letter says, and there is “scant evidence of the effectiveness of treatment with multiple medications,” a practice that “increases the likelihood of drug interactions and other adverse effects.”
The three HHS divisions also outlined ways in which the federal government intends to help states address the issue. In advance of the annual report’s June deadline, ACF will publish a Program Instruction that specifies what information that will be requested. And at some point during the summer, the divisions plan to convene child welfare and health authorities for “peer learning and technical assistance.”
CMS is currently in the process of disseminating findings from a 16-state working group on best practices for use of psychotropics among children on Medicaid.
Source http://www.youthtoday.org/view_article.cfm?article_id=5131
No regulation from feds yet; just information sharing
Starting this summer, states will have to provide the federal government with details about how they control the use of psychotropic medications on youth in foster care.
The Obama administration said in a letter to state officials last week that it was concerned about the “safe, appropriate and effective use” of the drugs, which are most often prescribed to adolescents in connection with a diagnosis for mood or conduct disorders, though many child advocates believe they are frequently used as chemical restraints because of their numbing effect on kids.
“As we strengthen child welfare systems’ ability to safely and appropriately manage psychotropic medication use, it is necessary to recognize the corresponding need to…implement effective, non-pharmaceutical interventions,” says the letter, sent jointly by three different divisions of HHS.
States must present the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families (ACF) with an Annual Progress and Services Report in June 2012. That report must now include “comprehensive descriptions of procedures and protocols planned or in place to ensure the safe and appropriate use of psychotropic medications,” the letter says.
The letter is signed by George Sheldon, acting assistant secretary for ACF; Donald Berwick, director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS); and Pamela Hyde, administrator of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration (SAMHSA).
Sheldon presided over Florida’s Department of Children and Families when it became the lightning rod for this issue in 2009, the year that 7-year-old foster youth Gabriel Myers hung himself. Myers had been prescribed psychotropic drugs without informed parental consent or a judge's order while in the foster care system.
A DCF review of Myers death found that doctors, judges, lawyers and social workers are often poorly-informed and need education and training when it comes to giving psychotropic drugs to children. But state legislation aimed at better regulating use of the drugs on foster children was killed the following summer.
The HHS letter suggests particular alarm at the fact that nearly half of foster youth in group or residential homes “are taking at least one psychotropic,” and that the “majority of children in foster care receiving psychotropic medications have multiple prescriptions.”
There is a dearth of information about how effective psychotropics are for kids, the letter says, and there is “scant evidence of the effectiveness of treatment with multiple medications,” a practice that “increases the likelihood of drug interactions and other adverse effects.”
The three HHS divisions also outlined ways in which the federal government intends to help states address the issue. In advance of the annual report’s June deadline, ACF will publish a Program Instruction that specifies what information that will be requested. And at some point during the summer, the divisions plan to convene child welfare and health authorities for “peer learning and technical assistance.”
CMS is currently in the process of disseminating findings from a 16-state working group on best practices for use of psychotropics among children on Medicaid.
Source http://www.youthtoday.org/view_article.cfm?article_id=5131
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Changes at DCF cause concern on advisory panel - Conn.
By Jacqueline Rabe Thomas
The sweeping changes the Department of Children and Families has made in recent months are drawing the ire of the agency's advisory panel, whose members--as parents, community providers, child lawyers and foster parents--are seeing first-hand the ramifications.
"You need to hear the crap that's going on," Janice Andersen, the deputy director of a Bridgeport-based group that deals with juvenile justice and other child welfare issues, told a top DCF official Monday.
It wasn't quite the reaction Fernando Muniz was expecting. He came to the meeting with a three-page update on the positive impact of keeping more children with their families, how reducing congregate care for the youngest children has played out and how the number of children living out of state has declined.
"As we have sat around this table all these years, these are all things you asked for," Muniz said in response to the harsh criticism. "Your points have been well taken."
But members of the State Advisory Council say many of the changes are causing widespread concern.
"Foster families are in absolute panic that you are sending children into unsafe homes. Just because someone shares the same genes does mean their criminal history shouldn't matter," said Laurie Landry, a therapist in Wethersfield. "What are you thinking?"
Connecticut previously had one of the lowest rates in the country of placing abused and neglected children with family members when it was determined they couldn't stay at home. Because of this, the department began waiving what Muniz describes as "the most restrictive guidelines in the country." That often includes waiving what the agency calls a non-relevant criminal record.
As a result of the changes, the number of children placed with family members increased from one in seven at the end of last year to one in five in September.
The group also said the agency's move to decrease the number of abused and neglected children with specialized needs being sent to live out-of-state--from 364 children in January to 258 in October--also is having some harmful affects.
"They may be coming home, but we aren't prepared for them," said Betsy Palmer-Ehrenfeld, who coordinates a network of foster homes for special-needs children across the state. She says the money is not available to ensure appropriate treatment for children with severe behavioral issues such as cutting themselves or exhibiting problem sexual behavior.
Muniz said many of those that were living out-of-state aged out of care, some went home and others were placed in facilities in the state. He said about half of the applications to place a child out-of-state have been rejected since the start of the year.
Anderson, who is the chairwoman of the advisory panel, also complained that parents continue to be treated poorly by DCF, despite the agency's ending surprise visits in response to allegations of abuse and neglect.
"There's a huge elephant in this room we have to talk about," she said. "You are not really trying to get parents and families involved." She cited advice the department is giving school districts in the Bridgeport region on how to handle a situation when they suspect a child is not getting the health care they require. "They are being told to report the parent for medical neglect. You should be helping them find the help."
Muniz responded that there would undoubtedly be hiccups in implementing such sweeping changes, but reminded the group that it is the agency's job to make sure children are safe.
"We are only here for abuse and neglect," he said. "DCF is not intended to be a poverty help program."
That upset Karen Hanson, a coordinator for child services at Yale's Child Study Center.
"You are going to send them to 2-1-1 and the Department of Social Services. Give me a break they can't even pick up the phone. That makes no sense," she said.
Source http://www.ctmirror.org/story/14453/changes-dcf-cause-consternation-their-advisory-panel
The sweeping changes the Department of Children and Families has made in recent months are drawing the ire of the agency's advisory panel, whose members--as parents, community providers, child lawyers and foster parents--are seeing first-hand the ramifications.
"You need to hear the crap that's going on," Janice Andersen, the deputy director of a Bridgeport-based group that deals with juvenile justice and other child welfare issues, told a top DCF official Monday.
It wasn't quite the reaction Fernando Muniz was expecting. He came to the meeting with a three-page update on the positive impact of keeping more children with their families, how reducing congregate care for the youngest children has played out and how the number of children living out of state has declined.
"As we have sat around this table all these years, these are all things you asked for," Muniz said in response to the harsh criticism. "Your points have been well taken."
But members of the State Advisory Council say many of the changes are causing widespread concern.
"Foster families are in absolute panic that you are sending children into unsafe homes. Just because someone shares the same genes does mean their criminal history shouldn't matter," said Laurie Landry, a therapist in Wethersfield. "What are you thinking?"
Connecticut previously had one of the lowest rates in the country of placing abused and neglected children with family members when it was determined they couldn't stay at home. Because of this, the department began waiving what Muniz describes as "the most restrictive guidelines in the country." That often includes waiving what the agency calls a non-relevant criminal record.
As a result of the changes, the number of children placed with family members increased from one in seven at the end of last year to one in five in September.
The group also said the agency's move to decrease the number of abused and neglected children with specialized needs being sent to live out-of-state--from 364 children in January to 258 in October--also is having some harmful affects.
"They may be coming home, but we aren't prepared for them," said Betsy Palmer-Ehrenfeld, who coordinates a network of foster homes for special-needs children across the state. She says the money is not available to ensure appropriate treatment for children with severe behavioral issues such as cutting themselves or exhibiting problem sexual behavior.
Muniz said many of those that were living out-of-state aged out of care, some went home and others were placed in facilities in the state. He said about half of the applications to place a child out-of-state have been rejected since the start of the year.
Anderson, who is the chairwoman of the advisory panel, also complained that parents continue to be treated poorly by DCF, despite the agency's ending surprise visits in response to allegations of abuse and neglect.
"There's a huge elephant in this room we have to talk about," she said. "You are not really trying to get parents and families involved." She cited advice the department is giving school districts in the Bridgeport region on how to handle a situation when they suspect a child is not getting the health care they require. "They are being told to report the parent for medical neglect. You should be helping them find the help."
Muniz responded that there would undoubtedly be hiccups in implementing such sweeping changes, but reminded the group that it is the agency's job to make sure children are safe.
"We are only here for abuse and neglect," he said. "DCF is not intended to be a poverty help program."
That upset Karen Hanson, a coordinator for child services at Yale's Child Study Center.
"You are going to send them to 2-1-1 and the Department of Social Services. Give me a break they can't even pick up the phone. That makes no sense," she said.
Source http://www.ctmirror.org/story/14453/changes-dcf-cause-consternation-their-advisory-panel
Indiana child welfare supervisor faces charges
GREENSBURG, Ind.— An Indiana child welfare supervisor who was the caseworker for a slain 12-year-old Greensburg boy faces charges after allegedly giving a client a drug and sending her a photo of his genitals.
Indiana State Police arrested 28-year-old Scott Ogden of Greensburg last week. WRTV-TV and WISH-TV report he's charged with dealing a controlled substance, official misconduct, and distribution of obscene matter.
Court records show he sent text messages to a woman who lost custody of her children and offered information about them in return for sex. He also gave her three prescription painkiller pills.
Ogden was the case worker for 12-year-old Devin Parsons, who was beaten to death by his mother in June.
A telephone message seeking comment was left at the Greensburg home a man named Scott Ogden.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-in--greensburgchildd,0,3823164.story
Indiana State Police arrested 28-year-old Scott Ogden of Greensburg last week. WRTV-TV and WISH-TV report he's charged with dealing a controlled substance, official misconduct, and distribution of obscene matter.
Court records show he sent text messages to a woman who lost custody of her children and offered information about them in return for sex. He also gave her three prescription painkiller pills.
Ogden was the case worker for 12-year-old Devin Parsons, who was beaten to death by his mother in June.
A telephone message seeking comment was left at the Greensburg home a man named Scott Ogden.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-in--greensburgchildd,0,3823164.story
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)