Child abuse attorney not trained - Penn.

By Terrie Morgan-Besecker

WILKES-BARRE – Luzerne County has lost out on potentially thousands of dollars in state reimbursements because an attorney who represented children in abuse cases did not obtain training required by the state.

Frank Castano, executive director of Children and Youth Services, said he cannot seek reimbursement for work attorney John Bellino performed as a guardian ad litem after July 1, 2011 because Bellino did not obtain specialized training mandated by state legislation that went into effect last year.

The revelation comes as the court system faces mounting criticism for failing to monitor payments made to Angela Stevens, a Kingston attorney who admitted she double billed the county for representing parents in Children and Youth cases.

A Times Leader investigation revealed Stevens, who was paid more than $144,000 in 2011, charged the county for each fee petition she delivered to the court, even though many appeared to have been delivered in one trip.

President Judge Thomas Burke on Friday would not comment on why Bellino, who was paid a flat salary of $50,230, was permitted to remain employed if the county could not be reimbursed. Burke said he could not discuss the matter because it is a personnel issue.

Guardian ad litems are attorneys appointed by the court to represent children who are in the custody of Children and Youth Services to ensure their best interests are protected, independent of their parents’ interest.

The state Department of Public Welfare reimburses Luzerne County Children and Youth 50 percent for guardian services. As of July 1, the department no longer provided that funding for a guardian who did not obtain the training, which was mandated under an amendment to the state’s Adoption Act that went into effect last April.

Bellino, who had served as guardian for 11 years, was among the 59 county employees who were laid off Thursday.

It’s not known how much of Bellino’s salary from 2011 and 2012 might have been reimbursed by the state because the court system did not submit any invoices to Children and Youth detailing the number of hours he worked on cases, Castano said.

In the 2010-11 fiscal year, Castano said he sought 50 percent reimbursement for $48,208 in invoices submitted by court administration for work Bellino performed. The court had to submit invoices, even though Bellino was paid a flat salary, because DPW required documentation of the number of hours and cases on which he worked, Castano said.

Bellino said Friday he did not obtain the training because he did not know he was required to take it.

“I thought I was exempt from it because I’ve been doing this so long. I thought it was for new guardians,” Bellino said.

Bellino said was told by Castano of one training session held last year, but he did not learn about it until the last minute and could not attend due to a conflict. He said he assumed he could take it this year.

“When (Castano) told me that was a requirement for reimbursement, I believed at that point I could get it this coming year,” he said.

Children and Youth also has a contract with North Penn Legal Services to provide two attorneys as guardian ad litems. Castano said he was able to seek reimbursement for their work because both of those attorneys had received the training.

To date DPW has reimbursed the county $17,833 for the first quarter of fiscal year 2011-2012, according to deputy press secretary Ann Bale. The county spent a total of $66,252 with North Penn in the second quarter, which will be eligible for 50 percent reimbursement. That request has not yet been processed, Bale said.

Source http://www.timesleader.com/news/Child_abuse_attorney_not_trained_03-03-2012.html

Family grieves after child is taken by CPS - Arizona

by Kristine Harrington

PHOENIX -- They are the cases that tug at the heart, children torn away from their families because Child Protective Services (CPS) believes their living conditions to be unfit.

It's the struggle one Arizona family is trying to cope with right now, losing a young family member, and they say it isn't fair.

Devon Cone is 2 years old.

“Devon is very close to all of us, he's very close to his brothers,” said his aunt, Cari Cone. “We are a very close family. We have all these kids. They are all happy, every single one of them is happy.”

Devon's mom is a drug addict who lost custody of all her children. Her three older boys were all adopted by their maternal grandma years ago. Then came Devon, who turned 2 last week, but his grandma, Mary Boland, was denied Devon.

“I have not slept for days, I have not slept for days,” Boland said.

Cone said she would take him but being unemployed she said CPS denied her, too.

“They told me the reason why is that I don't have the money to take care of him so I said are you going to take my kids too because I don't have the money, but the CPS worker said no,” she said.

That's when Devon went to live with his uncle more than a year ago.

“That's who he thinks is his daddy,” Cone said.

And that's who would be his adoptive daddy, but CPS won't allow it and no one is sure why.

“They are using the excuse that Tracy, my father's ex-wife from 20 years ago, is a better fit,” Cone said. “ But she is in New Jersey.”

CPS will not comment on this case specifically but says family reunification is their goal, but it doesn't always work out.

“We want to look at a child as an individual. A child may not be a fit with the family. There may be someone else who's a better fit for the child,” said Deidre Calcoate, an adoption manager with CPS. “We would talk to the family and help them understand why the child was not placed with them.”

Whatever the reason, it is impossible for all these broken hearts to understand.

“I want my brother, I want my brother to stay with us,” cried one of Devon's brothers.

Of course, custody battles are always heartbreaking and costly. Still this family plans to fight and hopes to bring Devon home someday.

Source http://www.azfamily.com/news/Family-grieving-their-child-taken-by-CPS-137323248.html

Native Foster Care: Lost Children, Shattered Families

This is a must read and listen to report!

http://www.npr.org/2011/10/25/141672992/native-foster-care-lost-children-shattered-families

Articles about foster care $$ and possible fraud

Here is a blog following foster care money. It's interesting to not how much money is to be made and some of the fraud that goes on.

http://joshuaallenonline.com/category/foster-care-salaries/

Testimony agrees that child welfare system needs reform

Note from blog author:
This article shows that CPS is mostly about removal and money. It is obvious from our experience with CPS that they are not truly worried about the best interest of the child and they do not support families. CPS does it's best to rip families apart. Why? The almighty buck!!
---

By: MAUNETTE LOEKS, Staff Reporter
Published: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 10:08 PM CDT

The child welfare system needs fixed.

That was the overwhelming message during testimony Tuesday at a hearing as a legislative committee examines the Department of Health and Human Services.

From a Department of Health and Human Services standpoint, few issues were identified as problems within the department itself in local operations.

Nathan Busch, western service area administrator, highlighted the successes of the Department of Health and Human Services in the western service area, which includes the 11 counties of the Panhandle. Since Busch was appointed as western service administrator in October 2007, he said, he believes the area has seen improvements.

Over a four-year-period, the number of children identified as state wards has decreased by 245 children, he said. Busch said the western service area serves 605 state wards, with 73 percent of those children placed out of their home. Seventy-three percent of those children are placed out of their home. Of those children, 41 percent are placed with a relative or someone known to the area. The service area also provides services to 172 children outside the formal court via a non-court involved process.

“Though children aren’t a commodity to be counted, I believe this means children are achieving permanency in an expedient matter,” Busch said.

He said the western service area has also improved in meeting federal benchmarks put into place to measure outcomes to assure protection and safety of children in the child welfare or juvenile services system. In October 2007, he said, the western service area had been meeting only one of the six federal outcomes. However, the western service area is now meeting three of the six guidelines, with strengths in absence of maltreatment in foster care, timeliness of adoption and permanency for children in foster care. He said areas needing improvement include absence of maltreatment recurrence, timeliness and permanency of reunification and placement stability.

The western service agency has put into place efforts to try to improve in those areas, including the formation of a permanency planning committee.

“The challenge is to take an area where good things are happening and make an area where great things are happening,” he said.

However, for all the successes touted by the Health and Human Services, there were also issues presented during testimony. Just some of the issues touched on were:

-- In citing challenges faced by the western service area, Busch cited that there are not enough resources to provide services to children close to their home communities.

As of October 2009, he said, the western service area had 317 foster homes, which has grown slightly to 348 foster homes. Busch said there is a gap in the number of foster homes willing or able to provide for children with severe behaviors, such as mental health issues, infants or teenagers.

Over the last two years, the number of group homes in the district have decreased. Non-payment of services by the Boys and Girls Home had been cited as a problem by some of the providers, though Busch simply said that the reduction “is the result of terminations of contract or (the providers) choosing not to renew contracts.”

The western service area has only one youth shelter within its district, with 12 beds in Scottsbluff.

Some of the reduction in providers is a direct result of strained relations after the Boys and Girls Home had been contracted to provide services. Non-payment of services, a reduction in payment or non-referral of services to specific providers resulted in a loss of providers within the district. One provider said that the Boys and Girls Home situation has presented a distrust between providers and DHHS.

Foster families have also seen a decrease in payment and services, including the loss of respite and clothing payments for children. Foster parents and providers have said they have had to fight for services that were needed for children. In some cases, parents or providers give up. In other cases, they continue lobbying for the services or children have had to be placed into emergency protective custody situations for lengthy periods of times.

-- With a lack of services, children are being placed out of state. In one instance, cited by Busch, a child has been placed in Ohio because he said adequate services were unable to be obtained. Judge James Worden, who testified regarding observations seen in the juvenile justice system, said he has had to have at least three children placed outside of state because placement for the children had not been found within a 60-90 day time frame. He said he knew that placement for two children, placed in Colorado, and is in excess of $1,200 a month. Services could be provided within communities, if funded, he said.

Both Busch and Worden, as well as other people testifying throughout the hearing, said that reunification with parents is made more difficult when children have to be placed in other areas of the state or out-of-state. Access to familiar services, schools and visitation with parents becomes problematic.

-- Testimony cited needs for improvement in transparency and communication. Busch testified that local officials were notified by e-mail, at 5 p.m., on a Friday, that the Boys and Girls Home would be discontinuing services and had to rush to make placements. Other agencies cited that parents, workers and other officials partnering with DHHS initially didn’t have questions answered about the Boys and Girls Home coming into the community. This also resulted in questions and then problems. Problems have continued with other companies that functions have been outsourced since the Boys and Girls Home ended its contract.

While DHHS represents itself as transparent – “It does not benefit the children, the families, to play hide the ball” — families with cases involved in the system, foster families and other cooperating agencies named a need to improve transparency most often when commenting on improvements that needed to be made within the system.

-- Though the DHHS is tasked by law with focusing on reunification, some of the people testifying stated that they believed that the system focuses on foster services and adoption. Often, comments were made that the DHHS had failed to focus on children and families in providing services. Suggestions were made to help families by establishing early intervention programs, such as parenting classes, and continuing to provide support to families after children have been re-united with parents or adopted.

-- Current policies and procedures do not allow for flexibility within the system. Repeatedly, testifiers cited a difference in being able to provide services in rural areas. Some regulations do not allow multiple providers. Some regulations do not allow for flexible options, such as a proposal by Worden to have day treatment or reporting centers where children could receive services during the day, but return to home in the evenings. Routinely, the need to allow innovative programs was identified as a need of child welfare reform services.

-- Some problems were identified with the people working within the system. In three incidents cited during the hearing, prosecutors made decisions to remove children and at least one person cited that it was felt that the removal of children had been done as punishment to a parent for not testifying in a case. All three individuals testified that they believed more than one individual should be responsible for determining if a child is removed from a home to avoid conflicts.

One of those individuals testified about being involved in a case in Keith County, called the “collaboration” between agencies “collusion,” saying that officials within different agencies conspired to create falsehoods to remove children from home and keep them from homes. Two of those individuals testified that caseworkers had committed perjury in court hearings and that they had evidence from law enforcement and school officials proving such.

Cases where guardian ad litems or caseworkers had little knowledge of cases, having not met with children or families, were noted. Visitation issues were cited by Worden, CASA workers and families with cases in the court system were cited as problems because providers were not showing up or were canceling pre-scheduled appointments. Meetings designed to discuss and examine cases also had similar complaints, with case workers or others canceling appointments and not notifying parents or other persons working on the cases in a timely fashion.

-- Lack of training and low wages.

Everyone from foster parents to persons within agencies that partner with DHHS testified that training for caseworkers to foster parents is needed. People also testified that low wages to people working with children, such as visitation aids, were low and resulted in unqualified individuals supervising children and cases.

Caseworkers were also cited as being overworked, with too few caseworkers and too many cases assigned to workers.

Support services for families, and for foster children and children returned to homes, were also cited as needs.

-- More oversight, both fiscal and in operations. Waste and redundancy within the system where identified throughout the hearing. One testifier noted that she and her daughter had received 12 letters regarding a reduction in services. Other examples of waste and redundancy were also cited.

Testimony during Tuesday’s hearings came during open and closed sessions.

“We came out here to get your stories and what you would like to convey,” Sen. Kathy Campbell told the crowd attending the hearing. She regularly encouraged people testifying or attending the hearings to contact local representative Sen. John Harms with follow up testimony or information or to contact members of the committees overseeing the legislative study process

Source http://www.starherald.com/articles/2011/09/14/news/doc4e701a0aa84d9420064313.txt

Senate approves Foster Care Act

By HANNAH L. TORREGOZA
September 5, 2011, 5:08pm

MANILA, Philippines — The Senate has approved on third and final reading the Foster Care Act of 2010, a measure giving tax breaks to foster parents and donor agencies that put a premium on homeless children.

Senate Bill no. 2486, authored by Senate President Pro Tempore Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada and Sen. Pilar “Pia” Cayetano, aims to establish a system that would promote foster care for homeless children by giving foster parents and donor agencies tax incentives.

“Foster care” is defined by the bill as the provision of planned temporary substitute parental care to a child. The bill seeks to address the lack of institutions in the country that attend to the needs of abandoned and neglected Filipino children.

In order to qualify as a foster parent, a person must be of legal age and must meet a set of qualifications to prove that he or she is of good moral character, and capable of providing for the needs of the foster child.

During her sponsorship speech, Cayetano stressed the need for government to give attention and consideration to foster care as a preferred way of caring for homeless children as opposed to the current practice of placing them in institutions, such as orphanages and youth centers.

“Studies show that foster care creates a better living environment, and develops better individuals as opposed to institutional care,” Cayetano said.

“Through foster care, children are given more attention and care in a home setting, thus providing them with more opportunities for normal, mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical growth,” she added.

Once it is enacted into law, Estrada said, the government will provide assistance and tax incentives to foster parents, child-caring agencies and donor institutions.

The bill grants foster parents medical insurance through the Philippine Health Insurance (PhilHealth) if they are non-members at the time of foster care. They will also be provided with counseling, training on child care and development, skills training, and livelihood assistance.

Foster parents are also entitled to personal tax exemption, and additional exemptions for dependents. The Department of Welfare and Development (DWSD) will also see to it that the foster child will receive monthly support.

Source http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/333281/senate-oks-foster-care-act-third-and-final-reading

Psychiatry Drugs Foster Care Children – Ashley

Psychiatry Drugs Foster Care Children – Ashley I took my video camera to a Foster Care Alumni meeting and asked seven foster kids to tell me about there experiences in Child Protective Services while wards of the state. One thing they all had in common was massive over drugging with psychiatric drugs. Child placement agencies, foster parents, RTCs (Residential Treatment Centers) and Therapeutic Foster Homes get paid a certain amount of money each day for taking care of a foster child. The amount of money they get paid depends on a level of care system. The more difficult the child or the more problems that child has, the more money you get. A child at the basic level of care is worth about 17 dollars a day where as a child in the highest level of care could be worth as much as a 1000 dollars a day. This puts the incentive on diagnosing children with behavior problems to justify raising their level of care. A child on psychiatric drugs is worth more than a child without problems. It is not uncommon for a foster child to be placed on many different psychotropic drugs at the same time. Some investigations have found children on as many as 13 mind altering drugs prescribed by a psychiatrists at one time. These drugs include all categories of psychiatric drugs; antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, anxiety medications, anticonvulsants medications, etc. The SSRI drugs are commons such as Paxil, Zoloft, Prozac, etc. Also a number of these children described taking …

Source http://health5news.com/?p=2728

DCS unveils change to foster care reimbursement rates - Indiana

INDIANAPOLIS | The Indiana Department of Child Services announced Friday a new set of foster care reimbursement rates.

DCS officials now will use a foster child's age and level of need to determine how much his or her foster parent will receive in reimbursement, the department said. In the past, almost all foster parents received $25 per child, per day -- regardless of the child's age or circumstances.

The rates are intended to cover the reasonable costs of caring for a foster child including food, clothing, shelter, daily supervision and travel for visitation and school.

The rate change will affect all of the roughly 4,900 foster homes in Indiana -- 911 of which are located in Lake County, DCS records show. Porter County has 53 foster homes.

The change also will affect reimbursement rates for foster children who are living with relatives -- if the relatives are licensed foster parents.

Some foster parents will see an increase in reimbursement under the new rate system while others will see a decrease.

Foster parents housing a child with basic needs will receive between $18.28 and $22.90 per day under the new rate system, depending on the child's age. Those caring for children requiring more supervision will receive between $26.05 and $66.56, depending on the child's age and level of need.

The new rate system goes into effect Jan. 1.

It was developed as the result of a settlement in a federal lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union in 2009.

In the settlement, DCS agreed to develop a rate-setting method to determine foster care rates.

--

Foster care reimbursement rates per child, per day

Foster care
Infant - 4 years $18.28
5 to 13 years $19.85
14 to 18 years $22.90

Foster care with services
Infant - 4 years $26.05
5 to 13 years $27.62
14 to 18 years $30.67

Therapeutic foster care
Infant - 4 years $38.19
5 to 13 years $39.76
14 to 18 years $42.81

Therapeutic plus
Infant - 4 years $61.94
5 to 13 years $63.51
14 to 18 years $66.56

In addition to the above described per diem payment, foster parents may receive the following payments to purchase items for the benefit of the child:

1. Initial Clothing Allowance – DCS may provide the foster family with an initial clothing and personal items allotment at the time of placement of up to $200 based on the child's need.

2. Liability Insurance – DCS will provide foster care liability insurance for foster parents through a contract with the Indiana Foster Care and Adoption Association (IFCAA). Foster parents no longer need to be members of IFCAA to obtain the insurance.

3. Personal Allowance – DCS will reimburse foster parents up to $300 annually for each child in placement. Foster parents may request reimbursement for personal allowance items once the child has been in placement for at least 8 days. The items that fall within the personal allowance will be defined in DCS Policy.

4. Special Occasion Allowance – DCS will provide a $50 special occasion allowance on the child’s birthday and a $50 special occasion allowance during the December holidays.

5. Travel Reimbursement – DCS will reimburse foster parents for travel in excess of 162 miles if the travel is for visitation, school, physical/behavioral health appointment or other DCS required travel which will be set out in the Indiana Foster Parent Resource Guide.

The foster care per diem covers 162 miles per month for travel as determined by the Ball State Study. If foster parents travel in excess of 162 miles for the reasons cited in 5 above, foster parents can invoice DCS for the additional travel.

Rates are effective Jan. 1.

Source: Indiana Department of Child Services

Source: http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/article_378c9ae4-ce16-5faa-995b-a86e05e6009f.html

Psychiatry Drugs Foster Care Children – Tristen

Psychiatry Drugs Foster Care Children – Tristen I took my video camera to a Foster Care Alumni meeting and asked seven foster kids to tell me about there experiences in Child Protective Services while wards of the state. One thing they all had in common was massive over drugging with psychiatric drugs. Child placement agencies, foster parents, RTCs (Residential Treatment Centers) and Therapeutic Foster Homes get paid a certain amount of money each day for taking care of a foster child. The amount of money they get paid depends on a level of care system. The more difficult the child or the more problems that child has, the more money you get. A child at the basic level of care is worth about 17 dollars a day where as a child in the highest level of care could be worth as much as a 1000 dollars a day. This puts the incentive on diagnosing children with behavior problems to justify raising their level of care. A child on psychiatric drugs is worth more than a child without problems. It is not uncommon for a foster child to be placed on many different psychotropic drugs at the same time. Some investigations have found children on as many as 13 mind altering drugs prescribed by a psychiatrists at one time. These drugs include all categories of psychiatric drugs; antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, anxiety medications, anticonvulsants medications, etc. The SSRI drugs are commons such as Paxil, Zoloft, Prozac, etc. Also a number of these children described taking …

Psychiatry Drugs Foster Care Children – Aisha

Psychiatry Drugs Foster Care Children – Aisha I took my video camera to a Foster Care Alumni meeting and asked seven foster kids to tell me about there experiences in Child Protective Services while wards of the state. One thing they all had in common was massive over drugging with psychiatric drugs. Child placement agencies, foster parents, RTCs (Residential Treatment Centers) and Therapeutic Foster Homes get paid a certain amount of money each day for taking care of a foster child. The amount of money they get paid depends on a level of care system. The more difficult the child or the more problems that child has, the more money you get. A child at the basic level of care is worth about 17 dollars a day where as a child in the highest level of care could be worth as much as a 1000 dollars a day. This puts the incentive on diagnosing children with behavior problems to justify raising their level of care. A child on psychiatric drugs is worth more than a child without problems. It is not uncommon for a foster child to be placed on many different psychotropic drugs at the same time. Some investigations have found children on as many as 13 mind altering drugs prescribed by a psychiatrists at one time. These drugs include all categories of psychiatric drugs; antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, anxiety medications, anticonvulsants medications, etc. The SSRI drugs are commons such as Paxil, Zoloft, Prozac, etc. Also a number of these children described taking …

Source: http://health5news.com/?p=1631

Adoption, Thow Away Kids, Money and CPS

When adoption goes wrong
Giving up custody to get kids the mental health care they need
By Patrick Yeagle

Wally and Dawne Busch of Petersburg eagerly adopted their son Alan at the age of two in 2000, knowing that they would be in for some challenging times. They knew that Alan, now 13, had been abused by his biological mother, and they weren’t surprised when, around the time he hit puberty, he began to develop severe emotional and behavioral issues, which often manifest in violent outbursts, threatening Alan’s safety and that of everyone around him.

He threatened to kill other children at school, threatened to hurt the couple’s other children, mutilated his own body and talked often about killing himself. But the Buschs say their most troubling challenge hasn’t been Alan’s behavior. It has been trying to help their son in an environment that they say pushes families to give up custody of children to the state in return for mental health services.

The Buschs adopted Alan and his sister, Stephanie, with assurances from DCFS that the state would pay for the children’s medical needs, including mental health care. Despite counseling and therapy, Alan’s behavior became too dangerous for the family to keep him in their home, according to Wally Busch, so in October 2010 the family had Alan committed to a short-term psychiatric hospital with plans to send him to a long-term residential care facility at his psychiatrist’s recommendation. Lacking the hundreds of thousands of dollars needed to pay for Alan’s treatment, the Buschs approached DCFS about paying for long-term care, but the agency declined.

After Alan spent a week in the psychiatric hospital, the Buschs received a call saying he was ready to come home – that he was no longer a danger to himself or others. Fearing for the safety of their family and of Alan himself, the Buschs took their attorney’s advice and decided not to pick Alan up from the psychiatric hospital. DCFS charged them with neglect, classifying the Buschs’ choice as a “psychiatric lockout.”

The neglect charge against the Buschs was dismissed in court, but their choice to not bring Alan back home essentially meant they had given up custody of Alan to the state. He remains in state custody at a residential treatment facility, though the Buschs retain parental rights such as visitation.

Custody relinquishment
The Buschs’ story is typical of a situation called custody relinquishment. It involves an adoptive family becoming overwhelmed by the challenges of a mentally ill or emotionally disturbed child. Usually after trying several methods of counseling and therapy that don’t seem to work, the family decides that expensive long-term residential care is the only option left, but securing funding from the state proves difficult or impossible. The family then decides the only option to secure treatment for the child is leaving him or her in the hands of the state. The decision to “lock out” a child usually comes at the suggestion of a family’s attorney, psychiatrist, or even a state agency, but it often results in the family losing custody of the child.

It’s difficult to tell how many custody relinquishments happen each year, but statistics on psychiatric lockout seem to indicate a worsening problem. Screening, Assessment and Support Services (SASS), a division of the Illinois Department of Human Services, says in an internal report that the number of psychiatric lockouts statewide more than tripled from 30 in 2003 to 104 in 2010. The Community and Residential Services Authority (CRSA), a state agency which guides parents through the maze of child welfare services when they have trouble, indicates in its 2009 and 2010 annual reports that custody relinquishment happens frequently enough to be a significant concern.

“Parents who attempt to access services through lockout in many instances end up relinquishing guardianship to the state and are often treated systemically as abusive or neglectful parents,” CRSA notes in its 2009 report. “CRSA staff do not believe that lockout is an effective mechanism for service planning and the CRSA board has long believed that parents should not be forced to give up guardianship and parental rights to their children simply to get their service needs met.”

The reports note that “referral to CRSA often implies a breakdown or a gap somewhere in the state service system.” CRSA cases increased from 355 in 2009 to 374 in 2010, with about half of cases from both years coming from families seeking residential care for a child with severe emotional disturbances or behavioral disorders. Of CRSA’s 355 cases in 2009, 32 came from Sangamon County.

John Schornagel, executive director of CRSA, which is based in Springfield, says custody relinquishment cases are the ones that “fall through the cracks” between the services offered by the half-dozen child-serving state agencies, including those that provide post-adoption services.

“I wish lockouts didn’t happen,” Schornagel says. “As a group of agencies and as a state, we need to find a solution to custody relinquishment. Certainly, DCFS has a good clinical division, and they’re capable of handling adopted kids who are at risk for adoption disruption. But for parents to have to go through the living hell of abandoning their kids to the system simply to get their mental health needs met is just the wrong way to go. There must be a better way.”

Schornagel says that of the more than 10,000 cases CRSA has handled in its 26-year existence, only 44 have required the CRSA board to step in and issue non-binding recommendations to resolve a conflict between state agencies and adoptive parents seeking services. Most cases get resolved before they get to the psychiatric lockout stage, Schornagel says, adding that many conflicts can be resolved if parents contact his agency for help securing services before a psychiatric lockout ever becomes an option.

CRSA reports identify other issues that hinder families’ efforts to obtain state services for mentally ill or emotionally disturbed children, including a lack of services available in a geographic area, state agencies deflecting clients to other agencies, ever-changing diagnostic criteria that require constant changes to services and programs, and the inability of schools to pay for appropriate educational plans for children with special needs.

Schornagel says the custody relinquishment problem is largely the result of changes made to DCFS in the 1990s because of a federal court order that required DCFS to put foster children into permanent homes within two years of entering the foster care system. He says “disrupting adoptions” will continue as long as there is such a short time frame for getting kids into permanent homes, combined with parents who “aren’t fully prepared and trained for the clinical kinds of challenges they’re going to face” when adopting.

Kendall Marlowe, spokesman for the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, says the majority of adoptions do not result in custody relinquishment. He notes that Illinois had nearly 52,000 children in its foster care system in 1997, but that number has been reduced to fewer than 17,000 currently, mainly due to increased efforts to place foster children into permanent adoptive homes. About 26,800 children in Illinois receive a monthly adoption subsidy from the state, which Marlowe says is probably the best available estimate of currently adopted kids in Illinois – excluding adoptions done through private agencies.

About 99 percent of adoptions remain stable after two years, with 95 percent remaining stable after five years, according to a DCFS report.

Speaking generally and not about any specific case, Marlowe says long-term residential treatment like that sought by the Buschs is usually reserved for only the most mentally ill children. DCFS received 75 requests for residential placements in 2009, he says, and only seven of those cases received approval from DCFS director Erwin McEwen.

Many of the problems exhibited by adopted kids are common to all kids, Marlowe notes.

“Adoptive families are not the only families that struggle when kids move into adolescence, and many of the behaviors we associate with mental health conditions are very common among adolescents, including issues of sexuality, identity and attachment,” Marlowe says. “It can be too easy at times to perceive an adolescent’s struggle with maturity to be indicative of mental health conditions. Often, even when elements of mental health conditions are present, the more effective solution is therapy and intervention which involves the entire family. … Families often don’t want to hear that the entire family needs to be a part of the solution.”

Addressing the charge of neglect that often follows a psychiatric lockout, Marlowe says DCFS procedures call for an automatic neglect charge after any lockout, but the charge is usually only upheld if “the family is not engaged in coming up with a solution” for the child to return.

Schornagel says the proactive solution to custody relinquishment would be better community-based support services like intensive therapy and counseling in a child’s own community. Community-based services keep children in a familiar environment – usually their own home – while costing the state less money than residential treatment and pre-empting many of the problems that lead to psychiatric lockouts.

While many state agencies are working to establish more community-based services, Schornagel says that process requires diverting money away from things like residential care, which deals with kids who are already in crisis.

“My perception, from where I sit, is that community-based services aren’t available in the quantity or the quality that are necessary to maintain a lot of these kids, and that’s why it all breaks down,” Schornagel says. “All of the agencies that I’ve worked with have been, over the years, trying to back away from residential placement and take some of the money they were spending on residential care and redirect that to community-based programs. It’s a slow process of moving the money from the back end to the front end, and I think we’re in the middle of that.”

Marlowe says more community-based services are a big part of the solution, but families must also be prepared for the challenges they will face when adopting.

“All of us in the field believe that if we build a stronger safety net, we will be seeing fewer family crises,” Marlowe says. “The system as a whole is trying to move from a mode of reacting to crisis to a more preventative approach. But not every family’s problems can be solved by Dr. Phil in 60 minutes like on Oprah. Growing into a mature, healthy adult is a process that requires support from family at every turn.”

Too little, too late
But for families already in crisis, it’s too late to build a stronger safety net. In 1998, James and Toni Hoy of Ingleside, Ill., adopted a two-year-old son named Daniel. He displayed developmental delays, had been abused by his biological parents, and had been born under the influence of drugs and alcohol. As Daniel grew older, he began to display violent and aggressive behavior, which became dangerous enough that Toni Hoy says she didn’t feel safe in her own home.

The Hoys tried several methods of therapy and counseling for Daniel, but nothing seemed to work. The final straw was when Daniel, then 13, pulled a knife on one of the Hoys’ other children and threw another child down some stairs.

In 2007, they approached the Department of Human Services (DHS) and the Department of Healthcare and Family Services (HFS) about paying for $180,000-per-year residential treatment the family could not afford. The state declined to pay.

Denied funding for treatment they felt Daniel truly needed, the Hoys chose not to pick him up from the psychiatric hospital. Like the Buschs, they faced a charge of neglect for their psychiatric lockout, and their son became a ward of the state, which eventually placed him in a residential treatment facility.

The Hoys eventually got the neglect charge dropped, but it remained in the State Central Registry of abuse and neglect findings. They sued DHS and HFS to obtain funding for Daniel’s residential care, settling their case in July 2011 with an agreement that the agencies would pay for Daniel’s treatment while not admitting any fault. The Hoys also regained custody of Daniel, who is now 16 and was recently transferred from residential care to a juvenile detention center for assaulting a teacher and damaging a car.

While the Hoy case doesn’t set a precedent for other cases because it was settled before a court ruling, Toni Hoy says she has advised several other families in similar situations, and their case may serve as a catalyst for an upcoming class-action lawsuit.

The Collins Law Firm in Naperville, which represented the Hoys in their case, is examining similar cases to construct a class-action suit that could force changes in how the state handles psychiatric lockouts, custody relinquishment and residential care. Attorney Aaron Rapier at Collins says that suit is still in the planning stages and will not be pursued until later, to avoid jeopardizing the Hoys’ settlement.

In the meantime, John Schornagel at CRSA says the state’s financial woes limit the speed at which agencies can move from reacting to crises toward preventing them.

“State agencies have all been cut back on a variety of services – administration and direct services – and a lot of the nonprofits that do the heavy lifting are in trouble because the state isn’t paying their bills in some instances and they’re cutting back on services they provide to the community,” he says. “It makes being proactive more and more difficult. … I don’t think there’s any bad guys here. The agencies are doing what they can to do a better job with a very, very challenging population. I think they’re beginning to win the war, but there’s always casualties.”

Source article http://www.illinoistimes.com/Springfield/article-8964-when-adoption-goes-wrong.html

CPS Demands Truth When They Do Not Tell The Truth

When dealing with CPS, you will find that they will demand you to be truthful and sometimes, they will even accuse you of telling lies when you are not. But don't wait for the truth to come from their lips because that is not how they roll.

CPS will twist, exaggerate, omit, fabricate and whatever they can think of to their benefit and to your detriment. Your caseworker may be sneaky and may make things up but we have found that caseworker supervisors and regional supervisors tell lies more frequently. Even some of the CPS personnel associated with your state capitol offices have been known not to tell the truth about procedures to remedy wrongs done to you by CPS. (We have found that they frequently tell parents and relatives that there are no processes available through the state, such as administrative hearings.) CPS will do whatever they can to make you and your family look bad for the sole purpose of keeping your children until they are adopted out.

What is a lie?

A lie (also called prevarication, falsehood) is a type of deception in the form of an untruthful statement, especially with the intention to deceive others.

To lie is to state something with disregard to the truth with the intention that people will accept the statement as truth.

Somtimes, CPS will state part of the truth out of context, knowing that without complete information, it gives a false impression. Likewise, they can actually state accurate facts, yet deceive with them.

There are times that CPS will create a complete fabrication which is a lie told when they submit a statement as truth, without knowing for certain whether or not it actually is true. Although the statement may be possible or plausible, it is not based on fact. Rather, it is something made up, or it is a misrepresentation of the truth.

One of CPS' favorites is telling lies by omission (selective omission.) They omit an important fact, deliberately leaving another person with a misconception. Lying by omission includes failures to correct pre-existing misconceptions. Also known as a continuing misrepresentation. CPS is famous for selectively omitting anything good about you when they are in court or any other process where that information might be valuable and a benefit to you, your case and your children.

CPS often uses exaggeration to make your case even more crazy than it is. This occurs when the most fundamental aspects of a statement are true, but only to a certain degree. It is also seen as "stretching the truth" or making something appear more powerful, meaningful, or real than it actually is.

Many people who have fallen victim to CPS lies have stated that CPS even tells lies in court - directly to the judge. This is known as perjury. Perjury is the act of lying or making verifiably false statements on a material matter under oath or affirmation in a court of law, or in any of various sworn statements in writing. Perjury is a crime, because the witness has sworn to tell the truth and, for the credibility of the court to remain intact, witness testimony must be relied on as truthful.

So just how can they expect anyone to trust them? How can anyone believe even one word that they say?

Well, no one can but in most instances, only the judges in the courtrooms do believe them.

Victim after victim has come forward for years and each tells the same story. CPS lies to your face, behind your back and in court.

Why do they lie?

Job security - Those lies enable them to take children from their parents or guardians and feed them to the greedy CPS / foster / adoption system. The amount of money generated by our beautiful children is enormous. As long as there are children to funnel through their money machine, their jobs are safe. In the meanwhile, each state is making a ton of money also.

When it comes right down to it, the biggest lie is - "the best interest of the children." CPS could care a less about what is best for the children. All they care about is lining their pockets and scratching the backs of all their accomplices.

When dealing with CPS in person or over the phone, record everything! Check your state laws about recording conversations first but whatever you do, make sure you have proof of what was said. Using a mini-cassette recorder is best because other forms of recording would be considered easy to manipulate. You can get a device to use on your phone at electronics stores that is fairly inexpensive.

Click Here To Read Oral Coversation & Telephonic Recording Laws - State By State Information