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
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 neglect. Show all posts
Showing posts with label neglect. Show all posts
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Friday, November 4, 2011
Lawmaker: Mom’s struggle to keep her children shows problems with DCFS
By Brooke Adams
The Salt Lake Tribune
Price • This is what Jennifer and Brandon Stark brought in a plastic grocery sack as goodbye gifts for their four boys: a few rocks for their oldest son’s collection, puzzles, piggy banks, crayons and letters expressing their love.
On Oct. 25, a week after a judge terminated their parental rights and 14 months after the state Division of Child and Family Services first investigated the couple for alleged drug use and neglect, the Starks saw their sons for what may be the last time.
The case has caught the attention of parental rights advocates and a state legislator who says it exemplifies the way the court and child welfare systems work against parents, especially those with limited resources.
"She lost her children and her major crime was she didn’t have a job and a driver’s license and was therefore dependent on her husband," said Rep. Christine F. Watkins, D-Price. "I just found it astonishing in a very negative way."
Among troubling aspects of the case, according to Watkins, is the amount of time the parents were given to regain their children, the children’s placement with foster parents rather than relatives and the high rate of children in foster care in the region.
The Starks plan to appeal the placement of their boys, who range in age from 6 years to 7 months, with foster parents and say their attorney is optimistic. But odds of success are slim: 97 percent of parental rights terminations are upheld, according to DCFS. The division doesn’t track appeals challenging placements.
Watkins said she began investigating the DCFS Eastern Region, which includes Carbon and Emery counties, about 18 months ago after being overwhelmed with complaints from constituents.
"If you don’t do everything they tell you to do, exactly as they tell you to do it, then you’re done," said Watkins. "They will take your kids. It is tragic."
"There were a lot of things very wrong here," she said. "I worked with the state director, and a lot of changes have been made."
Among those changes: appointment of a new region director about nine months ago. But Watkins is still concerned and is already drafting legislation to address what she sees as flaws in the system. Among them, she says, is the lack of funds put into home services to help families stay together.
Last year, DCFS spent $94 million on foster care and kinship support services, but just $7 million on in-home services to help families correct problems that put their children in jeopardy.
Brent Platt, DCFS director, said he believes with a new director in place, the Eastern Region office is "moving in the right direction, but it takes time. He [the new director] is working closely with the Price office and trying to rebuild that relationship with the community."
It is unclear what, if any, effect the region’s problems played in the Stark case. The division’s stated preference is that in-home services be provided so that children remain with their parents and, if that is not possible, that they be placed with relatives.
Liz Sollis, DCFS spokeswoman, said she couldn’t legally comment on the Stark case specifically other than to note it is the juvenile justice system that ultimately decides what happens in child welfare cases.
That leaves the Starks, who provided some documentation to back their account, and their supporters to tell what happened.
The allegations • The Starks, both in their mid-20s, had three sons in August 2010 when police and child protective service workers first investigated them for alleged drug use and child neglect.
At the time, the Starks had been together for eight years and married for more than two years. Jennifer Stark, pregnant with their fourth child, was employed at a care center while Brandon Stark looked after the kids and ferried his wife to and from work. It was alleged they left the children alone during those trips, which they deny.
When the Starks refused to take drug tests, the state placed their three sons in a temporary shelter. The couple quickly relented.
As with many child welfare cases, some facts are disputed but not this one: as alleged, Brandon Stark periodically used marijuana, methamphetamine and opiate drugs. Over eight months, Brandon Stark was drug tested at least 34 times; about half his tests were positive. Jennifer Stark, in contrast, went through more than 16 drug tests, and each was negative.
After his first positive test, DCFS required Brandon Stark to separate from his wife and children and get drug treatment; he moved in with a friend, got a job at a fast-food restaurant and entered drug counseling.
The couple had moved out of their rented home, and Jennifer had lost her job. Her service plan was to find a place to live, get a job and sign up for counseling and peer parenting support.
Right from the start, Jennifer Stark, whose siblings and parents live in Ohio, asked her caseworker to consider placing the children with her sister, who was more than willing to take them.
"But we never heard from her," said Kim Kisseberth of Findlay, Ohio, one of Jennifer Stark’s nine siblings.
Meanwhile, Jennifer Stark found a place to rent, paid for by her husband, and in late September the boys were returned to her care; about a month later, Brandon Stark was allowed to move back in with his family.
The setbacks • As winter set in, Brandon Stark’s $8 an-hour job wasn’t enough to cover rent, utilities and $50 a week for his drug treatment program. The Starks moved to a cheaper place but were still underwater financially.
"It was either rent for us or it was his drug treatment," Jennifer Stark said. Brandon Stark dropped out of the program and couldn’t afford a second $140 drug assessment the state requested, she said. He soon relapsed.
DCFS drew up a new service plan allowing Brandon Stark to stay with his family as long as he re-entered drug treatment. A caseworker suggested he find a better-paying job or take on a second job to pay for the program and the family’s monthly expenses, according to the couple.
By mid-March, when Jennifer Stark gave birth to their fourth son, Brandon Stark had stopped participating in drug tests and was once again barred from living with his family. Jennifer Stark said she agreed to a new service plan only after the caseworker threatened to remove her children.
"I had no job, no means of transportation because I don’t have my driver’s license and was living far from everyone I know, trying to handle four kids by myself and stay as mentally stable as I could under the conditions," Jennifer Stark said. The caseworker’s advice? Rely on friends, family and the community for childcare, transportation and support, she said.
Jennifer Stark said she was told "something was wrong with me that I was with someone like [Brandon] and hadn’t seen the signs" of his substance abuse.
In early May, a caseworker found Brandon Stark at the home — though Jennifer Stark claims he had just stopped by to drop off a rent check — and the division again took custody of the four children, placing them with a foster family in Orem.
"We were told there were no foster families in this area equipped to take four kids," Jennifer Stark said — something DCFS acknowledges is a problem in rural areas.
A new service plan was drawn up, which looked much like the others: drug treatment for him, increased independence for her through learning to drive, getting a job, counseling. A permanency hearing, when decisions are made about whether to continue efforts to reunify a family, was set for late August.
"I was looking for jobs as much as I could," Jennifer Stark said. With public school out until fall, there was no chance she’d finish driver education and get her license in time.
And Brandon Stark’s plan "failed right off the get-go," Jennifer Stark said. He spent six weeks in jail this summer after falling behind in restitution payments in connection with a March 2010 misdemeanor shoplifting offense, according to court records.
For Jennifer Stark, the result was lost financial support and transportation to job interviews and to visits with their children in Orem. The state suggested she move into a women’s shelter.
"I was offended," Jennifer Stark said. "I had a roof over my head and Brandon was in jail at the time. So why?"
Still, she agreed to check it out.
"I was told I would have to cut all ties [with other family], on top of losing my kids, my husband and everything," Jennifer Stark said. "I didn’t want to lose my mother-in-law and what little support I had. They couldn’t guarantee transportation for anything. They said I would get a month [at the shelter] and then they’d try to find me a place to go. I said no."
But the decision to stick with her husband and stay out of the shelter proved to be more strikes against her, Jennifer Stark said, resulting in caseworkers describing her as "co-dependent."
It’s one of the issues that irks Watkins. "Are we helping families or are we destroying families?" she said.
Kisseberth said she’d offered over the years to help Jennifer when her relationship was in trouble, but her sister would "always say we were raised to not divorce that easily, that she was going to hold it together. She’d said, ‘So what if I leave him and one day my boys are coming to me saying, ‘Why did you take us away from our dad?’ "
The outcome • By June, the Kisseberths had completed all the steps necessary to be a kinship placement and were on track to be certified as foster and adoptive parents by the August hearing, which the state helped pay for them to attend.
The Kisseberths had remodeled their home, completed a home inspection, background check, foster parenting classes and interstate paperwork, and lined up daycare and other support. They had never met the three youngest children and hadn’t seen the oldest boy since he was a toddler but began building a relationship through weekly phone calls over the summer. They also sent a photo album introducing them to their extended family.
Kisseberth said that at the August hearing, the Starks’ caseworker, the state’s attorney and the couple’s attorney all recommended that the boys live with them.
Jennifer Stark said she acknowledged at the hearing that neither she nor Brandon were currently able to provide for their children — an admission they were told would increase odds of their children being placed in the custody of her sister.
People who had worked with the Starks and their children submitted letters describing them as well-bonded and, in Jennifer’s case, as making "a good amount of progress in a short time to be reunited with her children."
But days after the August hearing, 7th District Juvenile Judge Scott Johansen sided with the children’s guardian ad litem, who recommended the boys stay with the foster family with whom they had spent the previous four months and who are interested in adopting them.
"When they take the kids away from us, and put them in foster care, they don’t have any ties, they don’t know the foster parents," Jennifer Stark said. "What would have been the difference with my sister and her husband?"
On Oct. 18, the Starks’ parental rights were terminated. Days later, they bid their boys goodbye.
"Yeah, I made some mistakes, but I don’t feel it was bad enough to lose our children forever," Brandon Stark said.
His wife, he said, did "everything in her power and it was still not good enough for the state because she chose to stick with me. ... All we can do is hope and pray for the appeal to go through and hope her sister will get them so we can see them again."
Their last meeting with the boys was just a half-hour, and they were warned by a caseworker to not make promises, to not talk about the future, to leave their sons’ questions about when they might visit again unanswered, to leave Jennifer Stark’s tears unexplained.
That left them with these words: "Just, ‘Love you,’ " a weeping Jennifer Start said afterward. " ‘No matter what, we love you.’ "
Source http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/jazz/52788018-78/stark-jennifer-brandon-foster.html.csp?page=1
The Salt Lake Tribune
Price • This is what Jennifer and Brandon Stark brought in a plastic grocery sack as goodbye gifts for their four boys: a few rocks for their oldest son’s collection, puzzles, piggy banks, crayons and letters expressing their love.
On Oct. 25, a week after a judge terminated their parental rights and 14 months after the state Division of Child and Family Services first investigated the couple for alleged drug use and neglect, the Starks saw their sons for what may be the last time.
The case has caught the attention of parental rights advocates and a state legislator who says it exemplifies the way the court and child welfare systems work against parents, especially those with limited resources.
"She lost her children and her major crime was she didn’t have a job and a driver’s license and was therefore dependent on her husband," said Rep. Christine F. Watkins, D-Price. "I just found it astonishing in a very negative way."
Among troubling aspects of the case, according to Watkins, is the amount of time the parents were given to regain their children, the children’s placement with foster parents rather than relatives and the high rate of children in foster care in the region.
The Starks plan to appeal the placement of their boys, who range in age from 6 years to 7 months, with foster parents and say their attorney is optimistic. But odds of success are slim: 97 percent of parental rights terminations are upheld, according to DCFS. The division doesn’t track appeals challenging placements.
Watkins said she began investigating the DCFS Eastern Region, which includes Carbon and Emery counties, about 18 months ago after being overwhelmed with complaints from constituents.
"If you don’t do everything they tell you to do, exactly as they tell you to do it, then you’re done," said Watkins. "They will take your kids. It is tragic."
"There were a lot of things very wrong here," she said. "I worked with the state director, and a lot of changes have been made."
Among those changes: appointment of a new region director about nine months ago. But Watkins is still concerned and is already drafting legislation to address what she sees as flaws in the system. Among them, she says, is the lack of funds put into home services to help families stay together.
Last year, DCFS spent $94 million on foster care and kinship support services, but just $7 million on in-home services to help families correct problems that put their children in jeopardy.
Brent Platt, DCFS director, said he believes with a new director in place, the Eastern Region office is "moving in the right direction, but it takes time. He [the new director] is working closely with the Price office and trying to rebuild that relationship with the community."
It is unclear what, if any, effect the region’s problems played in the Stark case. The division’s stated preference is that in-home services be provided so that children remain with their parents and, if that is not possible, that they be placed with relatives.
Liz Sollis, DCFS spokeswoman, said she couldn’t legally comment on the Stark case specifically other than to note it is the juvenile justice system that ultimately decides what happens in child welfare cases.
That leaves the Starks, who provided some documentation to back their account, and their supporters to tell what happened.
The allegations • The Starks, both in their mid-20s, had three sons in August 2010 when police and child protective service workers first investigated them for alleged drug use and child neglect.
At the time, the Starks had been together for eight years and married for more than two years. Jennifer Stark, pregnant with their fourth child, was employed at a care center while Brandon Stark looked after the kids and ferried his wife to and from work. It was alleged they left the children alone during those trips, which they deny.
When the Starks refused to take drug tests, the state placed their three sons in a temporary shelter. The couple quickly relented.
As with many child welfare cases, some facts are disputed but not this one: as alleged, Brandon Stark periodically used marijuana, methamphetamine and opiate drugs. Over eight months, Brandon Stark was drug tested at least 34 times; about half his tests were positive. Jennifer Stark, in contrast, went through more than 16 drug tests, and each was negative.
After his first positive test, DCFS required Brandon Stark to separate from his wife and children and get drug treatment; he moved in with a friend, got a job at a fast-food restaurant and entered drug counseling.
The couple had moved out of their rented home, and Jennifer had lost her job. Her service plan was to find a place to live, get a job and sign up for counseling and peer parenting support.
Right from the start, Jennifer Stark, whose siblings and parents live in Ohio, asked her caseworker to consider placing the children with her sister, who was more than willing to take them.
"But we never heard from her," said Kim Kisseberth of Findlay, Ohio, one of Jennifer Stark’s nine siblings.
Meanwhile, Jennifer Stark found a place to rent, paid for by her husband, and in late September the boys were returned to her care; about a month later, Brandon Stark was allowed to move back in with his family.
The setbacks • As winter set in, Brandon Stark’s $8 an-hour job wasn’t enough to cover rent, utilities and $50 a week for his drug treatment program. The Starks moved to a cheaper place but were still underwater financially.
"It was either rent for us or it was his drug treatment," Jennifer Stark said. Brandon Stark dropped out of the program and couldn’t afford a second $140 drug assessment the state requested, she said. He soon relapsed.
DCFS drew up a new service plan allowing Brandon Stark to stay with his family as long as he re-entered drug treatment. A caseworker suggested he find a better-paying job or take on a second job to pay for the program and the family’s monthly expenses, according to the couple.
By mid-March, when Jennifer Stark gave birth to their fourth son, Brandon Stark had stopped participating in drug tests and was once again barred from living with his family. Jennifer Stark said she agreed to a new service plan only after the caseworker threatened to remove her children.
"I had no job, no means of transportation because I don’t have my driver’s license and was living far from everyone I know, trying to handle four kids by myself and stay as mentally stable as I could under the conditions," Jennifer Stark said. The caseworker’s advice? Rely on friends, family and the community for childcare, transportation and support, she said.
Jennifer Stark said she was told "something was wrong with me that I was with someone like [Brandon] and hadn’t seen the signs" of his substance abuse.
In early May, a caseworker found Brandon Stark at the home — though Jennifer Stark claims he had just stopped by to drop off a rent check — and the division again took custody of the four children, placing them with a foster family in Orem.
"We were told there were no foster families in this area equipped to take four kids," Jennifer Stark said — something DCFS acknowledges is a problem in rural areas.
A new service plan was drawn up, which looked much like the others: drug treatment for him, increased independence for her through learning to drive, getting a job, counseling. A permanency hearing, when decisions are made about whether to continue efforts to reunify a family, was set for late August.
"I was looking for jobs as much as I could," Jennifer Stark said. With public school out until fall, there was no chance she’d finish driver education and get her license in time.
And Brandon Stark’s plan "failed right off the get-go," Jennifer Stark said. He spent six weeks in jail this summer after falling behind in restitution payments in connection with a March 2010 misdemeanor shoplifting offense, according to court records.
For Jennifer Stark, the result was lost financial support and transportation to job interviews and to visits with their children in Orem. The state suggested she move into a women’s shelter.
"I was offended," Jennifer Stark said. "I had a roof over my head and Brandon was in jail at the time. So why?"
Still, she agreed to check it out.
"I was told I would have to cut all ties [with other family], on top of losing my kids, my husband and everything," Jennifer Stark said. "I didn’t want to lose my mother-in-law and what little support I had. They couldn’t guarantee transportation for anything. They said I would get a month [at the shelter] and then they’d try to find me a place to go. I said no."
But the decision to stick with her husband and stay out of the shelter proved to be more strikes against her, Jennifer Stark said, resulting in caseworkers describing her as "co-dependent."
It’s one of the issues that irks Watkins. "Are we helping families or are we destroying families?" she said.
Kisseberth said she’d offered over the years to help Jennifer when her relationship was in trouble, but her sister would "always say we were raised to not divorce that easily, that she was going to hold it together. She’d said, ‘So what if I leave him and one day my boys are coming to me saying, ‘Why did you take us away from our dad?’ "
The outcome • By June, the Kisseberths had completed all the steps necessary to be a kinship placement and were on track to be certified as foster and adoptive parents by the August hearing, which the state helped pay for them to attend.
The Kisseberths had remodeled their home, completed a home inspection, background check, foster parenting classes and interstate paperwork, and lined up daycare and other support. They had never met the three youngest children and hadn’t seen the oldest boy since he was a toddler but began building a relationship through weekly phone calls over the summer. They also sent a photo album introducing them to their extended family.
Kisseberth said that at the August hearing, the Starks’ caseworker, the state’s attorney and the couple’s attorney all recommended that the boys live with them.
Jennifer Stark said she acknowledged at the hearing that neither she nor Brandon were currently able to provide for their children — an admission they were told would increase odds of their children being placed in the custody of her sister.
People who had worked with the Starks and their children submitted letters describing them as well-bonded and, in Jennifer’s case, as making "a good amount of progress in a short time to be reunited with her children."
But days after the August hearing, 7th District Juvenile Judge Scott Johansen sided with the children’s guardian ad litem, who recommended the boys stay with the foster family with whom they had spent the previous four months and who are interested in adopting them.
"When they take the kids away from us, and put them in foster care, they don’t have any ties, they don’t know the foster parents," Jennifer Stark said. "What would have been the difference with my sister and her husband?"
On Oct. 18, the Starks’ parental rights were terminated. Days later, they bid their boys goodbye.
"Yeah, I made some mistakes, but I don’t feel it was bad enough to lose our children forever," Brandon Stark said.
His wife, he said, did "everything in her power and it was still not good enough for the state because she chose to stick with me. ... All we can do is hope and pray for the appeal to go through and hope her sister will get them so we can see them again."
Their last meeting with the boys was just a half-hour, and they were warned by a caseworker to not make promises, to not talk about the future, to leave their sons’ questions about when they might visit again unanswered, to leave Jennifer Stark’s tears unexplained.
That left them with these words: "Just, ‘Love you,’ " a weeping Jennifer Start said afterward. " ‘No matter what, we love you.’ "
Source http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/jazz/52788018-78/stark-jennifer-brandon-foster.html.csp?page=1
Friday, October 28, 2011
California auditor: 1,000 state-licensed facilities match sex offenders' addresses
By Michael Martinez, CNN
Los Angeles (CNN) -- The California state auditor has found that more than 1,000 state-licensed facilities -- including more than 600 for kids -- matched addresses in the sex-offender registry, saying oversight mechanisms lag behind state requirements.
The state Department of Social Services "cites the lack of resources as the primary reason why it has not implemented an automated sex offender address match and why its oversight mechanisms are falling short of requirements," said the state auditor's report, released Thursday.
Specifically, the report said that 677 foster and group homes and other state-licensed facilities for children matched sex offenders' addresses, as well as 385 state-licensed facilities for vulnerable adults.
The auditor found that almost 600 of the 1,000 address matches were "high risk and in need of immediate investigation," the report said. It was not clear from the report how many foster and group homes are in California, in total.
This month, the state social services agency and county child welfare agencies investigated 99% of the matches and began legal actions against eight licensees of facilities, including four license revocations, said the report, titled "Child Welfare Services -- California Can and Must Provide Better Protection and Support for Abused and Neglected Children."
In six of those actions, registered sex offenders were living or present in the child facilities, and counties found 36 sex offenders having "some association" with foster homes -- prompting authorities to remove children from the facilities and ordering the offenders out of the homes, the report said.
State costs for housing foster children have also grown dramatically, California State Auditor Elaine M. Howle found.
"The percentage of children placed with private foster family agencies — agencies that recruit and certify foster homes and are compensated at a higher rate than state- or county-licensed foster homes — has dramatically increased over the last 10 years and resulted in an additional $327 million in foster care payments during that time," the report said. "The counties we visited admit to placing children with these agencies out of convenience rather than for elevated treatment needs as originally intended."
The state social services agency "generally agreed" with the auditor's findings and outlined an action plan in response to several recommendations, the auditor said.
In an October 7 response to the report, director Will Lightbourne of the California Department of Social Services wrote he agreed that "address comparison provides an additional protection for vulnerable clients in care, and agrees that prevention should be part of the protection."
"We are concerned, however, that performing matches against every known sex offender address may not be the most effective means of prevention and ensuring protection. The process involved in this audit required CDSS and counties to investigate every known address of sex offenders, including addresses that were years and in some cases, decades, out of date," Lightbourne said.
"The California Sex and Arson Registry (CSAR) includes effective dates of address and identifies active and inactive addresses, and future processes to compare addresses therefore should focus on information technology solutions to minimize the need for staff to manually search through and verify information," the director continued. "The CDSS is exploring solutions that leverage technology and key partners to create an efficient and effective process to provide this additional protection."
The state auditor also recommended that the social service agency "complete comprehensive reviews of agencies' licensing activities more timely as well as on-site reviews of state-licensed foster homes, foster family agencies, and group homes. Moreover, Social Services should ensure that rates paid to private foster family agencies are appropriate and should monitor placements with these agencies," the auditor said.
In 2010, child welfare agencies in California's 58 counties received 480,000 allegations of child abuse or neglect. Each county maintains its own child welfare service program, and the state Department of Social Services provides oversight, the report said.
Source http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/27/us/california-sex-offenders/
Los Angeles (CNN) -- The California state auditor has found that more than 1,000 state-licensed facilities -- including more than 600 for kids -- matched addresses in the sex-offender registry, saying oversight mechanisms lag behind state requirements.
The state Department of Social Services "cites the lack of resources as the primary reason why it has not implemented an automated sex offender address match and why its oversight mechanisms are falling short of requirements," said the state auditor's report, released Thursday.
Specifically, the report said that 677 foster and group homes and other state-licensed facilities for children matched sex offenders' addresses, as well as 385 state-licensed facilities for vulnerable adults.
The auditor found that almost 600 of the 1,000 address matches were "high risk and in need of immediate investigation," the report said. It was not clear from the report how many foster and group homes are in California, in total.
This month, the state social services agency and county child welfare agencies investigated 99% of the matches and began legal actions against eight licensees of facilities, including four license revocations, said the report, titled "Child Welfare Services -- California Can and Must Provide Better Protection and Support for Abused and Neglected Children."
In six of those actions, registered sex offenders were living or present in the child facilities, and counties found 36 sex offenders having "some association" with foster homes -- prompting authorities to remove children from the facilities and ordering the offenders out of the homes, the report said.
State costs for housing foster children have also grown dramatically, California State Auditor Elaine M. Howle found.
"The percentage of children placed with private foster family agencies — agencies that recruit and certify foster homes and are compensated at a higher rate than state- or county-licensed foster homes — has dramatically increased over the last 10 years and resulted in an additional $327 million in foster care payments during that time," the report said. "The counties we visited admit to placing children with these agencies out of convenience rather than for elevated treatment needs as originally intended."
The state social services agency "generally agreed" with the auditor's findings and outlined an action plan in response to several recommendations, the auditor said.
In an October 7 response to the report, director Will Lightbourne of the California Department of Social Services wrote he agreed that "address comparison provides an additional protection for vulnerable clients in care, and agrees that prevention should be part of the protection."
"We are concerned, however, that performing matches against every known sex offender address may not be the most effective means of prevention and ensuring protection. The process involved in this audit required CDSS and counties to investigate every known address of sex offenders, including addresses that were years and in some cases, decades, out of date," Lightbourne said.
"The California Sex and Arson Registry (CSAR) includes effective dates of address and identifies active and inactive addresses, and future processes to compare addresses therefore should focus on information technology solutions to minimize the need for staff to manually search through and verify information," the director continued. "The CDSS is exploring solutions that leverage technology and key partners to create an efficient and effective process to provide this additional protection."
The state auditor also recommended that the social service agency "complete comprehensive reviews of agencies' licensing activities more timely as well as on-site reviews of state-licensed foster homes, foster family agencies, and group homes. Moreover, Social Services should ensure that rates paid to private foster family agencies are appropriate and should monitor placements with these agencies," the auditor said.
In 2010, child welfare agencies in California's 58 counties received 480,000 allegations of child abuse or neglect. Each county maintains its own child welfare service program, and the state Department of Social Services provides oversight, the report said.
Source http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/27/us/california-sex-offenders/
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
County Commission approves $267,000 settlement in foster care lawsuit
By Joe Schoenmann
Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2011 | 12:01 p.m.
Clark County will pay $267,000 to three children allegedly neglected and sexually abused while in foster care.
Steve Sisolak was the only commissioner to question the pre-trial settlement. He made sure wording was added to the payment to mandate as much counseling as needed for the three children, who were pre-teens during the time of the incident, even if that means cutting attorney fees.
"It's a small sum for what these kids went through," he said later. "These kids are really subjected to some horrors. It is a terrible shame."
Little information about the children or what happened to them was provided in county documentation. A case filed on the matter in U.S. District Court alleges that the abuse occurred in 2004. Attorneys were hired for the children's biological parent in 2009.
According to court documents, the foster parent was accused of denying medical care and providing poor supervision, which may have led to sexual abuse of a child or children by a man who was a registered sex offender in Nevada.
In return for the settlement, the plaintiffs, Tim D. Fullmer, et al., has agreed to dismiss their lawsuit against the county.
Foster care in Clark County has for years been the focus of intense scrutiny. In the mid-2000s, stories of children who died in foster care led to a resignation and the hiring of Tom Morton in 2006 to take over.
Morton, credited with helping turn Alabama‚s child welfare system into a national model, arguably improved the system, decreasing caseloads per case worker and ending the warehousing of children in Child Haven.
Morton resigned in August, citing increasing fiscal pressures and a trend indicating that cases per caseworker were once again on the rise, a trend he blamed on the need to cut staff in the face of budget cuts.
Source http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/sep/20/county-commission-approves-settlement-over/
Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2011 | 12:01 p.m.
Clark County will pay $267,000 to three children allegedly neglected and sexually abused while in foster care.
Steve Sisolak was the only commissioner to question the pre-trial settlement. He made sure wording was added to the payment to mandate as much counseling as needed for the three children, who were pre-teens during the time of the incident, even if that means cutting attorney fees.
"It's a small sum for what these kids went through," he said later. "These kids are really subjected to some horrors. It is a terrible shame."
Little information about the children or what happened to them was provided in county documentation. A case filed on the matter in U.S. District Court alleges that the abuse occurred in 2004. Attorneys were hired for the children's biological parent in 2009.
According to court documents, the foster parent was accused of denying medical care and providing poor supervision, which may have led to sexual abuse of a child or children by a man who was a registered sex offender in Nevada.
In return for the settlement, the plaintiffs, Tim D. Fullmer, et al., has agreed to dismiss their lawsuit against the county.
Foster care in Clark County has for years been the focus of intense scrutiny. In the mid-2000s, stories of children who died in foster care led to a resignation and the hiring of Tom Morton in 2006 to take over.
Morton, credited with helping turn Alabama‚s child welfare system into a national model, arguably improved the system, decreasing caseloads per case worker and ending the warehousing of children in Child Haven.
Morton resigned in August, citing increasing fiscal pressures and a trend indicating that cases per caseworker were once again on the rise, a trend he blamed on the need to cut staff in the face of budget cuts.
Source http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/sep/20/county-commission-approves-settlement-over/
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Oregon - Girl’s death spurs lawsuit
The state Department of Human Services faces a $1.5 million case over the abuse suffered by Jeanette Maples
By Karen McCowan
The Register-Guard
Oregon’s child protective services agency faces a $1.5 million lawsuit for failing to prevent the 2009 starvation, torture and beating death of north Eugene teenager Jeanette Maples.
Portland attorney David Paul mailed the wrongful death complaint Monday to Lane County Circuit Court. The court clerk had not received or filed the lawsuit Tuesday afternoon, but Paul’s legal assistant provided a copy to The Register-Guard. Paul has successfully represented children injured in state foster care, including a record-breaking $2 million settlement for twins injured by poor foster care.
The suit on behalf of Jeanette’s estate targets the state Department of Human Services, which is responsible for investigating reports of child abuse and neglect. The complaint accuses the agency of failing to reasonably respond to multiple reports over four years that Jeanette was being abused. It called the state’s inaction “a substantial factor” in her death at age 15.
Jeanette’s mother, Angela McAnulty, is on Oregon’s death row after pleading guilty in February to the aggravated murder of her daughter. The dead teen’s stepfather, Richard McAnulty, is serving a life sentence after pleading guilty to murder by abuse. He denied inflicting harm, but admitted failing to protect Jeanette from her mother or to report her injuries and starvation to authorities.
“Jeanette Maples’ death could have been prevented if the State of Oregon exercised reasonable care in responding to reports that Jeanette Maples was being abused,” the suit charges. It alleges that state workers failed to “investigate and heed” allegations of abuse from reliable sources beginning in 2006, four years before Jeanette died. It also accuses the agency of failing to consider Angela McAnulty’s documented history of child abuse in California before moving to Oregon.
The suit also faults the agency for failing to adequately assess Jeanette’s “vulnerability to abuse.” It says workers wrongfully concluded that Jeanette “could fend for herself as a young teenager” despite “a history of abuse and neglect by the adult parents in her home.”
Those charges echoed the January 2010 findings of an internal Department of Human Services critical incident team.
The suit says state “negligence” was a substantial factor in Jeanette’s “suffering, humiliation, pain, fear, anguish, and torture” and ultimately in her violent death. As a result, she suffered “severe hunger, starvation, anemia, dehydration, alienation of affection, distress and a lack of the enjoyment of her short life, to her non-economic damage in the amount of $500,000.”
Siblings not considered heirs
The Oregon Attorney General’s Office, which will defend the Department of Human Services in the case, declined comment on the suit Tuesday.
“It is the policy of the Department of Justice not to comment on pending litigation,” spokesman Tony Green said.
The bulk of the lawsuit’s damages would go to Jeanette’s father, Anthony Maples, of California. The suit seeks $1 million in noneconomic damages for his loss of Jeanette’s “society, love and companionship.” As her “lone qualified heir” under Oregon law, Anthony Maples would also receive $500,000 the suit seeks as the value of the estate his daughter would probably have accumulated in her lifetime if not for her wrongful death.
The suit seeks an additional $7,000 to cover the teen’s burial and related expenses.
Anthony Maples could not be reached for comment Tuesday. He told The Register-Guard shortly after Jeanette’s death that he had not been in touch with his daughter for nearly a decade. According to his unsuccessful February 2010 court petition to be appointed personal representative of her estate, he had nine drug possession convictions — at least five involving methamphetamine — between 1990 and 2008. The petition shows that he was in and out of jail until late 2008, when he entered and completed a one-year residential treatment program. According to a June 2010 declaration in support of that petition, Maples had been clean and sober for 16 months.
Lane County Circuit Judge Lauren Holland in August 2010 denied Maples’ request, instead appointing Portland attorney Erin Olson as the estate’s personal representative.
Step-grandmother speaks out
The prospect of Anthony Maples collecting damages from the suit distressed Jeanette’s step-grandmother, Lynn McAnulty. She testified during Angela McAnulty’s trial that she made multiple — and apparently futile — abuse reports to the Department of Human Services in the last months of the teen’s life.
“Why should he profit off Jeanette’s death?” the Leaburg woman said. “He doesn’t deserve it because he wasn’t involved in her life. He didn’t know her. He didn’t even come to her memorial service.”
Lynn McAnulty said lawsuit proceeds would more rightfully go to Jeanette’s surviving half-siblings — a 14-year-old girl and an 8-year-old boy — both in foster homes and in state protective custody. Absent a will, however, only a deceased person’s parents, spouse or children are legal heirs under Oregon law.
In a interview this month, McAnulty elaborated on her trial testimony that she repeatedly and unsuccessfully phoned child protective service workers in 2009, urging them to investigate Jeanette’s emaciation and injuries. She acknowledged posing as a concerned neighbor, saying she feared losing the limited access she had to her grandchildren if Angela McAnulty learned she’d reported abuse. (According to child protection caseworkers, the agency protects the confidentiality of people who report abuse.)
Lynn McAnulty said she told one phone screener, “This child looks like an Ethiopian (famine victim),” only to have the screener respond with “something like, ‘You’re telling us she needs medical help — that’s not us,’ and, ‘Are you sure she’s not anorexic?’ ”
McAnulty said she placed her last call to the agency the week before Jeanette died, after her son called to tell her he’d caught the girl drinking from the toilet.
“I said, ‘Someone needs to go there. Something’s wrong with this child. It’s urgent,’” McAnulty said. “I told her, ‘I’ve called several times,’ and she said, ‘We don’t just drop everything — we have to go through channels.’ ”
McAnulty also reiterated her trial testimony that she asked one screener if she should call the police, but was advised that child protection workers could more effectively investigate.
The agency’s internal investigation, now posted on its website (www.oregon.gov/DHS/abuse/publications/children/cirt-jm-initial-report.pdf) without the redactions that originally blacked out information that might have compromised Angela McAnulty’s trial, reports only two calls in 2009, both from “the same individual” on Dec. 1. It says the person reported that Angela McAnulty’s children were being “abused and neglected, especially the older one.”
Report details decisions
The newly public material says the caller reported that the older child — Jeanette — was not attending school, had “current marks and bruises” and “appeared malnourished.” It also said the caller reported that the child was “not allowed to speak with her.”
“The (caller) initially would not provide the last name of the children or an address,” the state’s internal report said. “In a subsequent call that same day, the reporter called back and provided the last name and address for the family. Concluding that the call did not constitute a report of abuse or neglect, the matter was closed at screening.”
The critical incident team found that conclusion to be in error, the internal report said.
“This report in fact constituted abuse or neglect and should have been assigned for child protective service assessment,” it said.
The team’s report also acknowledged that additional calls “may have been made but not documented” if they “did not rise to the level of abuse or neglect.”
The newly public material from the internal report shows that the agency responded to two 2006 reports that Jeanette was “being punished by being forced to kneel on the tile floor with her nose to the wall and hands behind her back for extended periods of time, that she was being forced to eat chili peppers, and that her hair was being pulled making her head sore.” But the agency “could not determine whether there was a safety threat” to the girl because of inconsistent information about food deprivation and punishment from Angela and Richard McAnulty, Jeanette’s sister, and Jeanette herself.
The new material also details the agency’s response to a 2007 report from “a credible source” that Jeanette had a bruise on her chin. It says the critical incident team found that the agency erred in closing that case without further assessment, based on Jeanette’s “denial that abuse had occurred.”
The agency has adopted new protocols in response to the internal report — including a policy of more thoroughly investigating cases involving children such as Jeanette, who are not in school or other settings where other adults can see their condition.
Source http://www.registerguard.com/web/updates/26794414-55/jeanette-maples-death-oregon-paul.html.csp
By Karen McCowan
The Register-Guard
Oregon’s child protective services agency faces a $1.5 million lawsuit for failing to prevent the 2009 starvation, torture and beating death of north Eugene teenager Jeanette Maples.
Portland attorney David Paul mailed the wrongful death complaint Monday to Lane County Circuit Court. The court clerk had not received or filed the lawsuit Tuesday afternoon, but Paul’s legal assistant provided a copy to The Register-Guard. Paul has successfully represented children injured in state foster care, including a record-breaking $2 million settlement for twins injured by poor foster care.
The suit on behalf of Jeanette’s estate targets the state Department of Human Services, which is responsible for investigating reports of child abuse and neglect. The complaint accuses the agency of failing to reasonably respond to multiple reports over four years that Jeanette was being abused. It called the state’s inaction “a substantial factor” in her death at age 15.
Jeanette’s mother, Angela McAnulty, is on Oregon’s death row after pleading guilty in February to the aggravated murder of her daughter. The dead teen’s stepfather, Richard McAnulty, is serving a life sentence after pleading guilty to murder by abuse. He denied inflicting harm, but admitted failing to protect Jeanette from her mother or to report her injuries and starvation to authorities.
“Jeanette Maples’ death could have been prevented if the State of Oregon exercised reasonable care in responding to reports that Jeanette Maples was being abused,” the suit charges. It alleges that state workers failed to “investigate and heed” allegations of abuse from reliable sources beginning in 2006, four years before Jeanette died. It also accuses the agency of failing to consider Angela McAnulty’s documented history of child abuse in California before moving to Oregon.
The suit also faults the agency for failing to adequately assess Jeanette’s “vulnerability to abuse.” It says workers wrongfully concluded that Jeanette “could fend for herself as a young teenager” despite “a history of abuse and neglect by the adult parents in her home.”
Those charges echoed the January 2010 findings of an internal Department of Human Services critical incident team.
The suit says state “negligence” was a substantial factor in Jeanette’s “suffering, humiliation, pain, fear, anguish, and torture” and ultimately in her violent death. As a result, she suffered “severe hunger, starvation, anemia, dehydration, alienation of affection, distress and a lack of the enjoyment of her short life, to her non-economic damage in the amount of $500,000.”
Siblings not considered heirs
The Oregon Attorney General’s Office, which will defend the Department of Human Services in the case, declined comment on the suit Tuesday.
“It is the policy of the Department of Justice not to comment on pending litigation,” spokesman Tony Green said.
The bulk of the lawsuit’s damages would go to Jeanette’s father, Anthony Maples, of California. The suit seeks $1 million in noneconomic damages for his loss of Jeanette’s “society, love and companionship.” As her “lone qualified heir” under Oregon law, Anthony Maples would also receive $500,000 the suit seeks as the value of the estate his daughter would probably have accumulated in her lifetime if not for her wrongful death.
The suit seeks an additional $7,000 to cover the teen’s burial and related expenses.
Anthony Maples could not be reached for comment Tuesday. He told The Register-Guard shortly after Jeanette’s death that he had not been in touch with his daughter for nearly a decade. According to his unsuccessful February 2010 court petition to be appointed personal representative of her estate, he had nine drug possession convictions — at least five involving methamphetamine — between 1990 and 2008. The petition shows that he was in and out of jail until late 2008, when he entered and completed a one-year residential treatment program. According to a June 2010 declaration in support of that petition, Maples had been clean and sober for 16 months.
Lane County Circuit Judge Lauren Holland in August 2010 denied Maples’ request, instead appointing Portland attorney Erin Olson as the estate’s personal representative.
Step-grandmother speaks out
The prospect of Anthony Maples collecting damages from the suit distressed Jeanette’s step-grandmother, Lynn McAnulty. She testified during Angela McAnulty’s trial that she made multiple — and apparently futile — abuse reports to the Department of Human Services in the last months of the teen’s life.
“Why should he profit off Jeanette’s death?” the Leaburg woman said. “He doesn’t deserve it because he wasn’t involved in her life. He didn’t know her. He didn’t even come to her memorial service.”
Lynn McAnulty said lawsuit proceeds would more rightfully go to Jeanette’s surviving half-siblings — a 14-year-old girl and an 8-year-old boy — both in foster homes and in state protective custody. Absent a will, however, only a deceased person’s parents, spouse or children are legal heirs under Oregon law.
In a interview this month, McAnulty elaborated on her trial testimony that she repeatedly and unsuccessfully phoned child protective service workers in 2009, urging them to investigate Jeanette’s emaciation and injuries. She acknowledged posing as a concerned neighbor, saying she feared losing the limited access she had to her grandchildren if Angela McAnulty learned she’d reported abuse. (According to child protection caseworkers, the agency protects the confidentiality of people who report abuse.)
Lynn McAnulty said she told one phone screener, “This child looks like an Ethiopian (famine victim),” only to have the screener respond with “something like, ‘You’re telling us she needs medical help — that’s not us,’ and, ‘Are you sure she’s not anorexic?’ ”
McAnulty said she placed her last call to the agency the week before Jeanette died, after her son called to tell her he’d caught the girl drinking from the toilet.
“I said, ‘Someone needs to go there. Something’s wrong with this child. It’s urgent,’” McAnulty said. “I told her, ‘I’ve called several times,’ and she said, ‘We don’t just drop everything — we have to go through channels.’ ”
McAnulty also reiterated her trial testimony that she asked one screener if she should call the police, but was advised that child protection workers could more effectively investigate.
The agency’s internal investigation, now posted on its website (www.oregon.gov/DHS/abuse/publications/children/cirt-jm-initial-report.pdf) without the redactions that originally blacked out information that might have compromised Angela McAnulty’s trial, reports only two calls in 2009, both from “the same individual” on Dec. 1. It says the person reported that Angela McAnulty’s children were being “abused and neglected, especially the older one.”
Report details decisions
The newly public material says the caller reported that the older child — Jeanette — was not attending school, had “current marks and bruises” and “appeared malnourished.” It also said the caller reported that the child was “not allowed to speak with her.”
“The (caller) initially would not provide the last name of the children or an address,” the state’s internal report said. “In a subsequent call that same day, the reporter called back and provided the last name and address for the family. Concluding that the call did not constitute a report of abuse or neglect, the matter was closed at screening.”
The critical incident team found that conclusion to be in error, the internal report said.
“This report in fact constituted abuse or neglect and should have been assigned for child protective service assessment,” it said.
The team’s report also acknowledged that additional calls “may have been made but not documented” if they “did not rise to the level of abuse or neglect.”
The newly public material from the internal report shows that the agency responded to two 2006 reports that Jeanette was “being punished by being forced to kneel on the tile floor with her nose to the wall and hands behind her back for extended periods of time, that she was being forced to eat chili peppers, and that her hair was being pulled making her head sore.” But the agency “could not determine whether there was a safety threat” to the girl because of inconsistent information about food deprivation and punishment from Angela and Richard McAnulty, Jeanette’s sister, and Jeanette herself.
The new material also details the agency’s response to a 2007 report from “a credible source” that Jeanette had a bruise on her chin. It says the critical incident team found that the agency erred in closing that case without further assessment, based on Jeanette’s “denial that abuse had occurred.”
The agency has adopted new protocols in response to the internal report — including a policy of more thoroughly investigating cases involving children such as Jeanette, who are not in school or other settings where other adults can see their condition.
Source http://www.registerguard.com/web/updates/26794414-55/jeanette-maples-death-oregon-paul.html.csp
Saturday, August 20, 2011
No Cause for Marijuana Case, but Enough for Child Neglect
By MOSI SECRET
Published: August 17, 2011
The police found about 10 grams of marijuana, or about a third of an ounce, when they searched Penelope Harris’s apartment in the Bronx last year. The amount was below the legal threshold for even a misdemeanor, and prosecutors declined to charge her. But Ms. Harris, a mother whose son and niece were home when she was briefly in custody, could hardly rest easy.
The police had reported her arrest to the state’s child welfare hot line, and city caseworkers quickly arrived and took the children away.
Her son, then 10, spent more than a week in foster care. Her niece, who was 8 and living with her as a foster child, was placed in another home and not returned by the foster care agency for more than a year. Ms. Harris, 31, had to weather a lengthy child neglect inquiry, though she had no criminal record and had never before been investigated by the child welfare authorities, Ms. Harris and her lawyer said.
“I felt like less of a parent, like I had failed my children,” Ms. Harris said. “It tore me up.”
Hundreds of New Yorkers who have been caught with small amounts of marijuana, or who have simply admitted to using it, have become ensnared in civil child neglect cases in recent years, though they did not face even the least of criminal charges, according to city records and defense lawyers. A small number of parents in these cases have even lost custody of their children.
New York City’s child welfare agency said that it was pursuing these cases for appropriate reasons, and that marijuana use by parents could often hint at other serious problems in the way they cared for their children.
As states and localities around the country loosen penalties for marijuana, for both recreational and medical uses, they are increasingly grappling with how to handle its presence in homes with children. California, where the medical marijuana movement has flourished, now requires that child welfare officials demonstrate actual harm to a child from marijuana use in order to bring neglect cases, and defense lawyers there say the authorities are now bringing fewer of them.
But in New York, the child welfare agency has not shied from these cases. For these parents, the child welfare system has become an alternate system of justice, with legal standards on marijuana that appear to be tougher than those of criminal courts or, to some extent, of society at large. In interviews, lawyers from the three legal services groups that the city hires to defend parents said they saw hundreds of marijuana cases each year, most involving recreational users.
The lawyers said they currently had more than a dozen cases on their dockets involving parents who had never faced neglect allegations and whose children were placed in foster care because of marijuana allegations.
Lauren Shapiro, director of the Brooklyn Family Defense Project, which defends most parents facing neglect charges in Family Court in Brooklyn, said more than 90 percent of the cases alleging drug use that her lawyers handle involve marijuana, as opposed to other drugs.
“There is not the same use of crack cocaine as there used to be, so they are filing these cases instead,” Ms. Shapiro said.
Marijuana is the most common illicit drug in New York City: 730,000 people, or 12 percent of people age 12 and older, use the drug at least once annually, according to city health data.
Over all, the rate of marijuana use among whites is twice as high as among blacks and Hispanics in the city, the data show, but defense lawyers said these cases were rarely if ever filed against white parents.
Michael Fagan, a spokesman for the Administration for Children’s Services, said the defense lawyers were offering a simplistic portrayal of these cases.
“Drug use itself is not child abuse or neglect, but it can put children in danger of neglect or abuse,” Mr. Fagan said. “We think the argument that use of cocaine, heroin or marijuana by a parent of young children should not be looked into or should simply be ignored is just plain wrong.”
Mr. Fagan said most of the cases involved additional forms of neglect, like a child who is not going to school or who has been left unattended.
“In other times, we find that admitted marijuana use masks other substance abuse,” Mr. Fagan said.
But lawyers for parents countered that the agency often brought neglect charges based solely on recreational marijuana use, then searched later for other grounds to bolster cases.
“In some cases, there are other allegations, but we think they are add-ons,” said Susan Jacobs, executive director of the Center for Family Representation, which works in Manhattan and Queens. “The reason the person is being brought into Family Court is the marijuana use.”
Ms. Jacobs cited the case of a former client, Jose Gunnell, 23, of Harlem, who lost custody of his 1-year-old daughter in March after an employee at a homeless shelter where he was staying found a $5 bag of marijuana in his room during an inspection.
Mr. Gunnell said in an interview that he stopped smoking marijuana in 2010 but that he used it again in March after having an infected tooth pulled. “The wound wouldn’t close,” he said. “I was getting hungry, but I couldn’t eat. I bought weed.”
The neglect petition that the Administration for Children’s Services filed against Mr. Gunnell shows that he admitted to smoking marijuana to develop an appetite.
The agency’s petition also said that his daughter did not always have adequate clothing, that shelter workers once smelled alcohol on Mr. Gunnell’s breath and that his room was dirty and had an odor.
The agency would not comment on Mr. Gunnell’s case or on others described by defense lawyers, citing confidentiality rules.
Ms. Jacobs acknowledged that the Administration for Children’s Services might at times correctly determine that marijuana use was one of many serious problems in a family, but she contended that those were only a minority of the cases.
State law makes possession of as much as 25 grams of marijuana — enough for 20 or 30 marijuana cigarettes — a violation similar to a traffic offense, punishable by a fine of up to $100. The Administration for Children’s Services does not track the number of parents facing marijuana allegations. It compiles statistics only on the total number of neglect cases for drugs and alcohol, rather than for individual drugs. There were 4,891 such cases in 2010.
State law considers a child neglected if his or her well-being is threatened by a parent who “repeatedly misuses” a drug. But the law does not distinguish marijuana from heroin or other drugs. The law says that if parents have “substantial impairment of judgment,” then there is a presumption of neglect, but it does not refer to quantities of drugs.
Furthermore, the law does not require child welfare authorities to catch parents while they are high or with drugs in their possession. Simply admitting past use to a caseworker is grounds for a neglect case.
In marijuana cases, as in all others, caseworkers have the obligation to remove children who they believe are in imminent danger, but they can recommend that the agency file neglect charges against the parents without removing the children. They can also close cases for unsubstantiated allegations.
Neglect findings, while sometimes allowing parents to keep their children, can have serious repercussions. They prohibit parents from taking jobs around children, like driving a school bus or working in day care, or from being foster care parents or adopting. And they make it easier for Family Court judges to later remove children from their homes.
The findings stay on parents’ records with the Statewide Central Register until their youngest child turns 28.
The policy of the Administration for Children’s Services to pursue marijuana cases is not widely known. But when told of it, some lawmakers said the agency was overstepping its authority.
“I would hope that A.C.S., knowing what a wide-net strategy the N.Y.P.D. is using, would treat marijuana arrests with a grain of salt,” said Brad Lander, a Democratic city councilman from Brooklyn. “A neglect charge should not be leveled.”
Ms. Harris, the woman briefly held in custody in the Bronx, said the police had searched her apartment because they believed drugs were being sold there, an allegation that she denied. She said the small bags of marijuana the police found belonged to her boyfriend and were for his personal use. She tested negative for drugs after she was released.
The Administration for Children’s Services filed neglect charges about a week after Bronx prosecutors declined to press charges. Ms. Harris was represented by the Bronx Defenders, a nonprofit organization that provides legal assistance to Bronx residents.
In a hearing the next day, the agency agreed to return Ms. Harris’s son on the condition that her boyfriend not return to the home, that she enroll in therapy and submit to random drug screenings, and that caseworkers could make announced and unannounced visits to her home. Ms. Harris’s case was closed in April without a finding of neglect.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/nyregion/parents-minor-marijuana-arrests-lead-to-child-neglect-cases.html?_r=1&src=recg&pagewanted=all
Published: August 17, 2011
The police found about 10 grams of marijuana, or about a third of an ounce, when they searched Penelope Harris’s apartment in the Bronx last year. The amount was below the legal threshold for even a misdemeanor, and prosecutors declined to charge her. But Ms. Harris, a mother whose son and niece were home when she was briefly in custody, could hardly rest easy.
The police had reported her arrest to the state’s child welfare hot line, and city caseworkers quickly arrived and took the children away.
Her son, then 10, spent more than a week in foster care. Her niece, who was 8 and living with her as a foster child, was placed in another home and not returned by the foster care agency for more than a year. Ms. Harris, 31, had to weather a lengthy child neglect inquiry, though she had no criminal record and had never before been investigated by the child welfare authorities, Ms. Harris and her lawyer said.
“I felt like less of a parent, like I had failed my children,” Ms. Harris said. “It tore me up.”
Hundreds of New Yorkers who have been caught with small amounts of marijuana, or who have simply admitted to using it, have become ensnared in civil child neglect cases in recent years, though they did not face even the least of criminal charges, according to city records and defense lawyers. A small number of parents in these cases have even lost custody of their children.
New York City’s child welfare agency said that it was pursuing these cases for appropriate reasons, and that marijuana use by parents could often hint at other serious problems in the way they cared for their children.
As states and localities around the country loosen penalties for marijuana, for both recreational and medical uses, they are increasingly grappling with how to handle its presence in homes with children. California, where the medical marijuana movement has flourished, now requires that child welfare officials demonstrate actual harm to a child from marijuana use in order to bring neglect cases, and defense lawyers there say the authorities are now bringing fewer of them.
But in New York, the child welfare agency has not shied from these cases. For these parents, the child welfare system has become an alternate system of justice, with legal standards on marijuana that appear to be tougher than those of criminal courts or, to some extent, of society at large. In interviews, lawyers from the three legal services groups that the city hires to defend parents said they saw hundreds of marijuana cases each year, most involving recreational users.
The lawyers said they currently had more than a dozen cases on their dockets involving parents who had never faced neglect allegations and whose children were placed in foster care because of marijuana allegations.
Lauren Shapiro, director of the Brooklyn Family Defense Project, which defends most parents facing neglect charges in Family Court in Brooklyn, said more than 90 percent of the cases alleging drug use that her lawyers handle involve marijuana, as opposed to other drugs.
“There is not the same use of crack cocaine as there used to be, so they are filing these cases instead,” Ms. Shapiro said.
Marijuana is the most common illicit drug in New York City: 730,000 people, or 12 percent of people age 12 and older, use the drug at least once annually, according to city health data.
Over all, the rate of marijuana use among whites is twice as high as among blacks and Hispanics in the city, the data show, but defense lawyers said these cases were rarely if ever filed against white parents.
Michael Fagan, a spokesman for the Administration for Children’s Services, said the defense lawyers were offering a simplistic portrayal of these cases.
“Drug use itself is not child abuse or neglect, but it can put children in danger of neglect or abuse,” Mr. Fagan said. “We think the argument that use of cocaine, heroin or marijuana by a parent of young children should not be looked into or should simply be ignored is just plain wrong.”
Mr. Fagan said most of the cases involved additional forms of neglect, like a child who is not going to school or who has been left unattended.
“In other times, we find that admitted marijuana use masks other substance abuse,” Mr. Fagan said.
But lawyers for parents countered that the agency often brought neglect charges based solely on recreational marijuana use, then searched later for other grounds to bolster cases.
“In some cases, there are other allegations, but we think they are add-ons,” said Susan Jacobs, executive director of the Center for Family Representation, which works in Manhattan and Queens. “The reason the person is being brought into Family Court is the marijuana use.”
Ms. Jacobs cited the case of a former client, Jose Gunnell, 23, of Harlem, who lost custody of his 1-year-old daughter in March after an employee at a homeless shelter where he was staying found a $5 bag of marijuana in his room during an inspection.
Mr. Gunnell said in an interview that he stopped smoking marijuana in 2010 but that he used it again in March after having an infected tooth pulled. “The wound wouldn’t close,” he said. “I was getting hungry, but I couldn’t eat. I bought weed.”
The neglect petition that the Administration for Children’s Services filed against Mr. Gunnell shows that he admitted to smoking marijuana to develop an appetite.
The agency’s petition also said that his daughter did not always have adequate clothing, that shelter workers once smelled alcohol on Mr. Gunnell’s breath and that his room was dirty and had an odor.
The agency would not comment on Mr. Gunnell’s case or on others described by defense lawyers, citing confidentiality rules.
Ms. Jacobs acknowledged that the Administration for Children’s Services might at times correctly determine that marijuana use was one of many serious problems in a family, but she contended that those were only a minority of the cases.
State law makes possession of as much as 25 grams of marijuana — enough for 20 or 30 marijuana cigarettes — a violation similar to a traffic offense, punishable by a fine of up to $100. The Administration for Children’s Services does not track the number of parents facing marijuana allegations. It compiles statistics only on the total number of neglect cases for drugs and alcohol, rather than for individual drugs. There were 4,891 such cases in 2010.
State law considers a child neglected if his or her well-being is threatened by a parent who “repeatedly misuses” a drug. But the law does not distinguish marijuana from heroin or other drugs. The law says that if parents have “substantial impairment of judgment,” then there is a presumption of neglect, but it does not refer to quantities of drugs.
Furthermore, the law does not require child welfare authorities to catch parents while they are high or with drugs in their possession. Simply admitting past use to a caseworker is grounds for a neglect case.
In marijuana cases, as in all others, caseworkers have the obligation to remove children who they believe are in imminent danger, but they can recommend that the agency file neglect charges against the parents without removing the children. They can also close cases for unsubstantiated allegations.
Neglect findings, while sometimes allowing parents to keep their children, can have serious repercussions. They prohibit parents from taking jobs around children, like driving a school bus or working in day care, or from being foster care parents or adopting. And they make it easier for Family Court judges to later remove children from their homes.
The findings stay on parents’ records with the Statewide Central Register until their youngest child turns 28.
The policy of the Administration for Children’s Services to pursue marijuana cases is not widely known. But when told of it, some lawmakers said the agency was overstepping its authority.
“I would hope that A.C.S., knowing what a wide-net strategy the N.Y.P.D. is using, would treat marijuana arrests with a grain of salt,” said Brad Lander, a Democratic city councilman from Brooklyn. “A neglect charge should not be leveled.”
Ms. Harris, the woman briefly held in custody in the Bronx, said the police had searched her apartment because they believed drugs were being sold there, an allegation that she denied. She said the small bags of marijuana the police found belonged to her boyfriend and were for his personal use. She tested negative for drugs after she was released.
The Administration for Children’s Services filed neglect charges about a week after Bronx prosecutors declined to press charges. Ms. Harris was represented by the Bronx Defenders, a nonprofit organization that provides legal assistance to Bronx residents.
In a hearing the next day, the agency agreed to return Ms. Harris’s son on the condition that her boyfriend not return to the home, that she enroll in therapy and submit to random drug screenings, and that caseworkers could make announced and unannounced visits to her home. Ms. Harris’s case was closed in April without a finding of neglect.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/nyregion/parents-minor-marijuana-arrests-lead-to-child-neglect-cases.html?_r=1&src=recg&pagewanted=all
Friday, August 19, 2011
Young boy’s death at hands of foster parents led to change
Marcus Fiesel was killed five years ago, prompting overhaul of child welfare system.
By Michael D. Pitman, Staff Writer
2:20 AM Sunday, August 7, 2011
It’s been five years since the death of 3-year-old Marcus Fiesel at the hands of his foster parents that captured the attention of the region, state and nation, sent two people to prison for the rest of their lives and led to a child welfare system overhaul.
Marcus, the Middletown boy with an impish grin, would have turned 8 in June. Instead of marking another birthday, he will be remembered for his horrific death.
The developmentally disabled boy was bound in a blanket wrapped with duct tape and placed in a playpen inside an upstairs closet while Liz and David Carroll Jr., live-in girlfriend Amy Baker, their children and foster children, and even the family dog, traveled to an August family reunion in Kentucky during the hottest days of the year.
“I’d like to think the laws that have changed in his memory have been beneficial in the fact that we haven’t had any other child have the same fate that he did,” said Gary Cates, a former state senator from West Chester Twp. “If that’s his legacy, that no other child’s been harmed, then that’s a tremendous legacy that Marcus left other children.”
Both Liz and David Carroll declined interview requests from prison.
Marcus’ death during the weekend of Aug. 4-6, 2006, in the closet of the Carrolls’ Union Twp. home in Clermont County placed a giant spotlight on some gaping holes in the child welfare system and led private foster placement agency, the former Lifeway for Youth, from operating in the state.
While his death was the breaking point to prompt reform in Ohio’s foster care and children services system, other children died while under the charge of Butler County Children Services: Tiffany Hubbard, 3, of Hamilton in 1986; Randi Fuller, 2, of Hamilton, in 2000; Christopher Long, 2, of Middletown, in 2001; Courtney Centers, 3, of Middletown in 2002; Jesus Rodriquez, 7 months, of Hamilton in 2003; and Justin Johnson, 13 months, of Middletown in 2004.
Marcus’ hurdles
Born on June 24, 2003, Marcus had many obstacles from the start. He was born with a developmental disability — though not specifically diagnosed, he had “global delays” and needed 24-hour care and attention.
Marcus slept on a foam mat at the home of his biological mother, Donna Trevino, and he and his siblings were not closely watched or cared for. Butler County Children Services became involved with the family in Aug. 9, 2004.
When Marcus was found wandering the streets on April 22, 2006, almost being hit by a car — roughly four months after he accidentally fell out of a second-story window — caseworkers removed Trevino’s three children from her home, where reports showed there was feces on the carpet and wall of the flea-infested home. This was the third time her children had been taken from her care.
The day Marcus went ‘missing’
The public story of Marcus’ disappearance began on Aug. 15, 2006, after Liz Carroll collapsed from an apparent heart condition at an Anderson Twp. park in Hamilton County. When medics responded, she told them she brought four children to the park, but only three were present. This sparked a massive three-day search by hundreds of volunteers, law enforcement and search and rescue teams.
“I still have nightmares about that little guy,” said Jann Heffner, then director of Butler County Children Services. “You don’t get into this business unless you care about the care and physical well being of a child.”
She and some of her staff, including Marcus’ caseworker Joe Beumer went out immediately to search for the child.
Beumer was in “shock and disbelief” but said the story of his disappearance “wasn’t adding up.” He doubted Marcus would have run off — even though that would be something he would do, when his foster mother collapsed. “Any child that experiences something like that I think their natural instinct would be to stay with that person that’s hurt,” he said, “even if they couldn’t do anything they would just sit there.”
Worry quickly turned into horror at the end of August 2006 when the Carrolls were charged with murder.
The case
Not many things hang on the walls in Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters’ office, but a drawing of Pulitzer Prize-winning political cartoonist Jim Borgman of Marcus holding hands with God walking toward heaven has a special place.
“To this day it just chills me that someone could do that to a little baby. They are where they belong and they will have to answer to God,” Deters said.
Deters had prosecuted the case before it was moved over to Clermont County since Marcus died in the Carrolls’ home. He said he thinks about the 3-year-old boy “all the time.”
“The inhumanity of how they treated him, it boggles my mind when you’ve got children,” he said.
The story of Marcus’ disappearance unraveled at Liz Carroll’s televised news conference, which Deters watched from his office. “It was rehearsed and came off very untruthful,” he said.
He immediately brought in Liz Carroll and Amy Baker (who now goes by Amy Ramsey) before a county grand jury. He talked to Baker first, and with her attorney present, said “if she was not truthful, she’ll go to prison.” After consulting with her attorney — who Deters said was ghostly pale after the attorney-client conversation — Baker admitted what happened to Marcus.
“It was disgusting,” Deters said of her testimony.
She revealed Marcus had been dead for days before the disappearance hoax at the park, and that she helped David Carroll burn the boy’s body in rural Brown County and throw the rest of his remains in the Ohio River.
Following a jury trial in February 2007, Liz Carroll was convicted of charges including murder and sentenced to 54 years to life in prison; her husband later was sentenced to 16 years to life as part of a plea deal.
The aftermath
An Ohio Department of Job and Family Services investigation pointed blame at Lifeway for Youth, the New Carlisle, Ohio-based foster care provider that placed Marcus with the Carrolls.
For reasons that include and extend beyond Marcus’ case, ODJFS later pulled Lifeway’s operational certificate, a decision upheld by a Franklin County judge.
Although investigations determined that Butler County Children Services did nothing wrong, Heffner was moved into a consulting role and then fired by the county commissioners. The Butler County Children Services Board — initially formed in the wake of 3-year-old Tiffany Hubbard’s abuse and death in 1986 at the hands of her biological father — was disbanded.
The Rev. Johnny Wade Sloan, chairman of the 11-member board, didn’t agree or see the reason to disband the board.
“(The Carrolls) promised 24-hour adult supervision and there was no reason for us not to place (the kids) when (Lifeway was) telling us, as a licensed agency, they had an ideal place,” he said.
But Sloan and Heffner said the decisions to disband the board and fire Heffner were political moves and not a result of Marcus’ death. “Marcus Fiesel became the focal point for that happening because that would have happened regardless,” Sloan said. Former Butler County Commissioner Mike Fox resigned his elected seat and later was appointment Children Services director. He has since resigned and is headed to federal prison in an unrelated case.
System changes
The death of Marcus Fiesel prompted change the Ohio child welfare system, though the need for retooling the system had been evident for years, said Gary Cates, a former state senator from West Chester Twp.
In 2007, Cates introduced legislation in the Ohio Senate and Rep. Courtney Combs, R-Hamilton, introduced legislation in the Statehouse.
“I hope and pray that it never happens again,” Combs said of Marcus’ death.
Implementing the legislation requirements cost about $15 million in both the 2008 and 2009 fiscal years, said ODJFS spokeswoman Angela Terez. That investment included about $5.2 million in federal funds in each of the years, she said. After Marcus’ death, the Criminal Justice Information System, formed in Montgomery County, expanded to now include 14 Ohio counties. Had CJIS been in effect in Butler County, Marcus could have been pulled from the Carroll home following a June 2006 domestic violence arrest of David Carroll Jr., though the charge was later dismissed.
“Any foster parent in our network — even foster parents where we don’t have children in their homes — if they are pulled over even for a speeding ticket we’re made aware of it instantly,” said Jeff Centers, current children services director. “Anything that might raise a red flag, we’ll know about it immediately.”
Centers said the county pays $46,000 a year for the CJIS licensing records checks and that the agency also has a $95,000 annual contract with the county sheriff’s office to have a deputy supervise the investigations unit and provide services such as security and finding runaways.
Source http://www.oxfordpress.com/news/oxford-news/young-boys-death-at-hands-of-foster-parents-led-to-change-1224553.html
By Michael D. Pitman, Staff Writer
2:20 AM Sunday, August 7, 2011
It’s been five years since the death of 3-year-old Marcus Fiesel at the hands of his foster parents that captured the attention of the region, state and nation, sent two people to prison for the rest of their lives and led to a child welfare system overhaul.
Marcus, the Middletown boy with an impish grin, would have turned 8 in June. Instead of marking another birthday, he will be remembered for his horrific death.
The developmentally disabled boy was bound in a blanket wrapped with duct tape and placed in a playpen inside an upstairs closet while Liz and David Carroll Jr., live-in girlfriend Amy Baker, their children and foster children, and even the family dog, traveled to an August family reunion in Kentucky during the hottest days of the year.
“I’d like to think the laws that have changed in his memory have been beneficial in the fact that we haven’t had any other child have the same fate that he did,” said Gary Cates, a former state senator from West Chester Twp. “If that’s his legacy, that no other child’s been harmed, then that’s a tremendous legacy that Marcus left other children.”
Both Liz and David Carroll declined interview requests from prison.
Marcus’ death during the weekend of Aug. 4-6, 2006, in the closet of the Carrolls’ Union Twp. home in Clermont County placed a giant spotlight on some gaping holes in the child welfare system and led private foster placement agency, the former Lifeway for Youth, from operating in the state.
While his death was the breaking point to prompt reform in Ohio’s foster care and children services system, other children died while under the charge of Butler County Children Services: Tiffany Hubbard, 3, of Hamilton in 1986; Randi Fuller, 2, of Hamilton, in 2000; Christopher Long, 2, of Middletown, in 2001; Courtney Centers, 3, of Middletown in 2002; Jesus Rodriquez, 7 months, of Hamilton in 2003; and Justin Johnson, 13 months, of Middletown in 2004.
Marcus’ hurdles
Born on June 24, 2003, Marcus had many obstacles from the start. He was born with a developmental disability — though not specifically diagnosed, he had “global delays” and needed 24-hour care and attention.
Marcus slept on a foam mat at the home of his biological mother, Donna Trevino, and he and his siblings were not closely watched or cared for. Butler County Children Services became involved with the family in Aug. 9, 2004.
When Marcus was found wandering the streets on April 22, 2006, almost being hit by a car — roughly four months after he accidentally fell out of a second-story window — caseworkers removed Trevino’s three children from her home, where reports showed there was feces on the carpet and wall of the flea-infested home. This was the third time her children had been taken from her care.
The day Marcus went ‘missing’
The public story of Marcus’ disappearance began on Aug. 15, 2006, after Liz Carroll collapsed from an apparent heart condition at an Anderson Twp. park in Hamilton County. When medics responded, she told them she brought four children to the park, but only three were present. This sparked a massive three-day search by hundreds of volunteers, law enforcement and search and rescue teams.
“I still have nightmares about that little guy,” said Jann Heffner, then director of Butler County Children Services. “You don’t get into this business unless you care about the care and physical well being of a child.”
She and some of her staff, including Marcus’ caseworker Joe Beumer went out immediately to search for the child.
Beumer was in “shock and disbelief” but said the story of his disappearance “wasn’t adding up.” He doubted Marcus would have run off — even though that would be something he would do, when his foster mother collapsed. “Any child that experiences something like that I think their natural instinct would be to stay with that person that’s hurt,” he said, “even if they couldn’t do anything they would just sit there.”
Worry quickly turned into horror at the end of August 2006 when the Carrolls were charged with murder.
The case
Not many things hang on the walls in Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters’ office, but a drawing of Pulitzer Prize-winning political cartoonist Jim Borgman of Marcus holding hands with God walking toward heaven has a special place.
“To this day it just chills me that someone could do that to a little baby. They are where they belong and they will have to answer to God,” Deters said.
Deters had prosecuted the case before it was moved over to Clermont County since Marcus died in the Carrolls’ home. He said he thinks about the 3-year-old boy “all the time.”
“The inhumanity of how they treated him, it boggles my mind when you’ve got children,” he said.
The story of Marcus’ disappearance unraveled at Liz Carroll’s televised news conference, which Deters watched from his office. “It was rehearsed and came off very untruthful,” he said.
He immediately brought in Liz Carroll and Amy Baker (who now goes by Amy Ramsey) before a county grand jury. He talked to Baker first, and with her attorney present, said “if she was not truthful, she’ll go to prison.” After consulting with her attorney — who Deters said was ghostly pale after the attorney-client conversation — Baker admitted what happened to Marcus.
“It was disgusting,” Deters said of her testimony.
She revealed Marcus had been dead for days before the disappearance hoax at the park, and that she helped David Carroll burn the boy’s body in rural Brown County and throw the rest of his remains in the Ohio River.
Following a jury trial in February 2007, Liz Carroll was convicted of charges including murder and sentenced to 54 years to life in prison; her husband later was sentenced to 16 years to life as part of a plea deal.
The aftermath
An Ohio Department of Job and Family Services investigation pointed blame at Lifeway for Youth, the New Carlisle, Ohio-based foster care provider that placed Marcus with the Carrolls.
For reasons that include and extend beyond Marcus’ case, ODJFS later pulled Lifeway’s operational certificate, a decision upheld by a Franklin County judge.
Although investigations determined that Butler County Children Services did nothing wrong, Heffner was moved into a consulting role and then fired by the county commissioners. The Butler County Children Services Board — initially formed in the wake of 3-year-old Tiffany Hubbard’s abuse and death in 1986 at the hands of her biological father — was disbanded.
The Rev. Johnny Wade Sloan, chairman of the 11-member board, didn’t agree or see the reason to disband the board.
“(The Carrolls) promised 24-hour adult supervision and there was no reason for us not to place (the kids) when (Lifeway was) telling us, as a licensed agency, they had an ideal place,” he said.
But Sloan and Heffner said the decisions to disband the board and fire Heffner were political moves and not a result of Marcus’ death. “Marcus Fiesel became the focal point for that happening because that would have happened regardless,” Sloan said. Former Butler County Commissioner Mike Fox resigned his elected seat and later was appointment Children Services director. He has since resigned and is headed to federal prison in an unrelated case.
System changes
The death of Marcus Fiesel prompted change the Ohio child welfare system, though the need for retooling the system had been evident for years, said Gary Cates, a former state senator from West Chester Twp.
In 2007, Cates introduced legislation in the Ohio Senate and Rep. Courtney Combs, R-Hamilton, introduced legislation in the Statehouse.
“I hope and pray that it never happens again,” Combs said of Marcus’ death.
Implementing the legislation requirements cost about $15 million in both the 2008 and 2009 fiscal years, said ODJFS spokeswoman Angela Terez. That investment included about $5.2 million in federal funds in each of the years, she said. After Marcus’ death, the Criminal Justice Information System, formed in Montgomery County, expanded to now include 14 Ohio counties. Had CJIS been in effect in Butler County, Marcus could have been pulled from the Carroll home following a June 2006 domestic violence arrest of David Carroll Jr., though the charge was later dismissed.
“Any foster parent in our network — even foster parents where we don’t have children in their homes — if they are pulled over even for a speeding ticket we’re made aware of it instantly,” said Jeff Centers, current children services director. “Anything that might raise a red flag, we’ll know about it immediately.”
Centers said the county pays $46,000 a year for the CJIS licensing records checks and that the agency also has a $95,000 annual contract with the county sheriff’s office to have a deputy supervise the investigations unit and provide services such as security and finding runaways.
Source http://www.oxfordpress.com/news/oxford-news/young-boys-death-at-hands-of-foster-parents-led-to-change-1224553.html
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Where IS CPS Concerning The Cushing Boys?
The facts about the Cushing's are very disturbing. It is absolutely impossible to believe that CPS does not see a reason to step into this matter. If this is not poor judgement, abuse, neglect and failure to protect - then nothing is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)