December 24th 07, 02:46 AM
posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.support.foster-parents,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated,alt.parenting.spanking
|
|
|
Louisville Lawmaker Wants CPS Changes
"LK" wrote in message
...
"dragonsgirl" wrote in message
. net...
"Greegor" wrote in message
...
On Dec 22, 9:27 pm, fx wrote:
Louisville Lawmaker Wants CPS Changes
POSTED: 11:44 pm EST December 18, 2007
UPDATED: 8:09 am EST December 19, 2007
http://www.wlky.com/news/14886429/detail.html
LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- A state lawmaker from Louisville is proposing changes
to the state's Child Protective Services System.
Rep. Darryl Owens said he and his colleagues have heard complaints from
parents about children being improperly removed from their homes. A
state commission recently concluded parents weren't getting a fair shake
in the courts when it came to fighting for their kids.
Owens said he wants to level the playing field by requiring attorneys to
represent the parent and the child at termination hearings. He also
wants training for lawyers and judges in family court cases and more pay
for publicly appointed attorneys working the cases.
sponsor
"There are some instances in which the removal does not appear to be
warranted and the fact they go in court and there's nobody there to
advocate on behalf of the child or parent works to their detriment,"
said Owens.
Owens pre-filed the bill in Frankfort for discussion in January.
Hell, Kentucky didn't even give people a Public pretender at TPR?
Or the other process?
*Do you think that people who can afford an attorney should be GIVEN a
public defender?*
Should they have to go broke to pay for one if the state is wrong?
Should I have to pay more taxes to cover their PD if they're guilty?
This article, so far as I saw, does not mention the financial status of
the parents.
If an accused has an income of, let's say $100,000 per year, do you think
your taxes should go to paying for their public defender?
Right to an attorney should have been guaranteed from the start!
Now if we can just make that a "vigorous" representation
instead of going through the motions and doing the
"stipulation scam" crud 10 minutes before the ""hearing"".
|