"0:-" wrote in message
news:MJydneVtqeFYix7ZnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
Doug wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
abc's primetime did a june 1 story on "the crisis of the foster care
system"..............among abc's conclusions were 52 percent of foster
children suffered from post-traumatic stress (a rate twice as high as
soldiers returning from war).............thirty percent of the homeless
have been in foster care............ twenty-five percent of those in
prison are foster care alumnus

Hi, maggie,

Former and present foster children represent the most endangered
population in this country.

And they came by it in the majority from their origins, the family they
were born into.

Child welfare experts contend

Some do.

that the only way to reduce the abuse in
foster care and the very poor outcomes for former foster children is to
have less foster care.

And some do not. Some believe that adequately funding the system for lower
caseloads WILL in fact move children through the system more rapidly to
permanency. Better funding will result in not just lower caseloads...a
problem pointed out BY EXPERTS even you have quoted, Doug, but allow for
hiring and training more qualified workers.

And reform movements are underway in many states and, on
the federal level, to place less children into state custody and release
foster children to their families earlier.

Which has NOT proven yet to be the safest course. Parents have been known,
as you know perfectly well, to re-abuse these same children. YOU quoted,
in another argument, figures showing high rates of re-offending.

Currently, the vast majority of children removed from their families were
not abused.

That is only true if you count raw numbers of removals...and ignore those
that are returned in short order.

Doug is quite correct, the majority are not removed for abuse. They are
removed for neglect. And as figures point out, neglect is by far the
greater killer of children.

Figures show that 2.1 kids per thousand were abused, but 7.4 per thousand
were neglected.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p.../figure3_3.htm

69,000 of children placed in foster care in 2003 were removed
from families CPS workers themselves unsubstantiated for risk of or
actual neglect/abuse.

When you claim "not abused" you are ignoring the research I posted here
that shows that "not abuse" and "unsubstantiated for abuse or neglect" are
not the same thing, nor the same yardstick.

Substantiation is a service needs driven assessment label, not a legal
definition of abuse.

Doug does not care about facts, they get in the way of his agenda.

Ron

These non-victims represent 30% of the foster care population.

"Victim" and "substantiated" are not interchangeable terms, as you
delusional claim. The study I provided you done for the USDHHS shows
clearly that you are not correct, and your insistence on ignoring it is
what earns you the title I give you of liar.

The majority of those who were substantiated were found to be
at risk of neglect or neglected.

Yes? 0:-

Of those children substantiated as victims of abuse, the majority were
substantiated because they were "at risk" of abuse, not actually abused.

Nonsense babbling again, Doug?

............. like welfare, foster care
is intergenerational (children growing up in foster care can become
mothers with children in foster care........... "the highest ranking
federal official in charge of foster care, wade horn of the department
of health and human services, is a former child psychologist who says
the foster care system is a giant mess and should just be blown
up"............

The most vocal of foster care critics are professionals who are directly
involved with it. Dr. Horn is one of the players in CPS reform efforts.

R R R R, volume does not equate with accuracy or expertise, Doug. Wade
Horn is identified as an anti-women's rights appointee to a political
office.

Wade makes the same mistake I've pointed out to you repeatedly and you
have ignored or minimized.

The concept of upfront services has two major stumbling blocks, closely
related to each other.

Those who NEED the up front services do NOT present themselves for those
services. Criminals, addicts/substance abusers, mentally ill.

And especially those guilty of abusing, or placing their children at risk.
They are NOT your self development conscious population that self assess
as needing help and seeking it.

Which brings me to point to, and something that this administration is
becoming a major concern of the public over: if up front services are to
be delivered they will have to be delivered by heavy intrusive efforts.

These take the disguise of "public services agents" calling up people to
"volunteer" the services, but always with the hint and occasionally the
open threat of action if the "services" are not "volunteered for."

You and others here like you have even argued this very same thing
yourself in the context of the current system.

I suggest you carefully read Wade's statements from last year, for this
very content. Nicely worded, not at all obvious, but to one that has
followed CPS and related agencies, and the paths that legislation has
taken, it is more than clear. It is moving the point of entry of
government, not removing it.

And it will have similar outcomes. Those that cannot or will not present
themselves will be on a list. And the very thing YOU ****ants claim is
being done, that is not, WILL BE A FACT OF LIFE: That CPS will be charged
with HUNTING child abuse, rather than taking incoming calls only.

The agency may not BE CPS, but other agencies will apply for grants, hire
new workers, and out they will go into the field. "Nurses," "community
service Workers," from fields as diverse as health, and recreation
(Recreation is a favorite place to focus on children and their parents and
signs of abuse when government wants to intrude on families.)

http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ola..._testimony.htm
Then read:
http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ola...905_child.html

And you will see the trend.

As for Wade himself, and the politics surrounding him, (and don't EVEN try
your bull**** of attempting to separate the quality and content of
someone's claims from their character and milieu with me, asshole), you
might want to look at the criticisms:

http://www.mediatransparency.org/per...hp?personID=89

The politics are, well, business as usual.

YOU just want the money to move from one place to another.

Do you have a personal interest in this, Doug? A financial one?


."there are no provisions for treatment, prevention,
family support, or aging out - just for supporting things as they
are"..........that status quo costs taxpayers $22 billion a year and
works out to $40,000 a year to keep a child in foster
care

The total cost of raising the child takes up about $14,000 of that.
Foster children's medical, dental and mental health needs are covered by
Medacaid. The remaining $26,000 goes to principals and workers in the
child welfare industry itself.

It isn't an industry. No profits accrue to anyone.

Administrative costs are many times much higher than 2/3 of the funding
going into foster care, although 66% is the general rule. For each foster
child, there is a battery of GALS, social service workers, state
caregivers, case managers, mentors, partridges, pear trees and the trees
in which they roost.

You are lying. And YOU have applauded the use of GALS, and social workers.
A case manager is a case worker. Stop your lying.

There are no partridges, other than computer support, clerical support,
utility fees, building rents, transport for children, and often parent
clients, etc., and as far as I know, "no pear trees and the trees in which
they roost."

Trees resting in trees, Doug?

You obviously aren't paying attention to what YOU are writing, and you
most certainly ARE patronizingly playing on your belief in the ignorance
and or stupidity of the readers.

Who, hopefully really AREN'T as stupid as you patronizingly make them out
to be with your nonsense.

Bio families do not have the expenses related to abused children, unless
they abuse and neglect and are responsible enough to pay themselves for
the outcomes.


We can presume the $14,000 per child figure is not for that population.

....................beyond abc's findings, the per annum cost per
child in foster care would keep a child in a good boarding
school............

....And pay for their college.

The overcrowded and abusive foster care system described by ABC news
became that way because of what the Pew Commission calls "the perverse
funding incentive" provided state CPS agencies to remove children from
their families.

You are ignoring, and thus misleading (called "lying" in some circles) the
rest of what the Pew commission found. And what others have found.

The abuse and neglect has taken on a much more perverse color than in the
past, with far greater injury with more serious outcomes that cost a great
deal more to treat. Number ARE going up, NOT down.

Federal Title IV-E Social Security Funding currently flows to the states
on the basis of how many poor children CPS takes into custody.

A simplistic way of describing something that is more comprehensive than
just the poverty level.

However, the poor neglect and abuse their children at a higher rate than
the non-poor. It's just a simple fact. Nothing complex. They are often
poor for reasons that are not just lack of ability to find a job.

People that don't abuse, and become poor, do not start abusing because
they are poor. People that live lifestyles that include abusive child
rearing and are poor do not stop abusing even if you provide them money.

This has all been tried before and failed.

As
long as the child stays in foster care, the state agencies pull down the
uncapped, on demand Title IV-E funding.

Appeals to emotions with loaded word choice, like 'pull down' leading one
to believe that they are 'making money' by this process.

They are spending money at a faster rate than they are getting it because
of the load on the system.

As for the TRUE reaction to PEW commission report, you need to go beyond
your bull**** propaganda, Doug.

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=63622

[[[ Notice they are saying the same thing I am saying. Funding has been a
perpetual problem .. in all areas of child protection, including the
courts. They too have been underfunded, badly. ]]]


home today's news about USN USN services contact USN media services news
sources search

Strengthening Courts, Improving Foster Ca A Progress Report from the
Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care

4/5/2006 2:53:00 PM

To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor

Contact: The Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, 202-687-0948; Web:
http://www.pewfostercare.org

News Advisory:

-- Strengthening Courts, Improving Foster Ca A Progress Report from the
Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care

-- Thursday, April 6, 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., U.S. Capitol Building, Room
H-137, Washington, D.C.

No child enters or leaves foster care without a judge's approval. Given
the critical role of juvenile and family courts in children's lives, the
nonpartisan Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care called for sweeping
court reforms to protect children in foster care and secure safe,
permanent families for them.

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 includes new provisions to improve the
juvenile and family courts that reflect some of the Pew Commission's
recommendations. These new court improvements will help courts track and
analyze their caseloads to improve outcomes for children in foster care,
allow judges and other court personnel to receive needed training, and
encourage collaboration between courts and child welfare agencies. The DRA
provides $100 million over five years for these court improvements.

These new court provisions add critical momentum to the efforts of states
to improve their child welfare and court systems. At this briefing,
members of the Pew Commission, Congressional leaders, judges, court
leaders and federal officials will explore the potential impact of these
court improvements on children in foster care throughout the United
States. Participants include:

THE HONORABLE BILL FRENZEL, Chairman, Pew Commission on Children in Foster
Care, Guest Scholar, Economic Studies, The Brookings Institution

THE HONORABLE WALLY HERGER (R-CA), Chairman, Subcommittee on Human
Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means

THE HONORABLE WADE HORN, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families,
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

THE HONORABLE JOAN OHL, Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth
and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

THE HONORABLE LEE F. SATTERFIELD, Associate Judge, Superior Court of the
District of Columbia, Former Presiding Judge, D.C. Family Court

WILLIAM C. VICKREY, Member, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care,
Administrative Director of the Courts, California Administrative Office of
the Courts

CLARICE DIBBLE WALKER, Member, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care,
Former Commissioner, D.C. Social Services

http://www.usnewswire.com/

-0-

/© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/

As the result of the Pew Commission report, Congress is currently at work
to remove the strings to Title IV-E funding. The money will become a
capped entitlement to the states, allowing CPS agencies to decide for
themselves how to spend the money. This will cut the foster population by
as much as 80% across the country.

It will defund, which will, of course, dump kids OUT of the foster system,
or close the doors to them when they need protection. The pendulum will
swing again.

The size of the needed workforce will increase to "give" those upfront
services that Wade is so supportive of. More AGENTS of the government will
make attempts at entre' to homes and family.

YOU, and they, are stupid.

The reform legislation, partially because of Dr. Wade's support, will
soon be passed by Congress. This is the reform legislation the
Organization of American Counties and CPS attempted to defeat through a
lobbying campaign about the Meth "epidemic."

Bull****. CPS has little to do with the reporting on meth. The news
services are sending journalist and reporters out to find out for
themselves and they are finding that indeed there IS such an epidemic and
it's have devastating impact on families and children.

You are a propagandist, and it appears you are one for the current
administration on these matters.

Meanwhile, individual states have reduced their foster care poplulation
by applying for and being granted exclusions from Title IV-E funding
restrictions. California, Iowa and other states were just granted Title
IV-E waivers. We can expect the state that harbors close to half of the
nation's foster children to reduce the population of state wards by 50%
over the next three years. Mamouth reductions in foster care populations
have occurred in Illinois, Oregon and other states granted Title IV-E
waivers in the past.

It won't be long, now.

It will be about two to three years before we see the first signs of this
boondoggle.

Watch.

Just as I predicted the upsurge in meth related issues for child
protection and the country I predict that child abuse rates, once we
change administrations, will be correctly reported and they will
skyrocket.

Families will not present themselves for "up front services" and we'll see
more and more clever "agencies" with specially trained, expensive, workers
going out to find ways into homes.

Having done so more abuse will be uncovered than ever before...because our
system and society has resisted intrusion into the family...and that will
break down.

That IS the goal of certain factions now influencing legislation, and they
are poised to do those intrusion under color of law.

They are NOT family friendly...just "family model" friendly, and the
objective is to NOT allow for non-biblical model families to exist.

You will see the gates to hell open on this one, Doug. If they carry it
off. 5 years at the outside before the public discovers they have been
conned by you and your kind.

0:-

And for those that care, another opinion on Wade and his politics and
values, which of course boils down to biases:

http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyt...ry.asp?id=5474







--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)