Foster Care worse than "at risk" parents

http://www.nccpr.org/reports/blog.htm

November 6, 2006

FOSTER CARE FLUNKS THE "EVIDENCE-BASED" TEST - AGAIN
Startling results from a Minnesota study

For many years, NCCPR has maintained that when a child is "at risk"
in his or her own home, most children most of the time are far better
off if the family gets help so the child can stay in the home instead
of placing the child in foster care.

But what if the family doesn't get help? A new study
from Minnesota includes some startling findings.

Researchers at the University of Minnesota apparently have
been following a large group of "at risk" families for some time.
And as part of the research they tracked three groups. One group went
into foster care. Another group -- equally maltreated - remained in
their own homes, but apparently got little or no help. Indeed, this
second group was identified by the researchers themselves, not child
protective services. A third group was equally disadvantaged
economically but suffered no maltreatment.

The study is called simply, "The impact of foster care on
development." It was published this year in the journal Development
and Psychopathology, (Vol. 18, 2006, pp. 57-76). Sarah Fenske, a
reporter for Phoenix New Times, found the study while working on an
excellent story about child welfare in Arizona.

The researchers measured the behavior, and general
emotional state, of all three groups before the foster care group went
into foster care, after they came out, and some time afterwards.

Not surprisingly, the group that was not maltreated did
best. But the group that did not enter foster care, on average, did
better than the group that did.

Thank about that for a moment. Two groups of children,
apparently suffering equal levels of maltreatment. Apparently in the
same condition psychologically when one group went into foster care.
And even though the children left in their own homes got little or no
help, the foster children still came out worse.

Not all foster children did as badly. Those placed with
relatives did better than those placed with strangers.

Of course these findings are averages. There are bound to
have been some children within the group who were so ill-treated at
home that even foster care was an improvement.

Also, the study was done in Minnesota, one of the most remove-happy
states in the nation. Using the formula in NCCPR's Rate-of-Removal
Index, Minnesota takes away children at a rate nearly three times the
national average. Only three states, Nebraska, Wyoming and Iowa, are
worse. So a sample from, say, Illinois, which is far more careful
about targeting who is taken away and so, takes children at about
one-seventh the Minnesota rate, might produce different results.

But this still is further evidence that foster-care is an
extreme intervention that should be used only when a child is so badly
treated at home that even the inherent harm of removal truly is the
less detrimental alternative.

And evidence is the right word. The mantra in child
welfare now is "evidence-based" - as in: "By golly, your
program had better have genuine scholarly evidence that it works or
don't expect it to be funded!"

In fact, "evidence-based" can be a code-phrase used to
stifle alternatives to approaches, like foster-care, that so dominate
the field that nobody ever asks its proponents for any evidence. If
you want to try an alternative to foster care, you have to dot every i
and cross every t to prove it works. But if you run a foster-care
program, or, say a residential treatment center (for which there is a
ton of evidence of failure) it's business as usual.

Substitute care, whether through orphanages or foster care,
has dominated child welfare in this country since at least 1853, when
Protestant minister Charles Loring Brace first started grabbing the
children of New York's Catholic immigrants, whom he feared, loathed,
and deemed genetically inferior, and shipping them off to the south and
Midwest on "orphan trains."

Isn't it time the agencies that make up the modern foster
care-industrial complex were forced to prove that their intervention
"works"?

Greegor wrote:
http://www.nccpr.org/reports/blog.htm

November 6, 2006

FOSTER CARE FLUNKS THE "EVIDENCE-BASED" TEST - AGAIN
Startling results from a Minnesota study

For many years, NCCPR has maintained that when a child is "at risk"
in his or her own home, most children most of the time are far better
off if the family gets help so the child can stay in the home instead
of placing the child in foster care.

But what if the family doesn't get help? A new study
from Minnesota includes some startling findings.

Researchers at the University of Minnesota apparently have
been following a large group of "at risk" families for some time.
And as part of the research they tracked three groups. One group went
into foster care. Another group -- equally maltreated - remained in
their own homes, but apparently got little or no help. Indeed, this
second group was identified by the researchers themselves, not child
protective services. A third group was equally disadvantaged
economically but suffered no maltreatment.

The study is called simply, "The impact of foster care on
development." It was published this year in the journal Development
and Psychopathology, (Vol. 18, 2006, pp. 57-76). Sarah Fenske, a
reporter for Phoenix New Times, found the study while working on an
excellent story about child welfare in Arizona.

The researchers measured the behavior, and general
emotional state, of all three groups before the foster care group went
into foster care, after they came out, and some time afterwards.

Not surprisingly, the group that was not maltreated did
best. But the group that did not enter foster care, on average, did
better than the group that did.

Thank about that for a moment. Two groups of children,
apparently suffering equal levels of maltreatment. Apparently in the
same condition psychologically when one group went into foster care.
And even though the children left in their own homes got little or no
help, the foster children still came out worse.

Not all foster children did as badly. Those placed with
relatives did better than those placed with strangers.

Of course these findings are averages. There are bound to
have been some children within the group who were so ill-treated at
home that even foster care was an improvement.

Also, the study was done in Minnesota, one of the most remove-happy
states in the nation. Using the formula in NCCPR's Rate-of-Removal
Index, Minnesota takes away children at a rate nearly three times the
national average. Only three states, Nebraska, Wyoming and Iowa, are
worse. So a sample from, say, Illinois, which is far more careful
about targeting who is taken away and so, takes children at about
one-seventh the Minnesota rate, might produce different results.

But this still is further evidence that foster-care is an
extreme intervention that should be used only when a child is so badly
treated at home that even the inherent harm of removal truly is the
less detrimental alternative.

And evidence is the right word. The mantra in child
welfare now is "evidence-based" - as in: "By golly, your
program had better have genuine scholarly evidence that it works or
don't expect it to be funded!"

In fact, "evidence-based" can be a code-phrase used to
stifle alternatives to approaches, like foster-care, that so dominate
the field that nobody ever asks its proponents for any evidence. If
you want to try an alternative to foster care, you have to dot every i
and cross every t to prove it works. But if you run a foster-care
program, or, say a residential treatment center (for which there is a
ton of evidence of failure) it's business as usual.

Substitute care, whether through orphanages or foster care,
has dominated child welfare in this country since at least 1853, when
Protestant minister Charles Loring Brace first started grabbing the
children of New York's Catholic immigrants, whom he feared, loathed,
and deemed genetically inferior, and shipping them off to the south and
Midwest on "orphan trains."

Isn't it time the agencies that make up the modern foster
care-industrial complex were forced to prove that their intervention
"works"?

Biased propaganda. One cannot prove a negative. If nothing happens
nothing can be proven. You know perfectly well that failures of the
interventions are in the minority and successes are many and they
cannot be discussed without the permission of the clients. The clients
aren't going to expose themselves to the public because often what they
did was illegal, drug use, child abuse, neglect, and other crimes.

It's their private life, and CPS has helped them get their ****
together.

It's easy to do this kind of abusive attack because there is no way to
disprove the lies.

You people make me sick.

And the comment on the Orphan trains is a flat out lie.

Those were not children taken from families. Those were abandoned
children on the streets, homeless and hungry and often badly abused and
WHY they were on the street, just like many of todays street children.

Some were flat out orphans, as was my paternal grandmother. Father gone
and never came back for her (likely died under a tree in a logging camp
but we've never found him) mother dead.

The trains were full of children just like those I describe. The
authors of such crap are lying pieces of ****, just like you..no wonder
you look for this crap as a hiding place when you are caught in your
lies and dangerous advice giving.

You are a coward, a liar, and scum, Greg.

And I can prove every single one. Want some proof?

Want to reread some of your old posts?

More than happy to oblige.

You lied to a federal congressional hearing.

You are now trying to sue the very state you lied about.

****ant.

Have a nice day.

0:-

"Greegor" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.nccpr.org/reports/blog.htm

November 6, 2006

FOSTER CARE FLUNKS THE "EVIDENCE-BASED" TEST - AGAIN
Startling results from a Minnesota study

For many years, NCCPR has maintained that when a child is "at risk"
in his or her own home, most children most of the time are far better
off if the family gets help so the child can stay in the home instead
of placing the child in foster care.

It is a well known fact that murder and abuse is much higher in foster hell.
It's a wonder they consider this foster 'hell on earth' for ANY child -
abused or not!!


But what if the family doesn't get help? A new study
from Minnesota includes some startling findings.

They're not really 'startling' - we've known for 3 decades that foster
'care' is a dismal failure when it comes to protecting children - but who
cares?


Researchers at the University of Minnesota apparently have
been following a large group of "at risk" families for some time.
And as part of the research they tracked three groups. One group went
into foster care. Another group -- equally maltreated - remained in
their own homes, but apparently got little or no help. Indeed, this
second group was identified by the researchers themselves, not child
protective services. A third group was equally disadvantaged
economically but suffered no maltreatment.

The study is called simply, "The impact of foster care on
development." It was published this year in the journal Development
and Psychopathology, (Vol. 18, 2006, pp. 57-76). Sarah Fenske, a
reporter for Phoenix New Times, found the study while working on an
excellent story about child welfare in Arizona.

The researchers measured the behavior, and general
emotional state, of all three groups before the foster care group went
into foster care, after they came out, and some time afterwards.

Not surprisingly, the group that was not maltreated did
best. But the group that did not enter foster care, on average, did
better than the group that did.

Thank about that for a moment. Two groups of children,
apparently suffering equal levels of maltreatment. Apparently in the
same condition psychologically when one group went into foster care.
And even though the children left in their own homes got little or no
help, the foster children still came out worse.

Not all foster children did as badly. Those placed with
relatives did better than those placed with strangers.

Yup - often fosties can't even remember the names of their 'children' - but
they remember how much they're paid right down to the penny. 2 kids and they
can quit their job - 4 kids and they can drive a Lexus - 40 kids and you
have a group home (see california grand jury findings for what kinda car you
get as a multi-million dollar group home 'director') lol

These scum will never be held accountable before man. But they will account.
lol


Of course these findings are averages. There are bound to
have been some children within the group who were so ill-treated at
home that even foster care was an improvement.

Also, the study was done in Minnesota, one of the most remove-happy
states in the nation. Using the formula in NCCPR's Rate-of-Removal
Index, Minnesota takes away children at a rate nearly three times the
national average. Only three states, Nebraska, Wyoming and Iowa, are
worse. So a sample from, say, Illinois, which is far more careful
about targeting who is taken away and so, takes children at about
one-seventh the Minnesota rate, might produce different results.

But this still is further evidence that foster-care is an
extreme intervention that should be used only when a child is so badly
treated at home that even the inherent harm of removal truly is the
less detrimental alternative.

And evidence is the right word. The mantra in child
welfare now is "evidence-based" - as in: "By golly, your
program had better have genuine scholarly evidence that it works or
don't expect it to be funded!"

In fact, "evidence-based" can be a code-phrase used to
stifle alternatives to approaches, like foster-care, that so dominate
the field that nobody ever asks its proponents for any evidence. If
you want to try an alternative to foster care, you have to dot every i
and cross every t to prove it works. But if you run a foster-care
program, or, say a residential treatment center (for which there is a
ton of evidence of failure) it's business as usual.

Substitute care, whether through orphanages or foster care,
has dominated child welfare in this country since at least 1853, when
Protestant minister Charles Loring Brace first started grabbing the
children of New York's Catholic immigrants, whom he feared, loathed,
and deemed genetically inferior, and shipping them off to the south and
Midwest on "orphan trains."

Isn't it time the agencies that make up the modern foster
care-industrial complex were forced to prove that their intervention
"works"?

Charlie Chinaman wrote:

....the usual crock of ****.

Guess how many of these guys are parents, fathers.

You have to wonder what these guys were doing before the Internet.

Obviously they weren't bothering children back then...like maybe their
own, or family members, eh boys?

http://www.kirotv.com/news/10255330/detail.html


KIROTV.com
Related To Story
Louis W. Conradt, Jr.
Louis W. Conradt, Jr.

Ex-Texas DA Dead After TV Child-Predator Sting
Police Were Arriving To Serve Warrant

POSTED: 12:06 pm PST November 6, 2006

TERRELL, Texas -- A Texas prosecutor committed suicide Sunday, after
allegedly being caught-up in one of the many popular TV news
child-predator stings.

Police were trying to serve Louis "Bill" Conradt Jr., 56, with an
arrest warrant at his home, alleging that he solicited sex with someone
he thought was a 13-year-old boy, but who was actually a decoy.

Dallas TV station KXAS reported that the explicit conversations even
included a webcam and the telephone.

Officers had a search warrant for his computer. As officers moved in to
make an arrest, they heard a shot. They found Conradt inside with a
self-inflicted wound. He died later at a hospital in Dallas.

The warrant resulted from one of the now-familiar stings in which NBC
"Dateline" and an Internet child-predator watchdog group lure people to
a home, where they are confronted by a reporter.

"Without going into details -- it was extremely explicit," said
Detective Sgt. Snow Robertson of the Murphy Police Department.

Police said Conradt had not gone to the house, but that they believe he
had been planning to.

"(Children) shouldn't have to worry about getting on the Internet and
worrying about an older person having sex with them," said Robertson.

Conradt was the chief felony assistant DA for Rockwall County, and was
formerly the DA in Kaufman County.

The mayor in Murphy, Texas, told the paper he hopes his town won't be
used again to try to trap child predators in this way.

NBC News confirmed that the sting operation involved "Dateline" and its
"To Catch A Predator" series and issued the following statement:

NBC News' "Dateline" was in Texas reporting on its "To Catch A
Predator" series in conjunction with online watchdog group Perverted
Justice. In the midst of that effort, Rockwall County Assistant
District Attorney Louis W. Conradt, Jr. contacted a decoy from
Perverted Justice who was posing as a 13-year-old boy. Local
authorities launched an investigation into Conradt's online
communications and went to his home with an arrest warrant. In the
course of that investigation, Conradt committed suicide. There was no
contact whatsoever between Conradt and "Dateline" at any point in the
investigation.

Other Names Released:

The Murphy Police Department has arrested more than 20 individuals on
charges of online solicitation of a minor in connection with the
investigative piece.

Last July, authorities in Murphy arrested six people on charges of
online solicitation of a minor while working with the community
watchdog group Perverted Justice. The group works to identify, locate
and capture sexual predators who prey on children. The group has been
in existence for four years and has assisted in the arrests of 260
people and more than 80 convictions across the United States.

With the success of last July's investigation, the Murphy Police
Department arranged a four-day sting operation that would again partner
the department with Perverted Justice as well as "Dateline NBC,"
officials said.

During the course of the sting operation, officials said more than 20
Internet child predator suspects were arrested after, police said, they
traveled to meet who they believed to be a 13- or 14-year-old child for
sex.

Murphy Police Chief Billy Myrick conceded that not all residents liked
having the sting operation brought into their city but he defended the
program and said that it was a benefit to the community.

In a news release, the Murphy Police Department said the suspects
captured during this event did not know that the Murphy Police
Department had partnered with Perverted Justice and "Dateline NBC."
They had no way of knowing that this was a sting operation or that they
were about to be arrested. Police said the suspects came to Murphy
because they actually believed that they were in contact with a 13- to
14-year-old child with whom they would engage in sexual contact. Two of
these predators drove from Houston, one came from Oklahoma and many
others live just moments away from this community.

"These Internet predators are operating everywhere. They know no bounds
and will go after anyone's child to satisfy their own personal
interests," Myrick said. "We are committed to this community's
welfare and we believe that we are doing the right thing."

The Murphy Police Department released the following list of suspects
arrested in connection with the sting operation:

* Eric Rubalcava, age 31, from Houston
* John Baker, age 25, from Frisco
* Stanley Kendall, age 54, from Mesquite
* Timothy Gilliam, age 32, from Flower Mound
* Asif Khokar, age 27, from Houston
* Samuel Tanguma, age 27, from Grand Prairie
* Steve Rosello, age 32, from Kennedale
* Edward Hollingsworth, age 35, from Dallas
* Milan Mehta, age 46, from Richardson
* Sajjad Mohammad, age 43, from Murphy
* David Pann, age 40, from Lewisville
* Alan Chernnay, age 58, from Plano
* William Dow, age 63, from Carrollton
* Kevin Carroll, age 37, from Carrollton
* Jose Soto, age 54, from Mesquite
* Christopher Cothrum, age 23, from Westworth Village
* Justin Estes, age 27, from Plano
* Paulo Deassuncao, age 37, from McKinney
* Timothy Knowles, age 35, from Euless
* Patrick Parr, age 33, from Frisco
* Randall Wolford, age 52, from Whitewright
* Louis W. Conradt, age 56, from Terrell

Police said that the suspects were arraigned before Murphy Municipal
Court Judge Cathy Haden, who set bonds ranging between $50,000 and
$100,000. They were then transported to the Collin County Jail by
personnel from the Collin County Sheriff's Department.

All of the men arrested have been charged with the offense of online
solicitation of a minor. Some of those arrested were additionally
charged with second-degree and third-degree felonies.

Officials said those arrested could face more charges.

Distributed by Internet Broadcasting Systems, Inc. The Associated Press
contributed to this report. All rights reserved. This material may not
be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
.......

Kane, What the hell do these internet pervs have to do
with the ISSUE of Foster Care versus Families?

These are Criminal pervs who get a constitutional court.
Families do not get that when kids are removed to foster care.

These stings keep catching SYSTEM INSIDERS
like LEO's, teachers, this former DA who offed himself, etc.
These stings reveal how many of these pervs are
WORKING IN THE SYSTEM, with access to kids!
(Some are even QUITE VOCAL about child protection,
like Mark Foley the PERVERT Congressman!)

Yet you posted this to try to slam BIO parents????
Have you had a nervous breakdown or what?

Do you think any of these PERVS feel that their anonymity
online is ethical or morally justified to PROTECT them
and their families?



Kane wrote
Guess how many of these guys are parents, fathers.

You have to wonder what these guys were doing before the Internet.

Obviously they weren't bothering children back then...like maybe their
own, or family members, eh boys?

http://www.kirotv.com/news/10255330/detail.html
Ex-Texas DA Dead After TV Child-Predator Sting
Police Were Arriving To Serve Warrant
POSTED: 12:06 pm PST November 6, 2006

TERRELL, Texas -- A Texas prosecutor committed suicide Sunday, after
allegedly being caught-up in one of the many popular TV news
child-predator stings.

Police were trying to serve Louis "Bill" Conradt Jr., 56, with an
arrest warrant at his home, alleging that he solicited sex with someone
he thought was a 13-year-old boy, but who was actually a decoy.

Dallas TV station KXAS reported that the explicit conversations even
included a webcam and the telephone.

Officers had a search warrant for his computer. As officers moved in to
make an arrest, they heard a shot. They found Conradt inside with a
self-inflicted wound. He died later at a hospital in Dallas.

The warrant resulted from one of the now-familiar stings in which NBC
"Dateline" and an Internet child-predator watchdog group lure people to
a home, where they are confronted by a reporter.

"Without going into details -- it was extremely explicit," said
Detective Sgt. Snow Robertson of the Murphy Police Department.

Police said Conradt had not gone to the house, but that they believe he
had been planning to.

"(Children) shouldn't have to worry about getting on the Internet and
worrying about an older person having sex with them," said Robertson.

Conradt was the chief felony assistant DA for Rockwall County, and was
formerly the DA in Kaufman County.

The mayor in Murphy, Texas, told the paper he hopes his town won't be
used again to try to trap child predators in this way.

NBC News confirmed that the sting operation involved "Dateline" and its
"To Catch A Predator" series and issued the following statement:

NBC News' "Dateline" was in Texas reporting on its "To Catch A
Predator" series in conjunction with online watchdog group Perverted
Justice. In the midst of that effort, Rockwall County Assistant
District Attorney Louis W. Conradt, Jr. contacted a decoy from
Perverted Justice who was posing as a 13-year-old boy. Local
authorities launched an investigation into Conradt's online
communications and went to his home with an arrest warrant. In the
course of that investigation, Conradt committed suicide. There was no
contact whatsoever between Conradt and "Dateline" at any point in the
investigation.

Other Names Released:

The Murphy Police Department has arrested more than 20 individuals on
charges of online solicitation of a minor in connection with the
investigative piece.

Last July, authorities in Murphy arrested six people on charges of
online solicitation of a minor while working with the community
watchdog group Perverted Justice. The group works to identify, locate
and capture sexual predators who prey on children. The group has been
in existence for four years and has assisted in the arrests of 260
people and more than 80 convictions across the United States.

With the success of last July's investigation, the Murphy Police
Department arranged a four-day sting operation that would again partner
the department with Perverted Justice as well as "Dateline NBC,"
officials said.

During the course of the sting operation, officials said more than 20
Internet child predator suspects were arrested after, police said, they
traveled to meet who they believed to be a 13- or 14-year-old child for
sex.

Murphy Police Chief Billy Myrick conceded that not all residents liked
having the sting operation brought into their city but he defended the
program and said that it was a benefit to the community.

In a news release, the Murphy Police Department said the suspects
captured during this event did not know that the Murphy Police
Department had partnered with Perverted Justice and "Dateline NBC."
They had no way of knowing that this was a sting operation or that they
were about to be arrested. Police said the suspects came to Murphy
because they actually believed that they were in contact with a 13- to
14-year-old child with whom they would engage in sexual contact. Two of
these predators drove from Houston, one came from Oklahoma and many
others live just moments away from this community.

"These Internet predators are operating everywhere. They know no bounds
and will go after anyone's child to satisfy their own personal
interests," Myrick said. "We are committed to this community's
welfare and we believe that we are doing the right thing."

The Murphy Police Department released the following list of suspects
arrested in connection with the sting operation:

* Eric Rubalcava, age 31, from Houston
* John Baker, age 25, from Frisco
* Stanley Kendall, age 54, from Mesquite
* Timothy Gilliam, age 32, from Flower Mound
* Asif Khokar, age 27, from Houston
* Samuel Tanguma, age 27, from Grand Prairie
* Steve Rosello, age 32, from Kennedale
* Edward Hollingsworth, age 35, from Dallas
* Milan Mehta, age 46, from Richardson
* Sajjad Mohammad, age 43, from Murphy
* David Pann, age 40, from Lewisville
* Alan Chernnay, age 58, from Plano
* William Dow, age 63, from Carrollton
* Kevin Carroll, age 37, from Carrollton
* Jose Soto, age 54, from Mesquite
* Christopher Cothrum, age 23, from Westworth Village
* Justin Estes, age 27, from Plano
* Paulo Deassuncao, age 37, from McKinney
* Timothy Knowles, age 35, from Euless
* Patrick Parr, age 33, from Frisco
* Randall Wolford, age 52, from Whitewright
* Louis W. Conradt, age 56, from Terrell

Police said that the suspects were arraigned before Murphy Municipal
Court Judge Cathy Haden, who set bonds ranging between $50,000 and
$100,000. They were then transported to the Collin County Jail by
personnel from the Collin County Sheriff's Department.

All of the men arrested have been charged with the offense of online
solicitation of a minor. Some of those arrested were additionally
charged with second-degree and third-degree felonies.

Officials said those arrested could face more charges.

Greegor wrote:
Kane, What the hell do these internet pervs have to do
with the ISSUE of Foster Care versus Families?

I didn't say it did. But I presume the majority are parents themselves,
what do YOU think?

They make my case for there being a great many more instances of abuse
than were being caught, and are being caught now. They are people with
some power...hence they are less likely to be caught, and less likely
to be prosecuted if they are caught.

These are Criminal pervs who get a constitutional court.
Families do not get that when kids are removed to foster care.

Obviously a lie, or stupidity. Please point out to us the elements of
this un-"constitutional court" you claim families get in place of the
"Constitutional" one.

These stings keep catching SYSTEM INSIDERS
like LEO's, teachers, this former DA who offed himself, etc.

Oh, they catch all kinds of people, Greg. Even sit at home child
carers.

These stings reveal how many of these pervs are
WORKING IN THE SYSTEM, with access to kids!
(Some are even QUITE VOCAL about child protection,
like Mark Foley the PERVERT Congressman!)

The list had a great many people on it that do not have access to kids.


But then, you make my point eloquently, if rantingly. R R R R R

The point is that there is a great deal of sexual abuse that gets
by...people don't get caught for it.

What's it been now, three years I've been saying this and you ****ants
in denial keep pointing to the ONES THAT GOT CAUGHT.....as though it
represented the truth about child abuse?

Yet you posted this to try to slam BIO parents????

I did? How do you figure that?

It's a free for all out there, stupid. Every class and category of
people commit crimes against children. I simply point out that when YOU
try to make out parents are innocent victims, and foster parents are
evil child rapers you are both wrong, and missing the point.

Have you had a nervous breakdown or what?

Projecting a little there, Greg?

Do you think any of these PERVS feel that their anonymity
online is ethical or morally justified to PROTECT them
and their families?

Are you suggesting I'm a perv, Greg?

Speak right up. You know where you are going, right? If not, you best
ask someone with some knowledge of the law. And have them review all
your posts.

So, did you guess how many are parents, fathers? Would you say their
own children might be at risk if these people are willing to prey on
other children?

You don't have to provide data. Just your unbiased opinion would be
adequate for my question.

Enjoying dodging the real questions in the newsgroups about you, Greg?
Giving legal advice, making accusations without being willing to put up
proof?

Little things, of course, but with great meaning, don't you think?

You risked someones children by giving legal advice. Have you really
thought about that?

I'd ask an attorney if I were you, before you try to bury your head in
the sand with these diversion.

We're just trying to help you and keep you out of more trouble, Greg.

0:-


Kane wrote
Guess how many of these guys are parents, fathers.

You have to wonder what these guys were doing before the Internet.

Obviously they weren't bothering children back then...like maybe their
own, or family members, eh boys?

http://www.kirotv.com/news/10255330/detail.html
Ex-Texas DA Dead After TV Child-Predator Sting
Police Were Arriving To Serve Warrant
POSTED: 12:06 pm PST November 6, 2006

TERRELL, Texas -- A Texas prosecutor committed suicide Sunday, after
allegedly being caught-up in one of the many popular TV news
child-predator stings.

Police were trying to serve Louis "Bill" Conradt Jr., 56, with an
arrest warrant at his home, alleging that he solicited sex with someone
he thought was a 13-year-old boy, but who was actually a decoy.

Dallas TV station KXAS reported that the explicit conversations even
included a webcam and the telephone.

Officers had a search warrant for his computer. As officers moved in to
make an arrest, they heard a shot. They found Conradt inside with a
self-inflicted wound. He died later at a hospital in Dallas.

The warrant resulted from one of the now-familiar stings in which NBC
"Dateline" and an Internet child-predator watchdog group lure people to
a home, where they are confronted by a reporter.

"Without going into details -- it was extremely explicit," said
Detective Sgt. Snow Robertson of the Murphy Police Department.

Police said Conradt had not gone to the house, but that they believe he
had been planning to.

"(Children) shouldn't have to worry about getting on the Internet and
worrying about an older person having sex with them," said Robertson.

Conradt was the chief felony assistant DA for Rockwall County, and was
formerly the DA in Kaufman County.

The mayor in Murphy, Texas, told the paper he hopes his town won't be
used again to try to trap child predators in this way.

NBC News confirmed that the sting operation involved "Dateline" and its
"To Catch A Predator" series and issued the following statement:

NBC News' "Dateline" was in Texas reporting on its "To Catch A
Predator" series in conjunction with online watchdog group Perverted
Justice. In the midst of that effort, Rockwall County Assistant
District Attorney Louis W. Conradt, Jr. contacted a decoy from
Perverted Justice who was posing as a 13-year-old boy. Local
authorities launched an investigation into Conradt's online
communications and went to his home with an arrest warrant. In the
course of that investigation, Conradt committed suicide. There was no
contact whatsoever between Conradt and "Dateline" at any point in the
investigation.

Other Names Released:

The Murphy Police Department has arrested more than 20 individuals on
charges of online solicitation of a minor in connection with the
investigative piece.

Last July, authorities in Murphy arrested six people on charges of
online solicitation of a minor while working with the community
watchdog group Perverted Justice. The group works to identify, locate
and capture sexual predators who prey on children. The group has been
in existence for four years and has assisted in the arrests of 260
people and more than 80 convictions across the United States.

With the success of last July's investigation, the Murphy Police
Department arranged a four-day sting operation that would again partner
the department with Perverted Justice as well as "Dateline NBC,"
officials said.

During the course of the sting operation, officials said more than 20
Internet child predator suspects were arrested after, police said, they
traveled to meet who they believed to be a 13- or 14-year-old child for
sex.

Murphy Police Chief Billy Myrick conceded that not all residents liked
having the sting operation brought into their city but he defended the
program and said that it was a benefit to the community.

In a news release, the Murphy Police Department said the suspects
captured during this event did not know that the Murphy Police
Department had partnered with Perverted Justice and "Dateline NBC."
They had no way of knowing that this was a sting operation or that they
were about to be arrested. Police said the suspects came to Murphy
because they actually believed that they were in contact with a 13- to
14-year-old child with whom they would engage in sexual contact. Two of
these predators drove from Houston, one came from Oklahoma and many
others live just moments away from this community.

"These Internet predators are operating everywhere. They know no bounds
and will go after anyone's child to satisfy their own personal
interests," Myrick said. "We are committed to this community's
welfare and we believe that we are doing the right thing."

The Murphy Police Department released the following list of suspects
arrested in connection with the sting operation:

* Eric Rubalcava, age 31, from Houston
* John Baker, age 25, from Frisco
* Stanley Kendall, age 54, from Mesquite
* Timothy Gilliam, age 32, from Flower Mound
* Asif Khokar, age 27, from Houston
* Samuel Tanguma, age 27, from Grand Prairie
* Steve Rosello, age 32, from Kennedale
* Edward Hollingsworth, age 35, from Dallas
* Milan Mehta, age 46, from Richardson
* Sajjad Mohammad, age 43, from Murphy
* David Pann, age 40, from Lewisville
* Alan Chernnay, age 58, from Plano
* William Dow, age 63, from Carrollton
* Kevin Carroll, age 37, from Carrollton
* Jose Soto, age 54, from Mesquite
* Christopher Cothrum, age 23, from Westworth Village
* Justin Estes, age 27, from Plano
* Paulo Deassuncao, age 37, from McKinney
* Timothy Knowles, age 35, from Euless
* Patrick Parr, age 33, from Frisco
* Randall Wolford, age 52, from Whitewright
* Louis W. Conradt, age 56, from Terrell

Police said that the suspects were arraigned before Murphy Municipal
Court Judge Cathy Haden, who set bonds ranging between $50,000 and
$100,000. They were then transported to the Collin County Jail by
personnel from the Collin County Sheriff's Department.

All of the men arrested have been charged with the offense of online
solicitation of a minor. Some of those arrested were additionally
charged with second-degree and third-degree felonies.

Officials said those arrested could face more charges.

"Greegor" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.nccpr.org/reports/blog.htm

November 6, 2006

FOSTER CARE FLUNKS THE "EVIDENCE-BASED" TEST - AGAIN
Startling results from a Minnesota study

For many years, NCCPR has maintained that when a child is "at risk"
in his or her own home, most children most of the time are far better
off if the family gets help so the child can stay in the home instead
of placing the child in foster care.

It is a well known fact that murder and abuse is much higher in foster hell.
It's a wonder they consider this foster 'hell on earth' for ANY child -
abused or not!!


But what if the family doesn't get help? A new study
from Minnesota includes some startling findings.

They're not really 'startling' - we've known for 3 decades that foster
'care' is a dismal failure when it comes to protecting children - but who
cares?


Researchers at the University of Minnesota apparently have
been following a large group of "at risk" families for some time.
And as part of the research they tracked three groups. One group went
into foster care. Another group -- equally maltreated - remained in
their own homes, but apparently got little or no help. Indeed, this
second group was identified by the researchers themselves, not child
protective services. A third group was equally disadvantaged
economically but suffered no maltreatment.

The study is called simply, "The impact of foster care on
development." It was published this year in the journal Development
and Psychopathology, (Vol. 18, 2006, pp. 57-76). Sarah Fenske, a
reporter for Phoenix New Times, found the study while working on an
excellent story about child welfare in Arizona.

The researchers measured the behavior, and general
emotional state, of all three groups before the foster care group went
into foster care, after they came out, and some time afterwards.

Not surprisingly, the group that was not maltreated did
best. But the group that did not enter foster care, on average, did
better than the group that did.

Thank about that for a moment. Two groups of children,
apparently suffering equal levels of maltreatment. Apparently in the
same condition psychologically when one group went into foster care.
And even though the children left in their own homes got little or no
help, the foster children still came out worse.

Not all foster children did as badly. Those placed with
relatives did better than those placed with strangers.

Yup - often fosties can't even remember the names of their 'children' - but
they remember how much they're paid right down to the penny. 2 kids and they
can quit their job - 4 kids and they can drive a Lexus - 40 kids and you
have a group home (see california grand jury findings for what kinda car you
get as a multi-million dollar group home 'director') lol

These scum will never be held accountable before man. But they will account.
lol


Of course these findings are averages. There are bound to
have been some children within the group who were so ill-treated at
home that even foster care was an improvement.

Also, the study was done in Minnesota, one of the most remove-happy
states in the nation. Using the formula in NCCPR's Rate-of-Removal
Index, Minnesota takes away children at a rate nearly three times the
national average. Only three states, Nebraska, Wyoming and Iowa, are
worse. So a sample from, say, Illinois, which is far more careful
about targeting who is taken away and so, takes children at about
one-seventh the Minnesota rate, might produce different results.

But this still is further evidence that foster-care is an
extreme intervention that should be used only when a child is so badly
treated at home that even the inherent harm of removal truly is the
less detrimental alternative.

And evidence is the right word. The mantra in child
welfare now is "evidence-based" - as in: "By golly, your
program had better have genuine scholarly evidence that it works or
don't expect it to be funded!"

In fact, "evidence-based" can be a code-phrase used to
stifle alternatives to approaches, like foster-care, that so dominate
the field that nobody ever asks its proponents for any evidence. If
you want to try an alternative to foster care, you have to dot every i
and cross every t to prove it works. But if you run a foster-care
program, or, say a residential treatment center (for which there is a
ton of evidence of failure) it's business as usual.

Substitute care, whether through orphanages or foster care,
has dominated child welfare in this country since at least 1853, when
Protestant minister Charles Loring Brace first started grabbing the
children of New York's Catholic immigrants, whom he feared, loathed,
and deemed genetically inferior, and shipping them off to the south and
Midwest on "orphan trains."

Isn't it time the agencies that make up the modern foster
care-industrial complex were forced to prove that their intervention
"works"?

From a "blog" gregg? Wow, somehow it does not surprise me that you could
attempt to use this as some form of "proof".

Ron

"0:-" wrote in message
ups.com...

Greegor wrote:
http://www.nccpr.org/reports/blog.htm

November 6, 2006

FOSTER CARE FLUNKS THE "EVIDENCE-BASED" TEST - AGAIN
Startling results from a Minnesota study

For many years, NCCPR has maintained that when a child is "at risk"
in his or her own home, most children most of the time are far better
off if the family gets help so the child can stay in the home instead
of placing the child in foster care.

But what if the family doesn't get help? A new study
from Minnesota includes some startling findings.

Researchers at the University of Minnesota apparently have
been following a large group of "at risk" families for some time.
And as part of the research they tracked three groups. One group went
into foster care. Another group -- equally maltreated - remained in
their own homes, but apparently got little or no help. Indeed, this
second group was identified by the researchers themselves, not child
protective services. A third group was equally disadvantaged
economically but suffered no maltreatment.

The study is called simply, "The impact of foster care on
development." It was published this year in the journal Development
and Psychopathology, (Vol. 18, 2006, pp. 57-76). Sarah Fenske, a
reporter for Phoenix New Times, found the study while working on an
excellent story about child welfare in Arizona.

The researchers measured the behavior, and general
emotional state, of all three groups before the foster care group went
into foster care, after they came out, and some time afterwards.

Not surprisingly, the group that was not maltreated did
best. But the group that did not enter foster care, on average, did
better than the group that did.

Thank about that for a moment. Two groups of children,
apparently suffering equal levels of maltreatment. Apparently in the
same condition psychologically when one group went into foster care.
And even though the children left in their own homes got little or no
help, the foster children still came out worse.

Not all foster children did as badly. Those placed with
relatives did better than those placed with strangers.

Of course these findings are averages. There are bound to
have been some children within the group who were so ill-treated at
home that even foster care was an improvement.

Also, the study was done in Minnesota, one of the most remove-happy
states in the nation. Using the formula in NCCPR's Rate-of-Removal
Index, Minnesota takes away children at a rate nearly three times the
national average. Only three states, Nebraska, Wyoming and Iowa, are
worse. So a sample from, say, Illinois, which is far more careful
about targeting who is taken away and so, takes children at about
one-seventh the Minnesota rate, might produce different results.

But this still is further evidence that foster-care is an
extreme intervention that should be used only when a child is so badly
treated at home that even the inherent harm of removal truly is the
less detrimental alternative.

And evidence is the right word. The mantra in child
welfare now is "evidence-based" - as in: "By golly, your
program had better have genuine scholarly evidence that it works or
don't expect it to be funded!"

In fact, "evidence-based" can be a code-phrase used to
stifle alternatives to approaches, like foster-care, that so dominate
the field that nobody ever asks its proponents for any evidence. If
you want to try an alternative to foster care, you have to dot every i
and cross every t to prove it works. But if you run a foster-care
program, or, say a residential treatment center (for which there is a
ton of evidence of failure) it's business as usual.

Substitute care, whether through orphanages or foster care,
has dominated child welfare in this country since at least 1853, when
Protestant minister Charles Loring Brace first started grabbing the
children of New York's Catholic immigrants, whom he feared, loathed,
and deemed genetically inferior, and shipping them off to the south and
Midwest on "orphan trains."

Isn't it time the agencies that make up the modern foster
care-industrial complex were forced to prove that their intervention
"works"?

Biased propaganda. One cannot prove a negative. If nothing happens
nothing can be proven. You know perfectly well that failures of the
interventions are in the minority and successes are many and they
cannot be discussed without the permission of the clients. The clients
aren't going to expose themselves to the public because often what they
did was illegal, drug use, child abuse, neglect, and other crimes.

It's their private life, and CPS has helped them get their ****
together.

It's easy to do this kind of abusive attack because there is no way to
disprove the lies.

You people make me sick.

And the comment on the Orphan trains is a flat out lie.

Those were not children taken from families. Those were abandoned
children on the streets, homeless and hungry and often badly abused and
WHY they were on the street, just like many of todays street children.

Some were flat out orphans, as was my paternal grandmother. Father gone
and never came back for her (likely died under a tree in a logging camp
but we've never found him) mother dead.

The trains were full of children just like those I describe. The
authors of such crap are lying pieces of ****, just like you..no wonder
you look for this crap as a hiding place when you are caught in your
lies and dangerous advice giving.

You are a coward, a liar, and scum, Greg.

And I can prove every single one. Want some proof?

Want to reread some of your old posts?

More than happy to oblige.

You lied to a federal congressional hearing.

You are now trying to sue the very state you lied about.

****ant.

Have a nice day.

0:-

Charlie Chinaman wrote:
"Greegor" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.nccpr.org/reports/blog.htm

November 6, 2006

FOSTER CARE FLUNKS THE "EVIDENCE-BASED" TEST - AGAIN
Startling results from a Minnesota study

For many years, NCCPR has maintained that when a child is "at risk"
in his or her own home, most children most of the time are far better
off if the family gets help so the child can stay in the home instead
of placing the child in foster care.

It is a well known fact that murder and abuse is much higher in foster hell.
It's a wonder they consider this foster 'hell on earth' for ANY child -
abused or not!!


But what if the family doesn't get help? A new study
from Minnesota includes some startling findings.

They're not really 'startling' - we've known for 3 decades that foster
'care' is a dismal failure when it comes to protecting children - but who
cares?


Researchers at the University of Minnesota apparently have
been following a large group of "at risk" families for some time.
And as part of the research they tracked three groups. One group went
into foster care. Another group -- equally maltreated - remained in
their own homes, but apparently got little or no help. Indeed, this
second group was identified by the researchers themselves, not child
protective services. A third group was equally disadvantaged
economically but suffered no maltreatment.

The study is called simply, "The impact of foster care on
development." It was published this year in the journal Development
and Psychopathology, (Vol. 18, 2006, pp. 57-76). Sarah Fenske, a
reporter for Phoenix New Times, found the study while working on an
excellent story about child welfare in Arizona.

The researchers measured the behavior, and general
emotional state, of all three groups before the foster care group went
into foster care, after they came out, and some time afterwards.

Not surprisingly, the group that was not maltreated did
best. But the group that did not enter foster care, on average, did
better than the group that did.

Thank about that for a moment. Two groups of children,
apparently suffering equal levels of maltreatment. Apparently in the
same condition psychologically when one group went into foster care.
And even though the children left in their own homes got little or no
help, the foster children still came out worse.

Not all foster children did as badly. Those placed with
relatives did better than those placed with strangers.

Yup - often fosties can't even remember the names of their 'children' - but
they remember how much they're paid right down to the penny. 2 kids and they
can quit their job - 4 kids and they can drive a Lexus - 40 kids and you
have a group home (see california grand jury findings for what kinda car you
get as a multi-million dollar group home 'director') lol

These scum will never be held accountable before man. But they will account.
lol

The only loss I feel with being an athiest is that the abusive child
raping scum such as you will not have an afterlife to pay for their
'sins.'

R R R R R R R R R





Of course these findings are averages. There are bound to
have been some children within the group who were so ill-treated at
home that even foster care was an improvement.

Also, the study was done in Minnesota, one of the most remove-happy
states in the nation. Using the formula in NCCPR's Rate-of-Removal
Index, Minnesota takes away children at a rate nearly three times the
national average. Only three states, Nebraska, Wyoming and Iowa, are
worse. So a sample from, say, Illinois, which is far more careful
about targeting who is taken away and so, takes children at about
one-seventh the Minnesota rate, might produce different results.

But this still is further evidence that foster-care is an
extreme intervention that should be used only when a child is so badly
treated at home that even the inherent harm of removal truly is the
less detrimental alternative.

And evidence is the right word. The mantra in child
welfare now is "evidence-based" - as in: "By golly, your
program had better have genuine scholarly evidence that it works or
don't expect it to be funded!"

In fact, "evidence-based" can be a code-phrase used to
stifle alternatives to approaches, like foster-care, that so dominate
the field that nobody ever asks its proponents for any evidence. If
you want to try an alternative to foster care, you have to dot every i
and cross every t to prove it works. But if you run a foster-care
program, or, say a residential treatment center (for which there is a
ton of evidence of failure) it's business as usual.

Substitute care, whether through orphanages or foster care,
has dominated child welfare in this country since at least 1853, when
Protestant minister Charles Loring Brace first started grabbing the
children of New York's Catholic immigrants, whom he feared, loathed,
and deemed genetically inferior, and shipping them off to the south and
Midwest on "orphan trains."

Isn't it time the agencies that make up the modern foster
care-industrial complex were forced to prove that their intervention
"works"?

"0:-" wrote in message
oups.com...

Charlie Chinaman wrote:
"Greegor" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.nccpr.org/reports/blog.htm

November 6, 2006

FOSTER CARE FLUNKS THE "EVIDENCE-BASED" TEST - AGAIN
Startling results from a Minnesota study

For many years, NCCPR has maintained that when a child is "at risk"
in his or her own home, most children most of the time are far better
off if the family gets help so the child can stay in the home instead
of placing the child in foster care.

It is a well known fact that murder and abuse is much higher in foster
hell.
It's a wonder they consider this foster 'hell on earth' for ANY child -
abused or not!!


But what if the family doesn't get help? A new study
from Minnesota includes some startling findings.

They're not really 'startling' - we've known for 3 decades that foster
'care' is a dismal failure when it comes to protecting children - but who
cares?


Researchers at the University of Minnesota apparently have
been following a large group of "at risk" families for some time.
And as part of the research they tracked three groups. One group went
into foster care. Another group -- equally maltreated - remained in
their own homes, but apparently got little or no help. Indeed, this
second group was identified by the researchers themselves, not child
protective services. A third group was equally disadvantaged
economically but suffered no maltreatment.

The study is called simply, "The impact of foster care on
development." It was published this year in the journal Development
and Psychopathology, (Vol. 18, 2006, pp. 57-76). Sarah Fenske, a
reporter for Phoenix New Times, found the study while working on an
excellent story about child welfare in Arizona.

The researchers measured the behavior, and general
emotional state, of all three groups before the foster care group went
into foster care, after they came out, and some time afterwards.

Not surprisingly, the group that was not maltreated did
best. But the group that did not enter foster care, on average, did
better than the group that did.

Thank about that for a moment. Two groups of children,
apparently suffering equal levels of maltreatment. Apparently in the
same condition psychologically when one group went into foster care.
And even though the children left in their own homes got little or no
help, the foster children still came out worse.

Not all foster children did as badly. Those placed with
relatives did better than those placed with strangers.

Yup - often fosties can't even remember the names of their 'children' -
but
they remember how much they're paid right down to the penny. 2 kids and
they
can quit their job - 4 kids and they can drive a Lexus - 40 kids and you
have a group home (see california grand jury findings for what kinda car
you
get as a multi-million dollar group home 'director') lol

These scum will never be held accountable before man. But they will
account.
lol

The only loss I feel with being an athiest is that the abusive child
raping scum such as you will not have an afterlife to pay for their
'sins.'

Why are homos drawn to athiesm??


R R R R R R R R R





Of course these findings are averages. There are bound to
have been some children within the group who were so ill-treated at
home that even foster care was an improvement.

Also, the study was done in Minnesota, one of the most remove-happy
states in the nation. Using the formula in NCCPR's Rate-of-Removal
Index, Minnesota takes away children at a rate nearly three times the
national average. Only three states, Nebraska, Wyoming and Iowa, are
worse. So a sample from, say, Illinois, which is far more careful
about targeting who is taken away and so, takes children at about
one-seventh the Minnesota rate, might produce different results.

But this still is further evidence that foster-care is an
extreme intervention that should be used only when a child is so badly
treated at home that even the inherent harm of removal truly is the
less detrimental alternative.

And evidence is the right word. The mantra in child
welfare now is "evidence-based" - as in: "By golly, your
program had better have genuine scholarly evidence that it works or
don't expect it to be funded!"

In fact, "evidence-based" can be a code-phrase used to
stifle alternatives to approaches, like foster-care, that so dominate
the field that nobody ever asks its proponents for any evidence. If
you want to try an alternative to foster care, you have to dot every i
and cross every t to prove it works. But if you run a foster-care
program, or, say a residential treatment center (for which there is a
ton of evidence of failure) it's business as usual.

Substitute care, whether through orphanages or foster care,
has dominated child welfare in this country since at least 1853, when
Protestant minister Charles Loring Brace first started grabbing the
children of New York's Catholic immigrants, whom he feared, loathed,
and deemed genetically inferior, and shipping them off to the south and
Midwest on "orphan trains."

Isn't it time the agencies that make up the modern foster
care-industrial complex were forced to prove that their intervention
"works"?