We don need no steenkin' CPS.

Doug wrote:
Why are non-victims provided "services?" Because they are removed during
the investigation and it was not determined they were NON-VICTIMS until
the investigation was complete.

Hi, Kane,

You are quite incorrect.

And you are lying again.

Services are usually provided families whose
children have not been removed.

"Usually?" More equivocating language, Doug? That's how you get started
with a lie.

Some are, and some aren't, Doug. Claiming I'm "incorrect" is more of
your bull**** spinning.

Grow up.

So, the fact that services are provided does not equate to children being
removed during the investigation.

Of course not. It's simple ONE of the reasons.

The opposite is true.

And you go on to describe something not "the opposite."

Removal itself is
a "service," but the vast majority of families who are forced into accepting
CPS services, whether they involve substantiated victims or unsubstantiated
non-victims, involve children who are NOT removed during the investigation.

Some are, some are not. Aren't you ashamed of yourself for reading that
one of the circumstances IS, just as I've said in the past, removal
during investigations? You should be.

In fact, the method used to force families to accept services is the THREAT
to remove their children. The threat of removal is, as you have explained,
the "stick" CPS uses to force parents to accept services.

Sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't. And we've discussed this many
times. How would YOU get a family to accept "services," Doug. Get down
on your knees and beg?

The court says deliver services. That's what CPS is required to do.

A simple check of Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System
(AFCARS) annually shows that a very small percentage of non-victim children
are returned to their homes within the time frame of an investigation (60
days).

Let's see the data, Doug.

So it is immediately obvious that the vast majority of the
nonvictims who were removed from their homes spent much, much longer in
foster care.

We know you are lying now, Doug, because I've posted a clear
explanation, with citation, just what a "non-victim," is and is not. And
it does NOT mean in all cases, or even the majority (quite the contrary)
that the child was in fact not victimized.

In fact, the majority of non-victims are not removed during the
investigation at all.

Now you want it both ways? Interesting.

When are they removed? After the unsubstantiated finding.

And back to yet another long resolved issue. "Unsubstantiated" does not
mean the child was not a victim. This is a long standing problem in
child protection...just what constitutes that label, and what it
actually means.

Just how long are you going to lie about this, Doug?

During the investigation, parents relunctantly agree to "services" under
threat of removal of their children.

Some services are no more than having their child evaluated. And most
cases are in fact valid reports of abuse and neglect, substantiated or not.

The children stay in the home, and a
safety plan is signed by the parents. As NCANDS reports, most "services"
begin at this point. 30 to 60 days later the investigation is completed
with a finding of unsubstantiated. And, sometime during the months that
follow, the parents miss a hoop in their "safety plans" that mandated the
"services." Remember the stick?

Sure do. And prove that statement, please.

Well, a stick is not effective unless it is used. Since the parents messed
up on one "service" or another, CPS now makes good on its threat and removes
the non-victim children many months after the investigation concluded with
an unsubstantiated finding.

Depends on what "the stick," is, Doug. And you know it. It isn't failure
to brush the child's hair, Doug. It's more often a dirty UA, or failing
to show for visitations with the child that was a "victim" and was
removed and is in foster care. Or more criminal activity. I love how you
portray the bio parents as poor helpless victims of the system, Doug.

It's a lie.

Children who were found by CPS itself not to be
at risk of or actually maltreated are now forcibly removed from their
families because mom or dad missed a hoop.

Depends on what the hoop was and is, Doug.

Just as I said above.

That is why Dan advised members of this group never to sign a safety plan
that provides "services" or remedies for transgressions the parents are not
guilty of.

BTW, whatever happened to your claim that the 69,000 to 109,000 non-victim
children removed their unsubstantiated families annually were "siblings" of
children substantiated as victims? (Which was proven false.)

No it wasn't. And I did not claim all were.

And whatever
happened to your claim that these nonvictims removed from their homes are
really children who were substantiated for some forms of risk or
abuse/neglect and unsubstantiated for others?

Children that were alleged to have been victims can be found to be, and
still assessed as "unsubstantiated," Doug, and you know that from our
past discussions and my proof from studies.

NCANDS data disproves this
immediately because the sum of non-victims and victims add up to the total
number of children subject to investigations or assessments.

Nonsense. Babble.

You repeatedly try shots in the dark to explain this glaring statistic --

Nope. I've provided authoritative citations that show why it's not all
simple and cut and dried as you hope to make it out to be.

that tens of thousands of nonvictim children are forcibly removed from their
unsubstantiated families each year.

Yes, the jackbooted thugs come in with truncheons swinging and rip the
little babies from their mother's arms, and there is blood everywhere. 0;-

Obviously, the causal variable to
removal is often not the maltreatment of the child or even that the child is
at risk.

Bull****, Doug. Pure unadulterated bull****.

Lying through your teeth, Doug. As always.

http://www.sacbee.com/static/archive...e/part_05.html
http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/children/a...s/report.shtml
http://preventchildabuseny.org/cpsandcourts.shtml
"The caseworker and agency cannot force your family to use these
services. But, if the Child Protective Services staff believes that a
child needs care or protection and the family is not willing to provide
it, they will petition the Family Court to order the necessary services."

http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Child_Pr...arentguide.asp
"What is Child Protective Services?

The CPS program receives, investigates, and assesses reports of child
abuse and neglect by parents, family, or household members. CPS offers
services after investigations if:

* children are not immediately safe from abuse or neglect; or
* a reasonable likelihood exists that children will be abused or
neglected in the foreseeable future and families have demonstrated that
they cannot control factors placing children at risk of abuse or neglect.

If needed, services are offered to parents to help them solve their
problems and learn how to care for and discipline their children in ways
that do not harm them or place them at risk of abuse or neglect. These
services may include:

* counseling,
* day care,
* homemaker,
* evaluation and treatment, and
* parenting training.
"

And then, of course, there is Ron's claim that all of these non-victims were
removed from their homes voluntarily upon the wishes of their parents.

"All?" Lying again, Doug?

You have taken three shots at an explanation.

No, Doug. I have argued this with you for three YEARS, and you have
dodged, lied, spun, and otherwise twisted the truth.

All three have been proven
incorrect. Do you want to give it another shot?

No, none have been proven incorrect, Doug. Not to anyone who reads the
cited material I've posted for over two years here, and is objective.

Would YOU like to try again? Say without the artful snipping and without
the blatant lies about my past postings?

0:-


--
"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)