Another DSHS Failure?: It took 10 years for the state of Washingtonto decide Chornice Lewis was an unfit foster mother.

Another DSHS Failure?

http://soundpolitics.com/archives/008831.html

It certainly appears so.

It took 10 years for the state of Washington to decide Chornice
Lewis was an unfit foster mother.

The price of official inertia was a young girl's vision.

Lewis, 33, is awaiting trial on two charges of assault, including
torture. Her plea: not guilty.

The victim: her claimed cousin and foster daughter, now 16, who
lived with Lewis for a decade in Tacoma and South King County.

State records show the girl was abused for years: beaten, burned,
locked in a storage closet and a car trunk, and partially blinded with
hypodermic needles.

Let me be clear. The villain, assuming these charges are true, is
Chornice Lewis. But it is also true, assuming this story is generally
correct, that Washington state officials should have rescued the victim
years earlier.

And credit where due: The official who finally removed the girl from
the home is social worker Heidi Canfield, who works for — DSHS.
Posted by Jim Miller at June 26, 2007 09:16 AM | Email This
Comments
1. You are right. We use agency, but DSHS and the judge require 3 month
checkups on-site where they interview the child about things and report
to the judge about status. Those are scheduled visits but there is no
way the foster parents can control bruises, burns, etc..

I would say this is a failure.
Posted by: swatter on June 26, 2007 09:34 AM
2. DSHS is a seriously broken agency. And it's broke from the top down.
Gregoire's and previously Locke's failure to demand reform at DSHS has
given the entrenched bureaucracy the go ahead to continue as before.
Meanwhile the budget goes up, and services to kids and parents are cut.
Posted by: JCM on June 26, 2007 10:13 AM
3. another DSHS failure. And everyone knew. This agency stinks.
Gregoire, what say you? Posted by: Michele on June 26, 2007 10:25 AM
4. #3 Michele,

Increase the budget by another 12% should solve the problem.
Posted by: JCM on June 26, 2007 10:43 AM
5. If you are willing to trust your personal responsibility to the
government, or when you have no choice as in the case of a child, you
just might be severely maimed or die. The government can't possibly do
the right thing for everyone, and when we expect it to do so, there is
always disastrous results. If this is what happened with child
protective services, imagine how the government will botch something
more routine as socialized health care. But wait, the evidence for that
is already out there in the the British and Canadian systems.

There is no substitute for personal responsibility, a caring family unit
and a for-profit system that recognizes the urgency of responding to
customer needs.
Posted by: Jeff B. on June 26, 2007 11:45 AM
6. Can you imagine the howls from the left if it were a GOP governor?
To get a grasp of it, just recall how they squealed about Gitmo and the
need to hang Rummy.
Gee, we have torture to children going on just shy of being endorsed by
the agency and it's system. Posted by: PC on June 26, 2007 12:55 PM
7. Two things struck me about this. The first was the case worker's
bureaucratic attitude of "well, there wasn't a problem before, so there
must not be one now". You would think when numerous neighbors are
complaining, the cops are suspicious, and the teachers and counselors
are not only fearful for her, but disputing the mother's claims that the
kid is a lier and troublemaker, you probably shouldn't be so damned lazy
and simply take the foster mother's word for it. Even taken at face
value, the mother's story doesn't pass the sniff test. Thank God this
kid got a new case worker, or she'd probably be dead right now.

The other thing that struck me was, why in the world was this woman
being licensed by the state to be a foster mom in the first place, and
being given custody of this girl based solely on her word the kid was
her niece, without anything resembling proof? I mean really, this woman
was 22 at the time, single, on welfare with three kids, and taking
"care" of her disabled mom, and the state was giving her two or three
foster kids at a time?

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
Posted by: Mike H. on June 26, 2007 01:26 PM
8. Blinded with hypodermic needles? What kind of a sadist is this foster
mom? Sounds like Saddam Hussein. Posted by: Peggy U on June 26, 2007
01:38 PM
9. These things are easily explainable if you look at the larger picture
of the ideology that controls DSHS. It's leader, with her hyphenated
last name, as well as Gregoire, are Gender Feminists. The belief that
all ills in society are the result of "patriarchal control and oppression."

Most of the DSHS funds are committed to collecting child payments from
fathers that have been kicked out of the lives of their children. This
is doubly rewarding for DSHS, because they get a "reward" from the
federal government for collecting these funds. And, of course, it fits
with the overall ideology that men and fathers are bad.

So, in that context, it runs against the prevailing ideology to ever
question a woman or a mother. Even though the majority of child abuse is
committed by women.

You can't fix the problem until DSHS is cleaned of the gender feminist
scream queens that run the place.
Posted by: BananaLand on June 26, 2007 02:41 PM
10. There will always be some who fall through the cracks and there will
never be a way to make all caregivers responsible. The best way to
ensure that the great majority of children can thrive and grow up is to
nuture and support strong families. Government will never be able to do
what a strong family support system can.

DSHS, like public schools has suffered through a couple of decades of
"progressive" thought. It is going to be difficult to fix a seriously
flawed system. Meanwhile, society has delinked, in my opinion, the
responsiblity aspects of parenting. Back in the day, people use to get
married and then have kids. Now, they hook-up producing children and
they may or may not marry the sperm donor. The effect on kids has been
devasting. Yes, I know that there are some abusive marriages, but by and
large, committed partners are better for raising kids.
Posted by: WVH on June 26, 2007 02:54 PM
11. Follow the money. If it was not profitable for DSHS to take the
child, then that is why they were there. If the ability to adopt them
out, or get IV-D funds from teh Feds was not there - that is why nothing
was done.

DSHS is a money making machine for the State of WAshington. Nothing will
be done to change them as long as that is the case.

Look at DCS alone - they have contracts with the Prosecutors to
prosecute for them. THey have contracts with the sheriffs offices to
handle civil subpoena's for them, and they have contracts with the
Commissioners to hold priority hearings for them for a fee. Sample
signed contracts can be seen at http://washingtonsharedparenting.com/?p=203

In 2004, DCS received $94 million from the feds under Title IV-D for the
collection of child support. Yet, not one single charge was filed
against a parent that kept the kids from seeing the other parent - why!?
Simple - they don't get paid to do that. So much for equal protection
laws in this state.

Ride the gravy train of DSHS!
Posted by: jojo on June 26, 2007 10:59 PM
12. jojo:

In so many things, it usually is follow the money. Also, track where the
education funding money goes in the future. The per pupil expenditure
increases, but are not necessarily comparable increases in student
achievement in terms of the average student increasing their basic
skills. I think you may be on to something.
Posted by: WVH on June 27, 2007 12:14 AM
13. Yep, this is what we get from BIG Government.


So what do YOU say CATO...?
Posted by: ArmyMedic/Vet on June 27, 2007 06:43 AM


CURRENTLY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES VIOLATES MORE CIVIL RIGHTS ON A
DAILY BASIS THEN ALL OTHER AGENCIES COMBINED INCLUDING THE NSA / CIA
WIRETAPPING PROGRAM....

CPS Does not protect children...
It is sickening how many children are subject to abuse, neglect and even
killed at the hands of Child Protective Services.

every parent should read this .pdf from
connecticut dcf watch...

http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com/8x11.pdf

http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com

Number of Cases per 100,000 children in the US
These numbers come from The National Center on
Child Abuse and Neglect in Washington. (NCCAN)
Recent numbers have increased significantly for CPS

*Perpetrators of Maltreatment*

Physical Abuse CPS 160, Parents 59
Sexual Abuse CPS 112, Parents 13
Neglect CPS 410, Parents 241
Medical Neglect CPS 14 Parents 12
Fatalities CPS 6.4, Parents 1.5

CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, HAPPILY DESTROYING HUNDREDS OF INNOCENT
FAMILIES YEARLY NATIONWIDE AND COMING TO YOU'RE HOME SOON...


BE SURE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOUR CANDIDATES STANDS ON THE ISSUE OF
REFORMING OR ABOLISHING CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES ("MAKE YOUR CANDIDATES
TAKE A STAND ON THIS ISSUE.") THEN REMEMBER TO VOTE ACCORDINGLY IF THEY
ARE "FAMILY UNFRIENDLY" IN THE NEXT ELECTION...