RICHARD WEXLER: REAL FOSTER CARE SCANDAL IS NUMBER OF KIDS REMOVED

On Nov 13, 4:36 am, " krp" wrote:
"Bearic" wrote in message

oups.com...

The system does experience some corruption, as all systems do to
one degree or another, but as a whole, it saves lives.

GOT PROOF?
Logic is proof.

Try using some!

If a child is in a dangerous environment and is then removed to a safe
environment, logic speaks to that fact. The child is safer. There
are instances in which the child protection services have been abused
just as there are instances in which the traditional family has seen
abuse, but CPS is not a conspiracy in which there is a plot to cause
harm to children. It was created to help them and it does.

Your infantile argument begins with TWO false premises.

You have clearly never engaged in formal debate, padre gordo,
because the only two false premises here are the ones that you're
making since I never said either of the things you are claiming below
and since I was not an abused child.

1. That ALL family environments are "dangerous" for children.

When I first came to this group, I had to skip dozens of angry
posts about your character as a liar. Now I understand why they were
written by so many people. You really are an insane pig. Aren't
you? Did you extract this lie from your left nostril or your right
one or was it your butt cheeks, padre gordo? I did not write that I
feel all family environments are dangerous.

2. That ALL state care environments are SAFE for children.

Another lie, I see. How old were you when you gained that reputation
you have for lying, padre gordo? I have written in just about every
post that I didn't think this was true.


Want to re-think that at all?

Tell me Eric, how badly did your mother heat you?

How badly did my mother HEAT me? roflmao~ You are as illiterate
as the others say, too. Is there anything behind all that hot, rancid
air you spew, or are you ready to admit the kind of low-life,
malicious, dim-witted weasel that you are? I have, possibly, the
best, kindest parents in the world, people who extended their hearts
and homes to help dozens of children through the years and gave me the
first hand experience and knowledge that I have with foster children.
You are as full of **** as everyone says, paper tiger. You need help,
badly. I pray to God above that you don't have children of your own.

On Nov 13, 4:52 am, " krp" wrote:
THE ADULT"Ron" wrote in message

...

Hmmmm and do you think there is NO harm in yanking a kid from his
family if
there is nothing wrong? What about the 'suspicion" abuse having to
have
some REALISTIC component to it before you grab kids and run?????
But you are wrong.
The FACTS dont support your conclusion kenny. Nothing new about that, but
I thought I'd just point it out.

Oh but the FACTS DO support me Ronny, your CPS BULL**** doesn't. They
have an entire field of psycholgy that supports my conclusions Ronny baby.
It's called "CHILD DEVELOPMENT." From its pioneers like John Bowlby on
studying the basics of "attachment and loss" the field has learned much
about trauma to children. Dispruting their envionment is now well
researched. Even children of military families. show SEVERE evelopmental
disruptions from the lack of attachments to communities and friends not to
mention devastation of ties to extrended families.

Keeping a child in an abusive environment is worse. If the
parents are suspected of abuse, the child should be removed until it
has been determined that the child is safe. Disrespectfully, since
you lied about my parents ~ E.B.

"Bearic" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Nov 13, 4:52 am, " krp" wrote:
THE ADULT"Ron" wrote in message

...

Hmmmm and do you think there is NO harm in yanking a kid from his
family if
there is nothing wrong? What about the 'suspicion" abuse having to
have
some REALISTIC component to it before you grab kids and run?????
But you are wrong.
The FACTS dont support your conclusion kenny. Nothing new about that,
but
I thought I'd just point it out.

Oh but the FACTS DO support me Ronny, your CPS BULL**** doesn't. They
have an entire field of psycholgy that supports my conclusions Ronny
baby.
It's called "CHILD DEVELOPMENT." From its pioneers like John Bowlby on
studying the basics of "attachment and loss" the field has learned much
about trauma to children. Dispruting their envionment is now well
researched. Even children of military families. show SEVERE evelopmental
disruptions from the lack of attachments to communities and friends not
to
mention devastation of ties to extrended families.

Keeping a child in an abusive environment is worse. If the
parents are suspected of abuse, the child should be removed until it
has been determined that the child is safe. Disrespectfully, since
you lied about my parents ~ E.B.


Maybe we have a misunderstanding here about the process by which child abuse
is investigated and removal is made?
EB said that children should be removed when a hotline call is made.
The hotline, EB, is nothing more than an allegation made by someone for some
reason.
Could be harrassment, could be the old 'divorce and custody' trick, could be
a misunderstanding, could be abuse, and could be nothing.
The allegations are either screened out, or sent to the local office for an
investigator to be assigned.
The investigator, in an effort to determine if abuse or neglect exists,
interviews the child, the parents, sometimes the caller (especially if they
are a mandated reporter), interviews neighbors or other significant persons
in the case, such as other parents to the child or paramours to the parent,
etc.
Using this information the investigator can usually determine whether or not
there exists immediate harm.
If so, the child is removed, if not, then the investigation may continue and
a determination made within a designated period of time.
I can give you an example that might help you understand this process.

Back in about 1995 or 1996 a hotline came in alleging that I had left my
five children (all young) at home alone over the previous weekend.
When the worker arrived she read off the allegations to me and asked to see
the kids. I told her that it was absurd, that I never left my kids at home
alone, and that we had been in Kansas City the prior weekend, that we had
taken the kids to an indoor theme park there called Jungle Jim's, had stayed
with friends, etc.

I then called the kids from the back yard, and she very appropriately asked
the kids if they had been on a trip with mom and dad recently. The kids
told her that we had just come back from Kansas City where mom and dad took
them to Jungle Jim's and they rode rides and played games, etc.

It was very easy for the worker to determine that the allegations were
untrue without removal.

Sometimes it's not quite that easy, and more time is needed to make a
determination, especially with very very young children who cannot express
themselves verbally. However, with seemingly obvious signs of abuse or
neglect, such as bruising or weight loss, coupled with other possible
indicators that might very well indicate abuse or neglect, but not clearly
and convincingly, it may serve a purpose to the child to be removed from the
home until a determination can be made.

To state that a child should be removed when a hotline call comes in is
wrong. Especially in cases where there is no clear evidence of abuse or
neglect.

I would think that the severity of the allegations, as well as the
indicators, would play a huge role in removal. It's not cut and dried 'just
take them', and to do so is a violation...both for the family, and for the
child. It is devastating for a child to be removed and placed with people
that they do not know. That is absolute fact. The mandate of child
protective services is the best interests of the child. It is not in the
child's best interests to yanked out of thier home without cause.

I think maybe if you had said 'removed on FOUNDED allegations' there would
not be controversy concerning your opinions. I think you may also have
meant that...removal upon a founded determination, or while further
necessary investigation is done.

On Nov 13, 11:06 am, Bearic wrote:

Keeping a child in an abusive environment is worse. If the
parents are suspected of abuse, the child should be removed until it
has been determined that the child is safe.

If all it took was a suspicion of abuse anyone could call the hotline
and have all the children in the neighborhood placed in foster care.

I have been investigated more than 15 times.

Five times CPS claimed they had credible evidence that I abused or
neglected my children.

And all five times when I availed myself of challenging their claim of
credible evidence, they produced NOTHING!!!!

And CPS was forced by their own system and Judge's to reverse all five
of their decisions.

Those findings included sexual abuse, broken bones, inadequate
guardianship, emotional neglect, excessive corporal punishment... and
on and on.

I was founded once for hitting my son in the face on a weekend I was
denied visitation and I had a police report to prove that weekend I
didn't get my kids.

Bearic wrote:
On Nov 13, 4:36 am, " krp" wrote:
"Bearic" wrote in message

oups.com...

The system does experience some corruption, as all systems do to
one degree or another, but as a whole, it saves lives.
GOT PROOF?
Logic is proof.
Try using some!

If a child is in a dangerous environment and is then removed to a safe
environment, logic speaks to that fact. The child is safer. There
are instances in which the child protection services have been abused
just as there are instances in which the traditional family has seen
abuse, but CPS is not a conspiracy in which there is a plot to cause
harm to children. It was created to help them and it does.
Your infantile argument begins with TWO false premises.

You have clearly never engaged in formal debate, padre gordo,
because the only two false premises here are the ones that you're
making since I never said either of the things you are claiming below
and since I was not an abused child.

The first thing you will learn about our beloved kenny (krp), is that he
has no interest in debate, formal or otherwise. He much prefers going
off on tangents and ignoring the facts that others present that
contradict his views.

But, one must learn these things for themselves, so have a good time.

1. That ALL family environments are "dangerous" for children.

When I first came to this group, I had to skip dozens of angry
posts about your character as a liar. Now I understand why they were
written by so many people. You really are an insane pig. Aren't
you? Did you extract this lie from your left nostril or your right
one or was it your butt cheeks, padre gordo? I did not write that I
feel all family environments are dangerous.

2. That ALL state care environments are SAFE for children.

Another lie, I see. How old were you when you gained that reputation
you have for lying, padre gordo? I have written in just about every
post that I didn't think this was true.

From the very first day that kenny began participating in Usenet.

Want to re-think that at all?

Tell me Eric, how badly did your mother heat you?

How badly did my mother HEAT me? roflmao~ You are as illiterate
as the others say, too. Is there anything behind all that hot, rancid
air you spew, or are you ready to admit the kind of low-life,
malicious, dim-witted weasel that you are? I have, possibly, the
best, kindest parents in the world, people who extended their hearts
and homes to help dozens of children through the years and gave me the
first hand experience and knowledge that I have with foster children.
You are as full of **** as everyone says, paper tiger. You need help,
badly. I pray to God above that you don't have children of your own.


See? It didnt take him all that long to alienate another possible
client/supporter. kenny is our resident spaz, we try and treat him
nicely but he will have none of that. Which of course forces us to
treat him like exactly what he is.

Ron

--
Kenneth Pangborn (AKA KRP) is a lying sack of ****!

Proof at:

www.aboutkenpangborn.com

LK wrote:
On Nov 12, 10:34 pm, Ron wrote:
LK wrote:
"Ron" wrote in message
...
LK wrote:
" krp" wrote in message
news:AkHZi.3482$jH2.3284@trnddc01...
wrote in message
ups.com...
The real scandal in Kansas child welfare is not that the state is
oppressing Sedgwick County by giving authorities "only" 72 hours to
keep
a child in limbo before a court decides if he ever needed to be torn
from his family in the first place
Where there's smoke, there's usually fire. It is better to "tear"
a child from a home whether it is safe there or not and check things
out if there is a suspicion of abuse instead of keeping the child in
an environment that can kill him.
Hmmmm and do you think there is NO harm in yanking a kid from his family
if there is nothing wrong? What about the 'suspicion" abuse having to
have some REALISTIC component to it before you grab kids and run?????
Is this person a foster parent or something?
Trying to increase the monthly income?
Is it Ron in disguise? Sounds like him.
I dont use disguises, nym's, or any of that other crap. I leave that to
kenny and others like him. I prefer honesty to lying.
Ron
That wasn't ment as an insult to you. My God!
And I didnt take it as such. The stance of the individual who wrote the
post is familiar, and one that I do not totally disagree with.

Oh Ron has found a friend.

The story was written by someone like yourself, someone who believes that
the system is totally corrupted and evil.
I can't believe you would think such a thing about me! I don't think that
the system is corrupted and evil. Just the people running it and profiting
from it.
The system IS the people. We both know that. One cannot be without the
other.

So...


As for profit, hmmm, other than the companies that provide services to
those in the system (companies are usually "For Profit" concerns) I cant
think of anyone who actually makes a profit.

The GAL's, therapists, drug companies, lawyers, adpotion agencies,
foster care agencies, you and Eric here.

The system is specifically designed to provide us with a level of
reimbursement that meets only 90% of the needs of the child on our care.
IOW, we loose 10% each and every month with each and every child.

Its easy math.


Stupidity has its own rewards. I'm sure that kenny knows this very well,
but is just to dam stupid to stop using his usual tactics.
But this isn't necessarily about Kenny, now is it? Please stick to the
topic.
He was an example. A pretty good one to. As such the comment was quite
"On Topic".

well he's not the one in here preaching that we should remove kids
based on an accusation to the hotline with no substantiation of abuse
or neglect either. If you believe that's the way things should be
done then you are pretty stupid. You would be no better then a common
babystealer just as he is.

Kindly read what I posted. Get back to me when you finish.

I'm also not interested in joining your personal attack squad. It is
wrong for you to publish anybodys personal information all over usenet

I never have, and never will. You might want to take a look at some of
gregg's posts though. Its pretty common for him to do that.

I dont have an "attack squad", personal or otherwise. I provide facts
and reasonable deductions based on those facts. I can support every
single one of my claims, with facts. So far, you have provided no
facts, only claims.

no matter how much you dislike them. I'm interested in discussing the
issue. So be an adult about this. My god Ron. You are like a sheep
following the herd. I am well aware that you do not like Ken and Greg
and probably me too as well as a few others who you have mentioned.

I dont dislike the individuals (with the exception of kenny, he just
cant tell the truth about anything, and I dont like liars), only their
uneducated and ignorant positions. And they have many of them. When
challenged on these they run, hide, bluster, obfuscate, misrepresent,
and generally spin anything they can in attempts to support
unsupportable positions. Its laughable.

So you should just ignore us if you don't like us. Don't give us the
time of day. You probably don't like anybody who is critical of your
precious CPS. So be it. Ken made a point that I agree with.
Children are harmed by the removal so the children should not be
removed unless it is absoloutely necessary.

I have made that very same point many times. Amazing that kenny and I
actually agree on something. OTOH, there comes a point where removal IS
necessary, for the health and wellbeing of the child. CPS workers are
trained to know where that point is, not kenny or yourself.

You and Eric want to jump the gun. Shoot first and ask questions
later. That is the wrong thing to do.


Ron
--
Kenneth Pangborn (AKA KRP) is a lying sack of ****!

Proof at:

www.aboutkenpangborn.com

On Nov 12, 10:27 am, Bearic wrote:
A call that reports child abuse is reason to remove a child from a
home until it can be determined whether or not the abuse took place,
yes. Where a child's life is at stake, you can't be too careful.
Things happen in families.

You think children should be removed based on every report?

Do you have any professional support in that delusion?

Ron, do YOU support this theory that kids should
be removed based on every report made?

Until the parents are proven innocent?

On Nov 13, 12:12 pm, Dan Sullivan wrote:
On Nov 13, 11:06 am, Bearic wrote:

Keeping a child in an abusive environment is worse. If the
parents are suspected of abuse, the child should be removed until it
has been determined that the child is safe.

If all it took was a suspicion of abuse anyone could call the hotline
and have all the children in the neighborhood placed in foster care.

I have been investigated more than 15 times.

Five times CPS claimed they had credible evidence that I abused or
neglected my children.

And all five times when I availed myself of challenging their claim of
credible evidence, they produced NOTHING!!!!

And CPS was forced by their own system and Judge's to reverse all five
of their decisions.

Those findings included sexual abuse, broken bones, inadequate
guardianship, emotional neglect, excessive corporal punishment... and
on and on.

I was founded once for hitting my son in the face on a weekend I was
denied visitation and I had a police report to prove that weekend I
didn't get my kids.

Eric, even the SYSTEM SUCKS on here disagree with
your theory that kids should be removed based only on
an abuse report called in on the hotline.

If your position was so, it would be a Public Relations disaster
that the Child Protection INDUSTRY would not survive.

Yes, it IS a huge INDUSTRY, with several tiers of beneficiaries.
What made you think it's not an INDUSTRY?

On Nov 12, 9:42 am, "LK" wrote:
"Bearic" wrote in message


The system does experience some corruption, as all systems do to
one degree or another, but as a whole, it saves lives.

Saves lives on one level, destroys lives on the next. The kids are alive
yes, but their lives are all ****ed up.

So is your point that since there exists the possibility of
emotional consequences, the child should be left to die? Nice.


The instances
of children being killed and abused in foster care are less than the
success stories.

Just curious, what is YOUR definition of success? In your own words please.
I can look in a dictionary myself.

Success meaning that the life of the child was saved when that child
would have otherwise died.

Children in normal two-parent homes are killed by
their mothers and fathers sometimes, too, but you can't judge all
families harshly based on random anecdotal examples. Resptectully,
E.B.

So, what's your point?

That IS my point. There are dozens, hundreds and thousands of
children who have died or been abused at the hands of their biological
parents, yet I won't make some outlandish claim that the system of
biological parenthood ****s up kid's lives. And yeah, some foster
parents abuse the system and I advocate those sick people go to jail,
but those people do not comprise the whole of the foster care system,
L.K. There are good foster parents out here who care about and do
right by the children. Respectfully, E.B.