We don need no steenkin' CPS.

Doug wrote:
The three main categories of maltreatment related to fatalities were
neglect (35.5%), combinations of maltreatments (30.2%), and physical
abuse (28.3%), (figure 4-3).7 Medical neglect accounted for 1.4 percent
of fatalities."
USDHHS does not break out the fatalities by cause -- abuse or neglect.
The hell they didn't and right on the page YOU CITED.

Hi, Kane,

The 30.2% of fatalities due to a combination of maltreatments do not
break out whether it was abuse or neglect. It lists them in combination.

Picky picky. Minimizing again, Doug?

Hi, Kane,

No minimizing. Just showing that CPS agencies reporting to NCANDS (USDHHS)
does not break out seperately the "combinations" of abuse and neglect
(30.2%) into abuse or neglect. As I initially said and you questioned.

If the 30.2% cannot be broken out seperately into abuse, then that
percentage cannot be included into fatalities caused by abuse. It follows
that these children could not by any stretch of the imagination be included
among children who died as the result of abuse that began with spanking,
which is what you attempted to do.

Strange that CPS and the fatality review boards cannot report the cause of
death, no? Until they do, you cannot grab at one of a combination of causes
and claim all of those deaths were caused by one of them. And you most
certainly cannot use that false premise that all were caused by the single
factor to further claim that spanking led to that single, fatal factor.

Further, it is obvious to anyone here that not all of those child fatalities
that were caused by abuse (28.3% or 421 children) died as the result of
abuse that started with spanking. Many of those fatalities due to abuse did
not involve spanking at all.

Don't tell me your are going to try and run another NCIC ignorance
number on us when the information you claim doesn't exist YOU cited.

As your latest example proved, the FBI only allows law enforcement access
to its NCIC data base, as I said.

No, you said they would not provide the data. 1

No, I said that the FBI only allows law enforcement access to NCIC. CPS is
not a law enforcement agency. You may want the post to which you initially
responded again. You will see that is precisely what I said.

The data I cited has a category that
includes both neglect and abuse, so fatalities in that category cannot be
separated out abuse or neglect. Obviously.

Picky picky, little deluded propagandist. We can split hairs for every,
but the truth is an appreciable and sad number of children are
"disciplined" to death, and that IS the business of CPS and the police.

Yes, a sad number of children are "disciplined" to death. But not 1,000 of
them, as you claimed. And USDHHS, as shown by the data both of us have
cited, does not support such a wild contention. In fact, the USDHHS data
disproves it.

Not all child abuse begins with spanking.

Not all the children who died as the result of abuse (421) in 2003 were
subject to maltreatment that began with spanking.

Greegor wrote:
Where is my CRB and why did Jerry Foxhoven say that
IFCRB does not review cases that are not Foster Care?
Where is the CRB function for kinship care?

Your questions are asinine.

What CRB are YOU entitled to?

CRBs are for children in out of home placement temporarily. Case reviews
every 6 months mandatory.

CRBs are NOT for non out of home placement (like still in home)

How do YOU know that Lisa's child's case is not the subject of judicial
or CRB review? There is NO requirement to notify anyone...NONE. The
worker and the CRB panel are all that are involve unless the CRB invites
a stakeholder.

Guess why YOU don't get invited. Guess why either Lisa is NOT being
invited or she is NOT telling you?

Guess what this judicially appointed panel would say to the worker and
Lisa, when Lisa answers there question with, "Yes, Greg is still living
in the home."

Stupid little self serving child.

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

Doug wrote:
Doug wrote:
The three main categories of maltreatment related to fatalities were
neglect (35.5%), combinations of maltreatments (30.2%), and physical
abuse (28.3%), (figure 4-3).7 Medical neglect accounted for 1.4 percent
of fatalities."
USDHHS does not break out the fatalities by cause -- abuse or neglect.
The hell they didn't and right on the page YOU CITED.
Hi, Kane,

The 30.2% of fatalities due to a combination of maltreatments do not
break out whether it was abuse or neglect. It lists them in combination.
Picky picky. Minimizing again, Doug?

Hi, Kane,

No minimizing. Just showing that CPS agencies reporting to NCANDS (USDHHS)
does not break out seperately the "combinations" of abuse and neglect
(30.2%) into abuse or neglect. As I initially said and you questioned.

If the 30.2% cannot be broken out seperately into abuse, then that
percentage cannot be included into fatalities caused by abuse. It follows
that these children could not by any stretch of the imagination be included
among children who died as the result of abuse that began with spanking,
which is what you attempted to do.

Strange that CPS and the fatality review boards cannot report the cause of
death, no? Until they do, you cannot grab at one of a combination of causes
and claim all of those deaths were caused by one of them. And you most
certainly cannot use that false premise that all were caused by the single
factor to further claim that spanking led to that single, fatal factor.

Further, it is obvious to anyone here that not all of those child fatalities
that were caused by abuse (28.3% or 421 children) died as the result of
abuse that started with spanking. Many of those fatalities due to abuse did
not involve spanking at all.

Don't tell me your are going to try and run another NCIC ignorance
number on us when the information you claim doesn't exist YOU cited.
As your latest example proved, the FBI only allows law enforcement access
to its NCIC data base, as I said.
No, you said they would not provide the data. 1

No, I said that the FBI only allows law enforcement access to NCIC.

Yep, and that's false.

CPS is
not a law enforcement agency. You may want the post to which you initially
responded again. You will see that is precisely what I said.

Show it.

The data I cited has a category that
includes both neglect and abuse, so fatalities in that category cannot be
separated out abuse or neglect. Obviously.
Picky picky, little deluded propagandist. We can split hairs for every,
but the truth is an appreciable and sad number of children are
"disciplined" to death, and that IS the business of CPS and the police.

Yes, a sad number of children are "disciplined" to death. But not 1,000 of
them, as you claimed. And USDHHS, as shown by the data both of us have
cited, does not support such a wild contention. In fact, the USDHHS data
disproves it.

Not all child abuse begins with spanking.

Oh, what DOES it begin with?

Not all the children who died as the result of abuse (421) in 2003 were
subject to maltreatment that began with spanking.

I didn't say "all the children." In fact I posted figures that show it
is NOT "all." But a large proportion. Stop lying, Doug.

You are now on your high speed spin cycle. And I'm hear to dry you out,
again and again.

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

wrote:
heeeeeere's where the boogieman lives..................the abuse or
neglect argument is the tip of the iceberg......................the
real killer is something called structural violence............it is
neglect on a grand scale and it is built into the
system................a big component is lack of affordable
healthcare..............it kills at least 10 times as many children as
parents.................for a comparison, check out how france handles
healthcare for its children..................the debate over unfit
parents draws semiskilled labor because there is money to be made from
having some people declared to be unfit..............it is a little
like being a trustee for bankruptcies without having to be a
lawyer.............those in the loop get to say what needs to be done
and taxpayers foot the bill..............providing adequate healthcare,
which would actually save more children's lives, would cost the same
people money instead of putting them on the gov'ment
payroll..............that is why they will fight you tooth and nail for
cps and claim you hate children if you don't jump on the
bandwagon...............this thing is not about
children..............it's about money........................

gregory says neglect kills more than abuse.................


No, Greg continually demonstrates he does not KNOW that fact. I am the
one that has to keep telling him, now for three years.

Any check of the data year after year shows that neglect is the major
killer of children. Sadly YOU ****ants want to discriminate between
abuse and neglect as though one was "nicer" or less serious than the other.

What a pack of sick ****s.

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

wrote:
just take their word for it...................then divide that number
by the number of children in the united
states........................see what fraction of 1 percent it
is...............then consider that five out of every 1.000 infants
born in the united states dies from lack of healthcare............dive
five by 1,000 and see what the percent is...........or see how many
children are born each year and see how may die of five out of each
thousand die from lack of healthcare..............the numbers really
are quite staggering..............

No citations, just babble. Not even intelligible.

Greegor 1490 from abuse or neglect................

Yep, and about a thousand of those from physical abuse.

Year after year after year. And hundreds of thousands injured every year
among whom some will never recover. Parents the burn their children.
Parents that rape their children. Parents that starve and or dope their
children.

Why is "neglect" to you scums not abuse?

Why is there a distinction between severe and less severe abuse with
ranting that the less severe is not the business of society, ****ant?

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

wrote:
nooooooooo, all you did was teach the cats what you had a nasty
disposition and they avoided you...............

Nope the same cat happily sleeps in my lap while I'm posting this.


]:^ runs around her dog lot barking that she conditioned
cats.................


How do you keep cats off things you don't want them on? Threaten them
with your little willy?

r r r r r



--
"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

Greegor wrote:
Where is my CRB and why did Jerry Foxhoven say that
IFCRB does not review cases that are not Foster Care?

They don't. Foster care is but ONE of the out of home placement choices
for children. They may be in a locked facility because of the severity
of their reactivity to the abuses of their parents (they have lost their
minds and are a danger to self and others), or they may be in a
treatment facility day or inhouse program where they are in the
community like other children but not living at home. Some are even
parent referred in those programs and NOT wards of the state.

This is why, when you ask or comment on system questions, "foster care"
is not an adequate term, usually, to describe the data or practices.

I have repeatedly used the term "out of home care" to differentiate
this, and have explained this to you how many times before, Greg?

Where is the CRB function for kinship care?

The same place as all OOHC CRBs. It's still done every six months.
Usually no one is there but the review panel, and the worker. Results
are given to the agency and to the judge that made the placement choice.
The latter is in fact the highest review of the case normally.

Why don't you go learn some of this, Greegor, and why can't you remember
that this has been covered in ascps before, more than once?

YOU are not privy to a CBR meeting unless YOU are specifically invited.
I wish they WOULD invite you and grill you just a bit. I've seen some in
action and they are FAR TOUGHER THAN JUDGES, you stupid little ****.
They are usually a mix of all kinds of folks from different backgrounds,
and they will NOT put up with **** like you and **** like yours.

They'd ask you once, why the hell you are in the home when the child
could be returned if you were gone, and if you answered like you do
here, they'd be sending a recommendation to the judge to find something
LE could charge you with..

To them you are a ****ant.

There are not there just to harass CPS (which IS part of they mandated
role and should be) but to look at ALL factors in a case to try and get
the child moved to "permanency."

While you idle your time away in Lisa's house.

You still aren't working, are you Greg?

Still freeloading, aren't you Greg?

Still trying to justify it all by pumping up your indignation at the
state and how you, some day, are going to make Lisa rich by suing Iowa,
aren't you, Greg?

With you, the old 'when did you stop beating your wife' fallacious
question is not wrong to ask. It's all there is left, because you ARE a
scumbag.

Isn't that right, Greg?

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

wrote:
heeeeeere's where the boogieman lives..................the abuse or
neglect argument is the tip of the iceberg......................the
real killer is something called structural violence............it is
neglect on a grand scale and it is built into the
system................a big component is lack of affordable
healthcare..............it kills at least 10 times as many children as
parents.................for a comparison, check out how france handles
healthcare for its children..................the debate over unfit
parents draws semiskilled labor because there is money to be made from
having some people declared to be unfit..............it is a little
like being a trustee for bankruptcies without having to be a
lawyer.............those in the loop get to say what needs to be done
and taxpayers foot the bill..............providing adequate healthcare,
which would actually save more children's lives, would cost the same
people money instead of putting them on the gov'ment
payroll..............that is why they will fight you tooth and nail for
cps and claim you hate children if you don't jump on the
bandwagon...............this thing is not about
children..............it's about money........................

gregory says neglect kills more than abuse.................

Why would affordable health care be unavailable for children? I know of
no area in this country that does not have some form of it if parents
will deliver their children to it.

You do know what medical neglect is, do you not, obsessive?

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

Well said!

AFfromDreamLand

Doug wrote:
Doug wrote:
The three main categories of maltreatment related to fatalities were
neglect (35.5%), combinations of maltreatments (30.2%), and physical
abuse (28.3%), (figure 4-3).7 Medical neglect accounted for 1.4 percent
of fatalities."
USDHHS does not break out the fatalities by cause -- abuse or neglect.
The hell they didn't and right on the page YOU CITED.

Hi, Kane,

The 30.2% of fatalities due to a combination of maltreatments do not
break out whether it was abuse or neglect. It lists them in combination.

Picky picky. Minimizing again, Doug?

Hi, Kane,

No minimizing. Just showing that CPS agencies reporting to NCANDS (USDHHS)
does not break out seperately the "combinations" of abuse and neglect
(30.2%) into abuse or neglect. As I initially said and you questioned.

If the 30.2% cannot be broken out seperately into abuse, then that
percentage cannot be included into fatalities caused by abuse. It follows
that these children could not by any stretch of the imagination be included
among children who died as the result of abuse that began with spanking,
which is what you attempted to do.

Strange that CPS and the fatality review boards cannot report the cause of
death, no? Until they do, you cannot grab at one of a combination of causes
and claim all of those deaths were caused by one of them. And you most
certainly cannot use that false premise that all were caused by the single
factor to further claim that spanking led to that single, fatal factor.

Further, it is obvious to anyone here that not all of those child fatalities
that were caused by abuse (28.3% or 421 children) died as the result of
abuse that started with spanking. Many of those fatalities due to abuse did
not involve spanking at all.

Don't tell me your are going to try and run another NCIC ignorance
number on us when the information you claim doesn't exist YOU cited.

As your latest example proved, the FBI only allows law enforcement access
to its NCIC data base, as I said.

No, you said they would not provide the data. 1

No, I said that the FBI only allows law enforcement access to NCIC. CPS is
not a law enforcement agency. You may want the post to which you initially
responded again. You will see that is precisely what I said.

The data I cited has a category that
includes both neglect and abuse, so fatalities in that category cannot be
separated out abuse or neglect. Obviously.

Picky picky, little deluded propagandist. We can split hairs for every,
but the truth is an appreciable and sad number of children are
"disciplined" to death, and that IS the business of CPS and the police.

Yes, a sad number of children are "disciplined" to death. But not 1,000 of
them, as you claimed. And USDHHS, as shown by the data both of us have
cited, does not support such a wild contention. In fact, the USDHHS data
disproves it.

Not all child abuse begins with spanking.

Not all the children who died as the result of abuse (421) in 2003 were
subject to maltreatment that began with spanking.

wrote:
Well said!

AFfromDreamLand

So you would agree that "many" of the fatalities due to escalating from
spanking to death didn't really happen then? That the source I cited was
lying?

That people who kill or injure their children by that escalation really
didn't do that? They just suddenly jumped from no spank to beating their
child to death?

How very convenient for the logically impaired and the compulsive liars.

0:-




Doug wrote:
Doug wrote:
The three main categories of maltreatment related to fatalities were
neglect (35.5%), combinations of maltreatments (30.2%), and physical
abuse (28.3%), (figure 4-3).7 Medical neglect accounted for 1.4 percent
of fatalities."
USDHHS does not break out the fatalities by cause -- abuse or neglect.
The hell they didn't and right on the page YOU CITED.
Hi, Kane,

The 30.2% of fatalities due to a combination of maltreatments do not
break out whether it was abuse or neglect. It lists them in combination.
Picky picky. Minimizing again, Doug?
Hi, Kane,

No minimizing. Just showing that CPS agencies reporting to NCANDS (USDHHS)
does not break out seperately the "combinations" of abuse and neglect
(30.2%) into abuse or neglect. As I initially said and you questioned.

If the 30.2% cannot be broken out seperately into abuse, then that
percentage cannot be included into fatalities caused by abuse. It follows
that these children could not by any stretch of the imagination be included
among children who died as the result of abuse that began with spanking,
which is what you attempted to do.

Strange that CPS and the fatality review boards cannot report the cause of
death, no? Until they do, you cannot grab at one of a combination of causes
and claim all of those deaths were caused by one of them. And you most
certainly cannot use that false premise that all were caused by the single
factor to further claim that spanking led to that single, fatal factor.

Further, it is obvious to anyone here that not all of those child fatalities
that were caused by abuse (28.3% or 421 children) died as the result of
abuse that started with spanking. Many of those fatalities due to abuse did
not involve spanking at all.

Don't tell me your are going to try and run another NCIC ignorance
number on us when the information you claim doesn't exist YOU cited.
As your latest example proved, the FBI only allows law enforcement access
to its NCIC data base, as I said.
No, you said they would not provide the data. 1
No, I said that the FBI only allows law enforcement access to NCIC. CPS is
not a law enforcement agency. You may want the post to which you initially
responded again. You will see that is precisely what I said.

The data I cited has a category that
includes both neglect and abuse, so fatalities in that category cannot be
separated out abuse or neglect. Obviously.
Picky picky, little deluded propagandist. We can split hairs for every,
but the truth is an appreciable and sad number of children are
"disciplined" to death, and that IS the business of CPS and the police.
Yes, a sad number of children are "disciplined" to death. But not 1,000 of
them, as you claimed. And USDHHS, as shown by the data both of us have
cited, does not support such a wild contention. In fact, the USDHHS data
disproves it.

Not all child abuse begins with spanking.

Not all the children who died as the result of abuse (421) in 2003 were
subject to maltreatment that began with spanking.



--
"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