|If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.|
||Thread Tools||Display Modes|
Arizona CPS Stealing Children for Profit: Angry parents Drop political equivalent of nuclear weapon at school board meeting....
Thank you Ben, from Greg in Iowa!
For every ONE worker inside an agency, there are probably
TWENTY people working as CONTRACTORS who depend on the
agency removal or supervision of children for their livelyhoods.
That's not even counting the "public pretenders" who
generally fail to provide family a "vigorous defense".
Too many people allow themselves to be steam rollered
by the devious lying misfits of the Child Protection INDUSTRY.
Did you know that in two other states, CPS actually
lined up whole classes of girls for gynos at school,
SCREENING FOR SEXUAL ABUSE?
That school district and CPS agency needs
to be sued in FEDERAL COURT for many millions
of dollars and placed under a Federal consent decree.
While US law technically makes violation
and conspiracy to violate civil rights a CAPITAL CRIME,
don't expect that law to be applied.
But MONEY, that's the MAIN THING these corrupt
people care about.
Thanks for the Federal case law.
Ben Ness wrote:
Angry parents who lost their children to CPS showed up at a school
board meeting and dropped what was to be the political equivalent of a
I've found some interesting reading in my e-mail the other day, a lot
unhappy people in Central Arizona all of a sudden, especially on the
School Board.. Ben Ness
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I'm writing to let you know about something Interesting that is
happening in Coolidge, Arizona. it was recently learned that Child
Protective Services has conducted dozens, if not hundreds of illegal
interviews without a search warrant of children in school without their
parents or attorneys being present, the parents had no prior
notification that their children would be interviewed by the
the Principal at Hohokam School in Coolidge, Arizona. confirmed that
CPS has been conducting these interviews for years and he was unaware
that it was a violation of the constitution until angry parents who
their children to CPS showed up at a school board meeting and dropped
what was to be the political equivalent of a Nuclear Weapon...
one of the children's parents address the Pinal County school board
at a meeting held on Wednesday August the 9th 2006 in Coolidge and asked
the following question of all parents in the room "would you want your
child interviewed at school by the police, child protective services or
anyone else, without your knowledge, permission or you being present?"
of course everybody said no! then one of the other parents said it
happen it's illegal! at which point the person addressing school board
said that's right! so why was it done to my children? he then told
them what the Vice principal at Hohokam had told him, Then all Hell
He also remarked that he did not appreciate arizonas Child Protective
Services using the Constitution of the United States as Toilet Paper
in a time of war, while the good Men and Women of our Armed Forces are
Fighting and Dying for It...
The Pinal County School District is about to become one big lawyer
this is a direct violation of the Constitution as reaffirm by the 7th
Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Doe v. Heck...
Note: IT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR DCF TO CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION IN
HOME AND INTERVIEW A CHILD WITHOUT EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES (IMMINENT
"PHYSICAL" DANGER) OR PROBABLE CAUSE.
This also applies to the Illegal Interviews done at public school
without the parents knowledge.
Question: How is a child in "imminent physical danger" when the child
is at school?
The decision in the case of Doe et al, v. Heck et al (No. 01-3648, 2003
US App. Lexis 7144) will affect the manner in which law enforcement and
Child Protective Services ("CPS") investigations of alleged child
or neglect are conducted. The decision of the 7th Circuit Court of
Appeals found that the practice of a "no prior consent" interview
child will ordinarily constitute a "clear violation" of the
constitutional rights of parents under the 4th and 14th Amendments to
the U.S. Constitution. According to the Court, the investigative
interview of a child constitutes a "search and seizure" and, when
conducted on private property without "consent, a warrant, probable
cause, or exigent circumstances," such an interview is an
search and seizure in violation of the rights of the parent, child,
possibly the owner of the private property.The mere possibility or risk
of harm does not constitute an emergency or exigent circumstance that
would justify a forced warrantless entry and a warrantless seizure of a
child. Hurlman v. Rice, (2nd Cir. 1991)A due-process violation occurs
when a state-required breakup of a natural family is founded solely on
"best interests" analysis that is not supported by the requisite
of parental unfitness. Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246, 255, (1978)
While Arizona is within the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals jurisdiction,
the Constitution of the United States still applies to all 50 States
But wait, there is more, he then hands out copies of this document
can be found at the House Ways and Means Committee website...
C.P.S is targeting specific families with limited set budgets, where
child removal is commonly practiced for personal financial gain.
House Committee on Ways and Means
Statement of Cynthia Huckelberry, Redlands, California, and Sushanna
Khamis, Yucaipa, California
OVERVIEW OF NEGATIVE IMPACT RELATED TO THE CURRENT CHILD PROTECTIVE
Child Protective Services was designed to protect children and aid
families that are in need of assistance in order to maintain the family
unit. Unfortunately, today we are finding that C.P.S is targeting
specific families with limited set budgets, where child removal is
commonly practiced for personal financial gain. The lack of compassion
exhibited by C.P.S caseworkers towards the impoverished children that
they serve, further devalues their lives in the eyes of these
caseworkers. Thus indicating, that a lack of understanding and caring
related to the circumstances of these financially challenged families,
creates further dissention, prejudicing these C.P.S workers from the
very people they serve.
Within this document, the information provided will serve as an insight
into the true source of the problems that plagues C.P.S today. Also, it
will provide possible solutions that may be utilized to best serve a
restructured Child Protective Service Agency.
HOW C.P.S LEGALLY REMOVES CHILDREN FORM PARENTAL CUSTODY
C.P.S systematically removes children from their families, whom do not
meet the criteria for removal, through vague and ambiguous
interpretation of their own codes and policy and procedures. They are
able to operate in this manner by selecting specific target groups.
The target groups that C.P.S has tagged are the poor, disabled,
and the undereducated. Parents/guardians unfamiliar with the law, with
limited or no financial means to secure impartial unbiased legal
representation, blindly trust the courts. Therefore Child Protective
Service is able to manipulate the court system to secure foster care or
adoption status of these children for profit.
Example: Each child placed in foster care has an annual value of
More monies are available, up to $150,000 dollars per child, for those
that meet the special needs criteria. After 24 months- during the
concurrent foster care /adoption process, placement becomes final,
upon an $8,000 dollar bonus is dispersed to the county from the State.
This bonus money is then divided amongst individuals that enabled the
adoption process to be completed. This is not necessarily a positive
solution for these children, but a personal financial gain to workers.
Thus, this leads us to believe that some of the decisions made by C.P.S
officials serve only as a means to enhance their personal budgets.
Upon removal, C.P.S creates a plan for reunification that is designed
promote the family's failure. These case plans do not allow the
families the time needed to comply nor do they have the financial
resources needed to meet the court assigned criteria. Unbeknownst to
the families, the courts, lawyers, and C.P.S workers falsely interject
foster care criteria when family criteria should be utilized. Workers
may also place long-term program demands on the parents that purposely
overrun the 24-month time period.
This then allows the state to complete the adoption process to outside
In other cases, failure to protect -WIC 300b was cited to obtain
of the children, when the custodial parents acted protectively, in
accordance to the law, after a crime was committed against one of their
children. Currently all children from these cases remain in
custody" under the authority of C.P.S.
FAMILY COURT CUSTODY REMOVAL - PARENT ALIENATION SYNDROME
Let it be known, that Family Court officials regularly remove custody
children from one parent to another (usually mother to father), citing
parent alienation syndrome. C.P.S agrees to serve as the tool to enable
custody transfer, a corrupt process observed by the FBI. Where, in
truth, caseworkers are never allowed to testify in family court under
the cloak of C.P.S authority, due to possible misuse or conflict of
interest related to the right to privacy laws. FBI Agent/Lawyer Brenda
Atkinson- San Francisco can verify this information by calling her at
Child Protective Service also submits false documentation so as to
provide a supportive basis necessary to substantiate their decisions.
Thus the truth is purposely obstructed altered or omitted to justify
In many cases, C.P.S has failed to investigate additional outside
reports from various professionals and agencies such as children's
physicians, police agencies, school system, etc.
WHY DOES CPS SYSTEMATICALLY REMOVE CHILDREN FROM THEIR FAMILIES AND
PLACE THEM IN FOSTER CARE?
Since Clinton enacted the adoption and Safe Families act in 1997, this
has lead to widespread corruption within the child Protective Services
Agency and outlying neighboring agencies. By systematically removing
children from predominantly poor families, C.P.S is able to secure
foster care/ adoption status for these children with little or no
Thus C.P.S victimizes those families that have no means available, to
properly investigate C.P.S corrupt activities directed at their family.
Since Federal and state matching funds generate the budget for C.P.S,
the single means utilized to elevate the budget is to increase foster
care and adoption caseloads.
Bonus incentives for adoptions are currently $8,000 per child. $4,000
given to the foster parents and another $4,000 is placed in a general
fund, to reward workers for completing their job duties. Workers in
this county, state that they do not personally financially benefit from
this fund. Thus it leads us to believe, that other neighboring
are benefiting form this fund, in return for deceptive practices that
support C.P.S decisions.
False Allegations of drug abuse have been logged against mothers and
their newborn infants as a means to place these infants into protective
custody. The hospital staff has allowed C.P.S to remove infants (a
hospital violation) prior to verification of blood and urine drug
tests. C.P.S is mandated to secure verification of drug allegations
blood and urine results, prior to removing the newborn infant from the
hospital. All cases known to us resulted negative for the mother and
the newborn, but these infants were never returned, and were adopted
outside of kinship.
In the past year, the FBI has arrested and imprisoned C.P.S workers who
were actively involved in baby trafficking for profit. These C.P.S
workers knowingly abducted infants from the hospital where they in turn
networked them into legal adoption agencies. Augustus Fennerty, FBI
director for Crimes against Children (Washington D.C) can verify this
information. (202) 324-3000
CHILD SEX TRADE INDUSTRY
Southern California FBI District has videotape recorded CPS workers
placing foster care children onto planes via LAX, destination Europe
child sex trade industry. This can be verified through Ted Gunderson,
(retired) FBI Director Southern California (310) 477-6565.
SEXUAL VICTIMIZATION IN FOSTER CARE
For the families in relation to our group in San BernardinoCounty, it
has come to our attention while comparing similarities, that
approximately half the children in foster care have been molested.
These children were not sexually abused by their parents, but by the
foster fathers or others in the foster home. It was also noted that
these foster homes are still operating in the same capacity prior to
complaints, without any investigation into these allegations. C.P.S
officials were made aware of these accusations by the children, but
failed to follow through with a criminal investigation.
In conclusion, Child Protective Service is nothing more than an
for child molesters, to make a profit, while at the same time
a crime, only to be protected by a malignant system that delivers a
never ending supply of victims
SYSTEMATIC FRAUDULENT MANEUVERS UTILIZED TO ENHANCE C.P.S BUDGET
* C.P.S manufactures multiple nonexistent /fictitious abuse case
scenarios to offset true statistical abuse case information.
* C.P.S concurrently processes these children from foster care to
adoption, in order to obtain perverse monetary incentives in the form
* C.P.S provides a market to neighboring agencies and the courts
(commissioners, psychologists, monitors, court mandated behavioral
instructors, court appointed legal counsel), in order for them to
financially benefit from the foster care/adoption system.
* C.P.S victimizes innocent impoverished families, draws them into
a corrupt system to utilize their children as pawns for commerce.
MALICIOUS OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES
* C.P.S is utilized by family court officials, as an adverse tool
to extricate children from one parent to the other, with reference to
"parent alienation syndrome".
* Where, in truth, caseworkers are never allowed to testify in
family court under the cloak of C.P.S authority, due to possible misuse
or conflict of interest related to the right to privacy laws.
* C.P.S utilizes coercive measures to persuade parents to submit
statements of prior alleged abuse, when these actions were nonexistent.
In other words, forcing desperate parents to "plea bargain" to a
C.P.S fabricated crime, for the return of their children from foster
* C.P.S fabricates portions of investigations, where such duties
have never been physically performed, to purposely mislead or direct a
* C.P.S knowingly abandons children into foster care, conscious of
the fact that some foster care parents and or individuals in the home
physically and sexually abuse the children in their protective custody.
* C.P.S intentionally fails to prosecute parents accused of child
abuse, since in the majority of cases, no initial crime has been
* C.P.S represents themselves in positive personas, by omitting,
altering, and falsifying documents, so as to mislead the public and or
government of their true actions as listed above. Thereby publicly
grandstanding, displaying an inaccurate social martyrdom for the well
being of children.
* C.P.S ignores crimes committed in foster care, such as the
atrocious acts of unexplained deaths.
* C.P.S fails to question these individuals for their abusive
conduct, whereby, if it were not a foster care parent, these
would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
SHOULD CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE BE RESTRUCTURED?
The police should determine if a child has a true need for protection
from his parents, since child abuse is a criminal offence. Thus, C.P.S
should be incorporated with Crimes against Children Units that are
currently located within police, sheriffs and FBI agencies.
The merging of the two would reduce the amount of false allegations
reported, since complaints made to a police unit is a criminal offence.
Also, the police have the training and resources needed to conduct a
thorough investigation. This allows them to determine that if a crime
has been committed that warrants the need for foster care.
A parent/guardian under the suspicion of the crime "Child Abuse"
meet the criteria for removal. This would activate the foster care
system. Only then would the foster care system be utilized as a
response to a possible or suspected crime.
Thus in turn, this would eliminate the unnecessary utilization of the
foster care system that has been grossly misused in the past.
Unwarranted victimization of children and their families would be
greatly reduced and soaring costs would be contained. This would
minimize the number of future cases that fall through the cracks and
lost in the system.
WHAT ROLE SHOULD THE SOCIAL WORKERS PLAY IN THE NEW CHILD PROTECTIVE
* All caseworkers must have a bachelor's degree in social work
from an accredited college.
* All states must create bachelor level licensing for social
* All workers must have a current license to work within any state
or county in the United States with reciprocity.
* All social workers must have a preceptor for at least three
months prior to individual casework.
WHO SHOULD BE A MEMBER OF THE CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICE TEAM WITHIN THE
CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN UNITS?
Other members from various agencies should be inclusive to this unit,
since they bring their specific expertise to complete a proper
investigation. It is our opinion that the following individuals who
should comprise this team are as stated: Registered Nurse, School
Principal, Detective, and Social Worker.
SHOULD AN OUTSIDE AGENCY SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEW THE CHILD PROTECTIVE
SERVICE TEAM'S PERFORMANCE?
All agencies must have an outside quality control board that monitors
case investigations on a random basis and when requested by the public.
This Board must include members similar to the Child Protective
Service team, with the addition of an individual from the public. No
member may be employed more than three years, to maintain the integrity
of the boards' unbiased decisions.
SHOULD WE MAINTAIN A CHILD ABUSE INDEX LIST?
The child abuse index list shall be maintained only when an individual
has been prosecuted and convicted by a court of law for a crime against
a child. Today's said list shall be destroyed, so as to prevent harm
those currently listed who have been accused of a crime against a
but that have never been prosecuted or convicted. And, children should
never be placed on any list that would categorize them in an adverse
manner, such as this.
SHOULD THERE BE NEW RULES AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO FOSTER CARE?
There should be a limited number of children allowed to be placed in
single home under foster care, including adoption. No single family
shall be allowed to adopt or provide foster care to more than two
children at any time. The only exception shall be when siblings number
more than two and are placed in the same single dwelling. This will
eliminate the financial incentive for monetary gain related to housing
foster children and adoptions.
Redlands, California 92373
Yucaipa, California 92399
July 12, 2004
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515-0542
To our Honorable U.S. House of Representatives,
It is unfortunate that Child Protective Service officials have mislead
the government into believing, that increased funding is necessary to
solve the multitude of problems that encompass C.P.S. This agency is
utilizing the funding issue as the scapegoat for their problems, when
actuality the workers themselves, the lack of their personal
accountability, are the source of the problem. Further funding will not
solve C.P.S'S current crisis, only the restructuring of this agency
provide a solution.
by the way the angry families websites
can be found at the cps experience
Nightmare in America
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|We don need no steenkin' CPS.||0:->||Spanking||223||July 19th 06 07:32 AM|
|NFJA Position Statement: Child Support Enforcement Funding||Dusty||Child Support||0||March 2nd 06 01:49 AM|
|A test||Mark Probert||Kids Health||0||January 13th 06 04:51 PM|
|How Children REALLY React To Control||Chris||Solutions||437||July 11th 04 02:38 AM|
|The Determination of Child Custody in the USA||Fighting for kids||Child Support||21||November 17th 03 02:35 AM|