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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Guilty until proven innocent: Parents accused of child abuse by DCFSfight to clear their names
Guilty until proven innocent: Parents accused of child abuse by DCFS
fight to clear their names http://www.bnd.com/news/local/story/327965.html BY GEORGE PAWLACZYK AND BETH HUNDSDORFER News-Democrat The Illinois Department of Children and Family Services wrongly placed more than 3,000 people on the state's official list of child abusers over a five-year period, a News-Democrat investigation found. That's an error rate of one in four, based on more than 11,000 cases where people appealed to have their names removed from the list. Parents and foster parents accused of child abuse or neglect can lose their reputations, their jobs, even their children. "They're not all bad, there are good ones," Nick Brunstein said of state child abuse investigators, "but the bad ones have the power of God, and with the stroke of a pen they can ruin your life." Brunstein and his wife, Judi, of Belleville, are former foster parents who battled the DCFS to clear their names and won, but spent thousands of dollars on legal fees and lost their children. "We went through two years of absolute hell," Judi Brunstein said. A review of state child abuse records by the newspaper found that more than 80,000 people were placed on the child abuse list -- called the State Central Register -- from Jan. 1, 2002, to Aug. 1, 2007. Of those, 11,473 people appealed, and 3,051, or 27 percent, won their appeals and had their names removed from the list or saw their cases tossed out due to lack of evidence. Another 1,426 appeals were denied; 3,178 were abandoned or withdrawn by the accused; 3,289 cases were closed or dismissed through various administrative processes, and 529 appeals were pending. While DCFS will not release copies of administrative law judges' decisions, several were obtained by the newspaper from parents who appealed. DCFS spokesman Kendall Marlowe acknowledged that mistakes are made, but he said the vast majority of people on the State Central Register were placed there properly, and that most remain on the list for the required minimum of five years. He declined further comment. Child abuse investigations are based on a lower standard of proof, or "credible evidence," despite a 2004 recommendation by the Illinois Supreme Court that DCFS raise the standard to "a preponderance of the evidence" -- the standard used in civil courts. As with all court proceedings, getting to the truth can be difficult, and winning an appeal doesn't necessarily mean that in every case there was no abuse or neglect. "A lot of what happens at these hearings is it becomes a legal process, not ... whether it happened or not, but whether enough evidence is presented," said Meryl Paniak, the DCFS' chief administrative law judge. "So does that mean some people are probably unfounded and shouldn't be? Yes. And it's the same thing with some who are indicated and probably shouldn't be." However, attorneys who regularly represent parents at appeals hearings -- which are closed to the public -- say that many child abuse investigations are so flawed they are unreliable. "They're supposed to be thorough. They're supposed to be fair. They're supposed to follow their own rules. And in the majority of cases where we represent people, that's not what's happening," attorney Diane Redleaf, executive director of the nonprofit Family Defense Center in Chicago, said. "We see so many cases where the basic rules are being ignored completely by the state investigators," she said. Critics say the child welfare agency's caseworkers, bound by a legal mandate to protect children, are too quick to turn on the very people they rely on to make the system work, mainly dedicated and loving parents, including foster and adoptive parents. "I've told my friends not to adopt, not to foster through DCFS. They will get it in the teeth if they do," said Tom Kennedy, a Clayton, Mo., lawyer formerly based in Alton who has many Illinois clients. "On the one hand, they do a very bad job of investigating real serious cases of abuse. On the other hand, they don't know how to rule out unmerited, unwarranted claims." A 2006 News-Democrat series "Lethal Lapses" reported that 53 children died while under DCFS' care after flawed investigations by caseworkers who did not follow their own rules. Supporters of the system say where child abuse is suspected, caseworkers must first protect children. "All the social workers I saw in my own research were much more afraid of leaving a child in a home where they could be harmed than they were of falsely accusing a parent," said Jennifer Reich, an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology and Criminology at the University of Denver. In most child abuse cases there are no criminal charges, but people still need to hire a lawyer to fight the child abuser designation the state has placed on them -- even though many are poor and can't afford legal help, Kennedy said. They also must agree to cooperate fully with state investigators --usually by accepting a state-drafted safety plan -- or risk losing their children immediately. For that reason, many people simply choose not to fight back, parental advocates say. "If you don't have a lawyer, you are lost," said Chicago attorney Robert Lehrer, who formerly worked as a public guardian safeguarding abused children's rights. "DCFS is always represented by a lawyer who does nothing else. Most people don't appeal. They can't afford a lawyer and don't believe they have a chance," he said. Sign and they'll go away When a state official came knocking in February 2007, Nick and Judi Brunstein already had been cleared of allegations that landed them on the state's list of child abusers. But they didn't know it yet, because their lawyer had not been notified of the hearing judge's ruling. Nevertheless, a DCFS worker offered to return their foster care license and close the case if they signed a paper saying they were guilty of licensing violations, the couple said. "I told her that there is no way that we are going to sign anything and admit to something we didn't do," said Nick Brunstein, a retired Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. The oldest of the Brunsteins' three foster children -- an 11-year-old girl diagnosed as schizophrenic and bipolar -- accused the couple of physically and emotionally abusing them. She also said the Brunsteins were being overly strict by requiring the children to do chores and homework. The day after the caseworker's visit, the Belleville couple learned that DCFS administrative law judge Judy Heineken believed them and ordered their names removed from the child abuse list. They recently got their foster care license back. Heineken's 25-page ruling criticized DCFS caseworkers for basic errors in the investigation and for presenting an abuse case dependent on the uncorroborated word of the 11-year-old. The judge also chastised the agency's main expert witness, a Belleville psychologist, who didn't know the girl was schizophrenic and bipolar because she never checked her medical files. Heineken said school officials, friends and neighbors "wholly refuted" the girl's accusations. She also noted the Brunsteins repeatedly asked DCFS to resume supplying the same mental illness medication the girl received when living with other foster parents, but the agency refused. Fighting DCFS cost the Brunsteins $20,000 to hire a lawyer. And the three girls they hoped to adopt -- ages 2, 5 and 11 -- were taken from them and never returned. "I don't know if you can call this a win," Nick Brunstein said. "Our savings are wiped out, and our caseworker who wanted to take our foster kids and hurt us did exactly that. No one at DCFS will be held accountable." Today, the Brunsteins are parents again. The day before the DCFS worker came to the door, a surrogate mother delivered their daughter, Grace. "Kids get bruises and scrapes when they play," said Judi Brunstein as she watched Grace, now 14 months old, play with toys. "We are going to be on their radar for the slightest thing. It wouldn't surprise me if some day they try to get Grace." Advice: Abandon son People appeal for reasons other than being on the child abuse list. Sometimes it's for more financial aid for foster and adoptive children. Gary and Beverly Waltrip of Decatur appealed for more aid for their 13-year-old son, diagnosed as schizophrenic, bipolar and sexually aggressive with a borderline I.Q. Data supplied by DCFS show that of 262 appeals for more money during the 2002-07 period, a judge granted 96 of them, or 37 percent. DCFS supervisors wouldn't allow the Waltrips' 13-year-old adopted son to return home when he was taken to a Decatur area hospital after he allegedly sexually molested his older adopted brother. DCFS officials told the parents the teen's brothers and sisters could not be exposed to the youth until he received treatment and was no longer a threat to the other children. So the Waltrips placed their other adopted son and biological children temporarily with relatives. The Waltrips tried to get the teen into a residential treatment program, as a DCFS psychiatrist recommended. Yet for nearly two years while the family's other children lived apart and the boy's condition deteriorated, caseworkers stalled, dispensed false information and failed to provide the financial assistance necessary for residential treatment, an outraged DCFS administrative law judge wrote in 2006. Judge Susan Wambach heard the Waltrips' request for increased services for their son during an appeals hearing. Wambach ruled in their favor and granted increased financial aid that allowed the boy to be placed in the Onarga Academy, a treatment center about an hour's drive from Decatur. During the hearing, Wambach learned that when police detained the boy in connection with the alleged sexual molestation, a frantic Beverly Waltrip called a DCFS adoption specialist for help. The specialist advised Beverly to let the prison system take him. "It is shocking that an employee of the department would advise an adoptive parent to request that the court system send their child to prison," Wambach wrote in her 25-page decision. Later, the same adoption specialist was promoted to child abuse investigator. She could not be reached. "You would think it would be us working with them to help the kids. But it's not. It was them against us," Gary Waltrip said. Fewer protections Often, it's the most vulnerable families that come under DCFS scrutiny. "The brunt of the system falls on the poor ... who cannot afford to appeal," said Lehrer, the Chicago attorney. "While they need to go after people who are guilty of serious child abuse -- sexual abuse, burns, fractures -- the truth is that these kinds of cases represent a very modest number. Most of the investigations do not involve real abuse," he said. People who are accused of child abuse, or "indicated," and appeal don't have the same protections as in criminal proceedings and are presumed guilty until proven innocent. And names can get out, even though the state child abuse register is closed to the public, lawyers and exonerated parents say. The list is open to social workers, police officers, school officials, even members of neighborhood park district boards. Lehrer said that evidentiary rules at DCFS hearings, which are closed to the public, allow both sides to introduce hearsay evidence that would be banned from a criminal courtroom. While wrongly listing parents as child abusers is "terrible," it is not the result of malice on the part of DCFS investigators, said Reich, the University of Denver sociology and criminology professor. "I think there is in this system -- because of its low burden of proof -- a logical belief that it's easy to identify abusers and mistakes aren't going to be made, but that's not true," she said. Challenging the systemDCFS caseworkers ordered Kim Cooper to put a fence around her yard and new locks on her doors and windows at a cost of $5,000 because her severely mentally disabled daughter kept getting out. The single mother from Collinsville also had to agree to allow a private agency worker hired by DCFS to sleep on the couch to provide 24-hour supervision. Caseworkers first became involved when a neighbor called to say the 13-year-old girl, who has autism, was in their swimming pool. While Cooper was talking to a DCFS caseworker one day at her kitchen table, the teen somehow slipped past them and ran outside. Cooper and the state employee gave chase and finally caught the girl. The fence and locks proved ineffective. After that, Cooper refused further DCFS demands, which landed her on the state child abuse list, indicated for neglect. Cooper appealed, and a DCFS hearing judge eventually sided with her. But while Cooper waited for that ruling, caseworkers removed the girl from the home. "They took her out of my arms," Cooper said. "I didn't know where she was." The next day, Cooper filed an emergency petition and went to court to get her daughter back. A St. Clair County judge ordered the child's immediate return. Cooper found her daughter in a Granite City hospital's psychiatric wing. "She was on a mattress on the floor. There wasn't anything else in the room. It was awful," she said. "It's the most horrible thing I've ever been through." Contact reporters George Pawlaczyk at or 239-2625, and Beth Hundsdorfer at or 239-2570. CURRENTLY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES VIOLATES MORE CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED LIBERTIES & CIVIL RIGHTS ON A DAILY BASIS THEN ALL OTHER AGENCIES COMBINED INCLUDING THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY WIRETAPPING PROGRAMS.... 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 the free handbook from connecticut dcf watch.. 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/Foster care 160, biological Parents 59 Sexual Abuse CPS/Foster care 112, biological Parents 13 Neglect CPS/Foster care 410, biological Parents 241 Medical Neglect CPS/Foster care 14 biological Parents 12 Fatalities CPS/Foster care 6.4, biological Parents 1.5 Imagine that, 6.4 children die at the hands of the very agencies that are supposed to protect them and only 1.5 at the hands of parents per 100,000 children. CPS perpetrates more abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse and kills more children then parents in the United States. If the citizens of this country hold CPS to the same standards that they hold parents too. No judge should ever put another child in the hands of ANY government agency because CPS nationwide is guilty of more harm and death than any human being combined. CPS nationwide is guilty of more human rights violations and deaths of children then the homes from which they were removed. When are the judges going to wake up and see that they are sending children to their death and a life of abuse when children are removed from safe homes based on the mere opinion of a bunch of social workers. CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, HAPPILY DESTROYING THOUSANDS 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... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Guilty until proven innocent: Parents accused of child abuse by DCFS fight to clear their names
"fx" wrote in message ... Guilty until proven innocent: Parents accused of child abuse by DCFS fight to clear their names snipped I had my own experiences with Illinois DFS about sixteen years ago when someone made a false report that I was not feeding my newborn child. The investigator came to my home and I allowed her to enter and search, as well as talk to my kids. During her investigation she found that my child 'looked thin', but that there were dirty bottles in the sink that were obviously recently used, formula, and no signs of abuse or neglect. Regardless, the investigator insisted that I take my child to the local trauma center to be examined. I was told that if I did not do so the investigator would take custody of the child immediately and do so. I arrived at the trauma center and explained to the nurse why I was there. I also explained that I had complained in the hospital shortly after the child's birth about what I felt was excessive spit up. I said that I had been told that it was nothing, likely 'meconium' in her stomach. When a week passed I had called the hospital (the only place I could take her unless it was an emergency as our insurance dictated) 50 miles away where she was born and asked for an appointment, again, with the complaint of excessive spit up. I was again given the 'meconium' story. This time I was told that it would clear up within a few days. Again, a week later, I called and requested an appointment, again explaining the spit up and pointing out that my child would be due for a one month check up soon anyway. They gave me an appointment for weeks later. In the mean time, I explained to the trauma center staff that a home health nurse had been visiting my home every week and weighing my child and that I had complained several times to the nurse (still even remember her name) about the spit up. I told the staff that it seemed to me that my child spit up a good part of what she ate, but that she was certainly gaining size for all I could see as her clothing was becoming smaller and I had had to already move her from newborn sizes to 3 months. I told them that another of my children was allergic to regular formula, and that I had thought this may be the case with my daughter so I got permission from the doctor to put her on soy. When that didn't seem to help I began breast feeding again, as I had stopped in the hospital thinking that it might be causing her trouble because of the meds I was taking for thyroid and asthma. The physician came into the room and examined my daughter and said that she weighed less than birth weight, and that he could see no sigs of abuse or neglect to her. In fact, he commented specifically that her skin was plump and colorful, her eyes and moth were moist which indicated to him that she had, indeed, been fed regularly, and he appeared to be impressed that she did not have a bald spot on her head...indicative of a child being laid for long periods of time. He said that those spots were common in all babies, but that the most hair loss occurred in children who were neglected, and my daughter had no hair loss what so ever. The doctor also told me that he was called by the DFS worker and told to make a neglect report before I even arrived. He said that he told her he would do so only after examining the child and finding signs of abuse or neglect. He said that when he contacted her back he would not be giving her the report that she wanted because he saw no signs of abuse or neglect in my child. He did say, however, that she needed to be admitted to the hospital to get her weight back up and find the cause of her excessive spit up, as this would be the root cause of her failure to thrive. My daughter was admitted to a hospital relatively close to our home, and there the nurses and attending were asked to make a neglect report. After one day the cause of my daughter's FTT was found...she had gastric reflux. She was placed on a medication called Reglan and was put on a high calorie diet and began gaining weight rapidly. Because it was obvious to staff at this hospital that the gastric reflux was the cause of the FTT they also refused to make a neglect report. When the worker found out that they were also refusing she had my child moved to the hospital 50 miles away. There she requested, again, that staff make a neglect report. They complied as an 'ass covering' matter. Because there was no evidence to back up this report, as the medical records showed by all accounts, even those of hospital that made the neglect report, that there was no verifiable abuse or neglect, the workers supervisor refused to take my child into protective custody. She cited that the courts would not take kindly to a child being removed on medical conditions beyond my control, and because I could verify that the child had received medical care between birth and the time of hospitalization, as well as that I had complained many times both shortly after birth and the following weeks about the spitting up, I had acted appropriately and was not guilty of neglect. This worker was irate that she could not remove my child from my home, and she wasted a lot of hot air letting me know how she felt about it. She did manage to open a service case, and for weeks I listened to her rant in regard to my child...at one point telling my husband and I that she wanted to adopt our daughter. Eventually I became weary of the service plan. Not that I minded most of it...there were 'between a rock and a hard place' incidents that occurred. For instance: I lived on the lake, and DFS had given me a 'home maker' worker. One day, while outside at the pier with my kids teaching my son how to fish, the worker showed up for her appointment with me. The neighbor's child was in the lake swimming and the worker advised me that she would be making a neglect report against me as the 'responsible adult' if I did not direct the neighbor's child to get out of the water because there was no one supervising him. I told the worker that his mother was right inside their house only about 20 feet away, and that if it was an issue she should go knock on the door and talk to her. She said no, that I was the adult present and it was my responsibility. I gathered up my children and started back into my house and said 'No, now YOU are the responsible adult, make a report on yourself'. At another visit the worker verbally attacked me when I took crayons away from my five year old who was writing on the wall with them. She said 'How dare you stifle his creativity like that???' I was living in a rental house, and could not afford to pay for the repainting from the damage my son could do with the crayons and stated that he had paper, he could write on that, not the wall. She was very angry with me when she left that day. There were many incidents such as these...in one the worker told me that I MUST take my five year old son in the shower with me so that he would not be unsupervised for even a second. One day she witnessed my husband kissing me goodbye when he left the house and had the nerve to tell me that she could report me for exhibiting sexual behaviors in front of the children. When I had my fill I lef the state...I had planned to after recovering from the birth of my daughter anyway, but had never told DFS that this had been part of my plan. When I called the worker, after moving, and told her that I had moved she hunted me down and sent a worker to investigate me in the state I had moved to. When the investigating worker arrived she said that she had talked to the Illinois worker personally, that she had learned that reports had been made after the initial 'not feeding baby' report, and that they were petty but numerous and all made by the same caseworker who handled the case. She said that the worker demanded that she open a case here, and that she be allowed to manage that case from Illinois. The worker here said that they aren't real tolerant of having someone try to dictate to them as this Illnois worker had, and that she would perform her own investigation and if she saw fit she would open a case, if not, then she wouldn't. After seeing my kids, checking my daughter's medical records, etc, she declined the opportunity. It was my first case experience with DFS, and I learned from that that experience that it apparently isn't always about abuse and neglect. Sometimes it's about obsession. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Guilty until proven innocent: Parents accused of child abuse by DCFS fight to clear their names
"dragonsgirl" wrote in message ... Betty a simple question. Since you ADMIT DV against your own child - where do you find the GALL to toss rocks at Greg? Where the hell do you come off with all that angry sanctimony? You know, some folks MIGHT understand losing your cool with the kid. BUT you 100% DESERVE to be judged by the very SAME yardstick you have applied with Greg. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Dynamic of Shame in Interactions Between Child Protective Services and Families Falsely Accused of Child Abuse.. | Greegor | Spanking | 4 | January 15th 07 09:38 PM |
The Dynamic of Shame in Interactions Between Child Protective Services and Families Falsely Accused of Child Abuse.. | Greegor | Foster Parents | 4 | January 15th 07 09:38 PM |
The circumcision decision: Parents aren't guilty of child abuse | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | January 31st 05 06:02 PM |