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
|
|||
|
|||
When does the Child Protective System become abusive itself?
When does the Child Protective System become abusive itself? Randy Johnson 05 Jul 2006 21:00 GMT http://www.indymedia.org/en/2006/07/841989.shtml Oregon Child Protective Services is violating US Constitutional Rights, as it sets out to protect our children from abuse. Oregon is not the only state doing this, but my investigation is limited to my state at this time. Abuse by government against its citizens is also abuse. Read on! When does the Child Protective System become abusive itself? By: Randy Johnson Friedrich Hayek, 1960 “The greatest danger to liberty today comes from … the efficient expert administrators exclusively concerned with what they regard as the public good.” When one thinks of the child protection agencies who are to protect our children from neglect and abuse, one would seldom think this very system capable of abuse;. The numbers themselves show a need for specialized attention to child abuse and neglect. Enter Oregon State in 1989 with legislation creating the Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) whose funding and history is as shown by the Oregon Department of Justice. This shows the History of CAMI, the States program to provide funding to this new MDT system in order to facilitate the handling of Oregon’s incoming child abuse complaints. This system also seems to have become a gatekeeper to the judicial process, controlling which cases need more investigation / evidence, are unable to determine, or require prosecution and / or jail. With over three unfounded cases to each founded case reported statewide, it is imperative that the local MDT be above reproach, professional, and thorough in its investigations and determinations. Especially when one considers the fact that the total victims has not surpassed the 1999 high, but rather is following a normal average trend, with rises and falls, ever since the programs inception. The only statistic that has over doubled since the MDT systems inception is the total reports, which has steadily risen since 1996. Due to the nature of child abuse crimes, the accused is often incarcerated awaiting trial. Look at the Total Child Abuse / Neglect Reports chart (Oregon DHS) and realize that more cases were unfounded in 2004 (35,902) than all the reported cases total for the year 2000 statewide. Because these innocently accused are tax-paying, many times home-owning, hard-working fellow Oregonians with families, the law enforcement members of the MDT have a duty to protect them as well. “Protect the Innocent” used to be painted on almost all police cars and today that must still apply to those who have been accused of a crime they did not commit. The District Attorney has an obligation to the voters who elect them to enforce the law, but this does not include prosecuting and incarcerating the innocent. The Child Protective Services has an obligation to protect Oregon’s children and preserve the family structure, not rip innocent family members out of the home on false accusations. As Simone Weil said, (1933) “Every sovereign, centralized state is potentially aggressive and dictatorial.” As one can see from the map below, many of the counties with a high percentage of households under the poverty line have the highest abuse prosecution rates. The chart below that shows the disparity between counties in case outcomes. The simple fact that excessive prosecution rates and very low unfounded case numbers are only in the states poorest counties (with some population) raises the question of why is this only occurring where most are financially-challenged (not-a-crime), and therefore least able to defend themselves? The fact that none of the richest counties, the poorest county (Malheur), and many other counties with the same poverty level do not have the excessive prosecution rates, and these counties include most of the states largest cities, makes this even more questionable. These poorest counties are the only counties where ‘unable to determine’ rates are over 50%, (statewide average around 36%) unfounded cases are from just over 10% to just under 20%, (statewide average almost 40%; with the largest cities counties posting from just under to just over 50%). The only statistic within 10% of the statewide average is the founded case rate, the one statistic that should be spiking, but isn’t. The other trend you will note in the 2001 DHS study data (chart below) is the fact that almost all of the largest population counties post unfounded cases as the largest percentage, and those counties where founded cases are the largest percentage also post unfounded rates within 10% of the state average. The counties with the largest percent of unable to determine cases, leads one to question the very investigative abilities of this MDT approach, as it now exists, The members of the Jackson County Multidisciplinary / Joint Investigation Team (MDT) include the Jackson County District Attorney, Oregon State Child Protective Services, County and City Police Detectives who handle abuse cases, and representatives of the Children’s Advocacy Center. These MDT’s have become the ‘gatekeeper’ for all child abuse cases in the county. You will note in the Adult Criminal Process chart below, distributed by the Medford Child Advocacy Center to parents, that the MDT handles everything from the initial report to the decision to arrest, and then it goes to the District Attorney. Except in Jackson County where the DA is on the MDT. The authors of a May 2000 study, Karen C. Tumlin and Rob Geen, collected information from 31 states pertaining to the child abuse report screening and assessment process. Using 1996 data appearing in this report, Oregon compared to the national median as shown in the table below: Percentage of investigated Oregon National reports that were substantiated…………. 59.7%………….38.0% Oregon State CPS was prosecuting 21% more than the national average Percentage of all reports substantiated…………. 36.7%………….26.7% in 1996, just four years after the MDT system was finally funded. Entire Tumlin and Geen report available at the Oregon DHS website under the Child Protective Services division Tumlin and Geen also concluded “since few states have explicit guidelines, workers use their discretion and biases when making screening decisions.” This becomes obvious when parents tell you quotations of CPS Caseworkers stating, “Parents are not qualified, or properly trained to decide if their child is abused or not” and “We marry these men, have their children, and then they abuse them” or “I have more power in these cases than the judges and courts do.” This last statement may seem like a bad joke, until you interview a person or two that was exonerated by a jury, and then show letters demanding they produce more evidence of their innocence to Oregon CPS, or the agency will find them guilty. The letters acknowledge the court by stating that if the court decision agreed with CPS, and found you guilty, you could simply ignore this notice. In one case Oregon CPS did all of this over a year after the court acquitted them! The funding of this entire system should be from the state, removing any and all ties to convictions affecting budget funding, just like the Oregon State Courts for obvious reasons. The overall ‘big picture’ view of all the funding and its distribution via grants is provided by the Oregon Department of Justice Crime Victims’ Assistance Section Grant Unit (2005) as follows: These same non-profit and local community based programs are the very ones who stand to benefit financially from such gains, as they are attached to the very agencies and key players who control when and if any sexual abuse case is founded, or not. Then we come to the input from those involved in the system itself. When one begins to hear trial lawyers say, “You are innocent until proven guilty in America, unless you are charged with child abuse in Oregon, then it is the other way around” you begin to wonder. Trial lawyers, family members, and some alleged abusers state the system is ‘railroading’ the innocently accused without proper investigation. Studies show this may be due, in-part, to lack of training with Child Protective Services (CPS), District Attorneys (DA), and Law Enforcement detectives handling the investigation process. Another factor appears to be a funding issue, with much of the systems intake agency structure being funded through non-tax-dollar sources, including the fees and fines levied on the convicted. Studies show that Oregon’s shrinking state agency funding has contributed with overloaded CPS caseworkers and a shortage of qualified credentialed supervisory staff as required for oversight of the process in a timely manner. In the big picture, all of the nineteen county MDT’s violating Oregonian families in this fashion, control a portion of their funding, simply by how many convictions they achieve. All nineteen together make for a raise for all counties, and may be why Medford, a smaller city in Oregon, has the best staffed, funded, and equipped Children’s Advocacy Center in the State. Medford is located in one of Oregon’s poorest counties, and has a 51% unable to determine rate. Why become evident when a young lady and her young child showed paperwork ordering them to make monthly medical exams (at the Advocacy Center), or risk having her child taken by CPS. For all intensive purposes, the State may have well put a gun to this young mothers head! The mother was not the person accused of the possible abuse, but she had to live here for over a year (she wanted to return to her families state), keeping the monthly exams, as the MDT kept her case in the “Unable-to-determine” category the entire time. Over a year later, the case was dropped, mother and child fled Oregon, and the Child Advocacy Center added 15 exams to justify the need for funding their full time medical staff! This detail allows one to see how the local MDTs are directly funded from fees and fines charged convicted criminals, and so founded cases could become more important to local public and non-profit support agencies and MDTs budgets than just fulfilling the intended mission to keep our children safe. This however, is not unique to Oregon’s funding strategy. The Federal government is providing funding in the same manner to the exact same programs. The Oregon Department of Justice chart shows the flow of VOCA funds. The ethical implications of this pattern of funding from the Federal government, verses thirty-six counties in Oregon working from a single state fund, are much lower. First, the funding is divided up between all fifty states. Second, the state distributes to the respective counties via project or basic grants. With nineteen of Oregon’s most poverty stricken counties pumping a growing percentage of cases into the courts, with high conviction rates, coupled with low unfounded case rates, it does not take long to see how the overall state fund from which the county MDT’s and local Victim Assistance Programs could quickly create a raise. Also, consider that Oregon States general fund dollars have continued to shrink for a number of years now. Since the intake process, after the initial report, begins with the local MDT, the integrity and ethics of the team, and its operation, becomes imperative. This is as much for the protection of the children and victims as it is for those who are innocent and accused of abuse. The MDT serves as the gatekeeper for the entire process, the first step, charged with the joint investigation of such complaints and making the decision if the case appears founded and proceeds on for prosecution (and trial) or not as an unfounded complaint. The entire process is dependant on the integrity, expertise, judgment, and investigative talents of this expert county team, and so are your life, liberty, and happiness if you are ever accused falsely. When the intake coordinator for Medford’s Child Advocacy Center was asked if they had a procedure or policy in place to handle situations where the child is less than truthful, she answered with, “I have never even considered that.” This should scare every parent in the State! Any law written which unfairly relies on or assumes the absolute honesty of a minor child, could not have been a parent when authored. Is there a parent out there who thinks their kid is incapable of lying? I don’t care how good they are, or how well you raised them, they will all lie more than once before they grow up, some more than others. The meaning of the word ‘investigate’ may provide some insight into what has gone wrong with the investigation process. The problem is that there is two definitions at play here. Merriam Webster's Dictionary of Law (1996) (http://dictionary.lp.findlaw.com/ ) defines: Investigate [in-'ves-te-'gat] -gated -gating : to observe or study by close examination and systematic inquiry specif : to make (a criminal suspect) the subject of inquiry and study for the purpose of establishing probable cause: to make a systematic examination esp : to conduct an official inquiry The other definition is from the child advocacy profession, where the term ‘investigation’ is defined as, Investigation Collecting and assessing objective information to determine if a child has been or is at risk of being abused or neglected. This often includes face-to-face contact with the child and results in a decision about whether the report is substantiated. Child Advocacy Central (WA), Understand Child Welfare Terms, http://www.childadcentral.org/resources/terms.aspx The difference between the two definitions lies in the second sentence of the Child Advocacy definition of investigation. How do you make an objective decision based only on a face-to-face interview with an accuser? From there everything depends on whose definition you operate under, and so does the outcome. If the MDT conducts an official investigation and questions all involved witnesses they may prevent the prosecution of an innocent Oregonian, and the resulting effects on that family. This system prevents any criminal (or otherwise) penalty for less than truthful children! If you go by the Child Advocacy definition, you would need no more than to believe the child, and as scary as that sounds, county MDT’s and Oregon Child Protective Services are doing exactly that! The ethical legal delema for those who oversee the MDTs, and the officers of the court who are MDT members, is which definition of investigate is in the best interest of the public trust when charged with the task of protecting our children from abuse? Murder is the only crime higher on Oregon’s felony list than felony child abuse charges. Now consider the fact that one Jackson County investigation caused one judge to postpone a trial, because the DA had not yet spoken with the only eyewitness! One father, of an alleged abuse victim said, “I questioned both the police dectective and the CPS caseworker, after the interviews with the children were done. The bottom line from both, to answer the question ‘why’ they proceeded with the case was, “I Believed Her.” (referring to the formally abused teen who made the abuse accusation)” In this case the report was made to a school dean, and CPS and Medford Police Department (MPD) got the report the week before Christmas 2004 (mandatory reporting). The first interview with the reporting victim was a week into 2005 (3 weeks later). The second victim was interviewed a week after that (a month later). Two weeks later a third interview was done with a resident child of the accused mans home. (Month and a half after the original report) This is troubling since CPS regulations and policies require investigations to be complete within 30 days, unless you need more investigation time. In this case, the investigation ended with a 50+-year-old tax-paying homeowner in jail on the accusers statement only. This despite the second reported eyewitness / abuse victim said nothing happened, and a third child (a resident of the suspects home) stated the same. One accusing statement out of the two alleged victims, who were to have been abused in each other’s presence, was enough for the MDT to prosecute. When a CPS administrator was asked about this she said, “We are adults and we can roll with the punches.” How many other adults have been rolled over with such a punch based on a lie? The truth in this case is that this was the accusers way of getting dad back home. So I ask again, when does the CPS System become abusive? The DA or the MDT never spoke with the other young teen that reported the story to her junior high dean out of anger at the accusing teen victim. No one official interviewed the residents of the suspects home or family, even after the arrest. The parents of the second teen to have been abused, had their first contact with the police detective after a week of calls attempting to find our why their daughter was pulled out of class at school. The Principal of her school didn’t even know, for several days into the following week, that the interview even occurred. They were finally informed, after over a month since the mandatory report was made to police, that there daughter was reported to be a victim of sexual abuse! This would upset any parent! The father said, “IF this had been a real sexual abuse case, Oregon State Child Protective Services and Medford Police, knowing that neither the mother nor my household (divorced) was under any suspicion, did not inform us as parents (if this had been a real abuse case) for over a month, and that is just wrong.” He also stated, “My daughters faith in the entire judicial system has been destroyed by this. When she left the “Safety Committee” meeting (at school), she knew they had lied to her, and no longer trusts police as we taught her to. I cannot, as a parent, fault her for this since I witnessed her being told (by the accuser) that the case that sent her grandpa to jail for 4 & ½ months was based on a lie! If I did that under oath in court, I would be charged with perjury; unlike the accusing minor who lied on the stand, who is protected by sexual abuse statutes.” Statistics show there are many more Oregonians who have been improperly prosecuted by this unconstitutional system. After all, 3 out of every 4 complaints are unfounded, and luck of the draw says if you put enough of them through the system, some will be convicted and their fines and fees will pay your salary! Any wonder why investigation techniques are getting lax, as total cases keep climbing? Do you know someone that this has happened to? Has someone in your family been accused? If they live in Southern Oregon this journalist would like to hear from them, or at least Email a short version of their story (with contact information, which will remain confidential, it is only so I can verify the story). I offer this story as proof I will protect your identity, just as I did the parents quoted in this article, at their request. I will withhold the names where it is essential to protect the innocent and get the truth told. You can reach Randy Johnson by E-mail at . e-mail:: CURRENTLY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES VIOLATES MORE 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 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 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... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
... Link Between Abusive Child-Rearing, Overly Aggressive Behavior | 0:-> | Spanking | 0 | January 16th 07 07:12 PM |
When child imitates abusive parent denigrating you? | [email protected] | Single Parents | 3 | November 6th 05 03:43 PM |
NY: Abusive Mother also abuses state welfare system | Dusty | Child Support | 0 | January 10th 05 03:55 PM |