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
|
|||
|
|||
Being investgated
Betty wrote
tell her to make that available to the courts, DFS, and anyone else involved. This is advice from caseworkers. Legally you are entitled to get the test results and decide with your LAWYER whether to submit it. Could be particularly wise if the test is dirty or erroneous. Greg wrote The exams/interviews of kids that were NOT involved in the incident crosses another line. Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen of Springfield Missouri wrote Actually, it does not. See, when one child is obviously abused that leaves ALL children in the home at risk of harm, and in light of that DFS has a legal responsibility to check on the safety and welfare of the other children during an investigation. Citations please? Greg wrote The drug test demands on you are abusive if you have no drug use history. If you do have a drug use history that makes your situation tougher of course. Betty wrote I can agree. Without some sign that drug abuse may be an issue then this woman should not be subjected to drug testing. And yet this is an extremely common thing for CPS to do with no basis. Greg wrote 2. Many of them are anti-spanking ZEALOTS. Anti-spanking zealots often use rhetoric like referring to spanking as "beating" and would like to characterize ALL spanking as more extreme cases like yours, where bruises are formed. Betty wrote Add that regardless of what kind of 'zealot' a worker may be, state law dictates what is, and what is not child abuse. Spanking is legal in all 50 states. High courts have actually affirmed that CPS is NOT the spanking police. (EVEN if spanking goes too far!) The problem is that the lower (kangaroo) courts will still wrap you up in a big tarbaby before the high court opinion comes to bear in your case. In a more PRACTICAL sense, caseworkers KNOW they can't really get you for spanking, so they will, as one caseworker said "find something". Greg wrote As a parent you are NOT a mandatory reporter. If you could have just had a strong discussion with the Dad and kept that kid out of ""school""(?) until the bruising was gone, that might have been the best thing for your family. Betty wrote Beeep! Wrong answer again. Any person knowing of abuse of a child who fails to report that abuse is guilty of several different crimes, not the least of which is accessory and neglect. You don't have to be a mandated reporter. And why would there be a case with NO EVIDENCE? Being that people still have a right against self incrimination, there are some interesting problems there to be sure. If she would have concealed the bruises and kept the kid home for three days, she might have been guilty of "failure to protect" but what other crimes? They'd have to be really bad bruises before denial of medical care would be an issue.. Greg wrote The things these CPS agencies do are much more harmful for that child and for the fabric of your family than the bruising. As you have noticed, your OWN presumption of innocence |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Being investgated
Greegor wrote:
Betty wrote tell her to make that available to the courts, DFS, and anyone else involved. This is advice from caseworkers. Betty isn't one. She's just a smart grandmother did didn't listen to your babbling childish pretense that you think you are an informed and helpful parent's rights advocate. Legally you are entitled to get the test results and decide with your LAWYER whether to submit it. All things not illegal are your legal rights, Greg. That's not brain surgery. Are you then giving legal advice? Could be particularly wise if the test is dirty or erroneous. So if the test is dirty it should be hidden? And the person refuse to take the test the state requested? Yeah, that'll work. We can sure tell you aren't a child's advocate. In a home where abuse has occurred and is already reported you want the person to go all squirrelly on the court and their attorney? Oh sure. That's it. The lawyer is an officer of the court. He or she cannot abet a crime at risk of censure and loss of license to practice. If it's illegal to be a drug user in that state and HE has evidence you are, well, tsk tsk, Greg. The attorney can tell you HOW to submit the dirty test for the best chance of surviving and not having your kids removed, but they cannot legally advise you to both NOT submit and NOT take the state test. Their best advice is usually, "you are busted, and here's how to work the judge in your favor...first you kneel." Greg wrote The exams/interviews of kids that were NOT involved in the incident crosses another line. Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen of Springfield Missouri wrote Actually, it does not. See, when one child is obviously abused that leaves ALL children in the home at risk of harm, and in light of that DFS has a legal responsibility to check on the safety and welfare of the other children during an investigation. Citations please? R R R ... who made the claim first, Greg? Did you not say that the cannot interview or examine the children? Do you mean the next door neighbors kids, or the children that live in the household. How would they be NOT involved, Greg? For YOU to ask for other's citations....well, R R R R R .. Where's YOURS. Here's a little pump priming for you: Setting the scene: You know that the states receive federal grants to aid in child protection. You know that to do this a set of guidelines were created by the feds, that the states had to pass into law to be eligible and they had to PERFORM. You remember the "audits?" Well, check this out and tell us if the other children in the household can't be interviewed: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2...cfr1340.14.htm .... (d) Investigations. The State must provide for the prompt initiation of an appropriate investigation by a child protective agency or other properly constituted authority to substantiate the accuracy of all reports of known or suspected child abuse or neglect. This investigation may include the use of reporting hotlines, contact with central registers, field investigations and interviews, home visits, consultation with other agencies, medical examinations, psychological and social evaluations, and reviews by multidisciplinary teams. ... .... f) Emergency services. If an investigation of a report reveals that the reported child or any other child under the same care is in need of immediate protection, ... Pray tell, Greg, how would the state determine that "other children" than the reported child be accorded services if that other child cannot be interviewed? The following refers to a domestic violence call, not EVEN a child protection call and what are the officers advised to do? http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/162425.txt .... For this reason, officers should ask whether there are children living at the residence and, if so, where they are. o It is recommended that domestic disturbance calls be answered with at least two officers, not only for officer protection but also so that one officer can deal with the parties involved with the domestic disturbance while the other officer talks with any children who may be present. [[[ Oh! Golly...and the statute that says they can't is were, Greg? ]]] o Once the involved parties are calm, most parents, if asked tactfully, will allow an officer to talk with their children and may even appreciate the officer's offer to allay a child's fear that someone has been hurt or is going to jail. o If possible, an officer should speak directly with the children. Such conversations allow the police officer to gather information about the situation directly from the child and to assess the child's need for protection.... In fact, Greg, I recommend you read the entire document, as it lays the lie to so much of the garbage you 'parent's rights' advocates have wrong. Greg wrote The drug test demands on you are abusive if you have no drug use history. If you do have a drug use history that makes your situation tougher of course. Betty wrote I can agree. Without some sign that drug abuse may be an issue then this woman should not be subjected to drug testing. And yet this is an extremely common thing for CPS to do with no basis. I disagree with Betty on the grounds that it has not been established by investigation who the perp actually is. We can believe Tamara, our poster, but should CPS and the police? Why? Should CPS just automatically believe that the one that confessed is actually the perp? Why? Parents have lied for each other before. Hey, they'll even lie to protect an older kid that was the perp. That is the reason for cautions by CPS and investigations. If the person refuses the test, the court is likely to issue and order. By then the case is getting overheated and the next move by the COURT may be removal of the children. This we do not want, do we kiddies? 0.-] Once there are marks on the child and it's been reported it's very different than if no obvious evidence shows up and it's simply an allegation. THIS WAS A REPORT OF ABUSE. Not and allegation of abuse. Greg wrote 2. Many of them are anti-spanking ZEALOTS. Many are not, and spank their own children. Anti-spanking zealots often use rhetoric like referring to spanking as "beating" and would like to characterize ALL spanking as more extreme cases like yours, where bruises are formed. That's why they examine and take pictures. No bruises, the issue changes. Then they ask the children about owies, like "where does it hurt? If deep injuries are suspected, then of to be medically evaluated. Betty wrote Add that regardless of what kind of 'zealot' a worker may be, state law dictates what is, and what is not child abuse. Spanking is legal in all 50 states. Yep. This doesn't work well with your prior claim. High courts have actually affirmed that CPS is NOT the spanking police. (EVEN if spanking goes too far!) Yep. Sad isn't it? Imagine a judge finding that beating a child is just spanking a child. We are in trouble in this country. The problem is that the lower (kangaroo) courts will still wrap you up in a big tarbaby before the high court opinion comes to bear in your case. Yep. I'd say that a decision to make "EVEN if spanking goes to far!" is a poor judicial decision. Some judges that have done so have even expressed their regrets but had to go with how the statute read, and it read very poorly to protect children, and much more to let thugs off. In a more PRACTICAL sense, caseworkers KNOW they can't really get you for spanking, so they will, as one caseworker said "find something". Ah, the old, 'someone told me,' gambit. Yes, Greg, we know. Greg wrote As a parent you are NOT a mandatory reporter. If you could have just had a strong discussion with the Dad and kept that kid out of ""school""(?) until the bruising was gone, that might have been the best thing for your family. Betty wrote Beeep! Wrong answer again. Any person knowing of abuse of a child who fails to report that abuse is guilty of several different crimes, not the least of which is accessory and neglect. You don't have to be a mandated reporter. And why would there be a case with NO EVIDENCE? Oh, someone else DOES report, and at the same time reports you knew. Don't you ever think past the end of our nose? Or are you advocating that one should hide the injury of a child? Being that people still have a right against self incrimination, there are some interesting problems there to be sure. You have the wrong court and the wrong laws. If a parent fails to protect a child and that would include failing to ask for help, they have broken at least on statute. That it might incriminate them does not release them from the obligation to protect. Would you say, if your sainted mother, bless her sweet old head, were abused in a nursing home, the attendant that did it didn't report it, that he had the right to withhold the information because it might incriminate him? If she would have concealed the bruises and kept the kid home for three days, she might have been guilty of "failure to protect" but what other crimes? What other crime would be required to open and investigation and possibly remove the child and other children in the home and NEVER RETURN THEM? I just wonder if that's what Lisa faced. They'd have to be really bad bruises before denial of medical care would be an issue.. Oh dear, not more legal advice, Greg. Please. Do you know the statute on the mandated reporting guidelines? My boy, YOU don't get to decide how bad some injury is. YOU report it and let others do the evaluation. Check it out. This has been discussed here before more than once. Because Greg wants things to be a certain way, doesn't make them that way. Greg wrote The things these CPS agencies do are much more harmful for that child and for the fabric of your family than the bruising. As you have noticed, your OWN presumption of innocence To have in the household someone that is a poor judge of what hurts children? He sure, Greg. Remember my question of Doan he never could successfully answer? The Question, concerning how the parent can judge precisely where that line is between CP that doesn't injure and that which does, constituting abuse? Yet another example. A lot of people don't judge it well at all. And this is the result. Just how low to you wish the standard held to, Greg, to satisfy what you want, Dead Kid? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|