The Abuses of Child Protective Services By Liz Gini 3/27/02

Part V of a Series

"The interest of parents in the care, custody and control of their children is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this court," Troxel v. Grancille, 530 U.S. (2000). If this is the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, how have we as a nation allowed Division of child and Family Services (DCFS/CPS) to turn into such a Beas$t? See if you can find the hidden clues. The answer will be revealed next week.

Can you think of a scenario in which your children and grandchildren could be taken from your home in the dead of night? One in which your children and babies are grilled about sexually explicit subjects foreign to them and subjected to cavity searche$, abused by total stranger$, while their parents are not allowed to even be present?

Russia? China? A third world country? Try again. Try the Division of child and Family Services, Clark and Nye County, Nevada. $$

Because the removal of your children can be implemented by an anonymous telephone call, and because you may never be criminally charged (nor is this a civil suit against you) your family will fall into this "never land" recently created by the legislature$.

You may never know of what you are accused and your children will become imprisoned in the "protective custody" of a system from which there may be no escape. The web of lies and hops you enter into is like walking on ball bearings and just when a set of rules is handed down that you must obey, the rules will change, and a judge who has spent 30 seconds reviewing your case will be told by a $ocial worker who will not return your calls that you have been "uncooperative" and your children should remain in the $ystem for 6 more months. $$$

Nevada Revised Statute 432 (b), has unleashed the Bea$t to ravage Nevada families while chanting, "for the sake of the child."

In the weeks to come, I will try to present to you an up close and personal look at families traumatized forever by the actions of the Bea$t. Many of them paid tens of thousands of dollars, sacrificed their homes, liberty, and right to raise their children in their faith of choice. Some of the allegations they faced caused their friends and family to turn their backs; some faced imprisonment.

Family court judges are elected, and tend to err on the side of caution and removed children from their homes for $illy reasons and with no proof rather than return a child to a situation that has been described by a $ocial worker as dangerous. Some judges take the word of a $ocial worker whose very career is predicated on the number of children in his or her care, rather than listen to the parents or their physicians.

Judges might do well to study the statistics. In Southern Nevada in 1997, abuse or neglect was reported involving 55,088 families. Fewer that 45% of these reports were substantiated. Last year, on a national level, 60% of child abuse accusations were unsubstantiated.

Studies indicate that children are 10 times more likely to be abused in foster care than in their own homes. Children in foster care are housed with non-siblings from God only knows what kind of backgrounds. Sexual abuse is rampart. Children housed at Child Haven, the kiddie dog pound, share rooms, toys, colds and viruses.

A California report released by CPS Watch provided data that revealed the number of child fatalities in the general population was 0.3 per one hundred thousand. The number of child fatalities occurring in state care was 7.0 per one hundred thousand.

Last year, a three-year-old placed in the care of foster mother Brenda Craney of Los Angles died after being scalded by Craney. Instead of calling 911, Craney called her social worker and waited for her to arrive. It was outrageous that Craney was charged with only a misdemeanor for the death. Any parent with the misfortune to experience the same tragedy would likely have been charged with murder. It did not take long for a jury to convict her. But, the true travesty was yet to come. Judge Robert J. Perry later threw the verdict out. So much for "protective custody."

We will be reviewing one of the cases to which I was assigned where an eighteen-month-old baby nearly died when he fell from social worker Jayme Esplin's car. When I brought a camera to the hospital, four Metrognomes were called to guard this child's room. (I got the pictures anyway). The person who is safer is the caseworker. If a child who is left at home is injured or killed, the caseworker may face discipline, but if a child is molested, injured or killed in foster care, the caseworker is free from blame. They whip out their "qualified immunity" card so fast, you'd think you were on a Nevada roller coaster. Oh, that's right, you are. And what is the incentive to promote such evil? Have you been paying atten tion? According to the Dept. of Labor and Forbes magazine, the foster care industry is the largest "cottage industry" in America today. The seizing of our children is now called an industry. This cottage industry of cash harvested by foster homes, social workers, diagnosticians and judges march to a drum of over $12 million. Next week, we'll look at the $.

Liz Gini is a Certified Legal Assistant employed by Robert Glennen, Esq., and the author of two books. She is presently completing a book entitled "The A buses of Child Protective Services." Lizgini@lasvegastribune.com

http://www.lasvegastribune.com/2002/03/27/commentaries/LizGini/index.htm

-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), April 16, 2002

Answers

OK Tony,

You argument is that corruption in our government can cause more risks to those who are victims of abuse.

I'll make these arguments:

1) Relaxing enforcment of sexual abuse laws or legalizing sexual abuse can never be a "solution."

2) The government must protect those who allege abuse.

3) The government must presume that a defendent is innocent until proven guilty.

4) The government must implement mechanisms for accountability (checks and balances) so that no organizations or individuals in the government may use their powers in an unlawful manner without answering to another authority.

Government is imperfect, because it is made of imperfect individuals. To quote from Winston Churchill:

"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those others that have been tried from time to time."

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 16, 2002.

Mateo... with all due respect, just consider the fact that this type of thing is less simple corruption and more of the coming police state and thereafter something much more heineous. Dig around a bit and notice that this America is no longer a country operating as a Republic. The terrorist are right here at home; they threaten my family every day. They take the proceeds of all my hard work, they impend my business at every step; they threaten to take away my means of self defense, my children can be taken with a simple phone call, what the hell? We fought a revolution over a 3% tax. King George was a joke compared to what we have now. The Constitution wasn't perfect, you're right, but its better than what we have now. There is much more coming and Christians are the prime objective. I told people about this stuff twelve years ago and they laughed; now they call me to tell me I'm right. We are on the road to global tyranny. I've experienced it. I realize I'm going to take a beating for saying such, but I don't care anymore because people need to see what's ahead for us.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), April 16, 2002.

Come, come now Mateo, you saying that government is more importent then the protection of out children ? You really think a check and balance IN the government is actialy going to work ? Now imagine a child that is rip from your loving arms and never be able to see them again just because someone made a phony phone call, now imagine all that money that they get for every child they bring in, now imagine there GREED as they kidnap OUR children and corrupt the rest of the systom with money, now imagine a safe haven for pedophiles that can take ANY child that it wants and get off with them, while they are lock up into the federal systom, now imagine one that ran away and in search of there loving mothers arm and the child is taken away AGAIN.

Look into your heart and protect OUR children from these monster government coperation that can KILL and RAPE OUR children with only a slap on the wist. By the way, you have any ideal what a check and balance is ? I'm assuming not considering all the brainwashing public school had put you through, or are you in favor of tyranny ?

-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), April 17, 2002.

Tony writes:

"Come, come now Mateo, you saying that government is more importent then the protection of out children ?"

If you hope for anarchy as a solution, you are terribly mistaken to believe that anyone will be safe.

Tony writes:

"You really think a check and balance IN the government is actialy going to work?"

As a matter of fact, I do. It's worked for more than 200 years.

Tony writes:

"Now imagine a child that is rip from your loving arms and never be able to see them again just because someone made a phony phone call, now imagine all that money that they get for every child they bring in, now imagine there GREED as they kidnap OUR children and corrupt the rest of the systom with money, now imagine a safe haven for pedophiles that can take ANY child that it wants and get off with them, while they are lock up into the federal systom, now imagine one that ran away and in search of there loving mothers arm and the child is taken away AGAIN."

This sounds like a great "60 Minutes" story.

Tony writes:

"Look into your heart and protect OUR children from these monster government coperation that can KILL and RAPE OUR children with only a slap on the wist."

Where does your paranoia come from? Do you share your views with anyone in the real world?

Tony writes:

"By the way, you have any ideal what a check and balance is ?"

I do know what "checks and balances" are. If you are unsure, here is how it works:

"Checks and Balances is a system where people in the government are able to impede the work of others in the government if they believe the work to be a violation of rights."

Tony writes:

"I'm assuming not considering all the brainwashing public school had put you through, or are you in favor of tyranny ?"

I'm going to go out on a limb and make the assumption that you have either a terrible relationship with your father or you have no relationship with your father.

You presume that the government brainwashed me to believe in a system that you have no faith in. I wonder if you'd be kind enough to offer us your alternative to replace our federal republic.

I'm going to also assume that you are from Nevada based on your email. Is this where you get your negative view of public education?

Based on your constant misspellings and grammar problems, I'm going to guess that you're a teen. Regardless, I'd ask you to take your future contributions a bit more seriously. This is not a teen chat room, and you are sticking out with posts that don't fit the threads that you post to.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 18, 2002.

What in the world has this to do with furthering our knowledge of Catholism. This thread is way of base to the purpose of this forum.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 18, 2002.

I move to nevada, but I got my education from Indiana, you can blame the department of education for my english of Learning Disable, I try my best with all the pressure I went through so at least you could do is give me some credit. I don't think it really matters the person age or not, you suggesting that age has something to do with maturity, which I dought to be true, anyways your theory about the "Check and Balance" seem to be on the right track, now tell me the three checks and where tyranny is PREVENTED.

-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), April 18, 2002.

Tony wrote:

"I don't think it really matters the person age or not, you suggesting that age has something to do with maturity, which I dought to be true,"

Age does have something to do with maturity, even if some young people are mature and some old people are immature. The relationship still exists.

"anyways your theory about the "Check and Balance" seem to be on the right track, now tell me the three checks and where tyranny is PREVENTED. "

You seem to think that all government is inherently tyrannical. This is not true. When you travel outside this country, you will understand what we have.

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 18, 2002.