S/O Foster Care System

amother

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 7:25 pm

#BestBubby wrote:

1. If the parents want Trial by Judge that's fine. But the parents should have a RIGHT to Trial by Jury. I'm OK with Jane Doe/John Doe - as long as there is a public trial and the evidence is open - nothing "sealed".

2. If there is NO EVIDENCE how can government take children away with NO EVIDENCE? Because they have a "feeling"?
You can get evidence with "Munchausen by Proxy" - sometimes with hidden cameras and sometimes by removing the child and seing if the child is greatly improved.

3. The Law says that if there are willing family members with no criminal record the child MUST be given to the family. But CPS breaks this law all the time and nothing is done.

1-Many courts dont typically have trial by jury. If you want to evict someone then you typically have a trial in front of a judge, not a jury. Family court is the same. Judges make the decisions all the time, not juries. So not sure why you think that these parents should have trial by juries if its not typically done in all courts. And certain cases are private and sealed to protect minors which would be appropriate in these kind of cases as well. Parents who are abusive and/or incompetent dont have more rights than children who need protection from them so not sure why you think that these parents should have more rights than their kids.

2- There will not always be hard physical evidence and the case law includes rules of how to proceed in these cases. So you need to read the case law to understand how or why the judge reached the decision s/he did in each particular case. These cases are subject to appeal so the parents can always appeal if they disagree with the judge and a panel of appeal judges will review the case and see if the judge made the decision based on law. That is why we have so many different courts with the Supreme Court being the highest court in America so their decisions are usually final (unless they send it back to the lower courts for review but this is federal and then there are state courts as well).

3- Please cite the law and any case law involved so we can discuss them and see why cps is allowed to "break the laws" as you claim.

#BestBubby

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 7:34 pm

Here is a link to a 4 minute video of a family who had their 13 children removed "emergency" because "father was uncooperative" I.e. NO EVIDENCE of danger.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPeFECAEqHk

Thank G-d the Judge ordered the children returned - but there was an investigation (with the children in the home). The Psychologist praised the Parents to the Skies - but the Parents are still listed in the Child Abuse Registry which prevents them from many types of employment!

Ravenclaw, you are wrong for saying that children are Not removed unless there is severe abuse/neglect!

amother

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 7:36 pm

#BestBubby wrote:

I don't think Foster Care should be "dismantled" because there ARE some children who need to be removed from. home. I think Foster Care must be reformed:

1. Public Trials by Jury. Standard should be "beyond a reasonable doubt".

2. No removal of children without evidence of physical or s-xual abuse. (Today 85% are removed for "neglect" which could mean very little).

3. Children should be given to relatives (grandparents, aunt) and not strangers.

I also want to point out that it could take months or even years to get to trial since there are many cases so if a child is in danger then its not fair to keep him/her waiting all this time to be removed from the house. This is were an emergency injunction comes into play and the child can be removed without a trial as it is usually an emergency.

Also, "beyond a reasonable doubt" is a very high standard and not typically used in civil cases as you are not restricting the parents from living their lives (which is what you do when you send someone to prison) but rather you are protecting the safety and well being of a minor child so it is too high standard to have for such a case. (And I have already addressed the evidence question so I wont repeat it again.)

amother

Black

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 7:37 pm

Bestbubby, I am actually in a field where I am a mandated reporter. So I get yearly training in childhood abuse and neglect as well as se*ual abuse.
I'm sorry but you have no clue how things work. You don't make a call without any evidence or strong reason to suspect. Either physical evidence and/or what is told to us verbally by the child. And we are trained not to coach the child with leading questions when asking for clarification.
Finding some random horror stories online does not prove your point. Or a few random studies that might have been done on a very limited scale by a grad student rather than serious researchers. There's a lot of stuff floating around online. You want to prove a point, look up serious and respected scholarly journals where such studies are published.

#BestBubby

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 7:54 pm

amother [ Black ] wrote:

1. I am also a mandated reporter. My training says if there is any suspicion report to CPS - don't worry if it's "nothing" CPS will say it's "nothing". (I don't believe that).

2. My training says you DO make a call without any evidence - just a suspicion. And that CPS investigation will find the evidence. Or dismiss the case if no evidence.

3. Your training says not to ask the child "leading questions"??? My training says not to ask the child ANY questions. Only CPS will ask the child questions.

Something doesn't add up. I get training for mandated reporter and it's nothing like what you claim.

#BestBubby

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 8:01 pm

amother [ OP ] wrote:

1. If there is EVIDENCE that a child is in danger of death or injury then the child should be removed. But 85% of removals are for "neglect" where there is no danger of death or injury.

2. If a child is removed, the parent has a right to trial within 60 days - no keeping the child for months or years without a trial!

3. Taking a child is the WORST thing you can do to a parent - I think it's stopping them from living their lives! You are very callous about it.

4. Taking a child from a parent is the WORST thing you can do to a CHILD - unless their is evidence the child is in danger of death or injury!

80% of children put in foster care end up unemployed, in jail, teen pregnancy, homeless or dead. Putting children in foster is not "protecting" them - unless you have real EVIDENCE of danger of death/injury - and prove it in Public Trial by Jury!

southernbubby

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 8:15 pm

I once met a woman who was noticably cognitively impaired and was shocked when I heard some time later that she had married and given birth but the hospital immediately realized that neither she or her family members were at all capable of being responsible for a newborn so the baby was given to an adoptive family who agreed to an open adoption.
When my son was in the NICU, 2 moms lost custody of their preemies. One was an immature teenager and the other was a drug addict who engaged in prostitution. The teen was convinced to sign the baby over to a minister and his wife and the drug addict's mother got custody.
What I am trying to say is that sometimes it is the best thing for the child.

#BestBubby

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 8:17 pm

amother [ Pumpkin ] wrote:

Also, family courts are set up the way they are because they don't want to expose people's privacy to open trials. No one wants this. Can you imagine putting little kids on the stand in open court rooms? That's just cruel.

The Parents WANT PUBLIC Trials - because their children are being unjustly taken without evidence. And children very rarely testify in Court - even in the secret hearings. Instead the child's "lawyer" or a "social worker" testifies what THEY say the child wants (no video tape so lawyer/social worker and make up whatever they want).

The Cruelest thing to a child is to take them away from their parents and put them with strangers where they are abused, neglected and molested. Unless the government can prove in PUBLIC Trial by Jury that the child is in danger of death/injury.

Very hard for me to understand how anyone can defend this atrocity of putting kids in foster care where 80% end up unemployed, in jail, teen pregnancy, homeless or dead - without any EVIDENCE that their parents were a danger to them.

#BestBubby

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 8:27 pm

southernbubby wrote:

Sometimes it IS the best thing for the child. And Sometimes it is the WORST thing for the child. Children are 6 x more likely to be killed in Foster Care than by Parent. Much higher rate of abuse, neglect and molestation.

All I am asking is that there be a Public Trial by Jury so that ONLY those rare cases where the child is in danger is the child removed from the home. Also asking that the law that children be given to family be enforced. 70% of children are given to strangers - even when grandparents ask for custody. This is illegal but it happens anyway.

#BestBubby

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 9:29 pm

Ravenclaw, you claimed that children are not taken away unless there is Danger. I showed you one link where children were taken away "because father is uncooperative" (no allegation of danger).

Here is another link where CPS removed 5 children because the parents made the children do too much homework. https://www.sunherald.com/news......html

Ravenclaw, what "immediate danger" were these children in???

Excerpts from article:

[father] continued to press the question [why were my 5 children taken away] until the worker eventually said the couple was isolating his 6-year-old daughter by requiring her to spend too much time on homework.

DHS worker: She does homework for three to four hours a day at night.

Scott Berry: No, she doesn’t. (She) has an hour time limit. She has an hour to do her homework. She either does it or she doesn’t.

DHS worker: OK. So what happens if she doesn’t do it in an hour’s time frame?

Scott Berry: She doesn’t get to play outside .... She can come out of her room. She can do whatever she wants to, but she doesn’t get to go play in the backyard. That’s a privilege

Read more here: https://www.sunherald.com/news.....k=cpy

FranticFrummie

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 9:39 pm

OK, here I go, under my screen name.

I was in foster care from the age of 16 through 18. BEFORE I went into foster care, I dropped out of school, ran away from home, got involved in drugs, got raped, and ended up homeless, living on the streets. I got picked up by the cops one night, and placed in a home by CPS (my parents didn't want me back.)

When I got to my foster home, I got enrolled in a different school, and worked two part time jobs. I was working a total of 8 hours a day, plus full time school. I stopped hanging around with bad influences and partying. I graduated high school with a 4.0, a full semester ahead of my class because I had accrued so many advanced placement credits.

I was not kicked out at 18. I could easily have stayed if I wanted to go on to college and pay a small amount of rent. I decided to take an office job, and found some people to share a house with instead because I wanted some independence. To this day I thank my foster mom for saving my life. She's probably saved many other girl's lives as well. Being in foster care was the BEST possible thing that could have happened to me. (A few girls may have been determined to go back to the street, but not for a lack of love and support in foster care.)

When I got into the workforce, I ended up working 60 hours a week whenever it was time to do inventory, and I loved it. I loved the fast pace of working in a busy law firm. I loved supporting myself with hard work. When I became disabled, one of the things I miss the most is being able to go out and earn my own living.

My daughter wants to be a foster mom for at risk youth. She's seen what some of her friends have gone through at home, and wants to be able to make sure that other kids don't suffer the way her friends are. Her motives are purely altruistic. I am sure that if the day comes that she feels burned out and can't handle it anymore, she will take the appropriate steps to make sure that everything gets worked out to the best outcome. She would never leave anyone stranded.

#BestBubby

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 10:28 pm

amother [ Vermilion ] wrote:

Bestbubby if you want to advocate for cleaning up the foster system and fixing the problems that's one thing. But blindly saying children should remain in abusive situations is horrific. As a child of abuse, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. And throwing out numbers and articles won't change my opinion as someone who lived through it.

I am so sorry you were abused.
But how do you know you would not have experienced WORSE abuse in foster care?
Foster children are abused, neglected, molested - even killed - at a HIGH rate!
80% of Foster Children have a dismal outcome as adult.

simba

Sun, Aug 18 2019, 10:33 pm

#bestbubby, you repeat many times how awful the outcome of foster homes are, and I believe those numbers. Do you think it’s the same for frum kids taken away from their parents and put in other frum homes? Whether the foster family is family or another frum family do the numbers change?

I have a feeling that they do. And that’s what the women who were abused here are saying. They wouldn’t have been killed by another frum family. That’s just fear mongering. Please.