How the State Can Remove Custody

January 25, 2010 1 comment

SOUTH CAROLINA
Topics:
How the State Can Remove Custody
What the Law Says About Separating A Mother From Her Baby
Applicable State Law
Resources
HOW THE STATE CAN REMOVE CUSTODY
Statute: §§20-7-1572; 20-7-763(c)(F)1
Grounds: Abandonment or extreme parental disinterest, abuse/neglect, mental illness or deficiency,
alcohol or drug induced incapacity, felony conviction/incarceration, failure of reasonable efforts,
abuse/neglect or loss of rights of another child, failure to maintain contact, failure to provide support,
childʼs best interest, child in care 15 of 22 months (or less), felony assault of child or sibling,
murder/manslaughter of sibling child, presumptive father not the biological father, aggravated
circumstances, conviction for domestic violence.
Exceptions: State may elect not to file petition if: 1) when court finds that initiation of TPR is not in best
interest of child after applying statutory criteria for selection of a permanent plan for child and that this
finding and the permanent plan constitute a compelling reason for not filing for TPR; 2) when court finds
that agency has not afforded services to parents required by the service plan or that court hearings have
been delayed so as to interfere with services, but only if: a) parent did not delay hearings without cause
or delay or refuse services; b) successful completion of services may allow child to return home within
the extension period, and c) court has not made a “no reasonable efforts” determination.
WHAT THE LAW SAYS ABOUT SEPARATING A MOTHER FROM HER BABY
It appears the minor parent in foster care has parental rights over her newborn to the extent that Code
1976 § 20-7-300 sets forth that a minor parent may consent to health services for the child: ”Any minor
who has been married or has borne a child may consent to health services for the child.” Attorneys and
judges can help to ensure that teen parents are not forced to sign a voluntary placement agreement. The
agreement can have dire consequences for a young mom in care who wishes to keep custody of herbaby after emancipation 2 Some foster teen moms may need a chance to “catch their breath” after their
babyʼs birth. The alternative of temporary foster care is available through the state and services that
have the foster teen sign a voluntary agreement to hand over custody for a limited time only. When the
separation is over and the foster teen is ready to resume responsibility for child care, the infant is
returned to her pursuant to the terms of the temporary foster care contract she signed. The foster teen
should obtain legal counsel to assist and advise as to the temporary foster care alternative.
If young parents are to assume daily responsibility for the care of their children after discharge, they must
be allowed to practice that responsibility while in foster care.3 Ensuring that the young mother and her
child are placed together is a primary responsibility of the ward’s attorney. Reports and anecdotal
evidence suggest that local child welfare systems do not have enough mother/child placements to meet
the population’s needs.4 The separation of mother and infant is damaging to both. The baby is left alone
in the hospital for the entire night and portions of the day, precluding breast feeding and crucial bonding
with the mother. The state, in turn, pays an enormous price to keep a healthy child in the hospital. Such
separations are counterproductive and inhumane. They are also illegal. Attorneys for parenting wards
can address this problem from several angles. First, in some cases, steps may be taken while the ward
is pregnant to ensure that the relevant agency is making appropriate plans for the client’s post-pregnancy
placement. Next, when a client is illegally separated from her child, attorneys have several options. In
most states, the parent may file a writ of habeas corpus against the child welfare or foster care agency,
demanding that the child be returned to the mother. In some circumstances, an attorney’s threat to
initiate such action will be sufficient to motivate the agency to reunite mother and child in an appropriate
placement. Another option is to seek relief from a court with jurisdiction over the teen’s foster care
placement. The attorney should avail herself of state policies, such as those discussed above, to argue
that the ward has a right to placement with her child.5 Finally, in negotiating with state or local
bureaucrats, advocates should point out that as long as the parenting ward retains legal custody of the
infant, failure to place the mother and child together will compromise the state’s ability to receive federal
reimbursement for the infant’s care.
APPLICABLE STATE LAW
Before parental rights can be forever terminated, the alleged grounds for the termination must be proven
by clear and convincing evidence. Charleston County Dept. of Social Services v. Jackson 368 S.C. 87
(S.C.App. 2006) Natural parents are entitled to fundamentally fair procedures when the State seeks to
sever the relationship they have with their child. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14. When reviewing a family
court’s decision to terminate parental rights, the Supreme Court may make its own conclusion as to
whether DSS proved by clear and convincing evidence that parental rights should be terminated. South
Carolina Dept. of Social Services v. Cochran 356 S.C. 413 (S.C., 2003) Party seeking to terminate
parental rights must show conditions warranting such action by clear and convincing evidence. Code
1976, § 20-7-1572. Shake v. Darlington County Dept. of Social Services 306 S.C. 216 (S.C. 1991)
(Evidence did not clearly and convincingly establish that mother’s emotional instability and possible
personality disorder made it unlikely she could provide minimally acceptable care for child, and therefore
trial court properly refused to terminate mother’s parental rights; no expert testified about mother’s
emotional condition. Code 1976, § 20-7-1572(6).) A finding of willful failure to support a child will not be
predicated upon parental conduct that can be reasonably explained. Hardy v. Gunter 353 S.C. 128
(S.C.App. 2003) If the order terminating the foster teen’s parental rights is reversed and her attorney
successfully gets the case remanded to Family Court, the issue of termination may be reconsidered de
novo. South Carolina Dept. of Social Services v. Smith 311 S.C. 426 (S.C. 1993)
RESOURCES
Department of Social Services
P.O. Box 1520 Columbia, SC 29202
803-898-7318

http://www.state.sc.us/dss/cps/index.html

Legal Resources
South Carolina Legal Services
701 South Main Street, Greenville, SC 29601

South Carolina Centers For Equal Justice
701 South Main Street Greenville, SC 29601
General Phone: 864-679-3232
Fax: 864-467-3260
Web Site: http://www.sccej.org
Teen Parents and the Law (TPAL) program is based on a national teen court curriculum and serves to
teach teen parents life skills through the prism of civic education. The intensive program takes place over
a number of weeks and covers topics such as landlord-tenant law, consumer protection, child custody,
child abuse and neglect, domestic violence, voter registration, and state mandatory education
requirements. The program is designed to teach teen parents the skills to be effective parents and selfadvocates.
In April 2005, the Administrative Office of the Courts held a ‘train the trainers’ program on the
TPAL curriculum for Family Court staff members. Ten Family Courts were supplied curriculum materials
and are either implementing the program or are in the planning stages of implementation.6
Transitional or Independent Living Programs
South Carolina Department of Social Services
P.O. Box 1520 1535 Confederate Avenue Columbia, SC 29202-1520
Phone: (803) 898-7159
Fax: (803) 898-7792
Greenville County of School District – Teen Parent Program
205 Anderson Street, Greenville, SC 29601
Phone: (864) 241-3303
Collins Home and Family Ministries
P.O. Box 745, Seneca, SC 29672
Phone: (864) 882-0893
Fax: (864) 882-0452
Web Site: http://www.collinschildrenshome.org
The Collins Home is a nondenominational ministry dedicated to rescuing children from painful, and
sometimes dangerous, family situations and providing them with a safe, loving, nurturing environment
where they can grow and thrive as part of an extended family in a community that cares for and supports
them. The children learn to live and work with others as a mutually supportive family unit. At the same
time, the staff works with parents and children to teach important life skills, self-sufficiency, Judeo-
Christian values, and a strong work ethic.
Mother-baby Residential Facilities
Butterfly House Maternity Home
P.O. Box 13 Blackville, SC 29817
Phone: (803) 284-5042
Florence Crittenton Programs of South Carolina
19 Saint Margaret St. Charleston, SC 29403
Phone: (843) 577-0770
Substance Abuse Health & Treatment Resources
Partnership for Youth Transition (PYT)
http://www.ntacyt.fmhi.usf.edu
PYT is an initiative of SAMHSA (the Federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration) focusing on developing transition service systems for youth with behavioral or emotional
difficulties.
Southeastern Network of Youth and Family Services
Phone: (239) 949-4414
http://www.senetwork.org
A private, non-profit membership organization of youth service agencies in the states of Alabama,Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee.
Greenville Family Partnership
200 Mills Ave. Greenville, SC 29605

Phone: (864) 467-4099

http://www.gfpdrugfree.org/

Childcare Assistance
FAAP (District 4)
1905 Rolling Pines Dr. Columbia, SC 29206-1469
Phone: (803) 434-7020
Fax: (803) 434-3855
The liaison between the National American Academy of Pediatrics and all State Early Education and
Child Care activities.
Childrenʼs Place
310 Barnwell Ave NE, Aiken, SC 29801
Phone: (803) 641-4144
Fax: (803) 641-4147

http://www.childrensplaceinc.org

A child and family development center that serves at-risk children ages 6 to 13 years of age. Many of the
children are court placed because of abuse. The Center implemented a new after school program called,
“Gotcha” in 1997, a collaborative effort with Aiken County Public Schools. This program helps at-risk
students “catch up” with their classmates. Foster Grandparents mentored/tutored 47 students with their
homework, reading assignments, and additional practice work assigned by their school teacher. Reading
and math skills improved and failure rates subsided. Success was measured in reading levels and grade
improvements by teacher and parent surveys.
Foundation info: http://www.childrensplacefoundation.org/History.html
TANF (Temporary Aid to Needy Families) Funds
South Carolinaʼs TANF is known as the Family Independence Program
Division of Family Assistance
South Carolina Department of Social Services
PO Box 1520
Columbia, SC 29202
Phone: (803) 898-7474
FAX: (803) 898-7793

TANF/AFS (Adult and Family Services) or other
TANF is time-limited public assistance payments made to poor families, based on Title IV-A of the Social
Security Act. The program provides parents with job preparation, work, and support services to help them
become self-sufficient.
TANF legislation includes two rules specific to minor parents (parents under age 18). One rule requires
that minor parents live in an approved arrangement, usually with their parents. The other rule requires
that minor parents typically participate in education leading to a high school diploma or GED.
The living arrangement requirement to receive TANF says that a state is prohibited from spending federal
TANF funds on assistance to an unmarried, minor, custodial parent unless she lives with a parent, legal
guardian or other adult relative or is approved for an exception. The law recognizes limited exceptions to
this rule including situations in which a parent, legal guardian, or other adult relative is not available or
when such a placement could result in harm to the minor parent and/or her child. When residing with a
parent, legal guardian or other adult relative is inappropriate, the state must “provide, or assist the
individual in locating, a second chance home, maternity home, or other appropriate adult-supervised
setting.” Alternatively, the state may determine that a teen parentʼs independent living arrangement is
appropriate and that it is in the “best interest” of her child to make an exception to the general rule. 7
See also SC Code 1976 § 43-5-1220 (Minor mother must live with minor’s parents to receive welfare;

Chalk Up Another One For CPS

January 25, 2010 1 comment

Chalk Up Another One For CPS

How many more children have to die before we fix the problem?
As a general rule, Children’s Service agencies simply do not work. I’m sure people can point to one or two states who have sterling agencies with no children in the state who have been further victimized while under the “protection” of the agency, however, I’ll wager those are the exception, not the rule. I haven’t done the math, but I can personally name a good three dozen in the last two years who have wound up dead due to abuse while under the supervision and protection of Children’s Service agencies.

I don’t fault the individual caseworkers (although some of them have shown criminal levels of negligence and surely deserve blame), I’m faulting the entire system. It’s not working, for a multitude of reasons. The failures are widespread enough that I believe it’s safe to say it’s a “nationwide” problem, not a “specific state” problem. It’s not one agency, it’s many of them.

Here’s one of the latest CPS failures:

In 2004, three young siblings were removed from the care of their parents because the father of the children had abused one of them. The children first lived with their mother, but when she refused to sever contact with the father, who was by that time in prison for the abuse, the children were removed from her care as well.

The children then went to live with their father’s brother, Robert Ford, Jr., who had three children of his own. He and his wife intended to keep the children, but the folks at CPS felt that the children needed a more financially stable home. So, after seven months, the couple reluctantly placed their niece and nephews into a foster home and began saving money to adopt them.

Then, in January of 2005, while the Fords were still working to meet CPS requirements for a six child household, a prospective adoptive family began visiting with the children. After one of their visits with the family, the foster family reported that the youngest child, (then) 3-year old Sean Ford, had come home with a bruise on his bottom. The adoptive family explained that the boy had fallen from a bunk bed, but the foster mother felt the bruising was too severe. When the children reported that Sean had also been forbidden to have lunch as well, the foster mom called the authorities. A caseworker was sent to the home to evaluate the situation, met with the family and their four children and ultimately decided that there was no need for concern.

When the boy returned from a subsequent visit with welts on his bottom and thighs, Robert Ford made the next call. Once again, a caseworker investigated and decided there was no cause for concern.

On July 22, 2005, six weeks after they’d made application through a private agency to adopt the three children, the court issued a decree of adoption to Johnny and Lynn Paddock — despite the reports to CPS and despite their biological uncle’s family still working to meet the state’s requirements to adopt them. He and his wife put together a family scrapbook for the children. Robert Ford said that the children begged him to keep them that day, the last time that they were permitted to see them. Everything happened so fast, “all I could do was hold them and cry.”

The family lost touch with the children after the adoption; state law prevented them from knowing the adoptive parents.

Robert and his wife heard nothing more about the children until February 26 when they learned of Sean’s death on television. Lynn Paddock had beaten Sean with a length of PVC pipe, and when she went to awaken him in the morning, the boy was dead.

Lynn is charged with Sean’s death, no charges have been filed against the adoptive father. Lynn is being held pending trial, her bail has been set at $1 million. The boy’s surviving 8- and 9-year old siblings and the youngest two of the Paddock’s four children have been removed from the home. One child was injured so badly he was limping, according to the district attorney. The children told deputies that their mother stashed PVC pipes throughout the home.

Sean’s siblings have been placed back into the foster care system. Robert Ford and his wife again hope to adopt them. They also hope that they’ll be allowed to bury Sean.

They’ll make sure that Paddock, his adopted name, is nowhere on the tombstone.

Would Accountability Solve the System’s Abuses?

January 25, 2010 1 comment

Would Accountability Solve the System’s Abuses?
Tuesday, February 05, 2002

By Robin Wallace

E-Mail Respond Print Share:

A Tennessee federal judge in November ordered the arrest of all the employees at the Franklin County Department of Children�s Services for refusing to implement his ruling on a custody case involving a two-year-old child.

Tennessee’s child protective services office has been embroiled in scandal. Among other problems, caseworkers have been accused of falsify records and the state legislature has threatened to dismantle thestate’s foster care system unless the DCS reforms. In the case of the Franklin County arrests, the judge ruled that the child should be turned over to one of the parties in the custody case. DCS did not agree with judge’s ruling; they refused to turn the child over while they tried to stay the ruling.

And the Tennessee case may not be an isolated one. Some recent court decisions suggest that judges may be growing as frustrated with the child protective system as the families caught in it.

In May, a federal jury decided that a caseworker with the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services failed to protect three foster children who were brutally abused while in state custody. The jury found the caseworker knew of the abuse and ignored it, and violated the children’s civil rights by failing to protect them. The children were awarded $3.3 million.

In Maine, a committee of the state legislature studying the state�s child protective services system came to some scathing conclusions. The report, released in November, found that the state relied too much on foster care and needed to make greater efforts to keep families together.

In April, in a class action suit filed by child-care workers and foster parents wrongfully accused of abuse, a federal judge ruled that the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services needed to meet a higher standard of proof before reporting the workers as abusers to their employers.

Evidence presented in the Illinois case found that three-fourths of child care workers found to have abused or neglected a child were exonerated after appealing those finding, though sometimes not until years later. In the meantime, care workers and foster parents were being entered into a registry of abusers based on being accused and suffering the consequences of that listing long before their cases were decided once and for all.

Parents, however, don’t have the power judges do and it is still a rare case that makes it to a civil trial. That ‘s why activists are calling for reforms that will increase caseworkers accountability and impose penalties on those who act arbitrarily or vindictively.

The notion that a social worker would act purely out of vindictiveness sounds like parent propoganda, but California saw the need to pass a law specifically addressing that possibility. It allows for the prosecution of social workers who have been proven to have acted with intentional malice. Activists say it is almost impossible to prove a caseworker acted maliciously, but some accountability is better than none. Consider this Massachusetts case:

Postal worker David Luisi lost custody of his three children to his ex-wife for refusing to enroll in a program for “angry men”�because the only person he was angry at was the caseworker.

The couple separated in 1994 and Luisi was eventually awarded custody of the children after their mother gave them up, saying she couldn’t cope with the pressures of raising them. But in 1997, the mother filed a false abuse charge against Luisi. Based on that accusation, the Department of Social Services gave the children to the mother.

It took almost two years for Luisi to get a hearing, clear his name and then wait for DSS to correct their records. The children remained with the mother throughout the ordeal, during which time a doctor diagnosed Luisi’s young daughter as suffering from malnutrition and the mother’s boyfriend was charged with assaulting one of his sons.

Luisi informed DSS that he planned to seek custody of his children and pestered the social worker on the case to investigate his wife�s fitness. Concerned that the children appeared to be malnourished and neglected in their mother’s care and that her boyfriend was a danger, Luisi and his relatives complained to police, to the DSS and to the media that the children were being neglected.

In 1999, the social worker on the case sought an emergency order to terminate the Luisi�s visitation rights, claiming that his phone calls and anxiety over the fate of his children indicated he had problems with anger management. Visitation could only be resumed if he agreed to attend a program for men with anger issues that required participants to admit they were abusive. The alleged anger and abuse the social worker claimed required this treatment was not aimed at his own children. She was demanding he enroll in the program because she didn�t like the way he was treating her.

Luisi, who had been unequivocally cleared of the false abuse charge, feared that attending the program would brand him an abuser and hurt his chances of regaining custody when the case came to trial. He decided not to seek visitation with his children if it meant having to attend the classes.

But the case did not come to trial for another year. When it did come to trial in July, 2001, the judge gave full custody to the mother, ruling against the father because he had waited a full year to seek visitation. The judge also granted the mother permission to move to Niagra Falls, New York with the children. The judge said Luisi put his own selfish needs above the needs of his children. Yet it was the system that forced him to wait a year to seek visitation by demanding he enroll in a program for abusers because he was making too many phone calls to the social worker handling the case.

This need for greater accountability is the root of many problems with child services, activists maintain.

In the case of activist Nev Moore, her daughter was removed from their home, she said, as a strategy to force Moore to admit to being abused by her husband. Because she wouldn’t, the state kept her daughter. In other cases documented by activist organizations, social workers have defined abuse or neglect as parenting or family lifestyle choices they disagree with.

“If we had an accountability statue put in place these social workers would be a little more reluctant to go after these � frivolous cases that are blocking up our court system,” said attorney Janet Frederick Wilson.

Dean Tong Elusive Innocence Must Have Books

January 25, 2010 Leave a comment

Eight Suggestions to Guard You Against CPS

January 25, 2010 2 comments

Foster care, family preservation and civil liberties: When you want to trample on the Fourth Amendment, who ya gonna call?

Say you work for a county sheriff’s department and you suspect that a couple is growing marijuana in their home. But you don’t have enough evidence to get a search warrant. As Karl Malden used to say in those American Express commercials: What will do you – what will you do?

The dilemma arose in Sarasota County, Florida. And Sheriff’s deputies there came up with what they thought was the perfect answer: Pretend they were from the one government agency to which that pesky Fourth Amendment never seems to apply. Pretend to be from the agency that can enter any home based on no more than an anonymous telephone tip. Pretend to be from an agency so powerful that, even if technically, people have the right to refuse, they’d be too terrified to invoke it.

Yes, that’s right. The deputies pretended to be from child protective services, in this case, the Florida Department of Children and Families, and they pretended to be looking not for pot, but for child abuse.

According to the Sarasota Herald Tribune, the deputies told the couple they were investigating an anonymous tip about a child living in unfit conditions – and, they said, the couple had no right to refuse them entry.

It was all a lie, but once inside they found enough evidence to get a warrant, ultimately they found marijuana plants and drug paraphernalia. A circuit judge has ruled that illegal – and thrown out the tainted evidence. Because, after all, adults have Fourth Amendment rights.

But not children. Laws and court decisions vary from state to state, but as a practical matter, even if, technically, a parent can refuse entry to a child protective services worker, as a practical matter she’ll just run to court, claim that the refusal itself puts the child in imminent danger and get the court not only to let her in, but also to take away the children. (Indeed, she may not even need to go to court – she could simply exercise her “emergency” power to declare the child endangered, call the cops to let her in, and then leave with the child.) FULL STORY

#1
No matter what stage your “case” is in, the Number One (#1) thing YOU MUST DO- Document, Document, Document. This costs nothing and is the MOST IMPORTANT thing you can do in your defense. Keep detailed records of who said what, when. ESPECIALLY document face-to-face and conversations on the phone. Record or video tape if you have it. CPS workers “make mistakes”, LIE, and TWIST your words.
See Washington State Extended Families for a nice essay on how to do Documentation.

#2
If there is a lawyer in your area who HATES CPS and knows how to put up a DEFENSE, hire him now and help him defend you. If you have to sell the car, mortgage the house, clean out your retirement fund, borrow from relatives- pay his retainer.

NOTE- If you ARE a LAWYER who wants to learn HOW, see-
Legal Information

If you get a court-appointed attorney, you may or may not receive a “vigorous defense”. About the standard pay they receive is $500 total, so the pay is no motivation to them. You might get a young, idealistic one fresh from law school, and he may be pretty aggressive. Some older ones who are not calloused may also really go to bat for you and the children and provide Competent Counsel. In all cases, Help him defend you

Also see Make Your Court-Appointed Attorney Work For YOU at fightcps.com

NEW! August 8, 2008 How I Found Attorney Who “Hates” CPS

If there is NO such lawyer (there’s not very many), or you are penniless,

~you are going to have to learn how to DO IT YOURSELF in pro per or pro se ~

Be aware that some “courts” may be so “unencumbered by the Constitution” that a lawyer “may” risk his Bar License by providing a “vigorous defense”. (See What Happens in the FOG)

There are also stories about CPS KIDNAPPING THE LAWYER’S CHILDREN AND ASSASSINATING HIS CHARACTER TOO. We have heard of CPS doing the same thing to JUDGES, Doctors, Police officers, other CPS people (Whistle-Blowers), and even State Representatives who challenge CPS’ lies and fascist activities.

That’s why just filing your papers with the court clerk may be the only way to GET THE TRUTH ON THE RECORD. That is why the “Sui Juris” method was developed.

If you don’t get anything ON THE RECORD, you will likely have
NO appealable issues in the future. See this and ESPECIALLY THIS

What Happens in the FOG- Beginning with an anonymous hotline “tip” of suspected abuse, a parent enters a gray area of American jurisprudence. And it is not “murky” to his benefit.
Child Abuse, when alleged, is not a criminal matter. It is blithely characterized as a “Civil” matter, much the same as a lawsuit to collect on a breach of contract. Thus, the Constitutional protections afforded in a criminal case are not necessarily extended to those accused of Child Abuse. Full Article

~ INNOCENCE IS NO DEFENSE ~
Don’t kid yourself.
This is not the Happy, Fair Courts

To fully understand what Family Courts REALLY ARE- see Volksgerichtshof
Never forget to ask the “judge” if you are in a CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF DUE PROCESS
They cannot answer you honestly, because YOU ARE NOT

~By the way~
When the Nazi’s picked up the Jews
and sent them to Concentration Camps, they called it
Schutzhaft, literally translated “Protective Custody”

#3
Write your own version of history in a Sworn Affidavit
and FILE IT with the Court, the CPS, the DA, and whoever else that has ANYTHING to do with your case.
You are SWEARING to the truthfulness of your statements. The CPS witches aren’t swearing to ANYTHING (what is SACRED to them that they COULD swear on? The Humanist Manifesto II?)

You had better be telling the truth with no “embellishments” and citing FACTS you can back up with evidence or witnesses’ sworn statements. Say NOTHING self-incriminating. If you have something to hide, you aren’t going to lie your way out of it.

Grammar Quick Help Class 101 How your papers LOOK matters!

The importance of your Sworn Affidavit cannot be over- emphasized!
THE ONLY WAY you have appealable “issues” in the future
is to get your facts ON THE RECORD in court.

#4
SHUT UP— SHUT UP— SHUT UP!
Quit talking with the CPS monsters. You are waiving your FIFTH AMENDMENT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT and Miranda Rights every time you answer a question.
“The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” — Miller v. U.S. Source: 230 F 2d 486, 489

Personal and phone conversations are where “mistakes” (inventions and fabrications) happen when THEY write their report about the conversations. Words you say float up into the rafters and come back twisted against you. If you feel you have to talk with them, record it or videotape it. And don’t forget to DOCUMENT it.

CPS is NOT your friend!

Women especially fall into this trap. Especially in cases where a child is ALLEGEDLY abused or molested by a family member.

DO NOT pour your heart out to a CPS worker or CPS contractor Mental Illness clinician.

Do that, and you will join the ranks of “co-perpetrator” lamenting “I was so, so foolish. I was an IDIOT. I thought they were there to HELP me. I thought the CPS worker CARED. I thought I had PROFESSIONAL CONFIDENTIALITY with the psych shithead.”

CPS will use every word you say to make your child a Legal Orphan, because THAT’S what they are being PAID for.
Ignore or forget this at your and your children’s EXTREME PERIL.

August 21, 2008 NEW CASELAW

Case Name: U.S. v. Craighead, District: 9 Cir , Case #: 07-1-135
Opinion Date: 8/21/2008 , DAR #: 13245
Case Holding:
Interrogations occurring inside the home are custodial, requiring Miranda advisements under the Fifth Amendment, if the circumstances turn it into one of a “police-dominated” atmosphere.

Speaking personally, if there was no cop there, I would darn sure turn it into a “police dominated atmosphere”, by calling 911 and report that my home was being trespassed under the Color of Law with no Warrant.

If they DO have a warrant, SHUT UP, SHUT UP, SHUT UP.

#5
BE POLITE! The highest crime you can commit is “Contempt of Social Worker”. We have reports of POLICEMEN telling people that the Constitutional Rights and Miranda Rights are only for TV, and what they are doing is “The Real World”.
See The Oath of Office
EVERY OATH of OFFICE in the USA includes “support the Constitution”

Since many of them seem like childish morons, SOCIOPATHIC, and plainly nasty with no discernable social “skills”, this can be a difficult task.

“I would love to answer your question, but I cannot do that without violating my Fifth Amendment Rights and my Miranda Rights”

“I would love to let you in my house to look around without a Search Warrant. But I cannot do that without violating my Fourth Amendment Rights”

“There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you.” –William Hazlitt

We believe the court-ordered psych exam is a violation of your 5th Amendment rights. Don’t entertain the folly that psychiatrists are your friend. No, you do not enjoy professional “confidentiality” with them. They are the foremost tool of character assassination.

#6
Insist on LETTERS to and from the agencies. They can’t alter their words printed on paper that have been mailed to you. Nor can they alter your words either. KEEP COPIES of your letters to them.

#7 Get your records- FOIA/Privacy Act/ Open Records. Anything they FORCE you to sign, sign it “Under Duress”. You can also Rescind your previous signatures.
San Diego Courts Examiner
Gregory Smart
Freedom of Information Act & Public Records Requests
November 14, 7:58 PM

#8
Clean up your house and your life.
Obviously, if your house is a mess or your life is a mess, your CPS worker is going to use every bit of it against you. There is (so far as we know) absolutely NO LAW about “dirty house”, but they make a big deal out of it.
Shacking up with a boyfriend is the path to hell. Boyfriends have NO “natural affection” for your children, and they are the #1 baby rapists and child abusers and killers, at the TOP of any statistical data.

So this is something YOU CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT. Clean up. Quit smoking. Whatever you are doing that you KNOW is wrong, the choice is between your laziness, habits, lifestyle choices, CATS, and YOUR KIDS.

You choose. If you can’t, then don’t complain about what happens.

Also see AFRA Dress Codes. How you dress and conduct yourself in interviews, at court, or with the Mental Illness Clinicians- matters

Big Brother is Watching YOU in the UK

January 25, 2010 Leave a comment

Shredded Society: States Earn Bonuses & Rewards For Taking Children Away From Their Parents

January 25, 2010 Leave a comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,188 other followers