Posts Tagged ‘laws’

Will Anyone Help With a Class Action Law Suit Against CPS?

September 27, 2011

I am far from being a lawyer and have no idea how to really fight this section of our government, but if we don’t they will go on destroying families.  Please someone help start a class action suit against “Child Parent Separators”.  They traumatize innocent children all in the name of the old mighty dollar. We all need to put a stop to this, if anyone can help please do.   Thank you, Charlotte

cbliss@gmail.com

Some how cps or better called Child Parent Seperaters

March 30, 2011

How can we ever stop this evil agency?

CPS PLACEMENT, FALSE ACCUSATIONS, FIGHT CPS, LIES, HELP

August 22, 2009

I saw this letter and I think everyone should think about their innocents.  Try to fight with what you can.

If I were to write a letter to an attorney in a new CPS case, it might go something like this:

You have been appointed to represent me as an attorney in the county juvenile court. Be on my side; I need your help. I am fighting for the release of my three children from state custody. I am innocent of any wrongdoing. The caseworker made assumptions about me that are false. My children need to be at home with me, for their well-being – mentally, emotionally, and physically.

While you are my attorney, please keep in mind that you are working for me, not for the county that pays you. As my attorney I expect you to give me the best legal representation available. I therefore request face-to-face meetings with you at least once monthly to make sure you are actively working on my case, and not letting it slide between the cracks.

I understand that many court-appointed attorneys tend to simply guide parents through the juvenile court system, advising them to plead guilty to charges to make things easier for everyone else in the courtroom. This is not the kind of representation I’m requesting. I’m asking you to be actively involved in proving my innocence.

I’m hereby asking that you take my case to trial and make the caseworker prove all charges. Since they are false charges, I think it would be in my best interest, and the best interest of my children, if I were to fight to prove my innocence with a full trial. Do not under any circumstances ask me to plead guilty to false charges against me.

As you know, parents involved in CPS cases have to complete a ’service plan’ yet many do so and still do not get their children returned. I would like to avoid doing any kind of ’services’ and request that you refuse all services, and/or force the caseworkers to prove the need for any services requested. I do not want to be in the position of many parents in these cases forced to have psychological evaluations when there is no evidence of mental illness, or forced to do drug testing when there’s no evidence of drug abuse. Please honor my request, protect my best interests, and see that my time is not wasted by unnecessary court-ordered ’services’. Of course they would also be a waste of taxpayer money. Do everything you can to resist these services in my case. As you are my attorney I’m trusting you to fight these issues individually and fiercely.

I expect you to be 100% aware of what is happening with my case at all times, and to inform me immediately of any changes.

I expect you to obtain and share with me a complete copy of the case file including all case narratives.

I expect you to help me compile substantial evidence to prove my innocence in this case by preponderance of the evidence.

I expect you to produce legal paperwork including a complete response to all caseworker reports, declarations supporting my side of the case, and other documents as needed, and to present those documents to the judge or juvenile court referee who hears our case.

I expect you to do everything you can to prevent my name from being included on the central index, blacklisting people from working with children. I am innocent and my name should not be included on that list.

Please respond to my requests in writing within ten days; I will need your written response for my records in this case.

Sincerely,

Name of Client

CPS PLACEMENT, COURTS, FALSE ACCUSATIONS, ABUSE OF POWER, FIGHT CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES

August 22, 2009

United States citizens who are naïve to the ways of the Child Protective System and the courts, or perhaps not wealthy or connected, may inadvertently find themselves subjected to a nightmare. Many entities profit from the time a child first enters the “system”. What are some of the techniques CPS and the courts use, why does nobody hear about this problem and what is the outcome for the children and their families? How children are suffering harm by those with a duty to protect them.What harm do children and families suffer as a consequence of false accusations of child abuse?.
Last year over two million American families were falsely accused of child abuse!!

!
It is not in any one individual state but is now a worldwide epidemic.I don’t mean to disturb you but I really want people to be aware about that subject, because today, tomorrow, in the next half hour, it could happen to us too!
Very few children in America are genuine orphans. Most have relatives, family friends, neighbors or godparents who could, and are willing to, keep them if they must be moved temporarily or permanently from parental homes. As we know, there is such a halo around “adoption” and states have received financial incentives for finding “forever homes” for the children who are made Paper Orphans by a stroke of a judge’s pen. The child is labeled as abused and/or neglected and therefore is “at risk” and usually that means more money goes to the people who adopt the child, usually the ones in the pre-adoptive home where most babies are placed immediately. Those people have a say and can make comments along the way, so they are very much involved and interested in interrupting any chance that the baby will be returned home. If the baby stays in a “foster” home for 15 of 22 months, as you know from reading, then the termination can be effectively automatic by federal law and state incorporation of its provisions and sometimes that’s the excuse….

Fight Child Protective Services Help

August 10, 2009

If you are having difficulty processing how a person can be charged with any negligence or abuse related to a child and not be found innocent if they are indeed innocent – let me inform you of the differences between criminal court and family court. In criminal court the law does indeed maintain that a person is innocent until proven guilty. The state or prosecuter has the burden to prove that the defendant is guilty, in fact they have to prove it is reasonably possible just to get the defendent into court and tried. Some evidence must be obtained of some kind, and an indictment is needed. Therefore, while it is possible for an innocent person to be convicted of a crime, it is more difficult to do so.

In fact, this mantra ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ is so ingrained in our minds as Americans from tv, movies and culture that we mistakenly believe this is the law in ALL courts, and fail to be aware that it is only the law in criminal court. This is not the case in family court, where child abuse and neglect allegations are made. In family court there is no burden of proof on the state, county or prosecutor. Furthermore, you are guilty unless and until you can prove your innocence. Don’t believe it is true? Call up an attorney, friend or judge, or do an internet search to find out for yourself. This is not criminal court, and all abuse allegations begin in family court. If found guilty in family court by a judge, you may be tried in a criminal court – but only after.

One more thing – you can be punished for your ‘guilt’ (being you are believed guilty until you prove otherwise) before you are even brought before a judge.

Now let me ask you….if I accuse you of hitting your children in an abusive way how are you going to prove otherwise? Testimony of friends, family, bosses, co-workers, teachers and neighbors? No one has ever seen a mark on your child, heard of any abuse claims in the past or seen you abuse your children…..so what? Obviously you are clever enough to hit without leaving a mark (how many of us from watching too much tv know that the ‘right’ people know how to do this professionally), and you are also smart enough not to do it except in the privacy of your own home. Your children say it never happened? You are terrorizing them and influencing them to say that. No medical records of any untoward abuse or suspected abuse? Well who would bring their kid into the doctors office for injuries sustained during abuse? You just didn’t bring them in, doesn’t mean there weren’t any injuries. Lie-detector test? Not admissible in court, and even if it were – who here fully believes in their scientific accuracy? Sorry – guess you can’t prove your innocence – no matter who you are.

Why is the court set up this way? In the supposed interest of the child. The ‘better safe than sorry’ motive. Many offenders are clever enough to abuse children without any clue as to their guilt. Better to assume guilt and take action until innocence can be proven. The problem here is this – if you are innocent, your children have been taken away and put in foster care, tramatized by doctors visits, the foster care system and social services….to start with. Is this really ‘safe’? And how is it not ‘sorry’ either way you look at it?

This is just the beginning of the terrorism of Americans at the hand of Social Services – and it is all perfectly legal – furthermore considered either socially acceptable, or out of the ignorance of most Americans, believed to be untrue.

Don’t Ever Trust CPS

August 10, 2009

State’s Child Protection Agencies Collude with Judges to Defraud Federal Government
© Nev Moore Jan. ‘02

In 1974 Walter Mondale initiated CAPTA (the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act), the legislation that began feeding federal funding into the state’s child welfare agencies. With remarkable foresight Mondale expressed concerns that the legislation could lead to systemic abuse in that the state agencies might over-process children into the system unnecessarily to keep, and increase, the flow of federal dollars. Shortly after CAPTA was enacted there was a dramatic increase in the number of children in foster care, peaking at around 500,000 during the mid-70’s. George Miller, the Chairman of the federal Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, initiated an intensive investigation of the nation’s foster care system after the effects of CAPTA started to become apparent by the soaring numbers of children who were being placed in foster care. An official at the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare admitted to Miller that the government had no idea where many of the nation’s 500,000 foster children where living, what services they were receiving, if any, or if any efforts were being made to reunite them with their families.

To address the obvious free-for-all snatching of children that CAPTA had stimulated, the Committee crafted new federal legislation with the intent of creating accountability and clearer guidelines for the states child welfare agencies. During the crafting of P.L. 96-272 Chairman Miller’s concern was that the federal government was footing the bill for warehousing children in institutions and inappropriate settings without accountability. In 1980 the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act, P.L. 96-272, was enacted. The act included provisions that “reasonable efforts” be made to prevent children from being unnecessarily removed from their homes and placed in foster care. Although CPS has always tried to buffalo the media and the public that they are involved with families due to some sort of horrific child abuse or neglect, there has never been any debate among national policy makers, researchers, and federal agencies that the vast majority of CPS cases are due to poverty or frivolous/social reasons and do not contain elements of real child abuse. If the cases did actually involve acts of abuse they would be criminal, identified and investigated by law enforcement, rather than social workers, and would be prosecuted as such. P.L. 96-272 came into effect partly because Congress determined that a large number of children were being unnecessarily removed from their homes, and, once removed, they were lost in the limbo of foster care for years, many until they just grew too old, when they were then put on the streets at the age of 18.

The Child Welfare League of America testified before a senate subcommittee: “In fact, there were many instances then, as now, of children being removed unnecessarily from their families. It is important to recognize that children are almost always traumatized by removal from their own families.” So, accountability from each states child protection agency was also written in. To receive the federal money the states would have to submit an annual report to the federal government, known as an AFCARS report, that specifically accounts for each child in state care. ACLU Children’s Rights Project attorney, Marcia Robinson Lowry, explained in her testimony to Congress: “As a condition of federal funding, states must have a reasonable information system to identify children in federally-funded state custody.” These requirements were implemented in 1980. Up until 1999 some states were still not filing their federally required AFCARS report to the federal government. According to Jeffrey Locke, former Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Social Services, the excuse to the legislature was that they “couldn’t figure out how to
work their computer system.”

When I called Senator Therese Murray in 1998 to ask how many children had died in foster care in Massachusetts, her aide replied: “We don’t have those statistics.” At that time Senator Murray was the Senate Chair of the Committee on Health & Elderly Affairs, and therefore responsible to oversee the collection and filing of AFCARS data.

The “reasonable efforts” requirements were designed to address these issues by requiring the states child welfare agencies to have specific investigation and assessment policies to minimize frivolous removals, to provide “services” to address and ameliorate conditions that were detrimental to the child’s well-being; to place children with relatives when removal from the home was absolutely necessary; and make efforts to reunite families in a timely fashion. Methods to audit and track compliance with federal requirements were also built in. The states were to establish “citizen review panels” comprised of a specifically designated representation of the population which would include not only members of collateral professional communities involved in child protection, but “parents, foster parents, and former foster children.” Each state was to have at least three citizen review panels. The panels would essentially act as a standing jury of peers and would review CPS cases. Twenty years after P.L. 96- 272 went into effect the citizen review panels have never been established in most states.

Another means of creating accountability was to have the federal authority, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, conduct compliance audits, which are known as Section 427 reviews. The method of enforcement that Congress devised to ensure that the states followed the federal law was to provide incentive funds to the states that documented their compliance with the federal regulations. The states would self-certify compliance, but could be subjected to “periodic” 427 reviews by the Dept. of Health & Human Services. Were the states to find themselves in non-compliance they would simply return the incentive funds. It would seem that providing cash to agencies that are allowed to self-document compliance is a somewhat less than intelligent system. It would be interesting to track down exactly how much money the states child “protective” agencies have returned to the government because they found themselves in non-compliance. Gee, maybe this is rocket science.

Like CAPTA, P.L. 96-272 could only have worked if the federal government demanded compliance and meticulous accountability, and them imposed sanctions for non-compliance. Even better – criminal charges for racketeering for intentional fraud. Mark Soler, director of the National Youth Law Center in California explained:

“The Department of Health & Human Services has failed to promulgate meaningful regulations to implement the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act. It has applied even the minimal federal regulations that were developed in an inconsistent and arbitrary manner, and only token implementation of the laws protecting children.’

Even when HHS finds overwhelming evidence of lack of compliance during 427 reviews, no sanctions are imposed and they continue to keep the fed $$$ pouring in – in violation of their own regulations. Not so much as a slap on the hand or even token admonishment. Certainly explains how CPS developed their arrogance and contempt for any authority – because there is none. Their confidence that they are free from the feds insisting on compliance with the law is well illustrated by the foster care numbers which increased dramatically after CAPTA began feeding federal dollars into the states child protection agencies, then dropped equally dramatically after the enactment of P.L.96-272, which was supposed to create more specific federal regulation and accountability. However, once the state agencies saw that the federal government was not enforcing compliance, the foster care numbers soared once again.

Michael Petit, Deputy Director of the Child Welfare League of America, stated in his testimony before Congress: “A 427 is a meaningless process for most of the states. It represents no kind of sanctions to the states whatsoever for non-compliance.” Marcia Robinson Lowry told Congress: “States are passing HHS audits with systems in which no reasonable person could consider that children are being well treated. It is virtually impossible to fail a 427 audit.”

The initial concept of “reasonable efforts” was the only conclusion that any rational person could come to: rather than disrupt children’s lives, and traumatize them by seizing them from non- abusive situations and placing them with strangers (who are often no better, and sometimes far worse), assist families in overcoming their obstacles and problems by providing support and services. The idea never worked, though, because it has always been more profitable to too many to remove children rather than keep them at home. Rather than offer support and simple, practical services to families CPS forged contracts with vendors. Now private businesses, under the guise of “service providers”, could mushroom into existence knowing that their sugar daddy, CPS, would provide a never-ending flow of coerced clients. The market potential is unlimited – potentially every mother, father, grandparent, and child in the country. Rather than offering practical, meaningful services that are germane to the families circumstances, CPS clients are ordered to engage in “services” with CPS-contracted vendors; special interest groups who are dependent on CPS for their income and profit by maintaining the levels of children in foster care, and whose interests are protected by a bureaucracy intent on securing it’s own survival and protecting unlimited growth.

The extent of which CPS is allowed to continue to operate while being so far out of compliance with the existing state and federal laws is mind boggling. It would be a challenge to find any other agency in our countries history that operated in such gross and blatant violation of the law with absolutely no intervention from the administration. Tens of millions of tax dollars are being squandered on a system that is destroying families and causing lifelong emotional ruin to children – and those are the lucky ones who live through it.

The most egregious area of outright criminal fraud is CPS’s practice of filing their federally required documentation of compliance in secrecy through the courts. The federal foster care reimbursements are channeled through the Title IV-E section of the Social Security Act. Each states child welfare agency enters into a contract with the federal government, which is referred to as their Title IV-E state plan. It is this contract that spells out the responsibilities that CPS must, by law, comply with in order to receive their federal funding. To document compliance with the fed regs CPS must file a form through the courts in each individual case. In Massachusetts these forms are referred to as a “29-C.” 42 U.S. Code, ss 672 reads:

“These requirements are not mere formalities. The Finance Committee of Congress, in preparing its summary for final passage of the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980, P.L. 96-272, stated; ` The Committee is aware of allegations that the judicial determination requirement (sic: that a judge makes a determination that a child needs to be removed from the home) can become a mere pro forma exercise in paper shuffling to obtain federal funding. While this could occur in some instances, the Committee is unwilling to accept as a general proposition that the judiciaries of the States would so lightly treat a responsibility placed upon them by federal statute for the protection of children.”

1980 U.S. Code Cong. and Admin. News: “A judicial determination of those efforts (reasonable efforts, as defined in the Act) serves to closely examine, in the case of each individual child, whether reasonable efforts were made to keep the family intact.” In accordance with the federal requirements the Massachusetts legislature enacted G.L. c.119 ss 29b, which requires all judges to certify that the Department of Social Services met the obligation grounded in the federal statute of making reasonable efforts to protect the child short of removing him or her from the parents, and, if the child was removed, making it possible for the child to return home in a timely manner. Rather than “closely examining”, in Massachusetts this grave responsibility is carried out by judges by rubber stamping stacks of 29c forms that simply contain three “yes” or “no” check boxes. In many instances making three check marks is even too much work for Massachusetts judges and they rubber stamp the forms while leaving them blank – never mind actually verifying that the “reasonable efforts” were made. In return for these forms DSS receives it’s federal money.

The three questions are:

1. Continuation in the home is contrary to the well being of the child?

2. Reasonable efforts have been made prior to the placement of the child to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the child from his/her home?

3. Reasonable efforts have been made to make it possible for the child to return to his parent/guardian?

I discussed this issue a few years ago with Veronica Melendez at the Children’s Bureau (the federal authority). She told me that the federal government was under the impression that all parties were present in the court room at the time of the filing of the 29c’s, so that the parents attorneys had the opportunity to object, rebut, or verify the “reasonable efforts.” In reality, no one sees the federal forms except the judges and a representative of DSS’s main legal department. Attorneys ask us how we ever “got our hands on” the 29c forms, as we have never yet met an attorney who has seen the forms, let alone have been notified of the filing hearing. We even have forms on which the “no” boxes were checked, yet the children were still removed from their homes and federal funds collected for them.

By seizing children illegally in violation of the Title IV-E requirements, then filing false documents in secrecy through the courts to obtain federal funding, CPS is defrauding the federal government with intent. CPS should be subject to investigation and prosecution by the U.S. Attorneys Office. They should be held liable for the restitution of all illegally obtained funds, and prosecuted for perjury, obstruction of justice, and the fraudulent collection of federal funds under the False Statements and Accountability Act of 1996, P.L. 104-292 110 stat 3459, 42 U.S.C.S. 670-679a; P.L. 96-272; C.F.R. part 1356; and Title IV-E. I have discussed this issue with the Inspector Generals Office and they felt it could possible be prosecuted under RICO, yet they have also failed to act, possibly because it isn’t just CPS/DSS who is committing federal fraud, but also the judges who are signing the documents.

In 1988 George Miller, the original architect of P.L. 96-272, and Chairman of the congressionally appointed Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, recognized the fraud being committed in the name of child “protection”, and stated:

“What has been demonstrated here is that you have a system that is simply in contempt. This system has been sued and sued and orders have been issued and they just continue on their merry way. And HHS just continues to look the other way. You have a system that is not only out of control, it’s illegal at this point. What you are really engaged in is state sponsored child abuse

State’s Child Protection Agencies Collude with Judges to Defraud Federal Government

September 14, 2008

State’s Child Protection Agencies Collude with Judges to Defraud Federal Government
© Nev Moore Jan. ‘02

In 1974 Walter Mondale initiated CAPTA (the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act), the legislation that began feeding federal funding into the state’s child welfare agencies. With remarkable foresight Mondale expressed concerns that the legislation could lead to systemic abuse in that the state agencies might over-process children into the system unnecessarily to keep, and increase, the flow of federal dollars. Shortly after CAPTA was enacted there was a dramatic increase in the number of children in foster care, peaking at around 500,000 during the mid-70’s. George Miller, the Chairman of the federal Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, initiated an intensive investigation of the nation’s foster care system after the effects of CAPTA started to become apparent by the soaring numbers of children who were being placed in foster care. An official at the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare admitted to Miller that the government had no idea where many of the nation’s 500,000 foster children where living, what services they were receiving, if any, or if any efforts were being made to reunite them with their families.

To address the obvious free-for-all snatching of children that CAPTA had stimulated, the Committee crafted new federal legislation with the intent of creating accountability and clearer guidelines for the states child welfare agencies. During the crafting of P.L. 96-272 Chairman Miller’s concern was that the federal government was footing the bill for warehousing children in institutions and inappropriate settings without accountability. In 1980 the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act, P.L. 96-272, was enacted. The act included provisions that “reasonable efforts” be made to prevent children from being unnecessarily removed from their homes and placed in foster care. Although CPS has always tried to buffalo the media and the public that they are involved with families due to some sort of horrific child abuse or neglect, there has never been any debate among national policy makers, researchers, and federal agencies that the vast majority of CPS cases are due to poverty or frivolous/social reasons and do not contain elements of real child abuse. If the cases did actually involve acts of abuse they would be criminal, identified and investigated by law enforcement, rather than social workers, and would be prosecuted as such. P.L. 96-272 came into effect partly because Congress determined that a large number of children were being unnecessarily removed from their homes, and, once removed, they were lost in the limbo of foster care for years, many until they just grew too old, when they were then put on the streets at the age of 18.

The Child Welfare League of America testified before a senate subcommittee: “In fact, there were many instances then, as now, of children being removed unnecessarily from their families. It is important to recognize that children are almost always traumatized by removal from their own families.” So, accountability from each states child protection agency was also written in. To receive the federal money the states would have to submit an annual report to the federal government, known as an AFCARS report, that specifically accounts for each child in state care. ACLU Children’s Rights Project attorney, Marcia Robinson Lowry, explained in her testimony to Congress: “As a condition of federal funding, states must have a reasonable information system to identify children in federally-funded state custody.” These requirements were implemented in 1980. Up until 1999 some states were still not filing their federally required AFCARS report to the federal government. According to Jeffrey Locke, former Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Social Services, the excuse to the legislature was that they “couldn’t figure out how to
work their computer system.”

When I called Senator Therese Murray in 1998 to ask how many children had died in foster care in Massachusetts, her aide replied: “We don’t have those statistics.” At that time Senator Murray was the Senate Chair of the Committee on Health & Elderly Affairs, and therefore responsible to oversee the collection and filing of AFCARS data.

The “reasonable efforts” requirements were designed to address these issues by requiring the states child welfare agencies to have specific investigation and assessment policies to minimize frivolous removals, to provide “services” to address and ameliorate conditions that were detrimental to the child’s well-being; to place children with relatives when removal from the home was absolutely necessary; and make efforts to reunite families in a timely fashion. Methods to audit and track compliance with federal requirements were also built in. The states were to establish “citizen review panels” comprised of a specifically designated representation of the population which would include not only members of collateral professional communities involved in child protection, but “parents, foster parents, and former foster children.” Each state was to have at least three citizen review panels. The panels would essentially act as a standing jury of peers and would review CPS cases. Twenty years after P.L. 96- 272 went into effect the citizen review panels have never been established in most states.

Another means of creating accountability was to have the federal authority, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, conduct compliance audits, which are known as Section 427 reviews. The method of enforcement that Congress devised to ensure that the states followed the federal law was to provide incentive funds to the states that documented their compliance with the federal regulations. The states would self-certify compliance, but could be subjected to “periodic” 427 reviews by the Dept. of Health & Human Services. Were the states to find themselves in non-compliance they would simply return the incentive funds. It would seem that providing cash to agencies that are allowed to self-document compliance is a somewhat less than intelligent system. It would be interesting to track down exactly how much money the states child “protective” agencies have returned to the government because they found themselves in non-compliance. Gee, maybe this is rocket science.

Like CAPTA, P.L. 96-272 could only have worked if the federal government demanded compliance and meticulous accountability, and them imposed sanctions for non-compliance. Even better – criminal charges for racketeering for intentional fraud. Mark Soler, director of the National Youth Law Center in California explained:

“The Department of Health & Human Services has failed to promulgate meaningful regulations to implement the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act. It has applied even the minimal federal regulations that were developed in an inconsistent and arbitrary manner, and only token implementation of the laws protecting children.’

Even when HHS finds overwhelming evidence of lack of compliance during 427 reviews, no sanctions are imposed and they continue to keep the fed $$$ pouring in – in violation of their own regulations. Not so much as a slap on the hand or even token admonishment. Certainly explains how CPS developed their arrogance and contempt for any authority – because there is none. Their confidence that they are free from the feds insisting on compliance with the law is well illustrated by the foster care numbers which increased dramatically after CAPTA began feeding federal dollars into the states child protection agencies, then dropped equally dramatically after the enactment of P.L.96-272, which was supposed to create more specific federal regulation and accountability. However, once the state agencies saw that the federal government was not enforcing compliance, the foster care numbers soared once again.

Michael Petit, Deputy Director of the Child Welfare League of America, stated in his testimony before Congress: “A 427 is a meaningless process for most of the states. It represents no kind of sanctions to the states whatsoever for non-compliance.” Marcia Robinson Lowry told Congress: “States are passing HHS audits with systems in which no reasonable person could consider that children are being well treated. It is virtually impossible to fail a 427 audit.”

The initial concept of “reasonable efforts” was the only conclusion that any rational person could come to: rather than disrupt children’s lives, and traumatize them by seizing them from non- abusive situations and placing them with strangers (who are often no better, and sometimes far worse), assist families in overcoming their obstacles and problems by providing support and services. The idea never worked, though, because it has always been more profitable to too many to remove children rather than keep them at home. Rather than offer support and simple, practical services to families CPS forged contracts with vendors. Now private businesses, under the guise of “service providers”, could mushroom into existence knowing that their sugar daddy, CPS, would provide a never-ending flow of coerced clients. The market potential is unlimited – potentially every mother, father, grandparent, and child in the country. Rather than offering practical, meaningful services that are germane to the families circumstances, CPS clients are ordered to engage in “services” with CPS-contracted vendors; special interest groups who are dependent on CPS for their income and profit by maintaining the levels of children in foster care, and whose interests are protected by a bureaucracy intent on securing it’s own survival and protecting unlimited growth.

The extent of which CPS is allowed to continue to operate while being so far out of compliance with the existing state and federal laws is mind boggling. It would be a challenge to find any other agency in our countries history that operated in such gross and blatant violation of the law with absolutely no intervention from the administration. Tens of millions of tax dollars are being squandered on a system that is destroying families and causing lifelong emotional ruin to children – and those are the lucky ones who live through it.

The most egregious area of outright criminal fraud is CPS’s practice of filing their federally required documentation of compliance in secrecy through the courts. The federal foster care reimbursements are channeled through the Title IV-E section of the Social Security Act. Each states child welfare agency enters into a contract with the federal government, which is referred to as their Title IV-E state plan. It is this contract that spells out the responsibilities that CPS must, by law, comply with in order to receive their federal funding. To document compliance with the fed regs CPS must file a form through the courts in each individual case. In Massachusetts these forms are referred to as a “29-C.” 42 U.S. Code, ss 672 reads:

“These requirements are not mere formalities. The Finance Committee of Congress, in preparing its summary for final passage of the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980, P.L. 96-272, stated; ` The Committee is aware of allegations that the judicial determination requirement (sic: that a judge makes a determination that a child needs to be removed from the home) can become a mere pro forma exercise in paper shuffling to obtain federal funding. While this could occur in some instances, the Committee is unwilling to accept as a general proposition that the judiciaries of the States would so lightly treat a responsibility placed upon them by federal statute for the protection of children.”

1980 U.S. Code Cong. and Admin. News: “A judicial determination of those efforts (reasonable efforts, as defined in the Act) serves to closely examine, in the case of each individual child, whether reasonable efforts were made to keep the family intact.” In accordance with the federal requirements the Massachusetts legislature enacted G.L. c.119 ss 29b, which requires all judges to certify that the Department of Social Services met the obligation grounded in the federal statute of making reasonable efforts to protect the child short of removing him or her from the parents, and, if the child was removed, making it possible for the child to return home in a timely manner. Rather than “closely examining”, in Massachusetts this grave responsibility is carried out by judges by rubber stamping stacks of 29c forms that simply contain three “yes” or “no” check boxes. In many instances making three check marks is even too much work for Massachusetts judges and they rubber stamp the forms while leaving them blank – never mind actually verifying that the “reasonable efforts” were made. In return for these forms DSS receives it’s federal money.

The three questions are:

1. Continuation in the home is contrary to the well being of the child?

2. Reasonable efforts have been made prior to the placement of the child to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the child from his/her home?

3. Reasonable efforts have been made to make it possible for the child to return to his parent/guardian?

I discussed this issue a few years ago with Veronica Melendez at the Children’s Bureau (the federal authority). She told me that the federal government was under the impression that all parties were present in the court room at the time of the filing of the 29c’s, so that the parents attorneys had the opportunity to object, rebut, or verify the “reasonable efforts.” In reality, no one sees the federal forms except the judges and a representative of DSS’s main legal department. Attorneys ask us how we ever “got our hands on” the 29c forms, as we have never yet met an attorney who has seen the forms, let alone have been notified of the filing hearing. We even have forms on which the “no” boxes were checked, yet the children were still removed from their homes and federal funds collected for them.

By seizing children illegally in violation of the Title IV-E requirements, then filing false documents in secrecy through the courts to obtain federal funding, CPS is defrauding the federal government with intent. CPS should be subject to investigation and prosecution by the U.S. Attorneys Office. They should be held liable for the restitution of all illegally obtained funds, and prosecuted for perjury, obstruction of justice, and the fraudulent collection of federal funds under the False Statements and Accountability Act of 1996, P.L. 104-292 110 stat 3459, 42 U.S.C.S. 670-679a; P.L. 96-272; C.F.R. part 1356; and Title IV-E. I have discussed this issue with the Inspector Generals Office and they felt it could possible be prosecuted under RICO, yet they have also failed to act, possibly because it isn’t just CPS/DSS who is committing federal fraud, but also the judges who are signing the documents.

In 1988 George Miller, the original architect of P.L. 96-272, and Chairman of the congressionally appointed Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, recognized the fraud being committed in the name of child “protection”, and stated:

“What has been demonstrated here is that you have a system that is simply in contempt. This system has been sued and sued and orders have been issued and they just continue on their merry way. And HHS just continues to look the other way. You have a system that is not only out of control, it’s illegal at this point. What you are really engaged in is state sponsored child abuse.”

From FBI Investigating This CPS Office!, 2008/09/14 at 3:08 PM

FBI Investigating This CPS Office!

August 26, 2008

A dshs, child protective service worker came to my parent’s house and took my brother’s baby.  Procurement of an order to seize a child through distortion, misrepresentation, and/or omission in court and is a violation of the fourth amendment. ( Malik v. Arapahoe Cty. Dept. of Social Services.  (10th Cir. 1991)

 

That is exactly what the cps worker did.  She either failed to fully investigate intentionally or recklessly, withheld potentially exculpatory information from the court.

 

State and Federal laws state “every effort must be made to keep the child in the home (RCW 74.14A.020., RCW 26.44.063,RCW 13.34.060,Finding — 1999 c 17: “The legislature has found that any intervention into the life of a child is also an intervention in the life of the parent, guardian, or legal custodian, and that the bond between child and parent is a critical element of child development. The legislature now also finds that children who cannot be with their parents, guardians, or legal custodians are best cared for, whenever possible and appropriate by family members with whom they have a relationship. This is particularly important when a child cannot be in the care of a parent, guardian, or legal custodian as a result of a court intervention.”  [1999 c 17 § 1.]

WAC 388-15-037, RCW 26.44.063, RCW 74.04.050, RCW 13.34.020, RCW 74.13.031,  RCW 26.44.030, 42 U.S.C. § 671 (a) (15) and 672 (a) (1) -That is not all the laws she broke, and there are plenty of case laws to back this up.

 

As shown above RCW 13.34.00 finding; The government cps worker not only did nothing to prevent removal of the child from her home, she intentionally took her from her home.  My brother had left his daughter in my parents/his parents/baby’s grandparent’s care, where both the baby and my brother had lived since the baby was born.  She cps worker had prior knowledge that the grandparent were, cps approved, bonded with the child, yet still traumatize the baby and put her in a foster home.  The trauma caused by this cps worker is unforgivable, and that it disruptions in the parent-child/grandparent-child relationship provokes fear and anxiety in a child and diminish her sense of stability and self.  At first, the child is very anxious and protests vigorously and angrily.  Then she falls into a sense of despair, though still hyper vigilant, looking, waiting, and hoping for her return.  A child’s sense of time factors into the extent to which a separation affects her emotional well-being.  Thus, for younger children whose sense of time is less keenly developed, short periods of parental absence seem much longer.  “Taking a child whose greatest fear is separation from her family and in the name of ‘protecting’ that child by forcing on them, what is in effect their worst nightmare, is tantamount to poring salt on an open wound”.  Another serious implication of removal is that it introduces children to the foster care system, which can be much more dangerous and debilitating than the home situation.  Foster homes are rarely screened for the presence of violence and that the incidence of abuse and child fatality in foster homes is double that in the general population. 

 

This child was born addicted to drugs.  This had nothing to do with my brother.  She was taken to PICC center.  A hospital that specializes in getting newborns off drugs.  They were very pleased with my brother’s care, concern, and attentiveness.  So much so, they wrote a letter stating how my brother did everything perfectly to help this child through this difficult time.  They said she was “one of the well-adjusted PICC graduates that he had seen in a very long time.

 

CPS was told my brother that she would be going through the worst part of the withdrawal and that she was not developing properly.  The baby was promptly taken to her pediatrician, who gave her a clean bill of health.  He took her back to the PICC hospital, who ensured him she was medically normal, healthy infant that had out grown the effects of the drugs.

 

She was so healthy the PICC center used her picture and story for their funding flyer.  Then later came to her home and made a video of my brother and her for another funding project.

 

CPS is supposed to protect children.  This woman did not care about the best interest of the child.  Did you know that of the millions of people in prisons, 70% of them were foster kids.  What ever her motive was, she traumatized this baby, and it should be stopped before more children grow up and go to prison.  It is estimated that it cost $200,000 a year to keep inmates in prison.

 

She has clearly violated the 1st amendment (Doe v. Irwin US. D.C. of Michigan 1985,

 Elrod v. Burns 96 S. Ct. 1976,

 

She also violated 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th amendments (324 A 2d 90; supra 129 nj Super at 489, 369 NW 2d 889, MI App Div 1983, Reynold v. Baby Fold, Inc., Santosky V. Kramer 102 S. Ct. 1388 1982, Chrissy v. Department of Public Welfare 5th Cir. 1991, Malik v Arapahoe Cty Department of Social Services 10th Cir 1999) I could go on and on.

 

My parents and my brother to afraid to complain to anyone fear cps will make up lies and take the baby again. They only let my brother see his child once a week for an hour, and it is supervised by cps.  It will not let him see more until at least the fact-finding hearing.  They do nothing to protect the bonding so accentual to child development.

 

Not only are they trying to hurt the child and her dad, but they are trying to bring me into their the case, by telling the foster parents, my brother, my parents, the mother of the child and the baby’s lawyer that I had, had one or two kids taken away from me in the past.  First, I think do not think that would be public information, second it has nothing to do with my brother’s case with them, and lastly it shows how much they really care about children.  They reference them like mud pies, with no concern “one or two”.  I would think people that had a job caring for children, would not reference them in such a casual way.  It is not important to them; they are not talking as if they are not living beings, but like mud pies “One or two”.  That does not show any concern about children to me.  Maybe you could ask them how many other foster children are in the home with my child?  Would they reply, “Oh, one or two, it depends on how many sold; I mean were adopted this week.”

 

I have not researched this yet.  I am quite sure that is not public information for cps to give to any information they may or may not have about me to anyone.  I am not being investigated and do not live with my parents, this information would have nothing to do with investigating my brothers case.  It seems she is getting desperate and is trying to dig up anything on anybody with no regard for privacy laws, or any law for that matter.  The mother has two other children that have been taken from her.  Although the mother has given up all her parental right to the baby, the cps worker is sending my brother a copy of the files.  I have no idea what this information has to do with this case, but I would not think she should be giving private information out like candy on Halloween.  This woman seems a little unstable.  She just goes around lying in court, taking children, giving out protected information, and god only knows what else she has up her sleeve.   

 

I she is breaking state and federal laws and getting federal funding by doing so.  Cps gets federal funding, but cps must follow rules to legally qualify for that funding…  One of the first rules is that the cps must do everything possible to keep the child in her home.  That includes having the parent leave the home first .Offer services or any option that would keep the child in her home. (.RCW 26.44.063).

 

Cps having prior knowledge of the baby’s living situation could have used this option of having my brother leave and letting the baby stay, saving everyone a lot of worry and heartache.  Cps also knew the baby’s grandparents had been approve by cps.  They were “CPS approved” and already had background checks.  If cps were looking out for the best interest of the child, she would have never taken the child, from her grandparents.  The child had already bonded with them, loved, and trusted them.  I cannot imagine what reasoning she used putting the baby in foster care, and taking her from a loving home.

 

Another state and federal law is if the child cannot stay in her home, they must try to find a relative to take the child, before putting the baby into foster care.  She was already in a home with relative care. She did not call one relative.  By not telling the truth, it helped her get the warrant and money from the federal government.  Which in turn, help her with what ever she was planning, and what gain she would be getting by traumatizing a whole family?

 

All information is supposed to be presented to the judge.  It is suppose to be written out in detail what she did to keep the baby in the home and the relatives she contacted.  She did not do one thing to prevent this baby from being put into foster care; in fact, she made sure the baby was put in foster care…  In my opinion, she had some other motive for taking the baby and putting her in foster care.  It sure was not in the best interest of the child.   

 

She is lying to get federal money by not following the above rules.  That cannot be legal.  She is hurting innocent children, and I cannot see where she even makes reasonable decisions; she breaks the law, over uses her authority and she breaks innocent peoples constitutional rights.  This does not seem like a person or maybe a whole agency that should be looking out for the care of humans that are defenseless and she refers about as if they were mud pies.

 

I believe this must be stopped immediately.  I would go as far to think she is selling these children to people.  She sure had no reason to remove the baby from her home, no matter what she thought my brother might have done.  We are very lucky that my brother had some prior experience with cps; otherwise, he would have done what he did when the child was born.  What cps tries and make you do, sign a dependency, and your court appointed attorney agrees with them and doesn’t even inform you what you are doing or what other options you have.  He knew    better this time, but cps tried and pushing him, and having the dependency hearing the same day as the shelter hearing without council.  Cps feels they have all the power needed, after all what greater power could you have over a person, but taking you kids.

 

As far as I can tell the govern themselves.  If you want to file a complaint, you have to start with filing a complaint with the cps worker’s immediate supervisor.  If you do not like the results you get from that supervisor, you can go up one more.  Although, I have phoned different offices several times and both supervisor that work in the offices are either on vacation, out of the office that week, or some other lame excuse.  So I was not even able to talk to a supervisor.  Then I called the regional office, but they are not sure what can be done, but they have document called a “tort”, and they will email it to me.  It has seems they can do pretty much whatever they want to you and your family.  By the time, you could file a complaint they would have probably already auctioned off your kids, and say, they have not been with you so long they are not going to give them back.

 

I have heard horror stories about fighting cps.  If is not something they do to you, they get your family’s kid or even your lawyers kids.  They usually target low-income people that do not know their rights, and cannot afford to hire a lawyer.  They do not know any better and think they have to sign this dependency or cps will keep their kids.  I have first hand experience with this it is not just something I made up.  I know they do this and set you up to fail.  They make you go to so many classes and pay child support.  If you go to everything, they want you to go to, you do not have time, or employers are not willing to work around your schedule.  If you do not do everything they say, they keep your kids.  If you do not work, you cannot pay your child support and they have your driver’s license taken away, and then you do have the money to go to the classes and even if you did, you do not have a driver’s license to get to them.  If you drive, anyway, you end up in jail and they still keep your kids. 

 

They do all this by making you believe they have a right to tell you what a terrible parent you are, all because an x-spouse is angry with you and will do anything to make sure your life is a living hell.  When 40% of children in foster care could go home if they had the resources for affordable housing and day care.  Instead of helping the family stay together, they give middle-income people the money to take your children.  They even give adoptive parent money, health insurance and whatever they think they need and cps a bonus for getting the child adopted.  However, they do not help the families stay together, they do not receive any federal funds if the family is reunited, and the family does not receive any help either.

 

Seventy percent of the millions of people in our prisons were foster children.  This cost tax payers $200,000 a year for each inmate.  The parent turns to drugs and alcohol to relieve some of the pain.  Or they get so depressed they suicidal tendency, they hurt so bad they have mental problems so deep seeded and never recover.  They end homeless, in jails or institutions.  Did you know that the bible thumpers abuse their children more often and more severely than the drug addicts, but less likely to be investigated?

 

Luckily, this time my brother knew cps does not act in the child’s best interest.  My parents and he are financially devastated from their last ordeal with them.  He had not even done anything wrong, but was bull dogged into believing what cps said.  This time he did not sign anything and asked for a lawyer.  It was hard because he would have to wait two more weeks before there was even a chance to get his baby back and out of danger.  No matter what you do, the family is always the ones that have all the pain, and it’s just another mud pie to them, but they are going to make sure that’s all you have is mud pie and a broken heart. 

 

I researched everything in the dependency papers as good as I could.  I am not a lawyer or even close.  He gave everything I had to his lawyer and lucky the judge agreed the cps worker had defiantly over stepped her bounds, and the baby was finally returned to my parents, pending the next hearing.

 

They just keep trying to break you.  My brother can only see his daughter once a week for an hour in a little room, being supervised by cps.  Can you imagine what a baby would go through, she is only 14 months old only seeing her dad who has been with her almost day and night from birth, to only seeing him for an hour, and being taken away again.  I see absolutely no reason he could not have more liberal visitation, with my parents supervising.  CPS just continues to traumatize the baby, and will continue unless he gives custody to the state.  How can one hour a week be good for the father or the baby?  The baby surely does not understand why her dad keeps abandon her, but cps makes sure to make it as hard on the family as they can.  With no regard to the baby’s well being.

 

I could not imagine what would happen if he sign a dependency.  He does not have any money anymore and I truly believe he would never get her back.  This is just my opinion, but I truly believe that they have a buyer for his baby and that is why they are doing nothing to reunite the family and everything to destroy them.  What other reason could this woman have for trying to break this family apart?

 

I could not find any place other than here (The FBI) to file a complaint of any kind about cps.  Other than, the same office that is causing all this grief to start with.  Who lies to get federal money, kidnaps children, and disables parents.

 

I do not expect that you will respond to this, but if you cannot investigate these things, could you please at least tell me whom I could get in touch with that would investigate without letting them know who is involved.  My parent, brother, and I too, are so worried, scared, and live in fear every day that they might just come here and take her again.

 

This needs to be stopped.  It has taken such a toll on our whole family, none of us will ever be the same, and government should not be allowed to ruin families, and do who knows what to they do to the children they take.

 

I am begging you please help us or tell us who can.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Charlotte Bliss