Re: abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)

Remember me pointing out that agencies LIE to AFCARS?
This is only a more blatant example.
I wish they would just LIE more and remove real kids less!
Stealing the money is preferable to stealing the kids.

I can't say what the general public knows. Frankly I think it knows
little and wishes it knew less, when it comes to child abuse and
neglect. With the help of those such as you and Doug, they seem to be
getting their wish.

I don't believe you are right when you lead off with "most people," as
most people are unconcerned about this issue. Society fails children.
But, in this country, less than in many. More than some.

I do not believe so, unless you have access to actual case records and
can read the narrative yourself and draw your own conclusions. There
are, for instance, police reports, medical reports from emergency rooms,
and or the child's own physician, that sort of thing. It's not just what
the worker finds and reports. It's what they collect as well, both from
official sources, as above, and from interviews with witnesses.

The difficulty I have in answering you is based solely on my failure to
obtain from you a set of standards to define abuse.

If you can supply them, I'll answer.

"Substantiated" also includes "at serious risk of abuse and dangerous
neglect." You do know, and Ron posted yet again what we all know (why
you and others simply ignore is beyond me). That is that neglect is more
often the cause of serious injury and death than 'abuse.'

Intelligent people (and professions) refer to neglect as another form of
"abuse."

And it's for that very reason. It's deadly, and can do very high levels
of damage to a child, developmentally, and to their health, for life.

Substantiated is based on an assessment, not what the "people," "just
fell for."

Well, since you asked the question, then answered it erroneously
yourself, your conclusion is flawed. That means, Greg, you are wrong.

Shall I define "wrong" for you?

Well, you managed three strikes in one sentence there.

One, the public doesn't think about this at all. They believe what the
media, and the captured media tell them. I consider the captured media
those sources that derive from special interest groups, like you, and
Doug and others that are antiCPS goons.

Two, the public has no concept of what is or isn't "substantiated" (for
further understanding, see item One.

Three, anything you create yourself, as you did in the few previous
paragraphs is, by your own scary nature, "scary."

To anyone that actually studies, objectively, and digs deeply into such
questions as these, the findings are "interesting," and or
"challenging," but not the least bit scary.

What IS scary is that there are thugs so depraved they will take
portions of the whole, that appear to mean one thing, that when combined
with the other elements of whole, do NOT mean that at all, and use those
portions to mislead, no matter what it costs children and their parents
in the long run.

Injuries, lives lost, children taken...nothing seems to faze them.

But then, there's Greg, eh?

Since you don't understand that "classification," that according to Doug
is NOT vague at all, and to me it is something other than the official
definition (which would be closer to your loonytoons view of the
world...I must be slipping) what would the 40% actually mean, in the
real world?

Yoohooo...over here, the real world, Greg. When children bleed and die,
where their hearts are broken because some self centered little pissant
moves in with mom and engineers a removal and they lose their mother and
their mother loses them for their childhood? THAT REAL WORLD GREG.

You have a nullifying piece or two in that statement. The words "known"
and "thinking." Sorry. You neither know nor think.

That depends.

What IS abuse?

It unnecessary grief abuse? Like Lisa's child has and probably still
suffers?

Is gross disruption of developmental work by the child abuse?

Is it abuse for a child to live in a house with unpredictable terrors
visiting now and then?

Much abuse can't be easily seen by the lay person. But a profession
testing a child can see it. The 9 year old that has the social skills of
a 3 year old...a most dangerous situation to the child and to the
society he or she is entering soon as an adult. (Three year olds aren't
ready to "share their toys" and tend to be self centered and unaware of
the needs of others...as is normal for that age).

Is carrying a brain that has been stunted because of drug ingestion abuse?

Is dysfunctional dangerous sexual behavior learned from family sexual
molesters abuse?

The list could go on, but you are probably totally confused at this
point. Why punish you?

Would you mind posting a source for your claim? Or would that spoil the
effect of your insinuations?

For instance, how did the case come out, and was it a case of agency
malfeasance, or was it a single person or a small group acting
criminally without the knowledge of the CPS administration?

Yes, tell us all the dirty details, but let us also see your source.

Can we expect a reply to this request soon?

0:->

Do you think the general public knows that
when a family is "substantiated" for abuse
or neglect the vast majority are put in that
category under "AT RISK" and not from any
actual abuse or neglect at all?

Most people think if a family is "substantiated"
that they were actually found guilty of
abuse or neglect, by the agency goons.

Is there a category within the "substantiated"
group that is marked as having had genuine
actual proveable abuse?

How much of the "substantiated" group
are true actual abuse?

How many among the "substantiated" were
people who just fell for the "stipulation scam"
and were not guilty but were told it's easier
to "just go with the flow" than to stand up
for legal rights?   These "surrenders" seem
to be part of this huge block of "substantiated"
cases that score the agency as far as FUNDING!

It is interesting that even the accepted meaning
of "substantiated" is so far from what the public
thinks that it's scary.

And 40% of removed kids don't even fit
that VAGUE classification????

I had known that the hardcore stuff was
some small buried portion,  but I was thinking it
was like a pea in a snowball.   The truth seems
to be that actual true child ABUSE among the
kids removed is less than one sand particle
in a snowball.

In Santa Clara (area) California, in 2003 the NAACP
was wondering why when they obtained data,
40% was missing and they met lots of resistance.
Only recently it was discovered that the agency
was reporting FRAUDULENTLY.
In one case 2 kids were removed but for the
purposes of FUNDING they reported that 5
were removed.

The FBI is actually investigating Santa Clara CPS!

Doug's got to be pretty desperate to pick you up as yet another of his
little boot lickers, but hey, he was never known to discriminate before
when he found someone to agree with his bullshit.

You are a fit toady, observer.

And if Doug was being looked at as credible in any way by posters
here....eheheheheh....you have taken care of that.

It becomes pretty obvious what he's about by looking at what you are about.

Post some more of these fantasies of yours.

0:->

i agree with wade horn's statement that "governments ought to honor and
support the family as the most critical structure for insuring the
well-being of children who are, after all, our future" and have said
much the same thing............the state contrived divorcement of child
from parents (termination of parental rights) has not worked very
well.............the new reality is that the easy money for child
removal is drying up...........it also signals a withering of the "baby
snatching" arm of gov'ment that the anti-spanking forces used so freely
to threaten parents through the infamous mondale child abuse prevention
and treatment act............with the reduced need for foster care will
also come a diminished need for guardians ad litem and related
make-work jobs..........the 35-year-old war on drugs, used as a
springboard for the meth epidemic scare, is a bigger failure than
vietnam and iraq put together..............like foster care, it is
another example of a failed gov'ment boondoggle...........the 2004 pew
report addressed both the financing of foster care and the role of the
court system..........over a month ago, abc news devoted an hour to
step families in crisis............with the myth of the brady bunch is
busted the real question is whether adoption as an alternative to
foster care represents a shifting of the financial burden away from
taxpayers or is a workable solution.............

Hi, maggie,

Former and present foster children represent the most endangered population
in this country.

Child welfare experts contend that the only way to reduce the abuse in
foster care and the very poor outcomes for former foster children is to have
less foster care.  And reform movements are underway in many states and, on
the federal level, to place less children into state custody and release
foster children to their families earlier.

Currently, the vast majority of children removed from their families were
not abused.  69,000 of children placed in foster care in 2003 were removed
from families CPS workers themselves unsubstantiated for risk of or actual
neglect/abuse.  These non-victims represent 30% of the foster care
population.  The majority of those who were substantiated were found to be
at risk of neglect or neglected.  Of those children substantiated as victims
of abuse, the majority were substantiated because they were "at risk" of
abuse, not actually abused.

............. like welfare, foster care

The most vocal of foster care critics are professionals who are directly
involved with it.  Dr. Horn is one of the players in CPS reform efforts.

."there are no provisions for treatment, prevention,

The total cost of raising the child takes up about $14,000 of that.  Foster
children's medical, dental and mental health needs are covered by Medacaid.
The remaining $26,000 goes to principals and workers in the child welfare
industry itself.  Administrative costs are many times much higher than 2/3
of the funding going into foster care, although 66% is the general rule.
For each foster child, there is a battery of GALS, social service workers,
state caregivers, case managers, mentors, partridges, pear trees and the
trees in which they roost.

....................beyond abc's findings, the per annum cost per

....And pay for their college.

The overcrowded and abusive foster care system described by ABC news became
that way because of what the Pew Commission calls "the perverse funding
incentive" provided state CPS agencies to remove children from their
families.  Federal Title IV-E Social Security Funding currently flows to the
states on the basis of how many poor children CPS takes into custody.  As
long as the child stays in foster care, the state agencies pull down the
uncapped, on demand Title IV-E funding.

As the result of the Pew Commission report, Congress is currently at work to
remove the strings to Title IV-E funding.  The money will become a capped
entitlement to the states, allowing CPS agencies to decide for themselves
how to spend the money. This will cut the foster population by as much as
80% across the country.

The reform legislation, partially because of Dr. Wade's support, will soon
be passed by Congress.  This is the reform legislation the Organization of
American Counties and CPS attempted to defeat through a lobbying campaign
about the Meth "epidemic."

Meanwhile, individual states have reduced their foster care poplulation by
applying for and being granted exclusions from Title IV-E funding
restrictions.  California, Iowa and other states were just granted Title
IV-E waivers.  We can expect the state that harbors close to half of the
nation's foster children to reduce the population of state wards by 50% over
the next three years.  Mamouth reductions in foster care populations have
occurred in Illinois, Oregon and other states granted Title IV-E waivers in
the past.

It won't be long, now.

abc's primetime did a june 1 story on "the crisis of the foster care
system"..............among abc's conclusions were 52 percent of foster
children suffered from post-traumatic stress (a rate twice as high as
soldiers returning from war).............thirty percent of the homeless
have been in foster care............ twenty-five percent of those in
prison are foster care alumnus............. like welfare, foster care
is intergenerational (children growing up in foster care can become
mothers with children in foster care........... "the highest ranking
federal official in charge of foster care, wade horn of the department
of health and human services, is a former child psychologist who says
the foster care system is a giant mess and should just be blown
up"............."there are no provisions for treatment, prevention,
family support, or aging out - just for supporting things as they
are"..........that status quo costs taxpayers $22 billion a year and
works out to $40,000 a year to keep a child in foster
care....................beyond abc's findings, the per annum cost per
child in foster care would keep a child in a good boarding
school............