CAS is more harmful to children than physical discipline by parents

[tango]

Alberta mother prays for baby son injured in foster care

Last Updated: Friday, March 6, 2009 | 4:20 PM MT

CBC News

The mother of a 15-month-old Alberta boy who was seriously hurt at his Strathmore foster home this week says doctors have told her he may die from his injuries.

"They say if he does make it, he won't be the same — he'll have cerebral palsy because he has so much trauma to the head," the mother told the media Friday outside Calgary's Alberta Children's Hospital, where her baby remained in critical condition.

"All we are doing right now is praying for him," she said.

The mother, who is from the Tsuu T'ina First Nation, said her only other child, a daughter, had been in the same foster home, but she was removed after her son was admitted to hospital on Monday.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/200...ster-child.html

I think we need a full accounting of children dying, injured, missing/unaccounted for in CAS or CCAS care.

Edited March 7, 2009 by tango

[Oleg Bach]

My "friend" the social worker would go visit a child in foster care - the "care" givers were up in the kitchen eating a nice high quality steak - down stairs was the kid eating a hot dog with airplane glue encrustiong his nostrils - great care - the fostering parents get a couple of grand and eat steak...and call it child protection...I would safely say that these child protection people and their vast net work of "caring" people are parasites living off of children...As mentioned when a crazed and proslytizing religous fanatic who is a foster mother holds a hot curling iron to the hand of a boy the CAS deemed as autistic....well - I lost all respect for these people --------------as also mentioned - they will lie and alter documents to preserve their interests....and..... if they have a worker that is sadistic and power crazed - instead of getting rid of them they send her to some back water town - the same way the Catholic high arch recycle sodomist priests...

[Melanie_]

You know, bjre, the funny thing is you keep wanting to argue this in black and white terms, and not recognize the complexity of the issue. I’m not arguing with you about whether or not there are problems in the system; if you read the thread carefully you will see that I’ve agreed with you on that. I think there needs to be an accounting for any deaths in the system, and any screw ups like the one you’ve pointed out with “J”. But we still need to find a way to protect children from parents like “Justice Jack”, who sexually abuse their children then insist the problem is the way the stenographer typed her notes. There are people out there who treat their children horribly, and if we do what you want, which is disband CAS completely, we will be turning our backs on those kids.

You’ve speculated on my connection with CAS (nonexistent, for the record) – what is your agenda? Has CAS been involved with you as a parent, and are you now trying to find a way to discredit them? You seem to think it is ok to abuse children, and that its no one’s business what parents do to their kids. Maybe you can’t see beyond your own case, but there are many kids who desperately need to be protected from their parents, and as a society we are obligated to do whatever we can to help these vulnerable children. If the system fails, we need to fix the system, not do away with it completely.

Here’s a link to the Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect, 2003. It’s a little longer than the Justice Jack clips you’ve posted, but research tends to be wordier than subjective ramblings and doubtful rationalizations. Pay particular attention to Table 6-3, Age and Sex of Investigated Children, by Primary Category of Substantiated Child Maltreatment, in Canada, Excluding Quebec, in 2003. It shows you that in Canada, outside of Quebec, in 2003, there were over 25,000 cases of substantiated physical abuse; there were almost 3000 cases of substantiated sexual abuse; there were over 30,000 cases of substantiated neglect; there were over 15,000 cases of substantiated emotional abuse; and there were almost 30,000 cases of substantiated exposure to family violence (which has been linked to PTSD in children). There’s a breakdown according to the age and sex of the children involved. How can you say you want to abandon these kids?

I do agree with you that more effort needs to be put in to helping abusive parents learn how to change, or even better, learn how not to be abusive in the first place. Preventing child abuse is much better than dealing with it after the fact, or trying to justify it or cover it up, as you want to do. But when it happens, there needs to be a system in place that will protect children, and give them a safe home for as long as they need it.

If you come back with more quotes about how bad the system is, I’m not going to respond to you. I’ve already agreed with you that there are problems with the system, and that there should be an investigation into any improprieties. I’m more concerned with your support of child abuse, whether it be physical, sexual, or emotional, or whether in involves neglect. Until you recognize that there are children out there that need to be protected from their parents, and that CAS is trying to address this need, there is no point talking to you.

[Oleg Bach]

The CAS is not the answer - and banning these factory farms inhabited by infants and workers that need the "society" to earn a living would not be "turning your backs on the children" _ We need a new approach - first instead of dispising the poor and sending in elitist peeps who imagine themselves as surrogate parents to every child in the world - who look for the slightest unwashed face to justify the sreaming of neglect...is no longer an option. The Family Service Act must be reviewed and re-newed - The spirit of the act was to ensure the sustainment of the nuclear family - the whole family - man woman and child. Secondly the family law courts are totally lost, twisted and corrupted - not to metion being staffed by some mean spirited and dellusional individuals.

Also : To focus on alcohol and drug use by the poor in regards to the care of their children should be adjusted to the same way we focus on the rich and privledged...Cultural differences must be respected- whether it be the rural red neck culture or the new Muslim immigrant arrival who is head of his house hold and holds the old values of patriarchy...It seems our bias feminist have no problem with matriarchy....but have orgainized to destroy any protective patrarchy - as for fathers - we must go back to a more ancient and tradtional approach and make fatherhood more attractive...At one time the fathers or the patrons or papas were protectors..not just slavish providers in a consumerist society - we should allow the males to go back and take on the role of protector again - rich or poor.

CAS have become a monster that's sole purpose is like that of a corporation to sustain it self it's bottom line at all cost - and also the feds better start paying attention to the children and families in stead of letting these lunitics who are feeding on families as if they entitled to consume the weak to turn a profit and swell the ego..

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TRUSTS THESE AGENCIES BECAUSE POLITICALS AND JUDGES ARE OLD SCHOOL AND THINK THAT THE "SOCIETY" FUNCTIONS LIKE THE LOYAL TRUE BLUE ORPHAN HOME OF OLD - WITH KIND OLD LADIES TAKING CARE OF CHILDREN COS PAPA WAS A DRUNK....THESE DAYS ARE GONE - These child protection corporations are meat packing plants and the kids are food - This is a disgrace on the nation and someone had better review what is taking place with our lost and misplace childrens and families..THE NATION IS IN A STATE OF ROT - AS IS OUR PERCEPTION - THAT THE KIDS ARE WELL TAKEN CARE OF

THEY ARE USED AND ABUSES - FIX THE PROBLEM!

[bjre]

U.S. judges admit to jailing children for money

'http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090213/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_crime_usa_judges'

By Jon Hurdle Jon Hurdle – Thu Feb 12, 8:09 pm ET

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) – Two judges pleaded guilty on Thursday to accepting more than $2.6 million from a private youth detention centre in Pennsylvania in return for giving hundreds of youths and teenagers long sentences.

Judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan of the Court of Common Pleas in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, entered plea agreements in federal court in Scranton admitting that they took payoffs from PA Childcare and a sister company, Western PA Childcare, between 2003 and 2006.

"Your statement that I have disgraced my judgeship is true," Ciavarella wrote in a letter to the court. "My actions have destroyed everything I worked to accomplish and I have only myself to blame."

Conahan, who along with Ciavarella faces up to seven years in prison, did not make any comment on the case.

When someone is sent to a detention centre, the company running the facility receives money from the county government to defray the cost of incarceration. So as more children were sentenced to the detention centre, PA Childcare and Western PA Childcare received more money from the government, prosecutors said.

Teenagers who came before Ciavarella in juvenile court often were sentenced to detention centres for minor offences that would typically have been classified as misdemeanours, according to the Juvenile Law Centre, a Philadelphia nonprofit group.

One 17-year-old boy was sentenced to three months' detention for being in the company of another minor caught shoplifting.

Others were given similar sentences for "simple assault" resulting from a schoolyard scuffle that would normally draw a warning, a spokeswoman for the Juvenile Law Centre said.

The Constitution guarantees the right to legal representation in U.S. courts. But many of the juveniles appeared before Ciavarella without an attorney because they were told by the probation service that their minor offences didn't require one.

Marsha Levick, chief counsel for the Juvenile Law Centre, estimated that of approximately 5,000 juveniles who came before Ciavarella from 2003 and 2006, between 1,000 and 2,000 received excessively harsh detention sentences. She said the centre will sue the judges, PA Childcare and Western PA Childcare for financial compensation for their victims.

"That judges would allow their greed to trump the rights of defendants is just obscene," Levick said.

The judges attempted to hide their income from the scheme by creating false records and routing payments through intermediaries, prosecutors said.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court removed Ciavarella and Conahan from their duties after federal prosecutors filed charges on January 26. The court has also appointed a judge to review all the cases involved.

Edited March 7, 2009 by bjre

[bjre]

KIDS FALLING THRU THE CRACKS: THE FOSTER CARE NIGHTMARE

http://familyrights.us/specials/walsh_4-16...alsh%20Show.htm

There are more than half a million children and youth in the U.S. foster care system today. Studies reveal that children are 11 times more likely to be abused in state care than they are in their own homes, and 7 times more likely to die as a result of abuse in the foster care system. Ciara Jobes is one of those cases. Last year, she was found dead in the home of her foster mother; she was emaciated and had been badly beaten. This child — and many more — have fallen through the cracks, and cases like this seem to be popping up on a daily basis. Today, we discuss Shared Family Care, a new program that puts a different spin on foster care. Shared Family Care offers an alternative to traditional foster care and gives troubled parents a second chance: foster care for them and their children. Shared Family Care puts them in the home of a “mentor” family, who teach the basics of parenting, meal planning, budgeting, and finding work. First, we meet Gwen and Delaina; Delaina lives in Gwen’s home as a part of the Shared Family Care program, and Gwen is her mentor. Delaina is a mother of 8, and when her last child was born high on drugs and the state took her daughter away, Delaina knew she needed to change her life. She knew she couldn’t do it alone, so while in drug treatment she learned about Shared Family Care, and she shares her story of triumph in the studio. Then, Anna says she is proof that Shared Family Care can work. Anna is now a graduate of the program, and says it is responsible for turning her life around. Next we meet Iva and Daniel, family members of Ciara Jobes. Iva and Daniel say they are angry; with themselves, with the foster mother, social services, and Ciara’s school, and they talk about the young girl in the studio. Then, Tashima Dukes’ story begins at the age of 9, when she was taken from her mother and placed into the foster care system. By the time she was 18 years old, she had been in 13 foster homes. Now 24, Tashima, author of Truth Be Told…A Foster Child’s Recollection, was able to overcome her tragic upbringing, but says that if a program like Shared Family Care existed when her mom needed it most, she may not have been shuttled through 13 different foster homes. Finally, we meet John Reid, the Chief Operating Officer of Families First, Inc., which operates the Shared Family Care program in California. Sadly, this program only exists in three states, and is the first to go when budget cuts are made. John shares more about the program and reveals how people can get involved and push for Shared Family Care in their area.

[bjre]

A book again:

Out of Control: Who's Watching Our Child Protection Agencies? (Paperback)

by Brenda Scott (Author)

http://www.amazon.com/Out-Control-Watching...s/dp/1563840693

Quotation from the book:

This book of horror stories is true. The deplorable and unauthorized might of Child Protection Services is capable of reaching into and destroying any home in America. No matter how innocent and happy your family may be, you are one accusation away from disaster.

Social works are allowed to violate constitutional rights.

Innocent parents may appear on computer registers and be branded "child abuser" for life.

Child Protective Services kidnapped a six-year-old girl from her kindergarten class because she rubbed herself between her legs. The child was forced to strip, pose for photographs and submit to a vaginal exam. The diagnosis: a yeast infection. Without a trial, Child Protective Services demanded that the father leave home, until he admits his guilt.

One father is charged with abuse, molestation. and having a dirty house. All charges are dropped except for messy housekiiping. The sentence: 60 days in jail and both parents lose all parental rights.

These are not isolated incidents. Every year, it is estimated that over 1 million people are falsely accused of child abuse in this country. You could be next, says author and speaker Brenda Scott.

Child Protective Services is out of control. The system, as it operates today, should be scrapped. If children are to be protected in their homes and in the system, radical new guidelines must be adopted. At the core of the problem is the antifamily mindset of CPS. Removal is the first resort, not the last. With in-sufficient checks and balances, the system that was designed to protect children has become the greatest perpetrator of harm.

[bjre]

http://register.thestar.com/Article/510149

Another 200 cases to be probed

Attorney General promises action as Goudge fears other mistakes likely

Oct 02, 2008 04:30 AM

Theresa Boyle

Tracey Tyler

staff reporters

The commissioner who probed mistakes in 20 child-death investigations is concerned that wrongful convictions may have occurred in other cases and is urging the province to take a second look at myriad child deaths dating back 20 years.

Justice Stephen Goudge yesterday noted that medical opinion has changed in the areas of shaken baby syndrome and pediatric head injuries. Deaths once considered criminally suspicious may now be viewed otherwise, he noted.

Within hours of the report's release, Attorney General Chris Bentley promised that more than 200 past child-death investigations would be re-examined.

"The significant evolution in pediatric forensic pathology related to shaken baby syndrome and pediatric head injuries warrants a review of certain past cases because of the concern that, in light of the change in knowledge, there may have been convictions that should now be seen as miscarriages of justice," Goudge wrote in his final report.

During public hearings at the inquiry, Ontario's chief pathologist Michael Pollanen said a review of 142 infant deaths attributed to "shaken baby syndrome" between 1986 and 2006 is warranted. While the syndrome is still hotly debated in medical circles, new research shows that some children once thought to have died from being shaken in fact suffered head injuries from accidents and short falls, Pollanen said.

The chief pathologist said the province should consider undertaking a probe similar to Britain's Goldsmith review, which looked at past cases after a mother was wrongly convicted for killing two babies.

Ontario's $8.3 million Inquiry into Pediatric Forensic Pathology was sparked by errors pathologist Dr. Charles Smith made in 20 child-death investigations. In many of the cases, parents or caregivers were charged with criminal offences that "bear a significant social stigma," Goudge noted.

Twelve of the cases resulted in findings of guilt and incarceration of individuals. In some cases siblings of deceased children were removed from their homes and placed in foster care or put up for permanent adoption.

It was only at the inquiry that potential problems in other cases were brought to public light.

Smith issued a statement following the release of the report, stating that he had participated "in good faith" with the inquiry. He said he "remains optimistic" that Goudge's report will have a positive impact on the practice of pediatric forensic pathology.

In his four-volume report, Goudge made a total of 169 recommendations to restore the public's shaken confidence in pediatric forensic pathology.

One of the recommendations was a continuation of a review of Smith's older homicide cases that were not part of the inquiry.

The 200 cases Bentley said would be re-examined are presumably ones raised at the inquiry, all of which involved criminally suspicious deaths and homicides of children. Pathologists other than Smith worked on some of these cases.

At a Queen's Park news conference, Public Safety Commissioner Rick Bartolucci apologized to Smith's victims.

"I sincerely apologize on behalf of governments of Ontario, both past and present, to each and every individual who has suffered as a result of Dr. Charles Smith's work," he said.

Government officials said a "framework" would be developed for compensation.

Many of Goudge's recommendations touched on better training and accreditation of pathologists and additional funding for the forensic pathology system. Astonishingly, Smith was viewed as one of the nation's leading experts in pediatric forensic pathology and was often called upon by the courts as an expert in the field. Yet he didn't have formal forensic pathology training and he "lacked basic knowledge" about the field, Goudge said.

The commissioner said the profession of forensic pathology needs to be beefed up with better education, more recruitment and more funding. Victims of the flawed-pathology debacle are calling for a criminal investigation into the conduct of Smith and his two former superiors in the Ontario coroner's office – Dr. James Young and Dr. Jim Cairns – with a view to laying criminal charges.

All three should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice, said William Mullins-Johnson, who was wrongly convicted for the rape and murder of his niece, crimes for which he spent 12 years in jail.

"They invented a crime here," he told reporters. "They just basically took it out of the air and said, `Let's get him.'"

Brenda Waudby, who was wrongly charged with the murder of her 21-month-old daughter, agreed.

"I believe Dr. Smith has his own issues," Waudby added. "Am I angry at him? No. I'm angry at the whole system. Not just Dr. Smith."

- With files from Robert Benzie

Edited March 7, 2009 by bjre

[bjre]

A movie on foster care:

Comment from http://community.mylifetime.com/community/...l-movie-america

Talk About the Lifetime Original Movie, "America"

A Message From Rosie

I hope that people walk away from this movie with the understanding that there are half a million kids in need of help that are in dire situations. And the system right now is not set up to care for them.

Our foster care system was set up to care for war orphans after World War II. It wasn't set up to take care of the orphans of living people. It's overwhelmed and needs to be revamped from the ground up.

This movie is an accurate portrayal of what the foster care system is like in this country. This stuff is happening in our country ever day, and there's no solution in sight right now. It has to be put on the national agenda. It's something we have to deal with before there's another whole generation that is raised in and lost to the foster care system that's broken.

America is the story of a young boy helped through the emotional roller-coaster of the foster care system by a caring psychiatrist. The movie stars Rosie O'Donnell, Ruby Dee and newcomer Philip Johnson. It airs Saturday, February 28 at 9 pm et/pt. Encores March 1 at 8 pm et/pt and March 3 at 9 pm et/pt.

LifetimeDayna

posted at 8:29am Thu Feb 12

250 comments. Last comment: March 7, 2009, 6:29 am

[bjre]

Another movie (Disney cartoon) Lilo & Stitch

Shows another reason for social workers take away kids ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilo_&_Stitch ):

Cobra Bubbles tells Nani that unless she finds employment and improves their living conditions, he will have to take Lilo into foster care.

Quotation from the movie (

):

Ohana means family, and family means nobody gets left behind or forgotten.

[bjre]

Child (or Agency) Protection?

Posted by Rich Rigney, Coos Bay, November 15, 2008 9:37AM

http://blog.oregonlive.com/myoregon/2008/1...protection.html

"You guys do more damage to kids than the parents!" Most Child Protective Services Supervisors and caseworkers would consider this malicious slander. As a Child Protective Services caseworker of eight years, however, I know it to be true. I'm not alone. The above observation uttered by a loving parent with borderline intelligence is echoed by many. Consider the following irony lamented by Duke Law Professor, Doriane Lambelet Coleman (2006): "...in the name of saving children from the harm that their parents and guardians are thought to pose, states ultimately cause more harm to many children than they ever help."

Few in the field argue that Child Protective Services ("CPS") nationally has myriad problems that are well documented in the form of media, research, congressional sub-committees and expert reports. Documentation supporting this fact is ubiquitous and readily available on-line.

However, the most grievous problem is that those who can most benefit from this knowledge, those who might use it pragmatically to improve the lives of children and families - the caseworkers and supervisors of CPS - appear either ignorant of or indifferent to the damage that removal of children perpetuates. That is: the most profound problem with "Child Welfare" is that it is not about the welfare of the child.

Rather, it is about the welfare of the agency itself.

The internal paranoia that a "Cover-Your-Agency" (CYA) mentality creates has become so pervasive that most caseworkers and supervisors are determined not to make any decision that might jeopardize their career... and the children are afterthoughts. The agency hierarchy itself reinforces this CYA mentality due to its understandable desire to remain off the front page of newspapers. This "defensive social work" is helpful in preventing bureaucrat heads from rolling. The tragic wake of this status quo, however, is strewn with the lives of children and parents.

Estimates I've come across in my research reckon that between one-third and two-thirds of those children currently in foster care nationally should be living with their parents. Furthermore, it has become undeniable that despite many saintly foster parents the government makes a poor parent. The research shows unequivocally that CPS should be loathe to remove kids from their homes because, in most cases, there is nowhere better to put them. As a result, the state is stuck between a rock and a hard place: remove children from marginal parents, causing well documented, irrevocable emotional damage (not to mention the physical and sexual abuse that occurs more frequently in foster care), or leave these children with parents who, arguably, should never have had kids in the first place-- the "lesser of two evils" if you will. Enter the "Safety Model."

The state of Oregon has become one of the last ten percent of our nation's states to adopt a "Safety Model" guide to protecting our children, created by Wayne Holder, the man Oregon CPS has called the "foremost expert in child protection in the nation." (I encourage anyone interested to visit his website at www.actionchildprotection.org to understand Mr. Holder's credentials and the Safety Model as a whole.)

"What do I have to do to get my kids back?!" Those of us in CPS have all heard it. It is inevitably the first question our clients have and it is echoed frequently until the kids are returned. The Safety Model forces Child Welfare to quantify their answer to this question.

In my experience, most families don't care how long CPS monitors (or micromanages) their family as long as their kids can live with them in the process. Mr. Holder would probably site this as THE driving force behind the creation of the Safety Model.

In quantifying their answer to parents' most pressing question, CPS must delineate for all parties and the court, the necessary "behaviors, conditions or circumstances" in the home required to "manage"- not eliminate- the safety threats that necessitated the removal of the children. The agency's answers must be "specific" (i.e. quantifiable). They must be "well articulated." They must be "least intrusive." They must be "well defined." They must provide a "benchmark" (i.e. they must be measurable). They represent the "official record and expectation" for parent-child reunification.

The parents themselves need not change at all prior to the children being returned to the home.

The Safety Model, in addition to its dictates that CPS be as "least intrusive" as possible in intervening to control threats to child safety, requires that these threats be "observable and specific," "out of control," "imminent" and expected to cause "severe" harm to a "vulnerable" child.

No doubt for many of you this is a hard pill to swallow. These are unreasonably low standards for our most precious resource. You, like me, think children deserve more. The fact remains, it is irresponsible at best and abusive at worst to remove and/or withhold a child from his or her home upon the speculation that a "threat" of danger exists, when we know from the research that removal and placement of children in foster care is always detrimental.

I'm not talking here about severe neglect or physical/sexual abuse. In five years with Oregon CPS (I worked for three in California previously) I have had only one case with such abuse (and the research puts this type of abuse at about 15 percent combined).

The Safety Model is merely a tool, an attempt to minimize the trauma to children inflicted by their own government. There is no tool or legislation that will ever completely expunge child maltreatment or child deaths so long as the only requirement for parenthood is a capacity for coitus. I believe that if the state institutes a model, a tool envisioned by the "foremost expert in child protection in the nation," the state should actually use it. That is, if CPS is making the rules, they should follow them. Currently CPS (at least in Coos County, Oregon) is not, or not consistently.

The sad yet necessary truth is that it is not the job of Child Protective Services to pick the best available situation for kids and place them there permanently. That would literally be kidnapping. Rather, it is the job of CPS to work with marginal parents and make them "safe" or capable of providing a "minimum standard of adequate care." It is CPS's job to make parents "safe," not "good." Again, it is also our job to be "least intrusive" in our intervention.

In America we must accept freedom's costs with its benefits. As Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said, "There is nothing new in the realization that the Fourth Amendment [illegal search and seizure] protections come with a price." This is true of many other "protections," such as the right to procreate and parent.

Unfortunately, Child Welfare is not held accountable for the unattributable damage to children caused by removal from their families and foster care. However, it is well-documented damage. Shouldn't we, like doctors, use our professional judgment to "first, do no harm," rather than using it to forecast the future? It is the children who pay the ultimate price for this unqualified prophesying.

The Safety Model provides a useful tool that, if used correctly, can save many children from the fate of CPS being their only perpetrator.

Rigney works in Child Protective Services in Coos Bay

Edited March 7, 2009 by bjre

[Oleg Bach]

If child protection workers become so regimented - so power orientated and thoughtless to the long term effects of their intrusion into family life then they should be replaced by more skilled and wise practitioners --who have more on the go than some certificate in child care work from a second rate community college. Also - political and other ideologs should not have access to employment in these agencies. If some young worker who is jacked up on the last book they read on the latest in "early childhood education" goes storming out with police in tow to intimitade a parent - with the go-ahead of some supervisor that bounces from one agency to another duing his career...it does not make for a foundation of common sense - There is an unwarranted elitiism with some of these people...and not all but most are very very stupid - which makes them dangerous - and all if you defy then get personal - there job is not to be personal but professional - most can not do this.

[bjre]

No one has brought this up yet but in Winnipeg, the Family Services people are in court this week trying to have the children of a racist couple taken away permanently.

While the parents sound like a couple of real white trash losers the idea that the state can take their kids away because of their beliefs comes with a lot of troubling questions.

I have little doubt the two kids would be better off in a nice, normal family environment than being raised by these two.

I have little doubt kids born to any members of the Christian Scientists, or the Scientologists, or any other wierdo cult would be better off with others too. For that matter, kids born to loser criminals and welfare lifers would be better off with others, as well. Mom's a stripper? Take the kid away! Dad is a drunk! Take the kid away! Where exactly do we stop with this sort of thing? No one is suggesting the kids were beaten or molested, just that the parents aren't especially good parents.

Oh, and they're racists. Okay. But if you can take kids away from racists because that environment isn't especially good for the kids, then what other environments can you take kids out of? Hmm, should someone look at taking away the Khadr's kids? What about the kids of criminals? Should we take them away? What if your parents are dedicated Communists? Does that count? If your parents support Hezbollah and have a picture of Osama bin Laden on their wall can we take their kids away?

CBC

CAS have no time to think about if kids need to help.

They are too busy in trying to find slight reason to take more kids away and ask money from government.

And then just drop the kids to any family after they get the money.

They are one of the important reasons to make Canadian kids don't know learning is important to themselves and to Canada. Don't know what is responsibility.

CAS is the one of the most important reasons that Canada have no brilliant politician now.

Edited May 30, 2009 by bjre

[Oleg Bach]

Funny - I guess it's all right for a couple of gay male lawyers to adopt a couple of children - and it's acceptable for the kids to have too listen to them- through the bed room wall - grunt as they sodomize each other...or some bitter lesbian couple that might hate males in general raise a girl who may absorb some of this hate? Until you have experence what a CAS has become you really have no idea - They are a huge highly orgainized burecracy - they have over 15 thousand children in their "care" just in the greater GTA...It's a huge buisness that employs thousands - and you will see portable paper shredding services parked out side their offices as routine - and when cornered in court - the lie and lie and lie - twisting the truth - and drugging children needlessly. It is not what it used to be - these institutions are staffed by crazed idealogs...and most CAS type places are also experimental facilities - connected to major universities - they put parents and children under stress - in a room with one way mirrors while twitish students take notes - as if they were studying rats in a lab...

[Visionseeker]

Funny - I guess it's all right for a couple of gay male lawyers to adopt a couple of children - and it's acceptable for the kids to have too listen to them- through the bed room wall - grunt as they sodomize each other...or some bitter lesbian couple that might hate males in general raise a girl who may absorb some of this hate? Until you have experence what a CAS has become you really have no idea - They are a huge highly orgainized burecracy - they have over 15 thousand children in their "care" just in the greater GTA...It's a huge buisness that employs thousands - and you will see portable paper shredding services parked out side their offices as routine - and when cornered in court - the lie and lie and lie - twisting the truth - and drugging children needlessly. It is not what it used to be - these institutions are staffed by crazed idealogs...and most CAS type places are also experimental facilities - connected to major universities - they put parents and children under stress - in a room with one way mirrors while twitish students take notes - as if they were studying rats in a lab...

Me thinks your tin foil hat be on too tight this morn.

[Argus]

It does not set a good example.

Uh yeah, okay. There are more and more people with your attitude out there. Used to be kids were routinely smacked for wrongdoing. And yes, it occasionally turned into abuse, but only occasionally.

Over the last decade or two that has fallen steadily out of favour. Most parents I know never hit their kids.

And how has this set a good example, exactly? Youth violence is ever rising. It is far, far worse than it was twenty five or thirty years ago when parents routinely spanked their kids. Why do you suppose that is? Perhaps because these kids never were brought up short and shown the painful consequences of misbehavior at an impressionable age?

[bjre]

Alex Jones Tv CPS"Rant"of 2009

p.s.

[WIP]

Alex Jones Tv CPS"Rant"of 2009

p.s.

RIGHT!!! So, along with being a conspiracy nut who makes up his bullshit on the fly, Alex Jones has an axe to grind with child protective services. I'll jump to conclusions and assume that he is also a child abuser who is always on the lookout for negative stories about children's aid agencies.

He says: 80% of the abuse is either by children's aid workers or foster care; does he have any documentation to back up that claim? Or does he just pull it out of his ass like he does with his 9/11 conspiracy theories.

[WIP]

Some highlights from a study produced by the Children and Family Research Center of the University of Illinois:

Child Maltreatment in Foster Care:

A Study of Retrospective Reporting

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

She points out that foster homes are involved in only 1% of national reports of child maltreatment. Furthermore, she stresses

that foster families are held to stricter standards for the treatment of children, are

conspicuous and closely scrutinized in the community, are familiar with reporting

procedures and are therefore more likely to report, and that community organizations,

including the foster care agency, are concerned about legal liability regarding foster

children.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a retrospective study of medical reports of alleged physical and/or sexual abuse

assessed and reported by pediatricians in Leeds, England over the six- year period 1990–

1995, Hobbs , Hobbs, and Wynne (1999) discovered foster children were 7 to 8 times

more likely to be assessed for abuse than a child in the general population. Foster parents

were the perpetrators of abuse in 41% of the cases, as were birth parents in 23% of cases,

and other children in 20% of cases.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Perpetrator

For those cases that were not retrospective, adult relatives, whether they were the

relative caregiver or another relative of the foster child, were the most likely perpetrators

(39% of cases) (Table 3). The next most frequent perpetrator was a foster parent (27% of

cases). Birth parents were the perpetrators of abuse and/or neglect in 13% of cases.

Other children were noted as the perpetrator in 8% of cases

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore, foster care outcome reporting continues to include situations that one might

deem outside the purview of the foster care system, such as in school, an assault of a

foster child by a birth parent, threats by birth parents, or babysitters who victimized foster

children.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION

The results from this study indicate that overall 16% of indicated reports of abuse

and neglect in foster care are retrospective reports that occurred prior to foster care

placement. Of the 301 cases in this study, 21% of indicated reports in family foster

homes, 9% of indicated reports in relative foster homes, and 23% of indicated reports in

specialized foster homes were retrospective cases, with another 2 reports (one in a

relative home and one in a specialized home) actually causing the placement rather than

occurring there. It seems clear from this preliminary study that, true to anecdotal

information, there is over-reporting of abuse and neglect within foster care. With the

evidence from this study, it would seem appropriate that child abuse and neglect incidents

attributed to foster care in outcome reporting be adjusted to more accurately reflect and

account for retrospective reporting.

http://www.cfrc.illinois.edu/pubs/Pdf.file...ildmalretro.pdf

The final verdict should be that some parents are abusive and a detriment to the safety and wellbeing of their children. To give them a chance to have a better life, it was necessary for these agencies to be created and try to fix a bad situation.

I'm sure there are problems with Children's Aid and abuses by foster parents and case workers; but the alternative of doing nothing is unthinkable, especially during a time when half of all marriages end in divorce and children have to deal with stepfathers, stepmothers, and even get blended in with unrelated children as the parents try to create a new family.

[bjre]

especially during a time when half of all marriages end in divorce and children have to deal with stepfathers, stepmothers, and even get blended in with unrelated children as the parents try to create a new family

If that is a problem when children live without their birth parents as you said, send them to foster care makes children even far away from their birth parents.

And CAS takes children not only from divorce family.

The results from this study indicate that overall 16% of indicated reports of abuse and neglect in foster care are retrospective reports that occurred prior to foster care placement

Is the 16% something that you are happy with? In Ontario there is about 30000 kids in care under CAS, is that means there are 4800 kids “in care” are suffering abuse and neglect? If CAS really thinks of kids why did not they solve the problem caused by themselves first?

If CAS can not tolerate a bruise on face, why they can tolerate several thousands being abused in CAS care?

In Ontario, even CAS robs 1% children from their family and many of them are in name of neither abuse nor neglect. 16% is the abuse case in foster care is far higher than normal family.

The largest problem caused by CAS is not the abuse, it is the final outcome:

1. More kids becomes criminals.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/03/07/...aid-070307.html

Ontario is not the only province that needs to fix the system, Finlay's report says.

A sampling of facilities across Canada found that 57 per cent of young offenders had a connection to the child welfare system, the report said. In British Columbia, a recent study put that number at 73 per cent.

Only 24% can graduate from high school, while 36% end up in correction system. http://www.lawsociety.bc.ca/publications_f...blic-forum.html

2. Children have less responsibility, like what you said,

half of all marriages end in divorce

Fewer children are interested in learning reading. Fewer great people appear nowadays. Fewer people are capable and willing to push economy growth by their hard work. They think more about how to take money from bank policy, insurance policy, laws, union, or simply by stealing, destroying or attacking others. Because the culture they have reinforced is “Everything is for me” instead of “I need to contribute something while I take”

[Bonam]

Taking children away from their parents is a crime. Only in cases where a child is in extreme physical danger should it even be considered. The ridiculous power that the government now holds over its citizens, such as to tear apart families at a whim, is truly frightening.

[WIP]

If that is a problem when children live without their birth parents as you said, send them to foster care makes children even far away from their birth parents.

And CAS takes children not only from divorce family.

If we go back in time to the days before there were any children's aid agencies, children were abused with impugnity, unless they went to far and killed them. In England 150 years ago, boys were sold to workhouses to pay off debts and girls were sold into prostitution. Are you advocating a return to the old "anything goes" standard where nobody stepped in to help children born into horrible situations?

Is the 16% something that you are happy with?

Read it again! "16% of indicated reports of abuse and neglect in foster care are retrospective reports that occurred prior to foster care placement." Those are false reports, since it states plainly that the actual abuse happened to the children before they were placed in foster care.

The largest problem caused by CAS is not the abuse, it is the final outcome:

1. More kids becomes criminals.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/03/07/...aid-070307.html

Only 24% can graduate from high school, while 36% end up in correction system. http://www.lawsociety.bc.ca/publications_f...blic-forum.html

Caused by CAS! You have no basis to make such an assertion, especially from the information you cited. Children left in abusive homes may be even more dysfunctional and prone to criminal behaviour. The fact is Children's Aid does not get calls from the police regarding normal family situations....they aren't likely to have police knocking on their doors in the first place. They are taking abused kids from bad situations, so the odds of growing up normal are already severely reduced. As your link says:

"We're taking them out of very difficult family circumstances, bringing them into state care and then we're charging them for their behaviour. It's very concerning to me," Finlay said.

The report, which was obtained by CBC News, lays much of the blame on group homes that rely too heavily on police to resolve problems that could be handled by staff.

Kids have been charged for everything from refusing to read a book or hitting someone with a tea towel, Finlay said. One group home in Ontario called police 400 times in a single year

So, they're taking kids from bad situations, putting them in group homes, and then over-reacting when the kids commit minor and petty infractions -- calling the police, and making them liable for criminal charges. The child advocate doesn't mention that low payed group home staffers have to often deal with violent, dangerous youths, and that may cause them to over-react.

But once again, the group homes are there because these children were not adopted, and then got to old to be placed in foster homes. What is your alternative?

[Oleg Bach]

All CAS orgainizations are driven by profit and a will to maintain jobs for their thousands of employees - in effect turning infants and children into employers - in effect creating child labour under the guise of benevolence.

[Oleg Bach]

All CAS orgainizations are driven by profit and a will to maintain jobs for their thousands of employees - in effect turning infants and children into employers - in effect creating child labour under the guise of benevolence.

I dragged a major CAS - kicking and screaming right into the chambers of the Supreme Court Of Canada - and showed her chief justice that they committed fraud via conspiracey with members of the bar - who refused to disclose documents--- judges who knew they were lieing - and all I figure out was that the Supreme Court would not rule against it self...that the policy of controling human beings as if they were animals - through what they loved most - their children....is a policy - that corruptly continues from the very bottom to the very top ----like a rancher that controls his breeding stock -the coerce the population though kidnap. I saw a father suffer as if he was a female cat with the kittens snatched away...while these bastards took notes on his suffering as if he was a fu**ing lab rat.

[bjre]

A mother of 2 children, was worrying about her small child who was about 1 year old, because blood flow out of nose. She went to hospital every day wish to get pity from the doctors, the doctor don't think the child had serious problem and called CAS. CAS toke 2 kids away and said the mother have mental problem not suitable for parenting. The mother was so sad with depression that she committed suicide. Left her husband alone. Her network name in a Chinese web forum http://www.rolia.net was bluelove, She had post since 2002. No news in main stream media. Another life gone silently. Left 2 very small kids without mother. Don't know how many such tragedies has been generated by CAS.