Perjury

Scandal fallout: Oregon pulls foster kids from another provider

Oregon officials have stopped placing foster children with a Clackamas County agency that landed on a state "radar list" of troubled providers, the Department of Human Services said Thursday — more fallout from accusations the department did little to stop neglect by a Portland provider.

The provider, Youth Villages Oregon, is a local branch of a national organization. It was led, until this winter, by Oregon Health Authority director Lynne Saxton. A statement from a Department of Human Services spokesman didn't say why the provider was put on the radar list or how many children were affected.

The department plans to release a letter Friday detailing problems and threatening Youth Villages with the loss of its state license.

Connie Mills, a spokeswoman in Youth Villages' main office in Tennessee, told The Oregonian/OregonLive "we disagree with some of [the department's] conclusions." But she acknowledged that Oregon officials had "asked us to hold off on admissions to our residential campus program for the time being." The provider works with children facing serious behavioral and emotional issues.

Mills also shed some light on some of Oregon's concerns, saying they involved training and supervision issues.

"They have some questions about this program and we are actively addressing those while we work with [the department] on a corrective action plan," she said in a statement. "Some of the things we're doing include enhancing supervision of youth by significantly increasing highly skilled and trained staffing, as well as conducting additional trainings and evaluating other areas in which we can make improvements."

Youth Villages, formerly known as ChristieCare, is one of two providers facing sanctions after Department of Human Services officials this month reviewed seven providers on the most recent radar list.

The other one is Scotts Valley School in Douglas County, which treats behavioral problems and accepts private clients from across the country. Scotts Valley has been on the list longer than any other provider and is expected to receive a letter Monday, officials said. It does not treat any state-paid clients.

The Department of Human Services released information about the list and the results of its review in response to requests from three media outlets, including The Oregonian/OregonLive.

Those requests came during a tense legislative hearing last month on how the Department of Human Services deals with troubled providers. The hearing followed reports that top officials continued to send children to a Northeast Portland foster care provider despite knowing about serious financial issues and abuse accusations.

The state Department of Justice has filed suit against that provider, Give Us This Day, accusing its operator of misspending $2 million in state money to pay for personal expenses such as cosmetic surgery and vacations.

Give Us This Day spent 28 months on the radar list, officials testified at last month's hearing. The list, issued every few months by the department's licensing arm, looks at factors including media attention, the volume and severity of complaints, and chronic noncompliance. The licensing office has three staffers in charge of tracking 203 child-care providers.

"The document became known as the 'radar list,' but it was never intended to be more than an advisory about licensed facilities that someone thought should be added or removed to ensure that DHS executives were informed if asked," department spokesman Gene Evans wrote. "It was never a 'watch list' of locations where immediate action was needed or recommended — it was only an internal advisory document."

Gov. Kate Brown responded to the Give Us This Day scandal last month by replacing the Department of Human Services' interim director and announcing an independent investigation of the state's child welfare system.

Her choice to lead the department, state administrator Clyde Saiki, told lawmakers last month that human services managers lacked a central mechanism for spotting troubled providers. Evans said Saiki ordered the review that led to Thursday's announcement.

Evans said Saiki has "established an ongoing review process" to make sure managers meet and track concerns involving child-care facilities.

"This cross-agency team and regular review is one early outcome of the governor's charge to improve oversight of the child foster care system," Evans wrote.

Sen. Sara Gelser, D-Corvallis, who convened last month's hearing, is working up legislation to toughen licensing requirements and financial rules, and to give regulators the power to suspend a provider's license over abuse claims and other safety violations.

Gelser also has proposed changing how the department processes abuse and neglect allegations. Last year, more than half of complaints were ruled closed during an initial screening, in part because state law strictly limits investigations, usually to cases involving serious injury or an ongoing threat.

Gelser wants to set a lower threshold that would include threats, neglect through the denial of food or medicine, financial fraud and lesser injuries that don't leave a child near death.

— Denis C. Theriault

dtheriault@oregonian.com

503-221-8430; @TheriaultPDX

DHS investigating 7 foster homes

Children have been removed from one foster home as part of a DHS investigation ordered by Gov. Kate Brown and increased media scrutiny of the agency.

Children at the Clackamas County foster care provider Youth Villages have been removed from the facility, according to information released Thursday from the Department of Human Services.

That information became public following DHS's fulfillment of a public records request by the Statesman Journal and other media for the DHS "radar list" of foster care providers.

The list is periodically delivered to DHS executives to alert them about providers that have a high number of complaints or high severity of complaints, a record of chronic noncompliance with rules, or anticipated media attention.

Scotts Valley School, a therapeutic boarding school in Yoncalla, has been on the list for at least 36 months, the longest of any provider. The school does not have state-placed children, but is a private organization accepting payment to house and treat troubled children. Scotts Valley School did not return phone calls Thursday.

Along with Scotts Valley School and Youth Villages, other facilities on the "radar list" are: Chehalem Youth and Family Services, of Newberg, Eastern Oregon Academy, of Burns, Inn Home for Boys, of Portland, Kairos, of Grants Pass, and Youth Progress, of Portland.

The list released Thursday did not include details of any allegations against the organizations. DHS spokesman Gene Evans declined to comment on why those facilities are on the list, although he said Youth Villages and Scotts Valley School are the most serious cases.

"We're not releasing detailed information on those yet, because that's all being redacted," Evans said.

Connie Mills, public relations manager at Youth Villages, a national organization with several campuses, said in a statement that Youth Villages is improving its programming and disagrees with some of DHS's conclusions, but is "extremely concerned about this" and "taking these issues very seriously."

"We believe in being transparent about our work and constantly enhancing our program, so we are working closely and openly with DHS," the statement said.

DHS is working with the Department of Justice to issue "intent to revoke" letters notifying Youth Villages and Scotts Valley School of corrective actions they must take to stay licensed. Those letters are expected to be publicly released following DOJ review and will include detailed information about the allegations.

The existence of the radar list was first reported after journalists learned of it at a public hearing last month. DHS officials testified to the Interim Committee On Human Services and Early Childhood about how they are working to fix problems with the agency's child care system, and mentioned the list.

Gov. Kate Brown ordered an independent review of DHS following media reports that now-defunct foster care provider Give Us This Day had allegedly pocketed upwards of $2 million meant for childcare and provided substandard living conditions. Despite knowing of abuse and mismanagement, DHS officials did not revoke Give Us This Day's license.

Following those revelations, Brown demoted acting-DHS Director Jerry Waybrant and appointed State Chief Operating Officer Clyde Saiki as interim DHS director. Saiki said he plans a "deep" investigation of DHS.

A committee has also been created to guide the investigation, which is ongoing.

gfriedman2@statesmanjournal.com, (503) 399-6653, on Twitter @gordonrfriedman or Facebook.com/gordonrfriedman

Thank You

Hello Friends!

I'm a little late to share this, but I wanted to say Thank You for your support. We recently just hit 100,000 visitors! WOW! I never imagined that we would receive this much attention.

Since This Started

It has been quite a while since we started this blog. Our son had been taken away, and he was gone for 17 months. It was a hard battle, but eventually we got our son back and our family whole again. It wasn't without much pain, and we're still recovering 2 years after he came home. Our son and daughter never leave each other's sides. Whether this is due to their close age or the fact that she had to visit her baby brother at a DHS office, who knows for sure. But they love each other very much.

Both of our children have since been diagnosed with Ehlers-Danlos Type III, which is a hypermobility branch of the disorder. My son has more severe symptoms, often having tiny pinpoint bruises and joint pain, especially in his feet. My daughter seems to have a less severe case, though she did just suffer an elbow injury that was made worse due to her naturally bendy elbows.

We're finally starting to break away from the damage caused by the judicial system. For the longest time we were stuck living with my in-laws. We were stuck there for 4 years! As you can imagine, tension builds up after a while. But now we finally bought our own house and can start raising our kids.

Still Seeking Action

Again, I want to Thank You all for your support. The battle isn't over as we are still on the "child abuse registry" that Oregon DHS keeps. We are trying to work with lawyers and public officials to change this law since it does violate our due process rights. We know this battle is hard, maybe one of the most difficult ones in life. Keep strong, and I hope that we can support you as much as you have supported us.

Daniel Dossey

State Sanctioned Kidnapping

U.S. Observer

By Jim Dossett

Jim Dossett's Grandchildren

My understanding of the court system was similar to most Americans understanding of it. We read about court proceedings online, in newspapers and we hear about them on TV. Obey the law, no problem. Disobey the law and we have the finest system going. Our system compared to many is far and away the best. However it has, as I have come to learn, certain flaws that have evolved and have tilted the scales of justice.

My understanding of the court system in a nut shell was that, truth is found by careful and dutiful dissection in the court room. Evidence is paramount and lies are dissolved. Unfortunately politics, ego and dollars have consumed it.

This is our story. It could happen to anyone. It has and is happening here (Yamhill County Oregon) and around the country. Families are caught up in the bureaucratic functions of state departments so consumed by their internal policies that any attempt to cast reason their way is met with condemnation. That condemnation is supported by their superior understanding of the legal system. It did not happen overnight. Over years and decades, laws have been generated that enable government to pursue an agenda that would normally be considered unconstitutional by most American standards. In Oregon the Department of Human Services (DHS) primarily pursues court actions through the juvenile court system. The opposing party is put on the defense. An opposing party is considered guilty until proven innocent. In cases like ours the judge is the decider, no jury required. The State has unlimited funds for legal representation and experts. Unless money is of no consequence to those challenging the state, a public defender is the degree of legal help most receive. Money was of a consequence to us though we soon found out, that a public defender is not the best option in today’s court. Time is of no consequence to DHS. Once embroiled in a court case they are exacting their job description. Whereas their opponents have to shift, maneuver and crunch their daily lives at the expense of the system. Understand that court is only held during the work week and during normal working hours.

My experience with the system was brought on by an injustice that occurred in my family. I am the grandfather of an infant that was stricken with rickets. His parents are the typical loving mother and father. They have been accused by the State of Oregon of abusing their five week old son.

Here is our story:

On October 1, 2011 - my grandson was born. He was like his mother, stubborn as he refused to come out when the time was near. It had been two weeks since his scheduled delivery time. The doctor wanted to induce labor. My daughter was upset and concerned as she had read a lot about the medicine they were going to use. It was Pitocin, a highly controversial induction medication. I assured my daughter that the doctor knew what was best. The delivery was rough to say the least. My grandson got stuck coming out. My grandson was what is known as “Shoulder Dystocia”. His shoulders were stuck in the pelvis. The doctor manipulated my grandson with his hands for about 90 seconds which was a long time, in a scary situation. The infant was blue and not breathing when he finally inched through. The delivery team corrected his breathing and aside from being bruised, my grandson looked fine. His ABGAR score at birth was 3 (out of ten). That is a scale hospitals use to assess a child’s health at birth. He was not X-rayed at the time as X-rays are not normally done on newborns for obvious reasons. Unfortunately another infant was admitted to the hospital that was dead or dying on arrival. We totally understand the hospitals priority in that matter. Though, his misfortune took up practically the entire hospitals attention, which included the pediatrician on duty. Although close monitoring of my grandson by the pediatrician had been requested by the delivery doctor, it did not occur.

To top off my grandsons condition he had jaundice. Not severely but it took a few days to clear up. (In the past year I have researched many publications and presentations, one of particular interest for our case was a Dr. Sabah Serveas. She presented a power point lecture at a radiologist conference about birth injuries that resemble abuse. A Dr. Kleinman did an article addressing the problems with diagnosing metaphyseal fractures which mentions rickets.)

After leaving Willamette Valley Medical Center (WVMC) my grandson had to return the following 2 days for check-ups on his jaundice condition. The parents were exceptional in looking after his health needs. He had 2 well baby checks in his first two weeks. At about the third week he was seen by a doctor that performed a circumcision. On Nov. 7th he was seen along with my daughters mid wife. The mid wife admired my grandson during their visit. And of course the doting grandparents were almost always hovering close by. Everything was just perfect.

Clearly nothing was out of place. If there was any sign of neglect or abuse it is only logical that it would have been reported.

The nightmare that ensued has challenged my belief and respect for the system. It all started on Nov. 8th 2011. My grandson was 5 weeks old at this time. He had from birth been fussy and requiring a lot of love and attention. He was fussier than normal, and on Nov. 7th, his temperature was slightly elevated and he had been expelling a higher than normal amount of gas. My daughter administered baby Tylenol for his fever and an over the counter gas relief (gripe water). The next day his temperature was still slightly elevated (100.1). Whenever he was adjusted for feeding or diaper changes it was obvious he was in discomfort. The parents called an advice nurse that instructed them to have a doctor take a look at the infant, just to be on the safe side. It was after 5pm and the only available medical attention was the emergency room at WVMC.

When they arrived they saw a receptionist that took care of the initial paper work and had them wait for their examination. That wait was about an hour long. Important, as it must not have appeared that the infant required any emergency care. Once in the exam room, a triage nurse evaluated my grandson’s condition. Of importance is that she is quoted in her report stating, “All four extremities are strong and moving equally”. She does not pass down any concerns about the infant’s leg or suggest special care to the on duty pediatrician. Next, the duty pediatrician (Dr. Shaver) examined my grandson, noting in his report that upon entering the room he sees the infant laying on the table calmly looking about. After doing a visual check the doctor performs a hip check. My daughter and son-in-law heard and see my grandson scream. This is the first time either of them has heard him scream in his short few weeks. The doctor performed another hip check and another scream occurred. The doctor said that it was normal for an infant with abdominal issues. The doctor requested an abdominal X-ray and left the room. At 2006 hrs an X-ray tech entered in the room with a portable X-ray and attempted to do an X-ray of the abdomen.

As described to me: While positioning the child, the tech asks my son-in-law if the doctor had said anything about the child’s leg. The doctor had not. The tech X-rays the abdomen and leaves with his portable X-ray. Thirty minutes later at 2036, the tech returns with his portable X-ray and performs an X-ray of the child’s leg. This x-ray shows that the left femur is fractured. (During court, the doctor stated that he had ordered the X-rays at the same time.) The doctor advises that because the parents cannot explain how this happened, he is doing his job and starts a mandatory investigation. The parents are sincerely concerned for their child and hope the investigation explains what is wrong with their child.

Of note and surely to battle in the court room later is why did the doctor not convey his concerns about the leg from the beginning? In the judge's opinion it was stated that the doctor was immediately aware of a problem with the leg. Seriously? He ordered an abdominal X-ray. He does not pass on any information to the X-ray tech about careful handling of the leg? Had my grandson been discharged that night with concern only for his stomach what would have been the hospitals response when later he was brought in for a broken leg? Prior medical attention would have been considered thorough and no sign of injury.

Jim Dossett's Grandchildren

Anyway, my grandson is transferred to Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU)/Doernbechers hospital. There, a battery of tests is done. At this time there is slight swelling on the left leg that had not been there before. There was a skeletal survey done and it showed the femur fracture, some metaphyseal fractures and three rib fractures healing in various stages. There was no bruising, no soft tissue damage, no retinal hemorrhaging, no neck or head injuries, and no internal organ damage (internal CT scan was completed also with only minor differences in bone condition). The Abuse team nurse requests a vitamin D level blood test. Complete blood panels are done. Calcium, Phosphorus and PTH levels are also requested. Vitamin D, Phosphorus and calcium and PTH levels are essential to establishing bone strength without doing a bone density check (which was not done). The Vitamin D test was lost? The Calcium and Phosphorus were classified as Quantity Not Sufficient. And the PTH was Not Received.

Later - this is extremely important, everyone totally ignored this major discrepancy in our case.
On Nov 9th at an emergency hearing in Yamhill county court we had our first taste of how the DHS exults its power. After hearing all of the evidence the judge (Easterday) ordered that my grandson and his sister be allowed to stay with the parents until the jurisdictional hearing in January, under the stipulation that I and my wife be safety supervisors. That was generally accepted, as the parents and children were living with us at the time. At that point the DHS case worker Becky Brewster raised her hand and told the judge that she must reconsider. She told the judge that she needs to know that the infant boy had multiple fractures and liver damage. The word fracture was used for effect by DHS. Metaphyseals are located on the ends of the bones. Whenever someone hears fracture the visual of a bone snapped in half comes to mind. That is not the case with metaphyseal. The article by Dr Kleinman states that metaphyseal are indistinguishable from Rickets. And the presentation by Dr Servaes describes them as common in birth.

Becky Brewster in my opinion is an overzealous attention seeking case worker that feels that she is empowered with the duty of saving the children no matter what the cost. Unfortunately that weighs in with ignoring parenting rights, the constitution and lying under oath to accomplish her mission.

For the record - My 18 month old granddaughter was subjected to a skeletal X-ray upon the judge’s request. Her health was perfect.

The petition that was presented to the court listed the femur fracture as a fracture, the metaphyseal and rib fractures were at the time listed as possible and probable. The liver was not listed as damaged. The petition stated that liver enzymes were elevated, indicative of liver damage. The enzymes were elevated. At the time of the emergency hearing we explained that the doctor that performed the tests had confirmed to us that there was no liver or any internal damage. We fought that misrepresentation for most of our battle with the state. The judge (Cal Tichenor) wrote in his opinion that liver damage was ruled out and was not a consideration in his findings. One thing that annoys me is that we told everyone that my grandson had a low fever and that he had been given children’s Tylenol. Our research found that Tylenol raises the very liver enzymes that were being used to accuse us of abuse. Really, none of the doctors gave it a thought.

As is protocol for skeletal X-rays a follow up is required approximately 2 weeks later for evaluation of the healing process. On December 2, a second Skeletal X-ray was performed. On this one the same radiologist that read the first one mentioned that there was minimal periosteal formation on the 5th rib. Periosteal is what forms around bones in the healing process. The original X-ray showed no signs of a fracture on the 5th rib, nor did the CT scan (The radiologist had ordered the CT because she stated that it has a better modality for viewing ribs). The first Skeletal X-ray and CT scan on Nov 9th were basically identical though the CT scan reader had actually identified a rib (#7 rib) that the radiologist for the skeletal X-ray had identified as a fracture, stating that it was actually just artifact(?). The infant was out of the parent’s custody as of the 10th of Nov.When the Skeletal X-ray was done on Dec 2nd any fracture phase not on the first set was something that had to have occurred while in the states custody.The logical explanation is that a bone was fractured while the infant was in the states care. The radiologist did try to maneuver around how it could have happened. She was unable to deny that it was possible and could have occurred while my grandson was in foster care (state custody). Judge Tichenor ordered a 3rd X-ray during our first hearing to settle that argument. DHS ignored that order. Also, of note is that one of the liver enzymes presented as being elevated and indicative of a fracture (ALT) was at its highest level when checked while in the states care.

Our case was never one with criminal charges. It has always been a fight with DHS over custody. They had taken an infant away from a family without any factual evidence. There was no evidence of a crime having been committed. Yes, a non mobile child had a broken leg. There are, as I have found numerous medical explanations for weakened bones in infants. Diseases and vitamin deficiencies account for many. An infants' bones are “normally” strong and or pliable and do not break easily.

If as the experts had detailed in our case, there should have been attendant signs of abuse if in fact abuse had occurred. In our case where there was no explanation for what happened to my grandson’s femur. There was no swelling, no bruising, no soft tissue damage, no internal organ damage, no head or neck injuries.

When a child is taken from a family by the state, the court system gets involved and that is where this case turned horrific. On Nov.10, 2011 DHS took control of my grandson. Then the court system had to set up a hearing to hear testimony and the evidence. That was not possible until Jan.5th - almost 2 months later. Imagine having your child taken away knowing that he must have some kind of a condition that caused all of this and the system just whisks him away for months until you prove it was a health condition. It is insane. The parents have no drug, alcohol or domestic issues. Both are educated with a degree or seeking a degree. They have a perfectly healthy 18 month old (at that time). The infant that was taken had a rough delivery. All of this background info readily available and they take the infant away. The State knows that once they take custody, they are aware of the immense burden that places on them. They now have to justify it. The State has a huge legal team at their disposal. We know something is wrong with the infant’s bones. We make an appointment with the Shriner’s Hospital to have him checked out. Upon DHS finding out about this Becky Brewster cancels the appointment. When on the stand and asked if she had in fact cancelled it, she denied it. The judge presented her with the Shriner’s Document that showed her name as the person that had in fact cancelled the appointment! This action was ignored by the court; accept to make DHS arrange for another Shriner’s appointment. All DHS allowed Shriners to do in that rescheduled appointment was to review current medical records. No new testing was done.

Judge Tichenor heard our case in January and disregarded all of our experts, including one Dr David Ayoub, a radiologist with 23 years experience. That expert diagnosed my grandson with neonatal rickets and was 100% sure of his diagnosis. Two other doctors, one a pediatrician with 16 years experience and a medical emergency doctor with 30 years experience. Both felt that abuse was not the cause of the injuries. Pointing out that they had never seen a traumatic leg fracture without attendant outside signs of injury. Even the infant’s pediatrician who had been seeing the infant while in the states care wanted further testing done. He was not convinced it was abuse.

In my opinion the judge ruled in such a way as to take the responsibility away from the court. This also allowed him to let his DA win the case. If the judge ruled in favor of the state, it would go as most cases go. The State will control what the parents have to do to get their infant back. Psychological testing, parenting classes, visitation control, etc. All under the guise that it is in the best interest of the infant. It is a win win for the judge. All he has to do is write his opinion so as to justify his ruling. Now, what if the ruling affects the rest of the life of the parents and the child’s future? In our case with the parents, one has a psychology degree and the other is working towards one in that field. Where will they be able to use those degrees? They will be placed on a child abuser list for the rest of their lives. Would you think that it would be in the best interest of your child to give up your future source of income and their stability? Throw away all that money invested in a private college (Linfield College).

Currently we are still fighting. We lost our case in the first hearing. Albeit we believe that the transcripts bear out that the judge’s decision was wrong. He admitted that he did not know what happened to the infant. Plus how can he rule on a preponderance of the evidence when there was still doubt as to the occurrence of the 5th rib being fractured? The appeals Court chose the same course of action as Judge Tichenor. They did not read the transcripts as we requested.

New evidence has surfaced since the first hearing. Of course it could not be presented to the appeals court because it was not part of the first hearing. We are requesting a new hearing to review that an endocrinologist report done after the hearing showed that my grandson had been started on a high dosage prescription - Ergocalciferol D2 oral Nov 25th . During the original hearing the States expert, Dr. Valvano had convinced the judge that vitamin D was not important. We had argued during the hearing that Vitamin D fortified formula was used extensively prior to the blood test and that alone would have significantly increased his vitamin D level. My grandson’s levels were deficient at 20.7 even after formula supplementation.(Formula contains at least 40 IU of vitamin D per serving size)We are aware of 5 straight days of only having formula prior to the blood test which equates to about 400 UI a day of Vit D. We are adamant that the supplementation not only raised his levels, but was used along with the Ergocalciferol D2 to treat a bone condition.Which ironically is the vitamin that Dr Valvano said was not important.

At one point during this ordeal we suspected sex abuse and physical abuse of my grandson. The judicial system proved its unworthiness to me again. Once we submitted for a hearing to get my grandson out of that situation. The court in its almightiness scheduled a hearing for 2 weeks away. Yes, two weeks. All the while the infant was to stay in a home that had had suspected child abuse. When we finally made it to court the state argued for almost an entire day. The hearing was originally scheduled for an hour and changed on the day of the hearing for 3 hours. After all was said and the day was completed. The hearing was not. It was again scheduled to be seen again in 2 months. YES, two months later, all the while my infant grandson remained in the same foster care. It is ludicrous! Nothing in the world boils me over as much as the double sidedness of the court. When child abuse is suspected by DHS the state will take your child away in an instant. But when the shoe is on the other foot, the lines are crossed and the rules changed. No one has been able to explain to me how the best interest of the child is served when the State is only concerned with its own best interests!

We have been fighting this case now for over a year. We know that we are right and that the only reason this has gone on for so long is because of the states power. They control the courtroom in this particular kind of a case. They are normally dealing with parents that are either guilty or can only afford a public defender that probably councils them to do whatever the state says and just walk away. We have had three public defenders and have hired 3 different attorneys. One has stood by our side the entire time. His experience in this type of a case spans 35 years. He is determined to win. We also hired an attorney to represent us in a petition for review, sent to the Oregon Supreme Court. We found out this past February that the Oregon Supreme Court will not take on our case. We will not stop fighting.

My daughter and Son-in-law did not abuse their son. That is the truth and the truth stands alone, it will always be the truth.

Jim Dossett
ABH1 (E-6)
USN Retired

Confess or you'll never see your kids

http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/confess-or-you-ll-never-see-your-kids-184400401.html?ref=401

Posted: Dec. 21, 2012 | 2:06 a.m.

It sounds like something out of the Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials or modern-day North Korea: Authorities separate a husband and father from his family, warning that he can live with them only if he confesses to a crime he didn't commit.

This kind of twisted justice was repudiated by our Founding Fathers, and as a result, the United States legal system is the gold standard of the free world.

Yet this unconscionable scenario played out right here in Clark County over the past few years. And very soon, Southern Nevadans likely will pay dearly for it.

A Nigerian immigrant announced Tuesday that he has filed a federal civil lawsuit against Clark County for keeping him separated from his family for five months after a jury acquitted him of murder and abuse charges in the 2008 death of a 2-year-old boy. Victor Fakoya was not allowed to live with his wife and two daughters unless he admitted responsibility in Family Court to the charges he was found not guilty of in District Court.

"What has been lost in time and the joy of parenting my children is something I will never again regain," he said.

The lawsuit, which seeks $10 million in damages, alleges Child Protective Services employees tried to use the forced separation from his family to coerce Mr. Fakoya into admitting he caused Daniel Jaiwesimi's death.

"It seems morally incongruous for prosecutors to demand of Mr. Fakoya that, in order to settle his Family Court case, he confess to something for which he was acquitted," we wrote in this space in April 2011 - more than a year and a half ago. "It smacks of vindictiveness. There is no rational basis for the demand. The safety of Mr. Fakoya's children can be monitored without demanding a confession that would hang over his life forever, even if he is completely innocent."

Mr. Fakoya, a principled and observant Christian, has steadfastly refused to comply with the prosecutors' demands, even though doing so meant he had to live separately from his wife and two daughters.

A Department of Family Services caseworker recommended dismissal. "In light of the outcome of Mr. Fakoya's criminal trial ... it is respectfully requested and recommended that this matter be dismissed and the case closed," the caseworker wrote in a letter to the court, almost two years ago. But District Attorney David Roger's office pressed on, demanding the confession. (Mr. Roger has since left office.)

Although Mr. Fakoya has filed only against the county, individuals within Child Protective Services and the district attorney's office probably will be named later, says Mr. Fakoya's civil attorney, Brent Bryson.

"The mandate of Child Protective Services is, one, to protect children, and two, to reunify families together. We believe that mission was abandoned in Mr. Fakoya's case," Mr. Bryson said Tuesday.

Indeed. The two missions can sometimes appear to be in conflict. But children fare best within their own families - with both parents, when possible.

The conduct of the agencies in this case went beyond mere caution. They seemed unwilling to accept the verdict of a jury of Mr. Fakoya's peers, determined to use their power over the custody of the children to force a different outcome.

Now, in all likelihood, taxpayers will pay for that intransigence. And what measure of accountability might they get in the face of a multimillion-dollar judgment or settlement? Will anyone within Clark County government face suspension or termination? Will anyone step forward to renounce such Draconian tactics and vow that it will never happen again?

Meantime, as Mr. Fakoya notes, how can he ever be given back those months with his growing children?

Child Abuse Laws: Legally Abducting Children by Broadening the Definition of “Child Abuse”

September 5, 2012
by Dr. Mercola
Child abuse is a horrific act, no matter how you define it.

That’s why we have so many laws, and public and private agencies, set up specifically with the charge to protect children and maintain their safety. It’s exactly why so much funding is directed toward this goal.

But did you know that the money funneled to states and child protective services actually encourages them to accuse you of child abuse and even murder, and to take your children, even if you’re not guilty, and even though they have absolutely no proof that you harmed your child?

The Legal Abduction of Children

Horrendous as it sounds, it’s true: child abuse has become a business – an industry of sorts – that actually pays states to legally abduct your children and put them up for adoption!

Even more unbelievable is that, instead of pumping the money back into child protective service programs, some states actually are putting it into their general funds to help balance their budgets.

A number of groups have tried to reform this shady practice, but it was a California politician who caught media attention this past summer, when he said that, if elected, he would expose how local governments were amassing billions of dollars in annual reimbursements, in exchange for what amounted to legal abduction of children.
“Most people are not aware of how much profit many of these services provide the county,”John Van Doorn told a San Diego newspaper. “These profits are hard to ignore and even more difficult to pass up.

Counties can bring in thousands of dollars in excess revenue for each child in foster care, Van Doorn said – which means they have more incentive to remove children from their families than to keep families intact. “As such … our county government is a major factor in the dismantling of families and/or destruction of children’s lives,” he said.

He then cited San Diego CPS for “egregious behaviors” that included accusing parents of child abuse without any evidence.

The ugly truth is that San Diego isn’t the only community where false accusations of child abuse occur. Across the nation, the practice has become so blatant that some of the leading experts on child abuse and foster care have started to cry “foul.”

About the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA)

The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) is the federal law on which almost all state and local legislation and funding for child protective services are based. Enacted in 1988, CAPTA directs the U.S. Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children & Families to provide grants to communities for child abuse prevention programs.

As a federal mandate, CAPTA mandates states to implement child abuse laws on their own, so they can align themselves for the massive funding and grants that go along with the law.

In theory as the years went by, if the goal for this law – to reduce child abuse in this country – had been successful, then today we should need less funding for these programs, not more. Success also should have resulted in fewer children in foster care and even fewer being put up for adoption.

But in reality, the opposite happened. Instead of less children in foster care, the numbers went up for nine years after CAPTA was passed. And, layers and layers of state and federal government programs and agencies whose funding depends solely on child abuse occurring were created.

In 1999 foster care numbers started dropping – but only because of new laws that encouraged states to move children out of foster care and into adoptive homes.

Of course, that legislation came with funding too, giving CPS a new avenue for making more money and creating more jobs and more programs. The tragedy is what Van Doorn pointed out in his campaign: the financial incentives for rooting out child abuse actually encourage agencies to make false accusations against parents, and to tear families apart for something that did not occur.

How this Law Actually has Increased Child Abuse Reports

What happened in San Diego is not an anomaly, nor is it new. In 1991, the bi-partisan National Commission on Children had already figured out that children were being taken from their families “prematurely or unnecessarily” because federal formulas give states “a strong financial incentive” to do so rather than provide services to keep families together.”

As a result, the federal government and a number of states created legislation that was supposed to keep more families together. But as the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform (NCCPR) reports, those efforts only disrupted more families, and encouragedmore adoptions.

Again, the reason is financial: the new laws give “bounties to states of up to $8,000 or more per child  for every adoption they finalize over a baseline number,” NCCPR reports. And again, all the help goes to foster and adoptive parents. “About the only parents the federal government won’t help indefinitely are birth parents,” NCCPR found.

But the injustices don’t stop there, because in order to get that money, states have to have children to take away and place – and therein lies the incentive to falsely accuse parents of harming their children and to forcibly remove children even when there is no evidence to do so.
“CPS nationally are doing a job they’ve never been trained to do,” says Kim Hart, a trial strategist and facilitator who has been assisting attorneys in defending persons accused of child abuse for more than 18 years. They’re investigating people who have never been charged, and calling them child abusers, and taking kids away, and they get paid to do it.

This mechanism is bigger than what most people know. It goes all the way back to the 1980s with legislation that told states they had to develop registries with mandatory child abuse reporting.”

The money that follows a child abuse accusation and subsequent placement of the so-called endangered children into foster care or adoption is the real catalyst for the epidemic of child abuse accusations, Hart said.
“And there is no incentive for any physician or anybody involved to be intellectually honest about this because the law also gives them immunity if they’re wrong,” she said.

“So what happens is that the minute CPS is involved – or the second the EMTs are called (for example, in sudden infant death or alleged shaken baby cases), parents are already labeled as child abusers.”

How are States Spending this Extra Money?

According to NCCPR, in FY 2010 the federal government is expected to spend at least $7 more on foster care and $4 more on adoption for every dollar spent to prevent foster care or speed reunification. This is based on President Obama’s $4.681 billion foster care budget for FY2010 – an increase of $21 million over FY2009. The number represents a decrease of 4,300 children a month in foster care.

But this decrease is based on “placement of children in more permanent settings.” In other words, states are getting moremoney to take care of fewer children by placing more of them in adoptive homes.

The law also increases incentives for adoption by paying out $1,000 to $8,000 extra for certain types of children who are placed for adoption.

The twist is that states are not required to put this money back in to keeping families intact or even for preventing child abuse. Instead, by law, they can use it for non-child-related things, such as delivering meals to senior citizens or for transportation services, or a range of other home-based services!

In San Diego, Van Doorn couldn’t get a direct answer when he demanded that city officials tell him where their $4,000 per adopted child was going. But a look at any state’s budget – from Minnesota to Florida to Connecticut and back to California – can tell you that local governments and states are cutting back or flat-lining children’s services and using these extra federal dollars to balance their budgets .

Not Enough Abused Children? Change the Definition of Child Abuse

This certainly is a convoluted way to stop child abuse, if for no other reason than it’s a form of child abuse to tear families apart and take children away from parents who are accused of doing something they didn’t do. It also doesn’t explain one of the newer definitions of child abuse that came along after CAPTA was enacted, Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS).

Reliable statistics on SBS do not exist, but according to the National Shaken Baby Coalition (NSBC), as many as 1,500 babies a year are shaken by their parents, and either severely injured or killed.

While the numbers may not seem exceedingly large, they still add another arena in which CPS can seize children from their parents, and place them in adoptive homes – and claim the booty that the federal government gives them for doing this.

On the Backs of Children, an Industry Based on Child Abuse has Arisen

In San Diego, CPS proudly announced that due to their efforts, child abuse reports had gone down. But again, Van Doorn busted them – the numbers went down, he said, because the public had begun to catch on to the county’s recent court casesthey’d lost in conjunction with false child abuse allegations.

When you apply this same thinking to the national statistics, it makes you wonder how many other states and local municipalities are dealing with false allegations.

The truth is staggering, according to Hart, and is so prevalent that countless blogs have popped up addressing the problem, as well asentire websites devoted to helping people who’ve been falsely accused of child abuse.

Shaken Baby Syndrome – A Convenient Catch-All to Steal Babies Away?

Shaken Baby Syndrome has become an industry in itself, according to Dr. Edward Yazbak, a physician who has devoted the past 10 years to studying the issue and testifying as an expert witness on behalf of parents he believes are innocent of this crime.
“This is an inverted pyramid,” Yazbak says. “It’s an idea that has been added to and added to, but does not stand to science.

This shaken baby business has come out of nowhere and become an epidemic, and it’s the other side that’s making money – the child protective services, the funding, the grants that all these people get.

It’s obviously a very popular and passionate thing with them. But they’re literally convicting people before they’re even accused. It’s the only crime in the world like this, and many of these parents are perfectly innocent.”

A short Internet search can show you what Dr. Yazbak is talking about. Hundreds of private adoption agencies around the nation are totally dependent on public welfare services supplying them with children – and funds – to keep their “businesses” going.

Likewise, hundreds of state, county and community agencies and governmental jobs are dependent on the same thing – legally abducting children to pay for the programs that have sprung up in the name of protecting children.

Again, the numbers tell the story:

In 1990, two years after CAPTA was created, nearly 2.6 million children nationwide were reported as abused and/or neglected, and referred for investigation.  Despite the law, six years later, in 1996, 3 million children were reportedly abused, and under CPS “investigations.” Today the number varies, depending on how federal authorities define child abuse. Under one definition, statistics show that the numbers have dropped by nearly a third.

But with a “more inclusive” definition, the numbers have stayed the same at about 3 million – or about 1 in every 25 children. In a 2010 report to Congress, the Administration on Children & Families explained how the numbers figure in the face of other data showing a decline in child abuse.

But no matter how you interpret them, or whether the numbers have the stayed the same or dropped, the Congressional report doesn’t explain why the President and Congress have continued to inflate budgets with more money to take children away from their families.

So what can you or I do about it?

According to Hart, this is an issue that can’t be fixed with a single article or a few phone calls. It’s a national problem that’s gone on for decades, that needs local and federal pushes to change the laws that made these injustices possible.

Coincidentally, CAPTA is up for renewal in 2011, with billions more of your money proposed for the kinds of child abuse “prevention” that I’ve talked about here.

In an effort to change this, I encourage you to study the links I’ve included in this article, and then contact your legislators and ask them to take a closer look at the monster that CAPTA has created.

While sunsetting the law or stopping its funding is probably only a dream, Hart believes it’s possible that with enough pressure, you can lobby to have the “immunity” clause removed from this, so that at the very least, agencies who falsely accuse parents of child abuse can’t do so without being held responsible.

References:

National Commission on Children, Beyond Rhetoric: A New American Agenda for Children and Families, (Washington, DC: May, 1991) p.290.

Read the entire article here: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/02/05/legal-child-abduction.aspx

Copyright Dr. Joseph Mercola, 2011. All Rights Reserved.

http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/child-abuse-laws-legally-abducting-children-by-broadening-the-definition-of-child-abuse/

You Stole Her Heart A Gripping Look into the Department of Human Services

By Joseph Snook
Investigative Reporter

This is an exposé on the Department of Human Services (DHS) and how they stripped three young children from their mother. This article will reflect on how it was done under the auspice of “keeping the children safe.” The tactics DHS used, the rights they abused, the evidence they created and the evidence they simply turned a blind-eye towards is something every mother and father should be aware of. This is a - “Gripping Look into the Department of Human Services.”
When it comes to the safety of children, and their well-being, it is very important to understand that some families endure problematic events that present circumstances where action needs to be taken. Sometimes, removing children from parent(s) to protect everyone in the family is a necessary decision. Sometimes it is not, and this is when the US~Observer gets involved…
As an investigative reporter, I have witnessed many examples of government agencies that don't always do the right thing. For many reasons, the interests of certain government agencies can potentially alter government employees intentions. Sadly, for Amber Caitlin Parker, her three young children have been “stolen by DHS.”
DHS Background – From DHS:

“At any given time, Oregon's DHS can have up to 9,000 children in their system, at a cost of up to $27,000.00 per child annually.” --Margaret Carter, Deputy Director, Oregon Department of Human Services

“The 1971 Oregon Legislature created the Oregon Department of Human Resources, an agency providing a spectrum of human services to individuals, families and communities.
“The 2001 Oregon Legislature reorganized the department and changed its name to the Oregon Department of Human Services. In 2009 the Oregon Legislature transferred many of the health related functions to the newly created Oregon Health Authority. Today, the Department of Human Services key functions serve children, adults and families and seniors and people with disabilities.”

“They Stole My Heart”
--Amber Caitlin Parker

Amber Caitlin Parker (Duran)

Albany, OR - After years of abuse endured during two separate intimate relationships, Amber Parker found herself alone, supporting her three young children. Amber's life was threatened on more than one occasion by her former boyfriend David Boatright, father of her oldest child.
Michael Duran, father of Amber's two youngest children and currently married (divorce has been filed) to Amber, had also reportedly threatened and attempted to take her life numerous times.
David Boatwright's criminal history as described in a psychological report, which reflects on DHS documents produced by former DHS employee Kimberly Williams, shows that he has an extensive criminal record. Williams' report didn't differentiate between charges and convictions wherein the crimes included Assault I, Attempted assault of a public safety officer in 2011, Assault IV/Domestic Violence in 2008, Domestic Abuse/Harassment in 2007, Harassment in 2007, Assault/Harassment in 2006, Criminal Mischief II in 2006, Criminal Mischief II in 2007 and Menacing in 2005. Williams wrote that Boatright has a history of alcohol and drug abuse and domestic violence. It was confirmed according to documents obtained that Boatright would submit to random UA's and anger management/domestic violence batterer's programming. No information was obtained that confirmed whether or not these courses were completed. This reporter attempted to communicate with Mr. Boatright after a recent full review hearing, but was unable to make contact.
Michael Duran's criminal history was described in a psyche exam, which reflected on a report also produced by Kimberly Williams of DHS. His record reflected: "forcible entry", likely burglary in August of 2000, Possession of Controlled Substance (PCS) in 2002, Open Container in 2002, DUII in 2003, PCS in 2004, Assault IV in 2005, Attempt to elude in 2008. Convictions were for Assault IV, DUII, and attempt to elude. It is somewhat unclear which of these "charges" and "convictions" may have represented the same instances. Further inquiry into Duran's criminal history revealed the following: Parole violation on 11/10/11, Burglary I, PCS in 2005, Manufacture of Rock Cocaine, Felony drug possession 2005, felony drug possession 2006, Child neglect 1st degree 2005, Endangering welfare 2005, Contempt of court 2004. Duran is currently awaiting trial on reported Assault charges against Amber Caitlin Parker (police reports were used in our findings). Mr. Duran was contacted by this reporter and stated that, he was, “Advised not to talk to any reporters.” He further stated that, “He would be willing to talk, once everything was over.”
“I think PTSD played a factor in the following months after this whole thing started, Still I flinch when guys move too quickly if I don't trust them - which is most of them, or when they raise their voice.”
-- Amber Parker
Reported text messages sent from Duran to Amber stated that he would “paint her house in red with her blood.” In the fairly small community of Albany Oregon, one former neighbor of Duran's stated, “His father was in prison for murder, and he has many family members who are into drugs and violence. Michael Duran is probably the worst Duran I know of.”

Amber's bruises, "after one of their arguments," referring to Michael Duran.

“Michael and I were arguing (I think about his partying), we were in our bedroom next to the bed, he lifted me up by my neck about 6 inches - 1 foot off the ground and held me against the wall. When he let go about 5-10 seconds later, I almost fell onto our (at the time 2-3 week old) son. I put my hands down to stop myself from landing on him. My neck was very sore and I couldn't turn my head to the right for several days afterwards. I had 3 small bruises on the right side of my neck, and still have a ‘lump’ that sticks out a little bit.”
– Amber Parker
According to police reports, Duran “choked Amber and kicked her in the stomach” just months after she gave birth to their child and threw her out of a moving automobile, then attempted to “run her over.” Duran spent a total of ten months in prison for this and was released in October of 2009. After his release, Amber, apparently naive at the time, wanted to give their family a second chance. Her attempts failed and Duran allegedly continued to abuse her. Amber has since filed for divorce and obtained a restraining order against Duran, issued on December 16, 2011. Duran was recently indicted by a Grand Jury on Feb. 22, 2012 and is awaiting trial for assault IV, felony domestic violence charges. The trial is reportedly set for sometime in August as of this publication.
Amber has claimed many things according to documents from DHS. She has claimed that someone had broken into her house and attempted to poison her children, that they were coming in through the closet and attic. Another report stated that Boatright was drilling holes in her roof to “spy on her.”
They were very strange accusations, but when you look into the issues surrounding them and the domestic abuse that Amber suffered, it's surprising that she has been able to maintain her composure throughout this process. DHS documents claim that Amber was either using drugs or was a paranoid schizophrenic. She was battered, DHS!
On or around November 4, 2011, David Boatright was given custody of Amber's oldest son. On or around November 14, 2011, Amber's two youngest children were officially placed in foster care. At that time, she reportedly volunteered to do whatever she could to get her children back. Amber was referred by DHS to a Psychologist that they often use. Amber underwent a comprehensive psychological exam given by James A. Ewell, Ph.D. in Eugene Oregon. Ewell's report stated, “In addition to information gathered through the procedures mentioned above, I also received background data from Ms. Williams' letter of referral. Accompanying that letter Ms. Williams forwarded additional documents describing Ms. Duran's history, behaviors and contact with agency workers. These materials were briefly reviewed PRIOR to my meeting with her.” Strangely enough, Ewell's diagnosis apparently fell in line with what DHS had presumed... He stated that, “I do not believe Amber would currently be able to safely parent/protect her children, if they were returned to her care. She should be evaluated for the possible use of psychotropic medications. She probably also could benefit from supportive psychotherapy. She should continue to submit random urinalysis screenings...” While reading Ewell's entire report, I found parts of it repetitive and similar to what I had read from DHS reports.
Shortly after her children were taken, Amber obtained the help of the US~Observer. Amber was very skeptical of Ewell's report. She was strongly opposed to using psychotropic drugs, which Ewell suggested, and therefore unwilling to comply with a report she adamantly disagreed with.
Amber subsequently obtained an independent psychological exam from a well known psychologist out of Portland, Oregon.
This second exam was conducted by Frank Colistro Ed. D. (Ed. D. is a Doctor of Education Degree, equivalent to a professor or lecturer at the university level). Colistro found that Amber had similar findings resulting from similar tests given by Ewell, although Colistro's report seemed less repetitive and much more thorough to this reporter. Colistro stated, “Overall, results of this assessment do not support Dr. Ewell's diagnosis of Schizophrenia or any other form of mental illness, nor are there any indications of a substance abuse problem.”
Colistro also stated that Amber's findings were, “supportive of the appellation of Battered Women's Syndrome...”

Two different psychological exams produced two different conclusions

What would you do if you were beaten by the father of your child? What would you do if your life was threatened constantly? What if you were almost intentionally ran over by an automobile driven by your husband? What if you were choked, beaten, had your finger broken, and were constantly attacked and verbally assaulted? What if you were told that your house was going to be painted red with your own blood? What if you were kicked in the stomach? What if your ex's had such extensive rap sheets as reported in this article? What would you do if the people you looked up to for help, reportedly disregarded your claims and ultimately used them against you, then stole your children? What if the people who were supposed to help you, failed to understand that you were the victim of extreme domestic violence? What if the help they offered required UA's instead of treatment for domestic abuse? What if the help you were ridiculed for not accepting, required the use of psychotropic drugs?
One thing is clear to this writer: Amber has taken numerous parenting courses, she has removed herself from the presence of her exes. She has obtained restraining orders against her exes, she has filed for divorce from Duran, and has been doing all she can to get her children back. She has reportedly undergone 20 clean UA's (one was reportedly inconclusive due to a prescription she was taking at that time) and she has NO CRIMINAL HISTORY WHATSOEVER. Amber has a perfect record, minus a couple traffic citations. According to one psyche exam, "Amber has made substantial efforts to grow and learn in the area of parenting. Although not employed, she involves herself in productive, pro-social activities such as volunteering for the Humane Society and staying active in her church."
What would you do if you were subjected to this kind of treatment? What if you were told your children were possibly going to be placed in foster care permanently?
At a recent full review hearing, this writer communicated with DHS employee David Purcell.
Mr. Purcell, Julia Blackburn's (case worker assigned) supervisor, filled in for her at the hearing. Mr. Purcell expressed that he could not communicate with the press, but was willing to listen. Mr. Purcell was given this writers contact phone number and was asked to give it to his supervisor. Mr. Purcell was also informed of Amber's willingness to cooperate with DHS, given they were willing to accept her position regarding the psychological exams. It was surprising to see Mr. Purcell not only do the right thing during the hearing, but his willingness to listen was a trait this writer respects. I can report that Mr. Purcell appeared to be an honest person, who's intentions were truly genuine.
At the recent full review hearing, DHS' Attorney stated, "we've received information that a reporter is present" and asked that the judge not allow it. Judge Daniel Murphy responded by quoting Oregon law and the first amendment, then asked if anyone "objected", to which there was no reply. Concluding the hearing, Judge Murphy stated that if the children are not given back to one of the parents by August 9, 2012, that one of the attorneys needed to schedule another review hearing. Judge Murphy appeared to be concerned for the children, which was evident when he spoke to the many attorney's present.
Editor’s Note: The US~Observer contacted Julia Blackburn who is/was the case worker at DHS assigned to this case. During the short conversation, Blackburn stated, "I don't feel comfortable talking." We were eventually put into contact with DHS supervisor Marco Benavides. Mr. Benavides reassured the US~Observer that Amber’s case would be reassessed. Nothing has been documented to prove anything has happened as of this publication. In fact, Amber is reportedly awaiting a hearing where the determination will be made regarding DHS's decision to keep her children from her permanently.
Amber is a fit mother that needs counseling for Battered Women's Syndrome. DHS has failed thus far at doing the right thing in this case. DHS has given out of office visitation to Duran for the two youngest children and temporary custody of the eldest child to Boatright.
Amber currently has to visit her children under strict supervision at DHS. DHS has even gone as far as telling Amber she cannot "talk to the children about future placement with her..." In other words, if one of her children said they wanted to come home, she must "redirect the conversation." Amber was also recently notified that she was no longer permitted to take photos of her own children during her visits with them.
What is wrong with this picture people? David Boatright has custody of Amber’s oldest son and Michael Duran has visits with Amber’s two younger children, outside of DHS supervision, while he most likely awaits another prison term for his alleged criminal attacks on Amber. Amber’s visits with her own children are closely monitored and supervised, as she is constantly dissected and examined by DHS. This is NOT okay with this writer and this is NOT okay with the US~Observer. This is incompetence, it is negligence and this is absolute abuse of Amber. It will NOT continue…
If you have any information regarding DHS employees, Julia Blackburn, Kimberly Williams (former DHS) or Marco Benavides, please contact the US~Observer immediately via email edtior@usobserver.com, or call 541-474-7885. It’s time to put an end to abuse at the hands of DHS.

http://usobserver.com/archive/june-12/dhs-you-stole-her-heart.htm

Charges dropped in toddler assault case

By Nicole Montesano
Of the News-Register 

Charges against a McMinnville man accused of fracturing a toddler's skull were dropped on Thursday, after a grand jury declined to indict him.

Nicholas Ryan Bates, 25, had been charged in May with third-degree assault and first-degree criminal mistreatment, after his girlfriend's 2-year-old son was found to have suffered a fractured skull and collarbone.

Grand jury proceedings are secret by law; not even the defendant is allowed to be present. During the proceedings, the jury receives evidence favorable to the prosecution; no defense is presented. It then determines whether it believes that the evidence, if unexplained or contradicted at trial, would support a conviction. If so, it determines which charges are supported.

Defendants are informed of the outcome at a court hearing, when they are either formally advised of the charges against them, or the charges are officially dismissed.

Prosecutor May Chou said, that "at this point, I do not expect to" file any additional charges in the case. She declined further comment.

The case came to light in mid-May, when the toddler's mother, 22-year-old Felicia Megan Manley, took him to the hospital emergency room.

According to the Yamhill County Sheriff's Office, she told investigators that she and the child had been at Bates' home when she stepped outside to smoke a cigarette, and returned inside, to find the child had a small amount of blood on his mouth, as if he had bitten his tongue. The next day, the toddler was unresponsive and acted as if his arm hurt, so she took him to the hospital, where doctors discovered the injuries, and notified police. She told investigators she did not know how the toddler had been injured.

Bates said that he is no longer with Manley.

He said he does not know how or when the child was injured.

"We were not being good parents, that's all I can say. ... We were just having a bonfire, everyone was drinking, no one was paying attention."

The situation continues to be a painful one, he said, because he feels his reputation has been permanently damaged.

"I wish there was any way to fix that, but the damage has already been done. I don't know if anybody is ever going to believe me," he said. "I'm not a child beater. ... I'm just pretty upset about the whole situation."

http://newsregister.com/article?articleTitle=charges-dropped-in-toddler-assault-case--1339857429--3759--news

New child welfare audit says Oregon can do more to reunite parents and kids in foster care

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/04/post_65.html

Published: Tuesday, April 24, 2012, 6:00 AM     Updated: Tuesday, April 24, 2012, 10:43 AM

 By Michelle Cole, The Oregonian 
Follow

RobFinch/The OregonianAn Oregon child caseworker checks on a baby in foster care in this 2008 photo.

SALEM --While Oregon child welfare caseworkers do better than the national average in seeing that children taken into state foster care are returned to their parents, a new audit also finds caseworkers often do not include parents in critical discussions concerning their families and have little time to ensure meaningful visits between parents and kids. 

Overall, the 28-page report portrays a system under stress. 

Overworked child welfare staff do not get much help from the central office in prioritizing their work. Parents were unable to get addiction treatment, mental health care or other services they needed before they could bring their kids back home.

"We read a lot of stories about what's happening with caseworkers and children and we thought it was important for us to go out and see what areas we might be able to help improve," said Gary Blackmer, director of the secretary of state's audits division. 

Auditors analyzed data, visited child welfare offices and reviewed case files from October 2009 through September 2010. During that time caseworkers removed 4,736 children from their homes because of suspected abuse or neglect. In total, about 13,000 kids spent at least one day in foster care during that period. 

The report found 29 percent of the children in foster care were reunited with their parents; nationally 22 percent of the children returned home. Oregon had a lower rate of children returning to foster care because they were abused again. 

"Safely returning kids home to their parents is a priority and has been for the last several years because children do better at home -- as long as they are safe at home," said Gene Evans, spokesman for the Oregon Department of Human Services. 

But Oregon also takes proportionately more children into foster care than other states. Auditors were unable to measure whether there were some youngsters taken from their parents who shouldn't have been, said Andrew Love, the report's lead auditor. 

Much of the report connects the rising number of reports of child abuse and neglect -- up 20 percent in the last five years -- to a mounting load for caseworkers. 

Tasks that state officials consider critical to returning a child home were not being done regularly, if at all. 

For example, while policy requires caseworkers to meet parents face-to-face at least once a month to monitor progress. Those contacts occurred 62 percent of the time. 

Auditors found that "action agreements," forms signed by a parent or caregiver were not completed in 20 of 91 cases reviewed. Of the 71 agreements that were done, 22 were not signed by a parent and some had no date indicating the form had been reviewed by a parent. 

Even though experts stress the need for parents and children who have been separated to have quality time together, across Oregon those visits typically happened for one hour once a week at the local child welfare office. 

"In all the districts we visited, child welfare caseworkers and other stakeholders noted the amount and quality of parent-child visits was rarely adequate," the report said. 

There were exceptions. In Klamath County, auditors noted families have access to a visitation center located away from the child welfare office and where parents can also seek drug and alcohol treatment. 

But auditors did not paint a picture of a situation they expected would improve on its own. They noted that a new computer system had increased caseworker's clerical load. Caseworkers got little guidance from top managers about what in their 1,500-page policy manual should be their priorities. Until last year, child welfare caseworkers did not get job performance reviews. 

In their list of recommendations, auditors suggest that the agency designate a manager in its Salem headquarters to focus on what workers need to do to ensure that children return home. 

"We didn't see strong communication between central office and the field," Blackmer said. 

In a letter of response the agency's chief operating officer, Jim Scherzinger said caseworkers are doing the best they can. 

"Child welfare is staffed at approximately 67 percent of the need, given the current workload and there are tasks that go undone every day," he wrote. 

As for hiring a manager to oversee this part of the work, Scherzinger said the agency doesn't have the financial resources. Besides, he wrote, "a static list of priorities issued from Central Office will not serve families well and could leave children in unsafe settings." 

-- Michelle Cole