Friday, February 5, 2010

Reader Comments On My Last Blog...Possible Budget Cut?

Why are CPS supervisors required to hover over a child's opening of a present? Do they think the child will unwrap a bomb? A sex toy? A piece of porn or too much candy corn?

All along the department said the grandmother was sabotaging reunification. She continues...
Now, one year later, my grand baby is ready to be adopted. Termination proceedings have begun. My daughter is doing great now, yet supervised visits must go on; and my granddaughter cannot open a present without direct supervision of a social worker while opening the present! What is the department doing? When I exhibited a concern, I was said to be sabotaging; now that my daughter is clean and sober, doing well, they begin termination? And, they are right there to make sure mom isn't endangering the child? Just last Friday, I received an email from the state leader, saying that our visitation would be considered. You know what happened from that dialog? The CASA worker ask my daughter if she would relinquish her rights?! She said, "No, and I will appeal." Moreover, it was said, by CASA's attorney, that a granddaughter was returned to a grandmother "once" in our county and that would never happen again! Yes, I have that in writing.


Anonymous said...

Senator Roach,
Is there anyway for us to get a copy of the CASA's statement in writing. If they would share it please let me know and I will give you my information.
Thank you,
Grandma in Vancouver

Anonymous said...

Today I called the newly moved area supervisor to our office, Mr. Brent Borg, after the prior supervisor who helped to get my grandchild back home, was moved. I asked Mr. Brent Borg if the department held it's position in their attempt to reunify us with our granddaughter? After all, they had fought an all-day hearing with opposing CASA. CASA won. The way they won? By having an alleged witness, not present, who happened to be friends with the foster to adopt mom w/ dialog on myspace and facebook. The adopt mom also was our WIC provider before taking the baby. Thank God we printed it out before it could be deleted! I needed that for evidence. I told Mr. Borg this information. I also ask Mr. Borg if his office was a sovereign office? He said, "No" it isn't.' I said, "Then why was "hierarchy and political pressure" used as a basis for my denial to have my grandbaby home? Wasn't Susan Dreyfus supposed to monitor the mental institution to protect the public? Why then is political influence used in my order of denial? He had no answers. Said that, yes, the departmetn had changed their position and understood the termination question after this length of time; the baby was adjusted in the foster to adopt home. I told Mr. Borg that we have visited every week by web cam and pictures. He asked where? I told him. He said, " How is that going?" I said, great!" I informed Mr. Borg of all the corruption that had gone on with my case. He was not familiar with it, and asked that I send him a copy of my grievance on my prior divorce attorney who represented CASA against me. I did. I also told him that the prior divorce attorney stated that he had asked the CASA director to check for a conflict, and out of many of my files reviewed, the opposing CASA director saw no conflict! So I said, " a long-arm conflict does not constitute compliance with the RPCs." Why would a prior divorce attorney ask a vested opposing-party to determine HIS conflict? Also stated by the attorney were statements that were said to have occurred in the hearing. I informed the Bar and Mr. Borg that I had every disc, had noted the statements on the dics and that his statements were false! I sent him the grievance, 15 pages, and sent the Bar the grievance with proof of what is going on in this county. After all, the attorney opened all the doors for retrying the case to the Bar, so I entered the door; boy did I enter! Mr. Borg also stated that the state did not file an appeal on the denial. They are willing to spend tax payer dollars every week to take children away,keep them away, treat them for the disorders that result from taking them away, but no dollars to send them home. Why are the state leaders in office, I ask? What are we paying them to do?

gorillamum said...

I ask the very same question; Why are these people not only in office, but why are the tax payers not doing anything about the destructive behavior by lawmakers? And by destructive I mean the family structure, something EVERY President goes on and on about and how important it is. Well, only if they can CREATE the family structures THEY want for the love of money.