Monday, March 22, 2010

Reader With An Attitude Asks..."Just Who Are These Foster Extremists?"

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Who Killed SB 6416?":

Please define "extremists in the foster movement"...cause that and terms like "the fosters" really boarder on hate speech.

You still havnt explained why relatives, DNA connections with the first set of crappy parents (AKA the FIRST people to screw up)
are so much better a placement than, in theory, trained and vetted "fosters"

Please aim your gun not at foster parents in general but DSHS for ignoring the rules and letting people who shouldn't have contact with children through the gate.

Thats not the "fosters" fault.

Again...there are many very fine foster parents. But, let me comment on this.

1. Extremists in the foster movement ( and I include DSHS higher ups because they seem to like the status quo) are those who think that the end justifys the means. They have no problem with the lies told to judges (please see Stuth coverage) by CPS, the AGs working for CPS, the CASAs, or the foster caretakers. They have decided what the outcome should be and so the truth be damned.

2. It is only extremism that allows the protection of the system we now have. Who in the world...would not give full attention...(bring in the State Patrol for God's sake) to protect children from this failed agency that makes so many fatal errors? (Please see KOMO coverage on the deaths. There is one a month and that does not count the physical and mental maiming.) Read about it! Every week it is a new case. Some parents reported five times for abuse and the children end up dying because nothing is done. And yet, CPS steals other children from families when no abuse is reported (see Stuth Case and others reported here). They seek out children aged 3, blond, blue-eyed, non-drug affected children from poor families who can't afford an attorney.

3. Extremists everywhere love power. They love their power and fight to keep it so they can impose their views on others. King County CASAs particularly don't like their power threatened or questioned.

4. Extremists would move children from one to another based on whom they think best deserves the child...without even consideration of the family. They are elitists. Go back to the Stuth Case. The ultimate lie came when the judge was not told that Alexis Stuth had been removed, for cause, from her foster person the night before the judge was planning to give Alexis to this woman from hell. (No, Reader With An Attitude...I really can't call her a foster mommy...there was a reason Alexis was removed! Please see previous PPR.) Only extremists with agenda would fight so hard to take a child and give her to a XXXXX and in doing so purposefully withhold vital information from the judge. There were a bunch in the room that day. All of them padding the foster adopt system. At least they were trying. Their own lies of omission hung them. Did anyone get fired over their lies? No. It is OK to lie in a courtroom over children. That is the rule of foster extremists.

4. Extremists would scream bloody murder if someone lied about them in court...but have no problem if the child's family is cheated through lies in a courtroom.

5. Extremists would never fire a social worker for lying. (Please see Willard and Stuth cases in this blog.)

6. Alexis Stuth was removed "for cause." An extremist turned around and almost immediately permanently place another child with this unfit woman. Only an extremist CPS pro-foster adopt system would do what defies reason...turn around and do with another child what they couldn't do with Alexis.

7. Extremists ignore the law of "place with families first." In this state that law is disregarded when there is a child that meets the desired list (please see above).

Other comments...There are "foster parents" and their are "foster parents." are just over sensitive. I wish you showed as much care for the children. Why aren't you banging on the big steel door of government to save children? Too busy defending the system...right?


Anonymous said...

To the extremist foster parent: If you were a parent and I was CPS, I would say you have an emotion managment problem, although what would be more true, is that you are not doing any research to present a solid case. I was a former drug/alcohol counselor and I can tell you that the "original parents" may not have anything to do with young people going the wrong direction. Very few in high school come out of the public schools unscathed by the drug epidemic and that includes jocks, cheerleaders and genius, all of which were my clients. The statistics presented by the state on drug problems in high school are about as accurate as the relative placement statistics they fudged on. The children in this state with the biggest drug problems come from Bellevue and Issaquah, where the parents supply regular funding for their drug money.
What is probably more true in parenting skills, is that the wealthy are more prone to take their child in for an abortion rather than have their future interfered with by an unplanned pregnancy. The poor are more likely to keep them.
So, if 90% of the kids coming out of school have participated in various illegal activities, then who are the good parents? Are all grandparents with a child that goes haywire bad parents? Think again, missy.
I went through a part of foster training and I can tell you that some of the craziest people I have ever seen in my life were in that room and waiting to take in kids. Not only crazy, but had serious health problems and recovering drug addictions. They all got approved, whereas family are getting disapproved for health and ANY character defect they can find plus income. Foster adopts are encouraged to apply even if they only have a little income. You fail to see the discrimination because your view is colored by the fact it hasn't been your children removed with false statements nor were you denied by a bogus home study for your grandchildren.

Anonymous said...

Here are some statistics on foster care placement from the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform:
At the heart of the criticism of family
preservation is one overriding assumption: If
you remove a child from the home, the child will
be safe. If you leave a child at home the child is
at risk. In fact, there is risk in either direction, but
real family preservation programs have a
better record for safety than foster care.
And even when families don’t get
special help, two major new studies have
found that children left in their own homes
typically do better than comparably
maltreated children placed in foster care.
To understand why, one must first
understand one fundamental fact about foster
care: It's not safe. Here's how we know:

Anonymous said...

I beleive that the original study was done by MIT , as far as this comment goes just the mere problems due to alienation of affections that CPS promotes against biological families by placing them willy nilly to any foster stranger even family members that are adversarial to the parents is just criminal , I am also aware of substance abuse tests that CPS uses that have false positives and SAHMSA has even told the courts to stop I speak of ETG tests for alcohol and heres the black box warning , NH still uses it with low levels to take children with TPRs I have plenty more medical resources on this test if anyone is out there that is being tested for ETG please contact me because there is a reporter in Seattle at an ABC affiliate that wants to do a story on this I can be contacted

there is also a class action lawsuit against the labs
This is the black box warning from health and human services arm SAHMSA in pdf form
this is the one sent to all drug courts in the nation

Anonymous said...

Dear Pam Roach:
I'm disappointed in how our court system works. In my step daughters trial all the state talked about was that I'm enmeshed with the father, who never deserved to lose his child in the first place. My issue is that in our trial no one brought up the fact that she had been abused in foster care and is still being abused. We presented pictures of her abuse but all they were concerned about was the father and my fiancée.
The trial was supposed to be about me adopting my stepdaughter but nothing was brought up about my step daughter, myself or her foster parent, who was never questioned, nor even took the stand. If they thought I wasn't a good placement for the child why would they go before the court three times for her to stay with me if they were concerned about my home? Why did they go and try to do a secret adoption behind our backs while there still was an appeal going on? The caseworkers lied on the stand, the judge caught them in their lies and did nothing.
The Administrator admitted on the stand that he needed to put a rush on my step daughters adoption or they would lose the funding for her. I was approved to adopt her by the home study person who said she saw no issues with me or my home. She stated that the child should have never been removed from my care. The caseworkers testified to the same thing. But since I was a relative placement they would lose their funding. How does that happen? The best interest of the child doesn't matter? It seems only their funding is important to them. Who cares if she is in night care and daycare for up to twelve and one half our per day? She clearly isn't bonding with the foster parent if she is not ever in the home for any extended period of time. She is bonding with her caregivers more than her foster placement.
So where... is the justice...

Anonymous said...

The " Foster Care Extremists" you mean the "Departments"
co-conspirators who have a malignant vested interest in "Stolen innocent children;" The caregivers held up to be saints, the ones responsible for abusing one third of their charges the ones who CPS defends until the innocent childS death.
CPS wants these cretins as another layer of fraudulent witnesses against biological families. The "Department" can't quite get them "Qualified Immunity" but the "Department" does find all the rape,abuse,neglect and murder committed by these parties as unfounded!!!

Anonymous said...

How can you say better record than foster care when children have a 600 percent greater chance of dying, where 80 percent of sexual molestation incidences occur and one third of the innocent victims are physically abused...

The record speaks for itself you are taking children from their biological families where abuse in some degree happens .014 percent of the time and yet give kudos to fosterer's who abuse one out of three. The literal chance of abuse happening in foster care is close to a million times greater; is this why its called deliberate disinterest and intentional failure?

Anonymous said...

What good is it doing for everyone to either be against relatives OR foster parents? If the laws were followed there wouldn`t be a problem at all. Relatives and foster parents need to be able to have rights but biological family is best when possible for any child. I am a relative but belive there are many good foster parents out there who have the child`s best interest at heart. We all need to work together on this and find a way to protect the children`s rights.

Kansas CPS Post Audit said...

Well said Senator Roach!

unhappygrammy said...

DCYF/CPS would rather place our stolen children with Foster STRANGER's because many of them will kiss their A!! and bow down to the great and almighty DCYF/CPS, just to get placement of a stolen child, whereas biological families are standing up to them and fighting for their rights. They not only brainwash our children, they brainwash the foster strangers also. I took foster care classes. The lies that were told were too numerous to count!