From a Dear Reader:
From the concurring opinion: “The trial court also erred by failing to consider facts in the record that suggest the adoptive parent T.L. may have contributed to the child’s inability to bond.”
This sounds like a clear indication of parent alienation…
Is this how DSHS steals children... interfere with the real parents visits and support the foster parent?
Sunday, June 13, 2010
A.B.S. Reader Comment...Alienation Of Affection
Due to campaigning I have limited time to blog and will bring more reader comments forward. I remember the case of Paul Sanders who over 30 years ago sued the state and won. His daughter had not been happy because Paul would not allow her to date until she was 16 years-old. So, the girl went to a school counselor who suggested she did not have to live with an oppressive father and she could, if she wanted to, be in a foster home. So, the girl admitted herself to foster care. A young lawyer, Richard Sanders, argued that case! I knew Paul. He was director of Citizens Taxpayers Association. His was, literally, a textbook case. It was written in text books (apparently one that is rarely used :o).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Yes it is as we are Grandparents who raised our grandchild & now the state has taken away our visits & suppoting the people that want to adopt this child so they are alienating this child. DSHS does this in a lot of cases.
It is & in many cases DSHS considers themselves the parent & this is just sick.
sure is, thats also what happened in the Stuth family
Of extreme interest, judges in the lower courts just started new protocol. This new system requires that they meet with families in termination privately with the parents, their attorneys and the caseworker where they interview the parents and get the parent's side of the story in front of the caseworker. This may reduce a great deal of the propaganda supplied by the department. Unless, of course, the line of questioning is designed to support the department with biased, prejudiced questions.
Today my daughter is going to such a meeting, but I have concerns because this judge showed serious prejudice at the recent review hearing where she was funneled a barrage of false information. This could backfire or help our family depending on the line of questions. We will see.
Bad news. The special termination meeting between the judge and parents (this new thing)....well, it was what I suspected. They are trying to coerce my daughter and son-in-law to sign over parental rights in exchange for an open adoption. As we all know, the open adoption doesn't happen. The judge who has never been involved with our case to date, stated that they were going to for sure terminate and that my grandchildren were going to be placed in a new adoptive home. They aren't even bonded at all to my grandchildren.
Two women from the department who I have not even met, spoke negatively about placing with me as though they knew me. One of the attorneys stopped them because a confidentiality statement was not signed. The judge, of course, bought into all the false information as they usually do and sided with the department. Again, I am not a party to the case and should not be "convicted" without due process. I am going to file a lawsuit against the state for this practice.
But for now, I am going to do a hunger strike in front of DSHS starting Wed.
Jan Smith
AND, AND, two different court appointed attorneys refused to use the case of AB in argument.
My thoughts and prayers are with you Jan Smith. Good luck with your hunger strike. I hope it gets media attention as well as lawmakers! I too have been slander in family court as a grandmother... with no due process. It's not right and it's not fair!
Parental Alienation is the reason good foster parents quit.
Only those willing to in most cases falsely demonize the parent and practice Parental Alienation stay in the good graces of CPS.
How can our Society continue to believe in a Child Welfare system wherein biological family members are all automatically considered the enemy.
"Lovingfitfather"
Yes to your question. The support is entirely in the foster parent corner. I am a relative foster care parent, the difference, I do not know as my license states that I can have children from the age of infant to 12, I believe. But I can not have my own granddaughter. Her mother was told to relinquish her rights or lose her new baby. Of course she did and fled the state. The appellate court is aware of this but what can they do? I just finished writing a huge appellate brief. My first time writing a brief and a lot of work. Now to get to my own campaign. Family first, as you know and from a family's own words. Yes, fosters are considered priority with all resources available and families are victimized at best. I will be praying for you Jan. I made all media and members, supporters, aware of your protest through a hunger strike. I pray for media attention.
Post a Comment