Thursday, June 10, 2010

We Won! We Won! We Won!

Congratulations, to attorney Susan Wilk for an incredible effort!

Thank God!!!

In the Case of ALSB .....Families won a big one...government lost!

The Washington State Supreme Court reversed the lower court. The child is going back to the dad!
This is huge!

In this case the Hispanic father from Yakima had drug problems. (Unlike the Stuths or Willards for whom the department had to make up...lie...about "issues.") He was told if he went through a drug treatment program and visited his daughter regularly, he would be able to keep his daughter.

He moved to California and enrolled in and completed a treatment program. His mother and he drove to Yakima and made ALL of the visitation dates...and...the department took his little girl anyway! (They seem to like little girls.)

This man's daughter was adopted out. His case failed on appeal. Then Susan Wilk of the Washington Appellate Project argued the case before the WA State Supreme Court in June of 2008! This case took 2 years to decide. (But it was worth the wait!)

The man will get his daughter back.

If anyone reading this blog has had a similar case....go talk to a lawyer with this case in hand.


Anonymous said...

This is the big reason why no child should be adopted to anyone while the case is still within the confines of any court.

DSHS rushes to adopt for their federal funding. Yes.. it is all about the money.

Now, let us all wait with baited breath and see how long it takes to re-unite this family. I believe it will take them 6 months to a year..and all the while the department will still be collecting money.

Dollars to doughnuts though..the adopted parent will sue the state. I believe that she was responsible to some degree for the child not bonding with the father. I can say that I have never heard of any case where an adoption was reversed after finalization.

This indeed is a big win for families.


Amazing the Washington lower courts can't even follow the laws. I think maybe Washington needs to have a citizens panel (like a grand jury), provide regulation of judges and lawyers. I think the problem is that lawyers let judges off easy just like judges let lawyers off easy. I'm willing to bet that no judge in Washington will even be admonished for not following the law in this case. Washington isn't alone in this most of the other states need to solve this problem soon.

Aaron said...

Finally! What a great win for the parents of Washington State. Keep up the great work, Senator Roach!

Anonymous said...

She has been raised by her mother's cousin almost since birth. Her mother's cousin
has also adopted A.B.'s younger half brother, who has lived with his eldest sister his
entire life. The "prompt but orderly transfer" ordered by the court today will
wrench this child out of the only home she has ever known and deprive a brother of
his sister. Even if the trial judge did err by following this court's well settled case
law, the proper remedy would be remand for further proceedings.
I would affirm the courts below, and thus, respectfully dissent.

Justice Tom Chambers

Anonymous said...

Justice Chambers (If that's who you are):
The judge in this case conspired in a sense with WA DHS to violate the law: the law requires that the child be placed with the non-offending parent: DHS refused to do so because they couldn't get Nevada to carry out a home study. I don't see anything in the law about that home study being required, even if it is, then WA DHS is responsible for carryjng it out and they failed to do so. [VIOLATION#1] (BTW: there are private SWers who could have done so for a fee). I also see the child was taken without ever providing services to the father prior to that taking [VIOLATION #2] Merely because the other parent had "given" the child the drug doesn't negate the requirement: he didn't abuse her, so she should have been placed with him and services provided. Further DHS failed to provide visits at times that were in his usual parenting hours because they only work 8-5 M-F Really? Don't they show up to pick up kids on weekends? So there's no reason they can't schedule visits in the evening or weekends. [VIOLATION #3] (And the supervised visits were improperly planned, executed, and needless, to boot) The child's best interest is not merely in the home DHS has placed her in but rather the home which will provide the best parenting example and the closest contact with her siblings: the court failed to see that the father's overcoming drugs was a better parenting example than the mother's family where the aunt's sister (the natural mother) remains an example of failure. [See the NCCPR point paper on this Further, the child best interest isn't the standard nor should it be: because, if it were, DHS would lose every case because while in their care, children have died!!! And the agency is a known child abuser!!![VIOLATION #5: (see where practically every day there's a new story of an agency somewhere committing abuse)] Oh and the agency failed to disclose its record on child abuse to the parent before any hearing, This is the evidence which can be used against them when the court is hearing the best interest part [VIOLATION #6: willful failure to disclose evidence and the judge was a knowing accomplice to this: everyone knows that DHS has abused kids and why doesn't the defense have and submit that evidence: he has to know DHS is hiding it]

If you're a judge, you're a prime example of what's wrong with the legal system: its inability to see what's right before its nose. Your lack of ethics is truly amazing! You don't commit further injustice by claiming the original injustice requires it. You separated and kidnap the child long enough, now you want to claim she can't be returned? Wow!! That's not logical or just!!!