Another Outrage from Child Protection Services

Emial | 10/17/05 | Mark I. Johnson

[Carry_Okie]

Interested Parents,

Tuesday, October 18th at the Biltmore Hotel & Conference Center – 7:00 – 8:30pm, we are holding a meeting to inform, educate, and rally the public around the egregious abuse of power by the Santa Clara Social Services, Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) – Child Protective Services (CPS) as they attempt to rip my family, and many others apart. The Biltmore is located just south of Montague Expressway, east of highway 101 at 2151 Laurelwood Rd, Santa.

At issue are three key points that will be of interest to you as a parent:

1. Our rights as parents to raise and educate our children as we deem appropriate within the law, free from the harassment and abuse of Social Services,

2. Our rights as adoptive parents / families to seek and utilize resources that will help solidify the bonds of attachment which are essential to a successful adoption, and

3. The need for change in the policies of DFCS that will position them to embrace and support families rather than vilify parents and destroy families.

Synopsis of our Situation – The Johnson Family (my family) - is currently under siege by the Santa Clara Social Services, Department of Children and Family Services (DFCS) – Child Protective Services group (sometimes referred to as Emergency Response). The department’s intense interest in my family stems from an allegation of child abuse related to our oldest son who was adopted at birth, and who suffers from drug and alcohol abuse in-utero and a condition called Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD). It is my understanding that the mother of a baby sitter made the report after talking with her daughter who has never met my adopted son, and only sat one time for my two younger children for one day in our home. The sitter observed inconsistencies the furnishing of my oldest son’s room and observed the smell of urine. On this basis this, the mother, who has never met any member of my family, or stepped foot in our home, or discussed the circumstances surrounding our son, reported us to the police as child abusers.

Because we are home schoolers, we initially consulted the HSLDA who advised us not to allow CPS into our home or to interview our children unsupervised. We were further advised to seek the services of a local attorney to ensure that our rights as parents were not violated as we work to clear our names related to the allegations of child abuse, which we did.

The DFCS, as a result of our refusal to allow them to interrogate our young children without supervision, together with the fact that we home school and therefore they are unable to gain access to our children without our permission (as is commonly done when children attend school outside of the home), went to court and swore out a Protective Custody Warrant to force themselves into our home, to have their way with our children, and to remove my oldest son into their protective custody. Today, my wife and children are in hiding to protect our family, in a location not even know to me, while I have been engaged in a very distressing and disruptive court battle in an effort to have the Protective Custody Warrant quashed, a request that was denied last Friday.

To date, no one at DFCS has been interested in understanding our unique parenting needs, the resources we have used and the third parties who can speak to quality of our parenting, and love that we have for of all of our children. Their action, based on our stance of “tell us what you are concerned about so we can give you reasonable access to our family to resolve them”, has been to take the child and ask questions later. They have leveraged the courts in this effort.

Since DFCS has no interest, nor apparent requirements to ascertain the facts before they have ripped our family apart, we’ve decided to share them with you. Perhaps when you speak out someone in the agency will finally listen to how they are about to destroy yet another family in an effort to “protect” a child that does not need protection and initiate policy based changes. This is why I urge you to come out Tuesday evening! This is a completely free event paid for out of my paycheck.

Thank you for your support,

Mark I. Johnson

[Raycpa]

The only thing that was said in this initial post was a denial of access. It never mentioned a court agreed to interviewer. It read that it was intended to deny any access. In fact the parents went in hiding with the child.

[JudgemAll]

Yep, been there done that and still suffering.

When they got cops and lawyers and soc services and taxes, it's for the children, but when the parent contributes in self, lawyers and what not, it's harassment and abuse.

Social services are evil. Kids are just meat for politics, extortion, blackmail and dollars. They don't care about kid welfare, they only care about getting the parents.

[Carry_Okie]

The only thing that was said in this initial post was a denial of access.

It was clarified further down the thread.

The parents were always willing to submit the child for independent third party examination. CPS wanted custody of Christopher in foster care before even beginning an examination and then only by their contract therapists.

IMO, the parents were absolutely right to hide the kids.

[JudgemAll]

They're going to do the same thing for elderly care. If your grandpa's got money, he can't pay you to care for him! You will be screened and "qualified" nurses will take your inheritence.

Check those articles on social services for the elderly. It's big meat money, and America is asleep. Next bubble bursting, "all your homes are belong to government 'qualified' workers and universities"

http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/search

[JudgemAll]

Sorry, here are the relevant searched articles

http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060111/NEWS/601110312&SearchID=73232331986214

http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060111/NEWS/601110324&SearchID=73232332127762

Whatever money you have left after official taxes will be taken by the courts under any pretext, especialy when a family member becomes a problem child or spouse. You can't try to help people with problems now because they'll manipulate them against you.

Meat genocide market.

[Carry_Okie]

I didn't come up with anything on the search. Is there a specific article that you know of?

[verity]

"The problem is that the facts of the case are confidential. There is much that I am not at liberty to divulge."

The problem is that you posted this w/o providing all the facts. You must be a journalist.

[JudgemAll]

Yep, this is typical. They choose psychologists and care takers biased in their ways and they kidnap and brainwash kids. Independent or parental inquiry is deemed abuse. Their sending swat teams is deemed "child support" they make parents pay for.

CPS has the right to enter any house ANY HOUSE WITH KIDS WITHOUT A WARRANT, ARBITRARILY, WITH COPS BEHIND AND THEY CAN DO SEARCHES! FOR OTHER ITEMS AND WHAT NOT, EVEN SEIZE "TOYS" AND OTHER "GOODS OF THE CHILD" FOR WHEREVER "IT" WILL BE "CARED" FOR.

[Carry_Okie]

I have neighbors in trouble. He has Alzheimers, a broken neck, and now throat cancer. He is strong, cranky, and abusive toward his wife, who is small, malnourished, and has an alcohol problem. He very likely will not be compliant with an NG tube after cancer surgery. Both sons are in Iraq. They do need help, but I agree that the courts are the wrong place to get it.

A neighbor or two have been trying to feed her upon occasion, I've been occasionally caring for their yard, my wife (an RN) is helping her as an advocate, but as you can see, the situation is very complicated.

[Carry_Okie]

They choose psychologists and care takers biased in their ways and they kidnap and brainwash kids.

Yup. Worse, you can bet that if you need a court appointed attorney they'll be shilling for the government. In our county, a court appointed attorney has NEVER filed an appeal in a family court case involving CPS. Not one.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"To those of you who suspected the worst, you were dead wrong."

In this one instance, yes.

However, Mr. Johnson's benavior was far more consistent with guilt than innocence.

Actions speak far more loudly than mere words.

[Carry_Okie]

However, Mr. Johnson's benavior was far more consistent with guilt than innocence.

After having been confronted with CPS' record, and the statistical insignificance that Christopher was at risk, to assume that one will get impartial or just treatment out of family court and CPS is simply psychotic.

Mr. Johnson did absolutely the right thing: he negotiated with two corrupt and complicit political institutions from a position of strength and offered them a way out that assures full disclosure and independent verification.

To assume that simply because Mr. Johnson removed his child until he had such an agreement that he must be an abuser is equally demented.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"To assume that simply because Mr. Johnson removed his child until he had such an agreement that he must be an abuser is equally demented."

I will defer to your superior judgement as to what is and isn't dementia, since it is no doubt gathered from long experience of living in that sorrowful state.

[Carry_Okie]

I will defer to your superior judgement as to what is and isn't dementia, since it is no doubt gathered from long experience of living in that sorrowful state.

Gosh, is that the best you can do?

I've posted facts: hard data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The chance the Johnsons would harm their child is vanishingly small. Still, you desire to place them at the mercy of an unaccountable bureaucracy with a demonstrably failed track record of child abuse!

If you need so badly to hire an incompetent and corrupt police state to force people to live in the manner you would prefer, you are on the wrong forum.

[BoneHead]

Thanks for the update CO.

Still seems you're taking heat though.

Regards
Bonehead

[Rodney King]

Thank you. I stand corrected.

[Carry_Okie]

You are quite welcome.
I never doubted that you would have preferred this outcome.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"I've posted facts: hard data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics."

In other words, you've posted "facts" from the "incompetent and corrupt police state" you supposedly despise as a bunch of evil, lying SOBs, except when they happen to agree with you. You cannot have it both ways.

"The chance the Johnsons would harm their child is vanishingly small."

No, it's more along the lines that the Johnsons would be unlikely to get caught doing so. When I was a cop, we'd have a couple hundred kids a year just "disappear" in a modest-sized city. There are not that many perverts running around, and when we found deceased John & Jane Does that had not reached majority, most of them were victims of blunt force trauma, with no sign of sexual assault--but the bodies had been laid out very neatly at the dump sites, which is not the behavior of a child predator. Very rarely, we managed to get a positive ID--and only then did the case have a chance of ending up in those

"Still, you desire to place them at the mercy of an unaccountable bureaucracy with a demonstrably failed track record of child abuse!"

I would sincerely hope that they'd have a "demonstrably failed track record of child abuse," as opposed to a "demonstrably successful track record of child abuse."

And my experience with CPS is that if they're making any effort to do a removal, it's a very last resort. Your experience may be colored by the fact that you show the sort of behavior that escalate routine traffic stops into "stick time."

[70times7]

I've followed this thread from start to finish focusing on the exchanges you have both had with others, but in particular, with each other. You both supported your positions with well stated arguments and information. But I think what impressed me the most was the level of restraint and civility you both displayed when confronted with those who seemed to consider disagreement with them a personal affront. Thank you both for your leadership by example. I wish I could say I have always conducted myself as well on this forum.

Congratulations to the Johnsons - I love happy endings! We should resolve to keep them in our prayers, particularly for the sake of their son.

[Carry_Okie]

But I think what impressed me the most was the level of restraint and civility you both displayed when confronted with those who seemed to consider disagreement with them a personal affront.

I am never bothered with a debate supported by facts. A spirited disagreement is a chance to find weaknesses in your ideas, seek critical documentation, test new ways of framing a concept, and learn what motivates your opponent. With a credible person like Rodney, the differences are usually a matter of emphasis rather than principle. Such instances are often opportunities to find real solutions.

It's what this forum is supposed to be. Thank you.