Katie is in danger (Granddaughter of tinman, currently working in Iraq)

Glinda

[I.D.E.A]

I am just sickened by this turn of events. What now?

[Badeye]

(chuckle)

Same thing I thought this was about.

[I.D.E.A]

http://www.fightcps.com/ <~~good links and info

http://members.aol.com/okladybug/index.html <~~ OK has a fairly generous ‘grandparents rights’ law, maybe this could be used to your advantage....

[Tinman]

Thank you very much for those excellent links, the "fightcps.com" looks especially promising.

Thanks, again.

Regards

[Glinda]

I have a copy of the OAC governing grandparents and they are VERY generous. I finally got to the handbook for DHS and I am pretty sure that nobody in Creek County has ever even opened the book because they have yet to do anything by the book, so to speak. Thanks for the links, I will see what I can get from them.

[Glinda]

Good morning. I am going to the two links provided.

TTYL

[Glinda]

The “fightcps” site is as Godsend. It is full of the horror stories that have been committed by CPS and their intentions to protect children. As the saying goes, THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS, so when I go ice skating in Hades, I might stop fighting these buggers. Again, thank for the info.

[streetpreacher]

Jerk

[Teacher317]

These people have gone too far. I have read the laws regarding this and they are so far out of line that I am sure they have no idea where the boundaries are.

This is the nature of CPS, sadly. They are simply fighting an unwinnable war. When they take a baby from it's family, it's probably an inappropriate removal 50% of the time (and they're fought on it at least 95% of the time, even by the worst parents you can imagine). When they don't take a child, they're on the hook for their failure to protect the child if anything goes badly after that. But, like any bureaucracy, they cannot and will not take themselves out of the equation ("for our benefit" and all that rot).

That is also why the boundaries are so vague. No set list of rules would be very effective, even when warranted (you could never list every set of circumstances where a kid should be removed without being vague), and again as with all bureaucracies, they want as much freedom to act as possible.

Sadly, they're now entrenched, and they'll have to fight to the end to show that "they're right"... otherwise, they'll end up with a tarnished reputation and lost resources for admitting they were wrong. If they fight, they at least have a chance at vindication... but of course, they're fighting you using your own money, not theirs (since government doesn't earn a dime or produce anything).

Good luck and Godspeed to you and yours in the face of this monstrosity called CPS.

[theFIRMbss]

>Jerk

Maybe, however
it is a VANITY, and
it is wildly

inappropriate --
it's a hopeless complex
personal problem

we see one side of
and can't help with anyway
even if it's not

a Borat type thing.
The forum's for discussing
news, not tear-stained chats . . .

[I.D.E.A]

This termination hearing is effectively your daughters last chance to get her case before the judge. Most people get to this point by believing that if only they do what the worker says they will eventually get their kid back. Then suddenly 15 months and a thousand changing expectations later the parent is on the verge of having their rights terminated despite the fact that they have been in substantial compliance from the start.

Unfortunately once the rights have been terminated it is very hard to get that ruling overturned. However, it can be done but your daughter would have to show that she ‘substantially complied’ with the *original* plan they put into place with/for your daughter. Hopefully that plan identifies such and such steps that if completed will lead to reunification with her baby. Can you tell me if the first plan (or any others that followed) identified the goal as Katie going home?

Here is a sad yet happy case of a mother who had her children taken away, remedied everything the state asked her to yet still in the end her rights to her baby son were terminated. Something about how the mom never really bonded with the baby, I wonder if the canceled visitations and withdrawal of visitation privileges (state to mother) had anything to do with the then toddlers lack of connection with his bio mom despite the mothers continual and persistent attempts to keep the bond strong. Hmmmm

http://kidjacked.com/legal/va_tpr_appeals_case.asp <~~ the case in question, Kidjacked may be a great resource for you also.

[Tinman]

This is no "tear-stained chat", my friend. While it may not involve electing the next President or the WOT or the most recent Supreme Court decision, it is more than a simple "vanity" about a "complex personal problem".

As far as you, or anyone else, being able to "help", I guess is a matter of opinion and perception. We have already received a great deal of information and support to "help" us in this fight,with a government agency. An agency that,evidently, has a penchant for this type of behavior. Behavior that needs to be brought to light in the same way this forum has been used to report on abuses by BATF, the IRS, EPA, BLM,etc.,etc. etc..

I posted the intitial thread (link above) because I have been around this forum for quite a while and I've seen what can happen when the FReepers get behind any issue. I did not post anything, without much thought and consideration. Quite frankly, using this forum is truly one of my final options. I believe that two purposes are being served here. One, my family and I are receiving some much needed assistance and Two, a great many people are being made aware of a serious problem, that is more widespread than I would have ever imagined. If this was your child or grandchild, what would you do?

From Jim Robinson's own "statement", about what his site is all about:

" As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc."

Now, I see more than a couple of points in there that lead me to believe this is a very suitable topic of discussion for this forum.

"wildly inappropriate"?

I think not.

[Tinman]

Once again, thank you so much for the info and links you've provided for us. While they have been a cause for dismay, for what may be ahead of us, they have also given us some hope and encouragement that we may still resolve this situation fairly soon.

Your help is very much appreciated.

Regards

[Tinman]

"Sadly, they're now entrenched, and they'll have to fight to the end to show that "they're right"... otherwise, they'll end up with a tarnished reputation and lost resources for admitting they were wrong. If they fight, they at least have a chance at vindication... but of course, they're fighting you using your own money, not theirs (since government doesn't earn a dime or produce anything)."

We are rapidly finding out that your words are, unfortunately, very true.

By what my wife has been able to determine, in the last several days, these people (DHS) are in violation of, Federal law, OK State law, and their own mission statement/handbook. Yet, their attitude is, "WE can do ANYTHING we want!". At least that's what the caseworker has claimed.

Sadly, the judge is allowing it and our lawyer has been unable to prevent it.

Thank you and Regards

[darkangel82]

They're in seriousviolation of Federal law. A call to the local US attorney is definitely in order here.

[Tinman]

I know that the OK AG's office has already been contacted. I'm not sure what my wife and daughter have done on a Federal level, thus far.

Right now, I would be satisfied if someone in authority would simply say, "Hold on here! Both sides of this deserve and will receive a fair and impartial hearing." That hasn't happened, yet.

We'll do our best to provide updates to all that are interested.

Thank you and Regards

[Teacher317]

these people (DHS) are in violation of, Federal law, OK State law, and their own mission statement/handbook.

Oddly enough, it might be the third of those that might yield the quickest results for you. All agencies have appeals processes, and they are usually quicker than going through the courts. If you can find an administrative law judge who can tell them they've strayed outside of their own rules, they're likely to change direction more quickly than a state or federal court (where they are more likely to appeal an unfavorable judgment). Good luck to you!

[Glinda]

Therein lies the rub, finding a judge with the power AND sense to look at this situation and be fair to BOTH sides. It’s not a good thing when the presiding judge tells your lawyer to “sit down and shut up”.

[Glinda]

Which state, Texas or Oklahoma should we contact the attorney? And where in the federal code should I look for the child welfare laws?

[I.D.E.A]

http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/federal/federalchildlaws.cfm

I’m looking for any specific CFR’s right now...