Posted on 05/08/2008 5:54:21 AM PDT by MizSterious
"It's the plan that has to address the permanency," said Mary Walker, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. "Whether or not children will be unified with their parents or whether or not they will remain in foster care."
Children and parents are being interviewed this week, and Texas Child Protective Services will make recommendations. A judge would ultimately sign off on the plans. Court hearings addressing the children's status in foster care are scheduled to begin May 19 in San Angelo, Texas.
"Some of our moms are working on plans of their own that they can propose to CPS," said Cynthia Martinez with the Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid Society, which represents some of the FLDS mothers.
The April raid was prompted by a phone call from someone claiming to be a 16-year-old "Sarah," who was pregnant and in an abusive relationship. When Texas CPS and law enforcement responded to the YFZ Ranch, they claim they found evidence of other abuse, including teenage mothers. That prompted a judge to order the removal of all the children at the FLDS compound.
The children have since been placed in foster care facilities across Texas. In contrast to the massive hearing Judge Barbara Walther held that placed the children in state custody, individual hearings will determine what happens to the children now.
In a typical service plan, there are recommendations and requirements that may need to be completed before a parent is reunited with their child.
"If, for example, we have a parent who has some substance abuse issues, the plan may be that the parent go into rehab," Walker said. "If you've got issues with neglect, making sure the child is properly cared for, we'd look at parenting classes, homemaking classes. The plan has to address whatever changes are necessary to reduce the level of risk."
Walker said she did not know what the service plans would address or recommend with the FLDS children and their parents. Texas CPS workers have claimed that the polygamist sect has a culture that lends itself to abuse, with girls being raised to become child brides.
The Texas child welfare system gives authorities up to a year to work with a family. If necessary, a judge can grant an extension. With 464 children in state protective custody, authorities concede that this case is not typical.
CPS said it is working with the Texas Education Agency to deal with the educational needs of the FLDS children.
Educational assessments will be conducted on each child and sent to the school district where the children have been placed. Texas' educational authority will recommend the assessment be used on all FLDS children.
"It is anticipated that the children will continue their education on the campus of their foster placement," CPS said in a statement. "There are no plans at this time for the children to attend classes on any public school campus."
The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services has released new numbers on the children.
According to the May 2 census, there are 102 infants up to 2 years old. An estimated 99 children are ages 3 to 5; 131 children are 6 to 9 years old; 62 children are 10 to 13; and 42 are 14 to 17.
Texas authorities said there are 26 young women who the FLDS claim are adults, but the state believes are children. Two young men turned 18 while in foster care but have elected to stay with family members at a shelter, CPS said.
Some of the foster care facilities the FLDS children are staying in have racked up violations.
The Deseret News conducted an online check of the inspection records and reports for the facilities the judge ordered the children to stay in. They are publicly accessible on the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services' Web site.
"Foster children are being spanked with a belt as a form of discipline," said one 2007 report for the Presbyterian Children's Homes & Services in Waxahachie, Texas.
"Foster child was made to stand on one foot in a closed closet as a form of discipline," said another report on the facility.
For most of the facilities, most of the 2007 violations were for mundane issues such as record keeping. The Kidz Harbor Home in Liverpool, Texas, was written up in February for two residents having sex at the facility. The Cal Farley's Boys Ranch in Amarillo was written up in February for not reporting a child's critical injury in a timely enough manner. It was also written up that same month for having a staff member becoming aware of a child's bruises, but failing to report it.
"You must report and document suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation to child abuse hotline and the designated employee/administrator as soon as you become aware of it," the report said.
Online records show several facilities underwent a new round of assessments and inspections just before the FLDS children were placed in foster care.
THE case? All 50 states routinely remove children from homes when the child welfare agency thinks there’s evidence of neglect or abuse. The removal happens first, and parents can challenge the grounds for the removal in an attempt to get their children bakc, but they’ll hit a brick wall if try to challenge the state’s right to take the children without first proving abuse or neglect in a court. In situations deemed an emergency by these workers, they don’t even need a warrant. Otherwise, most states require a warrant or some similar court approval, but it’s routinely granted on the word of CPS workers.
You may regard child removals as a form of court-ordered punishment of the parents which should require a prior court proceeding in which the parents can present evidence and argue their case. However, no court views it this way. The legal basis for removal of a child is solely the protection of the child, and hard experience has shown why it has to be this way. Leaving children in a home where there’s good reason to believe they’re in danger too often results in further abuse of the children, or sometimes death or disappearance. Society has decided that the children’s rights are more important than the parents’ rights, because the children are much less able to help themselves. People try to challenge this all the time, but no one has ever gotten the basic premise declared unconstitutional, which is why these laws remain on the books and are regularly applied in all 50 states. Are there abuses of this power? Sure, and those are addressed by courts and through political avenues. But the basic right of states to exercise this power has survived every legal challenge to it.
There is a huge legal difference between criminal cases and other kinds of cases — the two other main types being civil and family — and different legal principles apply, e.g. you’re not entitled to a jury in a civil or family case, but you most certainly are in a criminal case. And removal of children from a home deemed dangerous by authorized state agents does not create a criminal case. Criminal cases sometimes arise from child removal situations, but even when they do, the child welfare case remains a totally separate proceeding. The parents can be innocent as angels, but if it’s shown that they have not maintained a safe home for their children and provided a minimum required level of care, the children can be kept in state custody until such time as the court is convinced by CPS that the parents have become able and willing to provide a safe home and adequate care for the children.
“Ucansee2 for some previous post (not going to find it now)the standard is not did the judge do the best job under the circumstances but was due process followed under the U.S. Constitution. “
I think another poster qouted the section of the Constitution which dealt with the rights of the accused.
Since this has nothing to do with the accused, but with the victims, and the laws of the state of TEXAS, and the CPS, then I don’t see due process under the Constitution even applies.
If I am missing something, tell me.
A most excellent overview and summation!
Nice concise post, mostly correct but it says nothing about suspension of constitutional due process even in child custody cases. I understand the difference between the civil and potential (nobody’s been charged yet except Dale Barlow and they don’t seem to want to arrest him) criminal. Everybody gets due process even in child custody.
“Some of the foster care facilities the FLDS children are staying in have racked up violations.”
Poor kids.
No way is the court going to hand over a child to someone who can’t prove either biological parenthood or legal adoption. Nor is the court going to hand over a child to one biological parent without a formal effort to find the other parent and offer that parent an opportunity to argue for custody. Children whose parents can’t be identified will remain wards of the state or be put up for adoption.
However, while it’s pretty clear that a lot of these children had either no biological parent, or only one living at the compound, it’s likely that all of them have parents somewhere who are aware of what’s going on and aware that there’s at least a possibility that one or more of their own children is among the group taken from the ranch. There are likely to be a lot of custody disputes, both between FLDS member and non-member parents, and between members where one parent lived at the ranch with the child and the other didn’t. I’ve already seen one post on the Texas Polygamy message board from a woman identifying herself a wife who was listed in the seized “bishop’s Record” as living in Idaho with at least some of her children, while her husband was living at the ranch. She said she had refused to go with her husband to the ranch and didn’t agree with his decision to move there. But she is apparently still a member of the church and living in an FLDS community in Idaho.
I expect there are other mothers and fathers living apart from their children who will petition for custody now that the situation is “in play”. Before, some couldn’t even find out whether their children were at the ranch, making it virtually impossible to bring legal action to try to get custody of them, and risky because giving the leaders at the ranch notice that an outsider was filing a petition for custody in Texas provided plenty of opportunity for the child to be secretly moved elsewhere.
I don’t know how many times I’m going to have to say I really have no interest in discussing mormonism.
I am strictly on this flds story because of absolute disgust for child abusers and a fascination with legal cases.
I already passed that thread right by, although the excessive mormon stories have been really annoying. There should be some way to filter non-news topics out of “latest posts”.
I still don’t understand why people around here claim there is no connection between lds and flds, and then go on to accuse those of us discussing flds with mormon-bashing. It’s quite confusing.
Now you're making fun of me :-)
but it says nothing about suspension of constitutional due process even in child custody cases
That's because the Constitution says nothing about any right to due process in child custody cases. The relevant passage says that no person shall be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." "Life" refers to the death penalty. "Liberty" has always been interpreted as not being imprisoned (and after the passage of the 13th Amendment, expanded to not being in a condition of "slavery nor involuntary servitude"), not as the freedom to do whatever you like with whoever you like regardless of whether they consent or able to give or withhold consent. Children are not considered legally able to give or withold consent to their own living arrangements, nor does the law regard them as property; it regards them as citizens with limited rights. There is a long common law history, both in England and the United States, of local government authorities removing children from their parents or other related caretakers at their own discretion, and nothing in the Constitution overrides that common law.
It's like the Second Amendment: lots of gun-grabber types WISH it said something different than what it actually says, but it still doesn't. Many people (mostly the non-gun-grabber types) WISH the Constitution gave them an unfettered right to keep their children unless there has been a full blown trial in a court of law deciding otherwise, but that just isn't so. And that is why no federal court has ever ruled that the basic state law model for removal of children on protective grounds is unconstitutional.
When it comes to government inspections the days of no tags are pretty much gone. They will find something you can improve on. If they were inspecting your home you would probably get violations too. It used to not be that way but that’s the way it is. What you need to look for are immediate jeopardy violations where everything comes to a standstill until things are fixed. Dis you find any of those?
“I don’t know how many times I’m going to have to say I really have no interest in discussing mormonism.”
I was only trying to warn everyone to be wary, should they want to go post on that thread. It seemed like walking into a dark alley, and hoping you don’t get mugged.
I only went to it because I was curious as to what ‘certain’ posters would say.
I did notice that ‘certain’ posters disappeared from this thread, and went over there the instant I mentioned it.
If you went to that thread, and read all the way through it, then you might find some answers to that question.
However, I don’t think getting the answer is worth the risk.
I had to skip most of it, and I usually read all the posts on a thread.
“There should be some way to filter non-news topics out of “latest posts”.”
They were discussing that very point over on that thread, and one posted suggested a way to ‘solve’ that would be to have a separate area for LDS threads (why just LDS? ) , named RELIGION, on F.R.
I almost choked on the chips I was munching.
“You are quite right. Living in Arizona....but wait...no...you’re wrong. He was living in Mohave County.”
” That’s not what the warrant said. “
(well, you are right about that. Twice, no three times you have made it sound like you have no idea what the warrant says, and are guessing based on news articles. )
How about we go with exactly what the warrant actually says.
Do you know?
Be prepared for many years of prosecution up to the Federal level on this mess. It is possible that a Federal judge will take charge over all of this.
Very good insightful post, and something that can't be mentioned too much. (Please repost now & then). It is indeed not only a "due process" adult rights' issue, but a due process children's rights matter as well.
There's always a hue & cry in the community when a citizen "turns his back" on known abuse; imagine how it would be for a CPS agency to do the same?
If this happened the way this says it did- I am totally against officials acting this way. Is it really OK for CPS, to lie to people? They have the upper hand legally- no doubt about that- so why lie? By lying to the mothers, they made the children think the mothers lied to them when they said they would be right back. This is about as cold and cruel as it gets. Anyone that says they care about the children should be screaming about this!!!!!!!!!!
A post well worth repeating..... and saving.
Indeed, it’s nice to be able to join fellow spigots and open up. I find letting it all flow is refreshing...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.