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.
“Two wrongs don’t make a right. “
Of that there is no doubt.
Simplifying the debate, I believe you claim that the Custody hearings were in violation of due right to speedy process, wherein the law specifies individual hearings for each custody case, within 14 days.
Correct?
The Judge looked at the circumstances, said that was impossible, and found a LAW that enabled an extension to the 14 day period.
So, just exactly what has the TEXAS COURT SYSTEM done that was not following the law?
“I can say sincerely that I appreciate that UCANSEE2 is one of a few CPS action supporters who have at least candidly acknowledged the harm that has been visited on these children by the state’s actions.”
Regardless to which side they seem to be on.
It is the standard practice to err on the side of those who cannot defend themselves, then proceed to find the true nature of the situation. Child abuse and sexual exploitation cases require a different standard due to their very nature. Do innocent people get caught up in these situations, yes, but it is a very rare instance indeed that the situation is not rectified once the facts are known. The potential innocence of an adult does not trump the absolute innocence of a child.
This practice has stood up time and again in courts across the land, both those over seen by liberal as well as Conservative jurist.
Religion nor the US Constitution are blank checks to do whatever one desires to those least able to defend themselves. No reasonable person, no matter their political stripe, Conservative or liberal, Republican or democrat, could in good conscience think otherwise.
I’m the one who came up with the traffic court analogy.
which really sucked.
But, it did lead to the point that there is a difference between those charged with crimes, and those that are victims. (which was my point)
And was an effort to justify the reason for the original ‘en masse’ hearing (which was the subject of DIAMOND’s point)
Thank you.
(for.....?)
Responding to a emotionally charged question with a positive, and intelligent set of statements.
(aka Keeping your cool)
Asking questions, instead of just being on the defense.
And turning to humor to keep things light.
here is a link to an interesting article.
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/story/631299.html
According to the article, the children will not get ‘individual’ custody hearings, but will be grouped with their siblings.
So, the issue of whether the custody hearings are being done ‘to the letter of the law’ is still very arguable.
(Why would I give info helping my ‘opponent’?)
(Because it’s what’s right, not who’s right.)
That is one comment I am never going to forget. I've been called many names on here but that one was by far the most outrageous. lmao!!
Isn’t that the way it usually happens? Brother and sisters are represented together?
Of course this is hard on the kids. If momma and daddy get a divorce though, do we blame the judge for the kids emotional problems? If momma and daddy go to jail do we blame the arresting officer?. If these people were breaking the law then why is the state of Texas being blamed instead of the parents?
“Isn’t that the way it usually happens? Brother and sisters are represented together?”
I don’t know.
I wonder if each ‘family unit’ getting a hearing would satisfy the letter of the law?
Ask those mormons you know if they are thinking of taking some of the victims into their homes to help out.
I also think they wouldn’t get on a forum and discuss it, they would privately and quietly just do it.
Wrong.
Besides, this case ain’t about religion, it’s about rape.
Wrong again. The FLDS is ALL about religion. Religion is the reason that these poor ignorant women are cooperating in the rape of their dughters and themselves.
That is the reason for the specific rules and practices that warren Jeffs instituted into the FLDS faith, and took with him to TEXAS, after being run out of Arizona, Colorado, and Utah.
There are state statutes, state common law, and state constitutions which may prescribe varying types of “due process” applicable to child custody cases, but there is no such provision in the U.S. Constitution. There is also no such thing as federal common law, so no help there. There are some federal laws which apply to state child welfare agencies which receive federal funds (i.e. all state child welfare agencies), but none of those laws has ever been found to conflict with the states’ laws and procedures in this area. Texas law has its own definition of due process applicable to this type of case, and there is no conflict between that and the U.S. Constitution, hence that is the law that applies. If Texas decides to bring criminal charges against any of the adults, then the due process provision of the U.S. Constitution would be applicable. The law is what it is. You can’t invent provisions out of thin air. Do you really think that with the tens of thousands of child seizures that have been done without prior court proceedings finding wrongdoing by the parents, that this whole question hasn’t already been put to the state and federal courts from every possible angle? It has, and all the courts have routinely found that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting children, and that this interest is best served by a policy of allowing the removal of children based on suspicion, and conducting family court hearings later.
Evidence or allegation? I would hope the former. Families ought to be the locus of society unless there is strong evidence that they are criminally destructive.
Your description of what is the norm with CPS cases makes one wish for trial by jury, not by unelected "experts" from the best sociology departments around the USA. You describe a system misshapen by the best of intentions, most likely sincere intentions, but ones in need of an outside check.
This is why I have insisted on criminal trials in the FLDS case. Outrage is aroused both by the accusations and the exercise of state power, and evidence of actual crimes, substantiated with evidence and argued skillfully, can strike a balance between people wary of government excesses and those wary of systematic, institutionalized abuse of women/girls.
And finally, if we can say that a culture that literally breeds women to become pregnant underage is criminal, we are looking in a microcosm of the USA, but with a lower crime rate in other aspects. Unfortunately, pre-teen girls are being sexualized left and right, shown how to tart up by their media role models and music. And boys (and men) have just as many insulting role models. I realize one could argue that the difference in teen pregnancy inside and outside the "compound" is the difference between choice and compulsion. Concupiscence and a culture's interest in mediating it and its consequences - or channeling them, or postponing them - are complicated, especially in a society that has no meaningful rites of passage or yardstick of maturity other than getting a driver's license.
But then again there's the ideal of a monogamous (first) marriage, probably the only other rite of passage worth mentioning, though either party to the affair might have more miles on them than junior's first car at 16.
There is one other rite of passage, but that leads back to the whole topic of concupiscence and a culture's interest in mediating it.
I think once the custody hearings, with each family unit, are complete, the complaints of due process will be moot.
There might be lawsuits, but there’s gonna be lawsuits over any technical glitch a good lawyer can find.
We are more likely to be occupied with the ‘but it’s my child’ appeal, when DNA tests show no match.
Watch for the media to parade a tearjerking soap opera of clips of the FLDS women who don’t regain custody of their children.
You ain’t seen nothing yet.
Simplifying the debate, I believe you claim that the Custody hearings were in violation of due right to speedy process, wherein the law specifies individual hearings for each custody case, within 14 days.
Correct?
The Judge looked at the circumstances, said that was impossible, and found a LAW that enabled an extension to the 14 day period.
I am not familiar with Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, but I would be curious to see the Rule. That having been said, though, I have no reason to doubt you that the judge found a discretionary out to give the CPS what it wanted, which just goes to show that the 14 Day Requirement is almost meaningless. If it was that easy for the judge to get around it, it may as well not be there.
I have not specifically argued that laws were broken by the State for the simple reason that the vagary of the laws permits CPS huge discretionary powers that are largely unfettered. In this case, CPS, which carried out the mass seizure no doubt asked the court to waive the 14 day requirement because of the impossibility of conducting individual hearings, a situation the CPS themselves created. And what the CPS asks for it usually gets.
So my complaints are more focused on what I see as the ambiguity of CPS laws in general, the excessive scope of the raid, which in my opinion was inadvisable and which unnecessarily caused trauma to many young children and perhaps some of the 13 monogamous couples and their children, who may not have been involved in any illegal activities. The State entered many separate residential structures, including some of homes of the monogamous couples and took children at gunpoint without any knowledge or evidence of child abuse in those dwellings, which tells me that a very powerful State enforcing ambiguous civil laws that do not have many of the ordinary protections of criminal law can become very dangerous to liberty.
If all the things said about this cult and its illegal activities have been common knowledge for years, I would have preferred the State or the Feds to have busted the criminals themselves long ago with criminal and civil laws, including RICO statutes, if possible. That having failed, I think it would have been better to remove the suspected perps instead of the children, reasonable efforts for which are mandated in the CPS law before the children are removed. Is anyone aware of ANY effort made by the CPS in that regard? In the final analysis, it doesn't really matter whether they did or didn't because of the large discretionary power they have.
That's my .02, anyway.
Cordially,
There will likely be a few criminal trials related to the YFZ ranch, but probably not many. Some children will be returned to their mothers who agree to CPS supervision of their living arrangements, not to include any men to whom they aren’t legally married, and it will be thought better for the children not to be dragged through testifying against or about people they formerly regarded as parents (e.g. the “father” to whom their real mother was “reassigned”, and his beatings of their new 15 year old “mother” in the first weeks after their “father” married her). Other children will be returned to a parent who had previously left the cult and been denied access to their child, and those parents are unlikely to want their children testifying in cases against adults still in the cult, due to the hopelessly interconnected web of family relationships, and the likelihood of repercussions against someone they want to protect (e.g. one of their adult children who has remained in the cult). My guess is that criminal trials may revolve more around things like evidence-tampering, perjury, etc. than the salacious details of life in the compound which led to the removal of the children.
The line between evidence and allegation is pretty blurry. Most states (maybe all) allow removals based on some kind of allegation, though I believe some don’t allow it based solely on allegations made by anonymous tipsters. It’s often impossible to get solid evidence of child abuse without removing the child, and as a result most states/courts will accept an allegation combined with some circumstantial evidence. There have just been too many cases where a child wasn’t removed on an allegation, due to someone’s determination that there was insufficient evidence, and the child is later found brutally beaten or starved to death. Then the solid evidence finally arrives in the form of a forensic report on the corpse, detailing concrete evidence of years of brutal beatings or starvation of a helpless child.
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.