Replies

Excellent article. This is the way it works, in case you don't know. There is a suspicion of abuse and Department of Children and Family Services presents information to the county prosecutor which results in the child being removed by the court from the parents and placed into "temporary" foster care through DCFS. Now the fun really starts.

DCFS is aided by a number of allied agencies motivated by the principle that it is the government's job to decide exactly how and by whom children should be raised. Child advocates. Home-makers. Psychologists. Social workers. Government bureaucrats. A service plan is drafted with "goals" established by the government, and whether the parent accomplishes these goals or not is determined by -- you guessed it -- the government and their degreed allies.

For instance: the court orders the parent to undergo "psychological testing." The psychologist diagnoses a "borderline personality disorder," which is not uncommon nor considered to be a mental illness. Nonetheless, the parent must then show "improvement" to the satisfaction of the government psychologist or the kids never come back.

Another example: the home-maker comes in and teaches parenting. She may not have any kids of her own, but she does have a degree. She will teach the 21 separate steps for changing a diaper, and woe be to the mother if she cannot recite all steps in the proper order. (It is particularly fun to cross-examine such a government agent when she doesn't have her checklist with her. Of course, she can't recite them all, either, but no matter.)

Of course, the government witnesses tell the court that there is insufficient progress, and in any case the goal posts are moved at the whim of any of the state agents. Eventually the child has been in foster care long enough that they begin to talk about the need of the child for "finality" and how much better off the child would be if the foster parents were allowed to adopt the child outright.

And the whole system is designed so the court is merely a rubber stamp on whatever the government decides. Typically, the parent cannot afford to have a lawyer fully litigate what I will laughingly call her "parental rights," much less obtain expert testimony of her own to challenge the dubious premises and practices of the government's experts.

Yes, many children would be far better off in foster care. At times in my life, I have little doubt that my OWN kids would have had a better week if they were living with someone else. Interesting, though, how we all just came to accept the idea that it is the proper function of government to rearrange family ties -- family ties -- according to that it thinks is best for children.

Oh, by the way. Putting a child in foster care is no guarantee that that child will be protected from sexual or other abuse by foster parents or other foster children.

In a related matter, I learned that by requesting 'government assistance' (in Ohio anyway) you are signing off on the fact the authorities have the "final say" in any matter regarding your child.

I am not now/never was/never hope to be a "welfare" recipient, but back around 1993/94 I was without health insurance. My son has a medical condition, and without any private medical coverage he qualified for a state health care for children - BCMH (income less than $125,000/household).

I asked for the paperwork to sign him up temporarily until I could get coverage. What I received in the mail was a "welfare" application (BCMH was only a fraction of the paperwork). They said the entire thing had to be filled out blah blah blah.
I did some research into the administrative code that I had to sign for/accept (at the local library, no internet at that time for me) and learned the hard cold facts.
The most revealing item was that I was giving the STATE, or it's "lawful" representative (social worker etc), authorization to enter my home, examine my financial/medical records, or access to other personal information (credit or whatever) without recourse.

I never returned the application. A short time later, a county "nurse" called to "schedule" a time when she could "evaluate" the home. I informed her that I decided not to take the medical benefits [I paid out of pocket *ouch*]. She was, to say the least, unhappy. She said that I had already given my *consent.* I said to show me the document where I signed for that (didn't exist). She never called back.

I'm not a criminal, I am a citizen.