Medical Experiments on children,minorites, women,inmates 1845-2007

Think US health authorities have never conducted outrageous medical experiments on us?

Ha think again, I just read this article and it's pretty sick what has happened through the years in the name of research...

Find out more here..


Vaccines and Medical Experiments on Children, Minorities, Woman and Inmates (1845 - 2007)

UK Media Request

Media request

Currently the Guardian UK newspaper is currently working on a cover story for the G2 section of the Guardian newspaper on the significant increase in the number of babies being removed from mothers deemed unfit.

The article will take a look at what's behind this trend - an exploration of some of the complexities and — and will include plenty of voices of mothers who have lost babies, adopted adults, adoptive mothers, and social workers and others who have to make these very difficult decisions.

They are particularly interested in finding mothers who have had a young baby removed from them.

Kate is happy to change names and identifying details if required. They have to write the piece by mid Jan but hoping to tie up all interviews before Christmas.

As I say, early Jan is not out of the question either, however.

If interested contact Kate Hilpern 01753 645554

mobile 0795 737 5403

KHilpern@aol.com

Kindest regardsFassit Teamwww.fassit.co.uk

Father: Son was in court for custody issues before murder-suicide

Larry Meriwether Jr. had gone to court Friday with the mother of his child, Fairlen Rawlins, in reference to child custody issues before police say he shot and killed his 7-month-old daughter and then himself, said his father, Larry Meriwether, Sr.

"(Rawlins) did have full custody (of Iyanna Meriwether)," Meriwether, Sr. said, adding that "they went to court (Friday)" and were supposed to go again on Dec. 26.

Meriwether, Sr. said there was no indication anything was wrong Friday before the incident happened.

"He came by and checked on me — I've been under the weather — so he checked on me and called his brother and best friend and they didn't detect anything," Meriwether Sr. said. "He was in good spirits. I don't know what transpired (later)."

For more on this story, see tomorrow's The Leaf-Chronicle.

Original Article -
The Leaf Chronicle - www.theleafchronicle.com - Clarksville, TN

A mother and child reunion

By Matt Loveless

Watch the video

LEWISTON - A mother and daughter are reunited after more than a decade apart.

The story gets it's start around 1996. According to court documents, Amy Lucas was abused by her husband, became addicted to pain medication, and ended up in jail.

Then, Child Protective Services came in to take away her four kids.

"These kids were (taken) everywhere," said Amy, now a Lewiston resident.

Amy said she got cleaned up, received counseling, a college education, and some time later, got her oldest three children back. But she says the word from Washington CPS was that they didn't know where the youngest, Danielle, then two and a half, ended up.

"Months went by where, no matter what I did for them, it wasn't good enough," said Amy. "I wasn't going to get my daughter back."

Karen Lee, a spokesperson for the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, said they talked with Amy in 2002, and decided that contact wasn't in the best interests of the child.

Then, the years went by, until a phone call from CPS on March 7 of this year."She said, 'Do you have a daughter named Danielle?' and I said, 'Oh, my God, yes,'" said Amy. "And, the first thing I thought was that they found her body somewhere."

Danielle was found, alive. She had been locked up for the previous three months in juvenile detention. Danielle said she had been living with her great aunt, who avoided questions about Amy.

"She was like, 'Your mom's dead, stop talking about her," said Danielle, now 14-years-old. "'Why do you need to talk about somebody that's not here?"

"Danielle was in detention as a runaway. She says she ran away to find her mom. It wasn't until March 9, 2007, after 11 years apart, that Amy got to hold her daughter again.

"I just walked up to her and grabbed her, held her, told her while I was holding her that I was her mom," said Amy.

"She told me she loved me, and I was just holding her, and we all started crying," said Danielle.

How does a mother not know the whereabouts of her daughter for 11 years?

The Washington Department of Social and Health Services says the foster family had legal guardianship, and was raising Danielle in "critical stages of her life." And, once again, they said it was in the best interests of the child to stay.

"To be honest with you, I didn't believe it," said Amy's attorney Clinton J. Henderson.Henderson says the foster family's guardianship was easier to get than you might think.

"It's easy to mislead judges if you want to take the time to do it," said Henderson. "The dependency proceedings are just pro forma, they just go through the proceedings."

Not until mid-September did a judge's ruling dismiss pending charges and state guardianship of Danielle. DSHS say they still disagree with the ruling to this day.

As a result of the litigation, Amy lost the license to the daycare she's owned for six years. She says she's now jobless, scared, but happy that she has her daughter back.

"Every time I look at her, I get tears in my eyes," said Amy. "She's so beautiful. She's so smart."

"I actually feel like I'm where I should be," said Danielle. "I don't feel empty-hearted and I don't feel like there's a hole in my heart."

"She's awesome," said Amy.

Original Article - A mother and child reunion KLEW CBS 3 - News, Weather and Sports - Lewiston, ID - Lewiston, Idaho Local & Regional

Here's another disturbing picture

This was my baby's default picture on his "My Space"

WTF? Am I the only one that see's there is a major problem in that house?

With allegations of the live in girlfriend being a child poronography potographer, and then seeing this kind of &%$ !!

Lets not forget the estranged husbands connections to the CYO and a Supreme Court Judge.

What are your opinions?

Need Opinions

If this were a picture of your children that you have been "legally" kept from for years would it bother you and why?

This is my daughters My Space default picture and I'm very concerned with the fact that the baby appears to be naked and drugged.

Especially since I've been kept from them for no reason.

Could it be my estranged husbands connections to the Church via CYO and the State via a marraige between Director of CYO Jospeh Panepinto and Acting Supreme Court Judge Barbara Panepinto.

This picture forces me to remember the sex scandal within the Catholic Church and panic.

What's your opinion?

When I showed this to my therapist, her first question was "Why is he naked?"

Then she asked "Why does he look so malnurished?"

Questions I can not answer!

Abusive foster mother gets 14 years in prison

Before I bring you this article - I have to say -

SYSTEM FAILURE IT'S TIME TO DISMANTLE THE SYSTEM IN PLACE DESTROYING OUR CHILDREN!

The systematic abuse of innocent children NEEDS TO STOP!

Child "Protective" services around the country is doing anything BUT PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN!

And now I bring you the story..

By JOHN IWASAKI

P-I REPORTER

KENT -- She stabbed her foster daughter's eyes with hypodermic needles, scorched her tongue with a stove-heated fork and dropped 10-pound weights on her feet.

Chornice Kabbelliyaa attributed her horrific behavior to severe mental illness, childhood sexual abuse and depression.

Her longtime victim -- Kabbelliyaa's cousin -- forgave her in court Friday, even as she pointed out that her relative, in custody for nearly two years, was "locked up and shackled -- exactly how I felt, once upon a time."

Judge James Cayce sentenced Kabbelliyaa to 14 years in prison Friday during a hearing at the Regional Justice Center in Kent, saying he doubted the mental assessment of the former foster parent conducted at Western State Hospital.

He noted that Kabbelliyaa, 34, who also goes by the last name of Lewis, had not committed similar atrocities on her own children and supposedly had not been found mentally unstable until she was incarcerated.

In September, Kabbelliyaa pleaded guilty to one count of first-degree assault and two counts of second-degree assault.

Kabbelliyaa repeatedly offered her "deepest apologies" and said she was "not making excuses."

Her victim, whose words were read in court, accused her cousin of greed and said "the state was so blind to your deceit."

A state review of the case released earlier this year found "a system breakdown involving all stakeholders" -- the Department of Social and Health Services, the court system, the court-appointed special advocate program and service providers.

Because Kabbelliyaa said she was related to the victim, DSHS and others involved gave less oversight to the case and offered less protection to the girl. School authorities reported concerns about the girl's injuries and said her explanations and stories seemed scripted.

The girl felt that "what would happen at home would only get worse" if she spoke out, a prosecutor said in court.

But DSHS workers often gave the foster parent, described as combative and intimidating, the benefit of the doubt in investigating complaints, holding her less accountable than a non-relative caregiver.

The girl was not removed from Kabbelliyaa's apartment until January 2006. She had lost vision in her right eye and had puncture wounds in her left eye caused by hypodermic needles used to treat Kabbelliyaa's mother's diabetes.

Court documents also say that Kabbelliyaa heated forks on a stove and stuck them in the girl's mouth. Kabbelliyaa insisted to social workers and others that it was the girl who was out of control, not her. The girl and her three siblings had become dependents of the state in 1996 after their mother allegedly abused, neglected and exploited some of them. They were then placed with Kabbelliyaa. By 2000, a pattern of allegations of abuse, neglect and licensing violations emerged against Kabbelliyaa, though DSHS repeatedly relicensed her foster home.

The state review listed 26 recommendations for DSHS and other parties as a result of shortcomings in the case, such as requiring documented verification of information provided by caregivers, including claims of blood relationships; training on working with difficult clients; regular school visits; and comprehensive medical examinations of foster children within 30 days of placement, with consistent follow-up care by the same physician.

Many of the recommendations were already under consideration before the review, said Sharon Gilbert, deputy director of field operations in Children's Administration in DSHS.

"One of the things we recognized was we definitely didn't do some of the things we needed to be done," she said. "One of the things that stood out was (a) pattern (of abuse and neglect) recognition. We relied heavily on child interviews. Children don't always tell us what's happening."

The training social workers have received should "cause them to be more skeptical if they're getting different stories from children or caregivers," Gilbert said.

The agency previously had foster home licensors conduct investigations of homes for licensing violations, such as when a caregiver moves out of state without telling DSHS, as occurred in the Kabbelliyaa case. Now Child Protective Service investigators will look into those licensing violations, as well as allegations of abuse and neglect, Gilbert said.

No disciplinary action was taken against DSHS employees in the case, spokeswoman Karen Lee said.

She said one worker involved in the case retired in 2004 and another, a foster home licensor, was retrained.

P-I reporter John Iwasaki can be reached at 206-448-8096 or johniwasaki@seattlepi.com .

Original Article- and comments= Abusive foster mother gets 14 years in prison

Worry drives out DCF staffers

REFRESH - Go to Home-Page

I am appaled when they try to say they need more money and that's why they have such a large turnover.

It IS the money that is causing these people to leave Federal funding translates into "legally kidnap" these kids.

Perhaps some of them have a heart, or maybe they've figured out they are being held accountable for "stealing" our children.

Negative publicity creates high turnover in child welfare agency

By Amy Bennett Williamsawilliams@news-press.com

Originally posted on December 02, 2007

In the past 21 months, almost 90 percent of Department of Children and Families' child protective investigators in Lee County have left the agency. Eight of the 38 investigator jobs in Lee are vacant. Five more resignations go into effect Dec. 10.

Small wonder DCF called its turnover rate "pervasive" in a management report released in October.

Even though there are five soon-to-be investigators scheduled to graduate from training early this month, they'll be joining ranks of people almost as fresh as they are. Throughout Circuit 20 — Lee, Collier, Charlotte, Hendry and Glades counties — 70 percent of investigators have less than two years' experience; 55 have less than a year.

Why?

"Many factors contributed to the turnover, including the inherent difficulties of the job made even more difficult by poor public perception of the Department in the community," the report said.

DCF spokeswoman Kristi Sonntag put it more succinctly: "Every time there's a high-profile case where an investigator is named, we lose people."

The News-Press has been investigating the Florida Department of Children and Families for two years. It has hosted a community roundtable to find ways to help Southwest Florida's most vulnerable children and has created a page on news-press.com complete with databases, resources and additional coverage on child welfare.

For example, Sonntag said, the year before Michelle Fontanez died in February 2006, allegedly at the hands of her stepfather after telling investigators he'd been abusing her for years, the turnover rate among Lee child protective investigators was 23.6 percent.

It's now 88.3 percent.

Last straw
One of those lost was Sara Phillips, 25, who resigned after a Lehigh Acres toddler burned with a curling iron became headline news last month. After the incident, in which 18-year-old mother Breanna Hall denied to Phillips she burned the child, but later confessed to a deputy, The News-Press columnist Sam Cook wrote: "The names of DCF directors change, but the song sounds the same for their investigators — incompetent."

That was the last straw for Phillips, who said she did everything she was supposed to.

"I dotted all my i's and crossed all my t's," she said.

She was called a "superb" investigator in a March performance evaluation. DCF secretary Bob Butterworth called Phillips' leaving sad. The department asked her to reconsider her resignation, but she remains adamant.

"The things that have been written about me have not only affected me, but have also affected my family, friends, and co-workers," Phillips said. "I love my job, really I do, but the stress of this was just too much."

This echoes the October review: "Public perception of the Department — particularly with respect to child protection — is poor. ... This has adversely impacted the Department's ability to recruit and retain child protective investigators and has seriously eroded staff morale in this area."

As wrenching as it is for workers who leave, children they serve suffer, too, said Harriet "Cookie" Coleman, the new Circuit 20 administrator.

"With such high turnover, you have less-experienced employees," she said, "and that makes the work of keeping kids safe much harder to do — let alone do well."

Desiree Lewis Dahlke would second that. She was in the child welfare system for years before she became too old for foster care at age 18. Now 24, she's a cook at Jayne's Victorian Garden in Fort Myers.

"At first, I was shoved around a lot," she said. "Then I had a really good one (caseworker) and had her for about six months. Then after that, it seemed like I had a new one every month. The last one, I didn't even meet."

Retention issue

DCF itself has historically held some of the blame for turnover, Butterworth said, because of pervasive secrecy and a willingness to scapegoat workers. "If employees think management is going to throw them under the bus, obviously that hurts."

Butterworth said he vows to change that, championing openness and responsiveness, yet he acknowledges finding and keeping frontline workers is a challenge.

"It's a very tough job, we require a college degree, and then we pay a whole $34,000 a year," he said. "If the Legislature would let me pay them more, I absolutely will, but until then ... ," he said, trailing off.

Meanwhile, Butterworth is working to fix DCF's perception from within.

"I'm hoping to change the image of us as 'the beleaguered agency,'" he said. "I want people to say, 'Wait a minute — we do lots of good things.'"

Closer to home, circuit administrator Coleman has ideas of her own, starting with a strong internship program.

"We need to expose people to the rewards and challenges of this work. It is not a thankless job, but it is a difficult job," Coleman said. "You really do make a difference."

Yet, though an internship agreement exists on paper between DCF and Florida Gulf Coast University, no one is enrolled.

Part of the problem, said professor Sakinah Salahu-Din, director of FGCU's division of social work, is the university requires its interns to be supervised by DCF workers with social work degrees, and they are in short supply, she said.

Top ranks leave

At the same time that its front line churns, there's turnover in DCF's top ranks as well. That often happens when there's a new administrator, Sonntag said.

Last month, circuit administrator Robert McHarry was demoted and replaced by Coleman while operations manager Harry Propper resigned, to be replaced by Kimberly Kutch on Dec. 3. And Nov. 21, Coleman dismissed 17-year DCF veteran George Glatt, the program administrator in charge of Collier, Hendry and Glades counties, although his last performance evaluation called him "an excellent leader and manager."

Glatt's firing was a shock to many of his colleagues, including Jackie Stephens, executive director of the Children's Advocacy Center of Collier County, which consults with DCF on cases of physical or sexual abuse.

"It was very much a surprise, and we're certainly going to miss him," said Stephens, who worked with him for more than 15 years

.Glatt, 63, who'd been hoping to retire from DCF, said he feels puzzled, betrayed and stunned by the way Coleman handled it. "She terminated me over the phone the night before Thanksgiving while I was on vacation."

Coleman realizes her move might puzzle outsiders. "George has done an excellent job, (but) he just didn't fit into my concept of a team."

Media spotlight

Glatt believes media coverage has a far greater effect on the department than the public realizes.

"When you're reading about your operation in the paper every day and when management fails to deal with it and, in fact, says, 'It's the newspaper's fault,' well, no, it's your fault," Glatt said. "These new managers come in and you hear these great platitudes, but none of these new managers really know the business of our business.

"Saving children's lives. Period. That's what this is all about.

"Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, based in Alexandria, Va., agrees, but points out turnover is symptomatic of deeper ills.

High-profile child death cases create a fear-based backlash he calls a foster care panic, which in turn creates a vicious cycle of stress, burnout and turnover — all of which ultimately endanger vulnerable children, Wexler said.

"If management climbs into a bunker, or worse, hunts for scapegoats, and the media do the same, then every caseworker becomes terrified of having the next such case on her load," he said. "So they rush to tear apart more families. That only further overloads workers."

The 30 remaining child protective investigators in Lee County average 30 cases each, Sonntag said, although each case might have as many as seven children. And when the five new resignations become effective Dec. 10, everyone's caseload will increase again, she said.

That spells more trouble for the children, warned Wexler, because even if replacements are hired quickly, they have to get up to speed on old cases.

"Of course, they're not going to know every case as well as they should. They may only have time to skim a file instead of reading it thoroughly," he said.

Then the cycle repeats itself: The more cases workers have, the less time they can spend on each, "So they make even more mistakes."

What follows, Wexler said, is turnover. "The fear of being crucified creates still another incentive to get out. So that's exactly what workers do."

For their part, Glatt and Phillips say they have no idea what they'll do next.

Yet Phillips remains optimistic there will always be those who want to protect children.

"There are a lot of people who honestly care about kids," she said. "Someone will come along who's a lot like me."

Original atricle= The News-Press, news-press.com, SS: Children's Resource Center, Worry drives out DCF staffers

Apple puts spotlight on CPS

Apple puts spotlight on CPSBenjamin

ShorsStaff writerJune 23, 2007

Amid the blue herringbone chairs in the waiting room of the county's juvenile court, it's not uncommon to hear scathing critiques of the Washington's child welfare system from disgruntled parents and their families.

But this week, the criticism came from an unusual quarter: Spokane City Councilman Bob Apple.

The outspoken, 51-year-old councilman waded waist-deep into a child welfare case involving a former employee and campaign volunteer, Daniel Morgan, 29.

Throughout several days of hearings, Apple could be heard variously accusing a state social worker of submitting false court documents, stating that an assistant attorney general should be jailed, and repeatedly accusing Child Protective Services of kidnapping a 2-year-old boy.

"It's a sham," Apple fumed in the waiting room, surrounded by the Morgans and their relatives. "If this is how the court system operates, then it's broken.

"A spokeswoman for CPS called Apple's comments "absolutely ridiculous.""None of these decisions are made in isolation," spokeswoman Kathy Spears said. "There are checks and balances in this system. When we go to court, we have to make the case that a child we are removing is at risk of imminent harm.

"Four years ago, Washington legislators opened the doors to the hearings where the fate of hundreds of allegedly abused or neglected Spokane County children are decided. The vast majority of the cases - on any given day, about 10,000 children are in Washington's foster care - pass unnoticed.

But the presence of Apple, an outspoken and blunt councilman, shined a light on the Morgans' two-month legal battle - and into the little-understood machinations of the child-welfare system.

At the center of the dispute are three boys and the familiar tale of a family torn apart by divorce and competing allegations of child abuse and neglect.

The Morgans, who own a car-detailing business, allege that an overzealous CPS social worker relied heavily on the reports of Robin's ex-husband, Derrick Allen. The 33-year-old is involved in a custody dispute with Robin, with whom he had two older sons.

"We would submit that this is really nothing more than a custody battle," said attorney Connie Powell, who defended Daniel Morgan against an allegation that he threw his 8-year-old stepson to the ground and kicked the boy in the buttocks.

Late Thursday night, a court commissioner sided with Morgan and his wife, and ordered the state to return their 2-year-old son, who was taken by police April 18. Social worker Sheila Thorne, a 13-year veteran of the agency, declined to comment."The department has made more than a reasonable effort to prevent the removal of (the boy) from the family's home," said Kim McClain with the state's Attorney General's office, which represents CPS in child-welfare cases.

Late Thursday night, a court commissioner sided with Morgan and his wife, and ordered the state to return their 2-year-old son, who was taken by police April 18.

Social worker Sheila Thorne, a 13-year veteran of the agency, declined to comment.

"The department has made more than a reasonable effort to prevent the removal of (the boy) from the family's home," said Kim McClain with the state's Attorney General's office, which represents CPS in child-welfare cases.

McClain said the two older boys in the home reported that Daniel Morgan had physically abused them. She described the family as "chaotic."

In April, three days after he made the report to police and social workers, Allen obtained a temporary change of custody to care for his and Robin Morgan's two biological children. Allen could not be located for comment.

"Unfortunately, in this field, when the custody of children is involved, everyone involved is willing to lie," said Dave Wood, a lobbyist for Washington Families United, a nonprofit group seeking reforms to the child-welfare system. "You don't know what the truth is. Something has to change."

The Morgans maintained the boy suffered injuries to his knee and head during accidents with a toy car and a bike, respectively. According to testimony, the boy told Allen that Daniel Morgan had caused the injuries.

The Morgans said Allen has used the referrals "as payback" and to gain custody of the two children he had with Robin Morgan.

"The injuries have nothing to do with Mr. Morgan," Apple said. "I've known these kids for 15 years. I know Daniel would never beat his kids.

"Since 2002, the state agency has received a "number of referrals related to parental neglect of the children and alleged physical abuse of the children by Mr. Morgan," according to the court documents. A state spokeswoman said she could not disclose how many of the complaints were made by Allen.

A state ombudsman who reviewed the case recommended that the children be removed from the home, according to court records. The agency said the parents have refused to engage in services, including anger management.

"We make a decision to take a case to court, and the court has an opportunity to review the evidence," said Spears, the CPS spokeswoman. "I think that is the strength of the child-welfare system: to have different parts looking at what we are doing so that no one agency is making decisions on their own."

On Friday, Robin Morgan said she had been unable to work for the past two months. Family members helped out at the couple's car-detailing business.

"I have been running back and forth between attorneys and visitations," she said. "I just hope that everybody can see that CPS is good, but there are not good CPS workers out there. I'm really happy that my son is home."

For his part, Apple maintained his support wasn't motivated by friendship alone.

"I will do it for any citizen who contacts me," he said.

Staff writer Benjamin Shors can be reached at (509) 459-5484, or by e-mail at benjamins@spokesman.com.

Child Protective Services faces legislative changes, may see its funding cut

By Josh Brodesky
arizona daily star
Tucson, Arizona Published: 11.27.2007

After nearly a year of intense public scrutiny following the deaths of three Tucson children, Child Protective Services faces the prospect of legislative changes and possible funding cuts.
The agency is in the midst of public hearings about its handling of cases involving three Tucson children who allegedly were killed by their parents.

Legislators want to hold a hearing in December on how CPS handled the case of 5-year-old Brandon Williams, an autistic boy who was killed in March, allegedly by his mother and a friend. That follows a September hearing on how the agency handled the case of 4-year-old Ariana Payne and her 5-year-old brother, Tyler, who were killed last year, allegedly by their father and his girlfriend

Some of the legislative changes under consideration would make CPS case records more open, allow CPS workers to file missing persons reports, give them greater access to criminal history records and open state employee records to the public in the same way as municipal and county employee records.

But with the state roughly a billion dollars in the red, there is also the prospect that the beleaguered agency will take a funding hit, even as it tries to meet public expectations for improvement.

"The governor has indicated it is her intent to hold children's services harmless from the majority of the reductions that would have to occur in agencies to meet the budget deficit," said Ken Deibert, deputy director of the Department of Economic Security, which oversees CPS.

"Any significant budget cuts for our services would certainly have some very concerning repercussions," Diebert said.

State Rep. Jonathan Paton, a Tucson Republican who has taken the lead in the legislative hearings on CPS, said he expects cuts across all state agencies, but he does not want to see a reduction in CPS workers.

"I don't necessarily think things are going to be improved if you lose more caseworkers," Paton said.

Low morale, high turnover

Against that backdrop of controversy and scrutiny, CPS workers continue to push on, handling roughly 35,000 reports a year.

For workers in Pima County, the year has been marked by high turnover and low morale, said Ilene Stern, a program supervisor and investigator.

"Morale is … seriously affected by workload, by media, by criticisms, by high turnover," she said. "It hasn't been good for a while."

Stern mostly handles reports involving children who have been placed with relatives or in foster care. She also oversees an investigator in Ajo and picks up reports on the side, partly because of staffing shortages.

CPS currently has 13 openings in Pima County.

"There are very few of us here for more than five years," Stern said. "I'm here 17 and a half, and I will retire here."

In that time the agency has evolved. Workers have less family contact and more case management, she said. Methamphetamine is prevalent in many cases. There is also an emphasis on in-home services, essentially referrals to family services such as counseling and parenting classes, as a way to keep children with families.

This emphasis on family is also seen in the agency's push for workers to take a more global approach to investigations, essentially looking beyond the black-and-white world of allegations to see what services or needs a family might require.

A recent independent review of the agency's handling of the Payne and Williams cases faulted CPS workers for being too focused on whether the allegations were true rather than the broader family situations and risks that existed.

To encourage a shift in philosophy, the agency has adopted a new assessment tool, which some workers have criticized because of its length. A sample version is roughly 80 pages.
Stern was diplomatic about the new tool, saying that while it took more time to fill out, the fieldwork didn't change, or at least it shouldn't.

"Your face-to-face time shouldn't be affected by your documentation," she said.

In her own handling of cases, Stern adopted this broader investigative approach.

The ride-along

On a warm, late October morning she treks out to White Elementary School on Tucson's far Southwest Side to investigate a report from the school of a young boy with a cut on his ear. Reportedly his father shot him with a disc gun, a small toy gun that fires plastic discs.

Stern interviews the boy about the cut, as well as his two older brothers, who are also students at the school. Her focus, however, quickly shifts from the cut, which is fairly small and clearly accidental, to concerns about a gun in the home and the employment situations of the parents.
After about an hour and a half interviewing the three children separately, she heads to the parents' house.

Neither parent is working full time. The mother goes to beauty school. The father works construction jobs but has been staying home to watch their young daughter. Stern gives them a referral for day-care services, which would allow the father to work more.

"They were very cooperative," she said. "This job is often sorting through who is pointing the finger at who. Part of my job is to put that information together."

In the public eye

There is no doubt public pressure about the handling of the Payne and Williams cases affected morale at the agency.

During the ride-along, Stern remarked that the Arizona Daily Star's coverage of the cases did not reflect the personal side of the work, or the workers.
And this summer, after the Star ran an article quoting state Rep. Steve Farley — a Tucson Democrat who took a ride-along with a CPS worker and has been supportive of the agency — a number of CPS workers forwarded the article by e-mail, commenting on how they had found a supporter.

"So often we only get the very negative media, and while some of that is included here, we now have someone supporting us," wrote Karin Kline of the DES public information office.
Lillian Downing, who heads CPS in Pima County, remarked via e-mail that perhaps the comments from Farley would help "turn the tide."

But Paton said the public scrutiny has brought about some needed changes to the agency, notably the requirements for workers to check court records and not to date clients or former clients — policy changes that he hopes to make law.

"You can see the results of an agency that's kind of been hidden away, and there have been some really bad things that happened," he said. "At the end of the day you see that because of the public's attention on what's going on, that scrutiny ultimately led to changes that they've made in their policies."

● Contact reporter Josh Brodesky at 807-7789 or jbrodesky@azstarnet.com.

As of this writting there are 27 comments on this story -
Click here for more
Child Protective Services faces legislative changes, may see its funding cut www.azstarnet.com ®

Schaefer: Trial by jury needed to remove child

By Tom Law Thursday,

November 29, 2007 9:03 AM EST

The Toccoa Record State Sen. Nancy Schaefer last week called for an overhaul of the state’s child protection services provided through the Department of Family and Children’s Services (DFCS).

Among the recommendations by Schaefer, who represents the 50th District which includes Stephens County, was that a jury trial be held when a child is taken from their parents.Schaefer also called for the requirement of a warrant signed by a judge before removing a child from their parents, except in an emergency situation such as a medical crisis.

“The Department of Family and Children’s Service, known as the Department of Child Protective Services in other states, has become a protected empire built on taking children and separating families,” Schaefer said in a lengthy e-mail.

“This is not to say there are not children who do need to be removed from wretched situations and need protection,” Schaefer said. “This report is concerned with the children and parents caught in legal kidnapping, ineffective policies and DFCS that does not remove a child or children when a child is enduring torment and abuse.”

Schaefer offered as an example an unnamed county in her district where she met with 37 families to discuss the “gestapo” tactics of the DFCS.“I witnessed the deceitful conditions under which children were taken in the middle of the night, out of hospitals and off school busses,” Schaefer said. “Having worked with probably 300 cases statewide, I am convinced there is no responsibility and no accountability in the system.”

Among Schaefer’s conclusions:

Poor parents are targeted to lose their children because they do not have the wherewithal to hire lawyers and fight the system.“Being poor does not mean you are not a good parent or that you do not love your child or that your child should be removed and placed with strangers,” Schaefer said.

All parents are capable of making mistakes and that making a mistake does not mean children should be removed from the home.

Parenting classes, anger management classes, counseling referrals, therapy classes, etc. are demanded of parents with no compassion by the system while they are at work and while their children are separated from them.

Caseworkers and social workers are often guilty of fraud.“They withhold evidence. They fabricate evidence and they seek to terminate parental rights. However, when charges are made against them, the charges are ignored,” Schaefer said.

Separation of families is a growing business because local governments have grown accustomed to having taxpayer dollars to balance their ever-expanding budgets.

DFCS and juvenile court can always hide behind a confidentiality clause in order to protect their decisions.

There are no financial resources and no real drive to unite a family and help keep them together.

The incentive for social workers to return children to their parents quickly after taking them has disappeared.

The policy manual for DFCS is considered the last word.“The manual is too long, too confusing, poorly written and doesn’t take the law into consideration,” Schaefer said.

Children removed from homes may not be safer in foster care.“Children of whom I am aware have been raped and impregnated in foster care and the head of a foster parents association in my district was recently arrested because of child molestation,” Schaefer said.

Grandparents are not often contacted by DFCS when children are removed from homes.

“Grandparents who lose their grandchildren to strangers have lost their own flesh and blood. The children lose their family heritage, and grandparents lose all connections to their heirs,” Schaefer said.

Schaefer is calling for an independent audit of DFCS to expose possible “corruption and fraud.”

She also called for immediate change. “Every day that passes means more families and children are subject to being held hostage.”

Schaefer said any financial incentives to separate families should end, and parents should be given their rights in writing.

She also called for a required search for family members to be given the opportunity to adopt their own relatives, and when someone fabricates or presents false evidence, a hearing should be held with the right to discovery of all evidence.

Original Article - The Toccoa Record: Top Stories

Need more proof on why you shouldnt have children in todays day?

How can it happen that parents can not give an unruly or disrespectful child a smack on the backside???

Federal funding that's how...

Ban on spanking
By Laurel J. Sweet
Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Parents who spank their kids - even in their own homes - would be slapped by the long arm of the law under an Arlington nurses proposal to make Massachusetts the first state in the nation to outlaw corporal punishment.

Kathleen Wolf's proposed legislation will be debated at a State House hearing tomorrow morning.

If signed into law, parents would be prohibited from forcefully laying a hand on any child under age 18 unless it was to wrest them from danger, lest they be charged with abuse or neglect.Rep.

Jay Kaufman, a Lexington Democrat, submitted the 61-year-old Wolf's petition at her request, but is not taking a position for or against corporal punishment.

He does recognize and understand the concern many would have on legislating parental rights, said Sean Fitzgerald, Kaufmans chief of staff, but the problem is the boundary is often overstepped. The right to hit should never be the right to hurt.

Charles Enloe, 45, of Plymouth, knows a little something about that. In 2005, he was infamously arrested and charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for taking a belt to his then 12-year-old son during an argument over homework.

The charges were later dropped and Enloe told the Herald yesterday the experience didn't change my views at all.

I believe discipline starts at home. Are they going to start legislating that you can't raise your voice to your kids? That you can't tell them when to go to bed? We'll be communists then.

The state Supreme Judicial Court agreed in principle when it ruled in 1999 that parents can spank their kids provided they don't threaten bodily injury.

Corporal punishment in the home is already illegal in Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Latvia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Sweden and the Ukraine.In 1979, Sweden became the first country in the world to ban spanking. Anders Erickson, spokesman for the Embassy of Sweden in Washington, D.C., said in the 1960s 53 percent of Swedes backed corporal punishment of children. By the 1990s, that number was less than 10 percent.

There are other ways and means to bring up children than to beat them,Erickson said. Much better ways.

An ombudsman is available to children in Sweden to report allegations of corporal punishment. Parents face jail time if its found they've stepped out of line.

Mother-To-Be Flees As Social Workers Warn Her They Will Take Her Baby

By PAUL SIMS
20th November 2007

A mother-to-be has fled her home after social workers threatened to take her baby within minutes of the birth.

Fran Lyon, 22, hopes a new local authority will take a different approach.

She insists that the mental health problems she had as a teenager -she started self-harming at 15 and has been treated at psychiatric hospitals for borderline personality disorder - are now behind her and there is no evidence she will harm her child.

Miss Lyon moved out of Hexham after receiving a copy of her "birth plan" from social services at Northumberland County Council.

It says she will be given a maximum of 15 minutes with her baby - who she has already named Molly - before she is taken into care.

She is now in the Birmingham Yardley constituency of Liberal DemocratMP John Hemming, who has taken up her case and is campaigning tooverturn the decision.

Miss Lyon said she had been hounded out of her home by a "barbaric"decision and felt she had no choice but to move if she is to have anychance of keeping her baby.

She added: "It is a sad indictment of a local authority in the waythey have dealt with an expectant mother who has tried to co-operatewith some of the most extreme measures imaginable."

Miss Lyon said social workers fear she is likely to develop Munchausen's syndrome by proxy.

The controversial condition is said tolead mothers to seek attention by harming their child or claiming it is ill.

"I have been told that I am not even to breastfeed my child in case I try to poison her," she said.

"As far as I am concerned, the birth plan is abusive and I will jus tnot stand for it.
It would leave Molly isolated from anybody who loves her from the first few minutes of her life.
It is barbaric and it deprives her of a basic right."

She hopes Birmingham City Council will review the case, but admitted: "I don't know what's going to happen. It's a waiting game at the moment."

Miss Lyon became involved with social services in July after adomestic incident involving her former partner.At a subsequent meeting, she revealed her history of mental health problems and was told they would be taking action to remove her child once she is born in January.

Munchausen's - first identified by Sir Roy Meadow during the 1970s -has been at the heart of a series of miscarriages of justice.

Sir Roy was responsible for evidence that led to the wrongful convictions of Angela Cannings and Sally Clark for murdering their children. Mrs Clark died earlier this year.

Miss Lyon has appealed for a place in a mother and baby unit so she can look after her child under supervision.

Northumberland County Council said last night: "Where a child or unborn baby is subject to a child protection plan and they move to another local authority area, responsibility would normally pass to the new authority."

"A transfer conference is arranged as soon as possible and the family and their support are usually invited to attend. The existing plan is discussed, but the new authority makes its own decisions about how to proceed."

"Northumberland County Council would make sure the new authority has all the relevant information it needs to make informed decisions."

Mr Hemming is chairman of the Justice for Families organisation and believes councils are now taking more babies to meet Government adoption targets.

He said of Miss Lyon's case: "What could be more traumatic than for amother to have her baby taken away at birth? It's monstrous."

That, in itself, can cause mental health problems which are then usedby social services against the mother as a reason not to return the baby. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

"There has been a massive increase in younger babies being taken intocare before there is even any evidence of harm."

The MP, married with four children, made headlines in 2005 when hefathered a love child after a six-year affair with his personal assistant.

Do NOT Marry or have children!

I came accross this earlier today and I couldnt agree more, however I have a twist I'd like to add- this advice is not only for men! More and more women are finding themselves in the same position as men are.

As anyone that has spent more than 5 min on my page they will know that I have been royal ^$#!@ by our wonderful system.

In my reasearch I've come accross some sick stuff- children have no chance in this world today!

If their parents don't screw them up the system will- so my advice is don't have children until they get this nightmare under control or you will one day think back to this blog and say "Oh man she warned me- I should have listened!"

Although the original writer of the blog below talks mostly about divorce I also add child protective services to the main list to NOT HAVE CHILDREN!

With that I bring you the original article..

Advice to Young Men: Do Not Marry, Do Not Have Children Marriage is a foundation of civilized life. No advanced civilization has ever existed without the married, two-parent family. Those who argue that our civilization needs healthy marriages to survive are not exaggerating. And yet I cannot, in good conscience, urge young men to marry today. For many men (and some women), marriage has become nothing less than a one-way ticket to jail. Even the New York Times has reported on how easily "the divorce court leads to a jail cell," mostly for men. In fact, if I have one urgent piece of practical advice for young men today it is this: Do not marry and do not have children.

Spreading this message may also, in the long run, be the most effective method of saving marriage as an institution. For until we understand that the principal threat to marriage today is not cultural but political, and that it comes not from homosexuals but from heterosexuals, we will never reverse the decline of marriage. The main destroyer of marriage, it should be obvious, is divorce. Michael McManus of Marriage Savers points out that "divorce is a far more grievous blow to marriage than today's challenge by gays." The central problem is the divorce laws.

It is well known that half of all marriages end in divorce. But widespread misconceptions lead many to believe it cannot happen to them. Many conscientious people think they will never be divorced because they do not believe in it. In fact, it is likely to happen to you whether you wish it or not.

First, you do not have to agree to the divorce or commit any legal transgression. Under "no-fault" divorce laws, your spouse can divorce you unilaterally without giving any reasons. The judge will then grant the divorce automatically without any questions.

But further, not only does your spouse incur no penalty for breaking faith; she can actually profit enormously. Simply by filing for divorce, your spouse can take everything you have, also without giving any reasons. First, she will almost certainly get automatic and sole custody of your children and exclude you from them, without having to show that you have done anything wrong. Then any unauthorized contact with your children is a crime. Yes, for seeing your own children you will be subject to arrest.

There is no burden of proof on the court to justify why they are seizing control of your children and allowing your spouse to forcibly keep you from them. The burden of proof (and the financial burden) is on you to show why you should be allowed to see your children.

The divorce industry thus makes it very attractive for your spouse to divorce you and take your children. (All this earns money for lawyers whose bar associations control the careers of judges.) While property divisions and spousal support certainly favor women, the largest windfall comes through the children. With custody, she can then demand "child support" that may amount to half, two-thirds, or more of your income. (The amount is set by committees consisting of feminists, lawyers, and enforcement agents - all of whom have a vested interest in setting the payments as high as possible.) She may spend it however she wishes. You pay the taxes on it, but she gets the tax deduction.

You could easily be left with monthly income of a few hundred dollars and be forced to move in with relatives or sleep in your car. Once you have sold everything you own, borrowed from relatives, and maximized your credit cards, they then call you a "deadbeat dad" and take you away in handcuffs. You are told you have "abandoned" your children and incarcerated without trial.

Evidence indicates that, as men discover all this, they have already begun an impromptu marriage "strike:" refusing to marry or start families, knowing they can be criminalized if their wife files for divorce. "Have anti-father family court policies led to a men's marriage strike?" ask Glenn Sacks and Dianna Thompson in the Philadelphia Enquirer. In Britain, fathers tour university campuses warning young men not to start families. In his book, From Courtship to Courtroom, Attorney Jed Abraham concludes that the only protection for men to avoid losing their children and everything else is not to start families in the first place.

Is it wise to disseminate such advice? If people stop marrying, what will become of the family and our civilization? Marriage is already all but dead, legally speaking, and divorce is the principal reason. The fall in the Western birth rate is directly connected with divorce law.

It is also likely that same-sex marriage is being demanded only because of how heterosexuals have already debased marriage through divorce law. "The world of no-strings heterosexual hookups and 50% divorce rates preceded gay marriage," advocate Andrew Sullivan points out. "All homosexuals are saying . . . is that, under the current definition, there's no reason to exclude us. If you want to return straight marriage to the 1950s, go ahead. But until you do, the exclusion of gays is simply an anomaly - and a denial of basic civil equality.

" We will not restore marriage by burying our heads in the sand; nor simply by preaching to young people to marry, as the Bush administration's government therapy programs now do. The way to restore marriage as an institution in which young people can place their trust, their children, and their lives is to make it an enforceable contract. We urgently need a national debate about divorce, child custody, and the terms under which the government can forcibly sunder the bonds between parents and their children. We owe it to future generations, if there are to be any.

Source

Original article - Political Correctness Watch

Are they begining to come clean?

Social Workers Allege Child Protection Service Abuses

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Social workers are alleging abuses in Kentucky’s Child Protective Services.
In a follow-up to a 3-year investigation of CPS, NewsChannel 32 interviewed a group of Kentucky social workers who alleged families are harassed and workers are pressured in efforts to boost adoption numbers.

Pat Moore said she was a state social worker until she was fired for not ignoring half a dozen allegations of abuse in a foster home.

“I did what I felt like I had to do,” Moore said. “It was the right thing to do and I stand by the complaint.”

When Moore found that two foster parents had criminal records, a son living with them had multiple felonies, and a convicted sex offender visited and, sometimes, cared for the children, she refused to arrange an adoption.

Her supervisors responded to her complaint with a memo suggesting the adoption proceed quickly.

“Our theory is that the basis for this is the tie to the federal money,” Moore’s attorney, Tom Beiting said. “That every time a child is not placed in the home comma the state of Kentucky through its Cabinet is losing money”

After she was fired, Moore filed suit and last month, the Commonwealth paid $380,000 to settle it.

The high-adoption trend apparently began in 2004, when adoptions in Kentucky ballooned to 724 while the federal bonus money more than doubled from $452,000 the previous year to more than $1 million.

“The Cabinet puts pressure on stats because federal and state money come from statistics,” said another social worker who wants her identity concealed for fear of retaliation against her family. “You get praised. The Cabinet praises you for terminating rights and adopting kids out immediately.”

She said the concerted effort to take children away and put them up for adoption was so brazen, she actually saw someone successfully place an order for children.

“Someone could not have a child and wanted a child so within the community,” the social worker said. “This person saw a family in distress, having a hard time, relayed to workers that they would like those children, and that’s exactly what has happened.”

And a former CPS supervisor, who also wants anonymity for fear of retaliation, said if an order for a child was delayed or denied, her supervisors would overturn local decisions.

“This one family was promised a child, and when it happened that this child was going to be reunified with the parent, they called our regional office, and our regional office came in our county and they harassed the birth parents and that kind of thing because they didn’t agree with our decision,” the former supervisor said.

Vanessa Shanks had her kids taken away and, when she fought back, her relatives had their children taken away. Then, after she won in court, her attorney’s child was taken away.

The former CPS workers said that kind of retaliatory power is common and, in the secretive, one-sided system, they can take anyone’s kids away on a moment’s notice - and get away with it.

According to data just released, there’s a huge disparity between counties on adoption rates. Some counties reunify 100 percent of children taken with their families. Other counties adopted out as many as 82 percent of children taken from their homes.

Original article - Social Workers Allege Child Protection Service Abuses - Print This Story News Story - WLKY Louisville « TN Family Court In Ne...

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (© ) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

Are Child Protective Services to Powerful?

I came accross this article this morning, sad but so true ...

Here's an excerpt..

Abraham Lincoln would not have been able to educate himself in front of the fireplace because a government agency would have determined that his living conditions were substandard

Heres the actual article-

Richard Disney » Are Child Protective Services Authorities Too Powerful?

Chld Protection THE NEW STRANGER DANGER

By: Thomas Dutkiewicz

Connecticut DCF Watch

Hartford, CT - Because of over zealous and abusive social workers innocent children are ripped out of loving homes every day because of rumors or anonymous reports. The federal court even stated that risk of harm or possibility of harm is NOT probable cause to remove any child. There must be credible evident of imminent "physical" danger in order to remove any child.

Parents need to teach their children that if anyone at school pulls you out of your class and wants to question you about your home, parents and siblings, they need to refuse to cooperate with those individuals unless mom or dad is present. The federal court in Doe v. Heck agrees and ruled that questioning a child by DCF or the police without the consent of the parent is an unreasonable search and seizure of the child and prohibited by law and a 4th and 14th Amendment violation.

In one court case the judge ruled that Severance of the parent-child relationship is “tantamount to imposition of a civil death penalty” Drury v. Lang, 105 Nev. 430, 433, 776 P.2d 843, 845 (1989)

New York Supreme Court Judge Brian Lindsay stated, “There is no system ever devised by mankind that is guaranteed to rip husband and wife or father, mother and child apart so bitterly than our present Family Court System.”

Judge Watson L. White from Cobb County, Georgia said, “There is something bad happening to our children in family courts today that is causing them more harm than drugs, more harm than crime and even more harm than child molestation.”

Parents need to teach their children that anyone from DCF (Dept. of Children and Family) are very dangerous individuals and are inhuman and they seek to take them away from their family for no legal reason so it is important never to speak with them unless mom or dad is there to defend them as their legal guardian. They will lie in court in order to harm them and the parents.

DCF will also suborn perjury from the child if the child denies abuse ever took place. They will harass the child repeatedly in fostercare and tells the child they can go home if they admit there was abuse of some kind even when there was never abuse or neglect.

Parents need to educate and empower their children they can assert their right to remain silent and they have their parents permission not to cooperate with DCF, police or any school personal who ask inappropriate questions dealing with the child or family. The child needs to say they are not answering any questions unless their parents are present as ruled by the federal court. Parents or children are free not to cooperate with any government official or employee of the school.

DCF workers as ruled by the Federal court are government officials in the eyes of the court and constitution, them being unlicensed social workers is not relevant to the court and the constitutional protections of the parents. The court went on further to say that the "Constitution is NOT limited to one type of government official", it applies to all government officials including DCF employees.

Thomas M. Dutkiewicz, President

Special Family Advocate

Connecticut DCF Watch

P.O. Box 9775Forestville, CT 06011-9775860-833-4127

Admin@connecticutdcfwatch.comhttp://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com/

P.S. Check out our web site for the FREE handbook on parental rights. There is also a manual on "reasonable efforts" with sections for Attorneys, Judges and Agencies.

Does the DSM Have Equivalents for the PAS Diagnosis?

Does DSM-IV Have Equivalents for the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) Diagnosis?

Richard A. Gardner. M.D.
Department of Child Psychiatry, College of Physicians and Surgeons
Columbia University, New York, New York, USA

DSM-IV Diagnoses Related to the Parental Alienation Syndrome

Examiners writing reports for and testifying in courts of law can generally find diagnoses in DSM-IV that are immune to the argument, "It doesn?t exist because it?s not in DSM-IV." These diagnoses are not identical to the PAS, but they have common elements that can justify their utilization. None of them, however, are identical to the PAS and cannot be used as substitutes for it. I present here those that are most applicable and potentially useful in courts of law.

Diagnoses Applicable to Both Alienating Parents and PAS Childrem

297.3 Shared Psychotic Disorder


A delusion develops in an individual in the context of a close relationship with another person(s) who has an already-established delusion.

The delusion is similar in content to that of the person who already has the established delusion.
This DSM-IV diagnosis is warranted in some of the severe PAS cases in which the programmer is paranoid, and the child?s campaign of denigration incorporates the same paranoid ideation. In a sense, most of the moderate, and even some of the mild cases of PAS, are examples of the folie-deux phenomenon. However, one cannot justifiably consider the mild and moderate cases of PAS to warrant the label psychotic with the implication of complete break with reality. In severe cases we do see bona fide delusions of persecution that can justifiably be considered paranoid. Most often, the delusional system is circumscribed to the alienated parent. It is important to note that this single diagnosis can be applied to both the alienator and the alienated child.

V61.20 Parent-Child Relational Problem

This category should be used when the focus of clinical attention is a pattern of interaction between parent and child (e.g., impaired communication, overprotection, inadequate discipline) that is associated with clinically significant impairment in individual or family functioning or the development of clinically significant symptoms in parent or child.

This diagnosis generally applies to a dyad. Obviously, there are a wide variety of parent-child relational problems that have nothing to do with PAS. In fact, it is reasonable to state that parent-child relational problems probably began with the first families that existed. This diagnosis is an excellent example of the aforementioned principle that none of the DSM-IV diagnoses described here can be reasonably substituted for the PAS. Rather, they are best viewed as disorders that have some symptoms in common with the PAS and may therefore justify being listed as additional diagnoses.

In the PAS situation there is a pathological dyad between the alienating parent and the child and another pathological dyad between the alienated parent and the child. The pathological dyad between the alienated parent and the child is one in which the child is being programmed into a campaign of denigration against the previously loving parent. The child is being programmed to exhibit any and all of the primary symptomatic manifestations of the PAS. With regard to the relationship between the child and the alienated parent, the child exhibits inordinate hostility, denigration, and fear of the target parent to the point where that parent is viewed as noxious and loathsome. Examiners using this criterion do well to emphasize that two separate parent-child relational problems are manifested.

Diagnoses Applicable to Alienating Parents

297.71 Delusional Disorder

Nonbizarre delusions (i.e., involving situations that occur in real life, such as being followed, poisoned, infected, loved at a distance, or deceived by spouse or lover, or having a disease) of at least 1 month?s duration.

Of the various subtypes of delusional disorder, the one that is most applicable to the PAS:

Persecutory Type: delusions that the person (or someone to whom the person is close) is being malevolently treated in some way

This diagnosis is generally applicable to the PAS indoctrinator who may initially recognize that the complaints about the behavior of the alienated parent are conscious and deliberate fabrications. However, over time, the fabrications may become delusions, actually believed by the programming parent. And the same process may ultimately be applicable to the child. Specifically, at first the child may recognize that the professions of hatred are feigned and serve to ingratiate the child to the programmer. However, over time the child may come to actually believe what were originally conscious and deliberate fabrications. When that point is reached the delusional disorder diagnosis is applicable to the child. Generally, this diagnosis is applicable to relentless programmers who are obsessed with their hatred of the victim parent, by which time the child will have probably entered the severe level of PAS. It is to be noted that when the PAS is present, most often one observes a circumscribed delusional system, confined almost exclusively to the alienated parent. This diagnosis may also be applicable to the PAS child, especially the child who is in the severe category.

301.0 Paranoid Personality Disorder


A pervasive distrust and suspiciousness of others such that their motives are interpreted as malevolent, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by four (or more) of the following:

> suspects, without sufficient basis, that others are exploiting, harming, or deceiving him or her

> is preoccupied with unjustified doubts about the loyalty or trustworthiness of friends or associates

> is reluctant to confide in others because of unwarranted fear that the information will be used maliciously against him or her

> reads hidden demeaning or threatening meanings into benign remarks or events

> persistently bears grudges, i.e., is unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights

> perceives attacks on his or her character or reputation that are not apparent to others and is quick to react angrily or to counterattack

> has recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding fidelity of spouse or sexual partner

PAS programmers who warrant this diagnosis would often satisfy these criteria before the marital separation. A detailed history from the victim parent as well as collaterals may be important because the programming parent is not likely to directly reveal such symptoms. They may, however, reveal them in the course of the evaluation, because they are such deep-seated traits, and are so deeply embedded in their personality structure, that they cannot be hidden. Most people involved in protracted child-custody litigation become "a little paranoid," and this is often revealed by elevations on the paranoid scale of the MMPI. After all, there are indeed people who are speaking behind the patient?s back, are plotting against them, and are developing schemes and strategies with opposing lawyers. This reality results in an elevation of the paranoid scale in people who would not have manifested such elevations prior to the onset of the litigation. We see here how adversarial proceedings intensify psychopathology in general (Gardner, 1986), and in this case, paranoid psychopathology especially. The PAS child is less likely to warrant this diagnosis. When the severe level is reached PAS children may warrant the aforementioned Shared Psychotic Disorder diagnosis. On occasion, the diagnosis Schizophrenia, Paranoid Type (295.30) is warranted for the programming parent, but such patients generally exhibited other manifestations of schizophrenia, especially prior to the separation. It goes beyond the purposes of this paper to detail the marital symptoms of schizophrenia which should be investigated if the examiner has reason to believe that this diagnosis may be applicable.

It is important for the examiner to appreciate that there is a continuum from delusional disorder, to paranoid personality disorder, to paranoid schizophrenia. Furthermore, in the course of protracted litigation, a patient may move along the track from the milder to a more severe disorder on this continuum.

301.83 Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD)

A pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and affects, and marked impulsivity beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

> frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment.
Note:Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.

> a pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation

> identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self

> impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating).
Note Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.

> recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior

> instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g. intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days)

> chronic feelings of emptiness

> inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights)

> transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms

Some alienators may exhibit some of these symptoms prior to the separation. However, as a result of the stresses of the separation, the symptoms may progress to the point where the diagnosis is applicable. Criterion (1) is likely to be exhibited soon after the separation because the marital dissolution is generally associated with real feelings of abandonment. Criterion (2) is often seen when there is a dramatic shift from idealization of the spouse to extreme devaluation. The campaign of denigration is the best example of this manifestation of BPD.

Criterion (4) may manifest itself by excessive spending, especially when such spending causes significant stress and grief to the alienated parent. Following the separation, alienating parents may satisfy Criterion (6) with affect instability, irritability, and intense episodic dysphoria. Although such reactions are common among most people involved in a divorce, especially when litigating the divorce, patients with BPD exhibit these symptoms to an even greater degree. Chronic feelings of emptiness (Criterion [7]) go beyond those that are generally felt by people following a separation. Criterion (8) is extremely common among PAS programmers. The tirades of anger against the alienated parent serve as a model for the child and contribute to the development of the campaign of denigration. The stress-related paranoia, an intensification of the usual suspiciousness exhibited by people involved in litigation, may reach the point that Criterion (9) is satisfied.

The examiner should note which of the symptoms are present and comment: "Five criteria need to be satisfied for the BPD diagnosis. Ms. X satisfies four. Although she does not qualify for the diagnosis at this point, she is at high risk for its development. Furthermore, when one lists diagnoses at the end of the report one might note the DSM-IV diagnosis and add in parenthesis "incipient."

301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

> has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements

> is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

> believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

> requires excessive admiration

> has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

> is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

> lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

> is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

> shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

My experience has been that most PAS indoctrinators do not satisfy enough criteria (five) to warrant this diagnosis. However, many do exhibit three or four of them, which is worthy of the examiner?s attention and should be noted in the report.

Criterion (5) is especially common in PAS indoctrinators. They act as if court orders have absolutely nothing to do with them, even though their names may be specifically spelled out in the ruling. Unfortunately, they often violate these orders with impunity because courts are typically lax with regard to implementing punitive measures for PAS contemnors. As mentioned in other publications of mine (Gardner, 1998; 2001), the failure of courts to take action against PAS programmers is one of the most common reasons why the symptoms become entrenched in the children.

Criterion (6) is often frequently satisfied by the programmer?s ongoing attempts to extract ever more money from the victim parent, but feels little need to allow access to the children. There is no sense of shame or guilt over this common form of exploitation. The programmer?s lack of empathy and sympathy for the victim parent is quite common and easily satisfies Criterion (7). The PAS, by definition, is a disorder in which a programmer tries to destroy the bond between the children and a good, loving parent. In order to accomplish the goal, the alienator must have a serious deficiency in the ability to empathize with the target parent. Criterion (9) is often seen in that PAS indoctrinators are often haughty and arrogant and this symptom goes along with their sense of entitlement. Again, if warranted, the diagnosis can be listed as "incipient."

DSM-IV Diagnoses Applicable to PAS Children

312.8 Conduct Disorder

A repetitive and persistent pattern of behavior in which the basic rights of others or major age-appropriate societal norms or rules are violated, as manifested by the presence of three (or more) of the following criteria in the past 12 months, with at least one criterion present in the past 6 months:

This diagnosis is often applicable to the PAS child, especially in situations when the conduct disturbances are the most salient manifestation. Under such circumstances, an examiner who is not familiar with the PAS may erroneously conclude that this is the only diagnosis. Such a conclusion necessitates selective inattention to the programming process, which is the hallmark of the PAS. Once again, we see here how a diagnosis, although in DSM-IV, cannot be used as a substitute for the PAS, but may be used as an additional diagnosis. I will not list here all 15 of the DSM-IV criteria, but only those that are most applicable to the PAS:

Aggression to people and animals

> often bullies, threatens, or intimidates others

> often initiates physical fights

> has used a weapon that can cause serious physical harm to others (e.g., a bat, brick, broken bottle, knife, gun)

> has been physically cruel to animals

> has stolen while confronting a victim (e.g., mugging, purse snatching, extortion, armed robbery)

Destruction of property

> has deliberately engaged in fire setting with the intention of causing serious damage

> has deliberately destroyed others? property (other than by fire setting)

Deceitfulness or theft

> often lies to obtain goods or favors or to avoid obligations (i.e., "cons" others)

> has stolen items of nontrivial value without confronting a victim (e.g., shoplifting, but without breaking and entering; forgery)

Serious violations of rules

> has run away from home overnight at least twice while living in parental or parental surrogate home (or once without returning for a lengthy period

As can be seen, most of the 15 criteria for the conduct disorder diagnosis can be satisfied by PAS children, especially those in the severe category. The target parent is very much scapegoated and victimized by PAS children. In severe cases they are screamed at, intimidated, and sometimes physically assaulted with objects such as bats, bottles, and knives. The child may perpetrate acts of sabotage in the home of the victim parent. Destruction of property in that person?s home is common and, on rare occasion, even fire setting. Deceitfulness is common, especially fabrications facilitated and supported by the alienator. Stealing things, such as legal documents and important records, and bringing them to the home of the alienator is common. Running away from the home of the target parent and returning to the home of the alienator is common, especially in moderate and severe cases.

309.21 Separation Anxiety Disorder

Developmentally inappropriate and excessive anxiety concerning separation from home or from those to whom the individual is attached, as evidenced by three (or more) of the following:

I reproduce here those of the eight criteria that are applicable to the PAS:

1) recurrent excessive distress when separation from home or major attachment figures occurs or is anticipated

4) persistent reluctance or refusal to go to school or elsewhere because of fear of separation

8) repeated complaints of physical symptoms (such as headaches, stomachaches, nausea, or vomiting) when separation from major attachment figures occurs or is anticipated

It is important for the reader to appreciate that the original diagnosis for separation anxiety disorder was school phobia. The term separation anxiety disorder is a relatively recent development emerging from the recognition that the child?s fear was less that of the school per se and much more related to the fear of separation from a parent, commonly an overprotective mother (Gardner, 1985b). DSM-IV recognizes this and doesn?t necessarily require the school to be the object of fear, but rather separation from the home, especially from someone with whom the child is pathologically attached.

It is important to note that the PAS child?s hatred of the victim parent has less to do with actual dislike of that parent and has much more to do with fear that if affection is displayed toward the target parent, the alienating parent will be angry at and rejecting of the child. At the prospect of going with the victim parent, the child may exhibit a wide variety of psychosomatic symptoms, all manifestations of the tension associated with the visit. The distress may be especially apparent when the alienating parent is at the site of the transfer. The child recognizes that expression of willingness or happiness to go off with the alienated parent might result in rejection by the alienator. The separation anxiety disorder diagnosis is most often applicable to the mild and moderate cases of PAS. In the severe cases, the anxiety element is less operative than the anger element.

When applying these criteria to the PAS child, one does well to substitute the PAS indoctrinating parent for the parent with whom the child is pathologically attached. At the same time one should substitute the alienated parent for the school or other place outside the child?s home. When one does this, one can see how most of the aforementioned criteria apply. When the child with a separation anxiety disorder is fearful of leaving the home to go to many destinations, the school is the destination the child most fears. It is there that the child feels imprisoned. In contrast, PAS children generally fear only the target parent and are not afraid to leave the programming parent and go elsewhere, such as to the homes of friends and relatives. In short, the PAS child?s fear is focused on the alienated parent. In contrast, the child with a separation anxiety disorder has fears that focus on school but which have spread to many other situations and destinations.

300.15 Dissociative Disorder
Not Otherwise Specified

This category is included for disorders in which the predominant feature is a dissociative symptom (i.e., a disruption in the usually integrated functions of consciousness, memory, identity, or perception of the environment) that does not meet the criteria for any specific Dissociative Disorder. Examples include:

States of dissociation that occur in individuals who have been subjected to periods of prolonged and coercive persuasion (e.g., brainwashing, thought reform, or indoctrination while captive).

Of the four categories of dissociative disorder (NOS), only Category 3 is applicable to the PAS. This criterion was designed for people who have been subjected to cult indoctrinations or for military prisoners subjected to brainwashing designed to convert their loyalty from their homeland to the enemy that has imprisoned them. It is very applicable to PAS children, especially those in the severe category. Such children have been programmed to convert their loyalty from a loving parent to the brainwashing parent exclusively. Cult victims and those subjected to prisoner indoctrinations often appear to be in a trance-like state in which they profess their indoctrinations in litany-like fashion. PAS children as well (especially those in the severe category) are often like robots or automatons in the way in which they profess the campaign of denigration in litany-like fashion. They seem to be in an altered state of consciousness when doing so.

Adjustment Disorders

The following subtypes of adjustment disorders are sometimes applicable to PAS children:

309.0 With Depressed Mood.

309.24 With Anxiety.

309.28 With Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood.

309.3 With Disturbance of Conduct.

309.4 With Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct

Each of these types of adjustment disorders may be applicable to the PAS child. The child is indeed adjusting to a situation in which one parent is trying to convince the youngster that a previously loving, dedicated, and loyal parent has really been noxious, loathsome, and dangerous. The programmed data does not seem to coincide with what the child has experienced. This produces confusion. The child fears that any expression of affection for the target parent will result in rejection by the alienator. Under such circumstances, the child may respond with anxiety, depression, and disturbances of conduct.

313.9 Disorder of Infancy, Childhood or Adolescence Not Otherwise Specified

This category is a residual category for disorders with onset in infancy, childhood, or adolescence that do not meet criteria for any specific order in the Classification.

This would be a "last resort" diagnosis for the PAS child, the child who, although suffering with a PAS, does not have symptoms that warrant other DSM-IV childhood diagnoses. However, if one still feels the need to use a DSM-IV diagnosis, especially if the report will be compromised without one, then this last-resort diagnosis can justifiably be utilized. However, it is so vague that it says absolutely nothing other than that the person who is suffering with this disorder is a child. I do not recommend its utilization because of its weakness and because it provides practically no new information to the court.

DSM-IV Diagnoses Applicable to Alienated Parents

In most PAS cases, a diagnosis is not warranted for the alienated parent. On occasion that parent does warrant a DSM-IV diagnosis, but its applicability usually antedated the separation and usually has not played a role in the PAS development or promulgation. As mentioned elsewhere (Gardner, 2001), the primary problem I have seen with alienated parents is their passivity. They are afraid to implement traditional disciplinary and punitive measures with their children, lest they alienate them even further. And they are afraid to criticize the alienator because of the risk that such criticism will be reported to the court and compromise even further their position in the child-custody litigation. Generally, their passivity is not so deep-seated that they would warrant DSM-IV diagnoses such as avoidant personality disorder (301.82) or dependent personality disorder (301.6), because such passivity does not extend into other areas of life and did not antedate the marital separation. One could argue that they have an adjustment disorder, but there is no DSM diagnosis called "adjustment disorder, with passivity." Accordingly, I will often state for alienated parents, "No Axis 1 diagnosis."

If, indeed, the alienated parent did suffer with a psychiatric disorder that contributed to the alienation, then this should be noted. Certainly, there are situations in which the alienated parent?s psychiatric disorder is so profound that it is the primary cause of the children?s alienation. In such cases, the PAS diagnosis is not warranted. Under such circumstances, this disorder should be described instead as the cause of the children?s alienation.

Final Comments About Alternative DSM-IV Diagnoses for the PAS

As mentioned, the primary reason for using these diagnoses is that the PAS, at this point, is not recognized in some courts of law. They cannot be used as substitute diagnoses for the PAS, but sometimes share in common some of the symptoms. Accordingly, they can be used as additional diagnoses. It is too early to expect widespread recognition because it was not feasible for the PAS to have been placed in the 1994 edition, so few were the publications on the disorder when the preparatory committees were meeting. This will certainly not be the case when the committees meet in the next few years for the preparation of DSM-V, which is scheduled for publication in 2010. None of the aforementioned substitute diagnoses are fully applicable to the PAS; however, as mentioned, each one has certain characteristics which overlap the PAS diagnosis. Because no combination of these alternative diagnoses can properly replace the PAS, they should be used in addition to rather than instead of the PAS. There is hardly a diagnosis in DSM-IV that does not share symptoms in common with other diagnoses. There is significant overlap and often fluidity in DSM diagnoses. None are "pure," but some are purer than others, and the PAS is one of the purer ones.

At this point, examiners who conclude that PAS is an applicable diagnosis do well to list it in the appropriate place(s) in their reports (especially at the end). At the same time, they do well to list any DSM-IV diagnoses that are applicable for the alienator, the alienated child, and (if warranted) for the alienated parent. Accordingly, even if the court will not recognize the PAS diagnosis, it will have a more difficult time ignoring these alternative DSM diagnoses.

Conclusions

Controversies are likely when a new disorder is first described. This is predictable. The PAS, however, has probably generated more controversy than most new diagnostic contributions. The primary reason for this is that the PAS is very much a product of the adversary legal system that adjudicates child-custody disputes. Under such circumstances, it behooves opposing attorneys to discredit the contribution and to find every argument possible for obstructing its admission into courts of law. And this is what happened with the PAS. The purpose of this article has been to help evaluators involved in such disputes understand better the nature of the controversy and to deal with it in the context of the present legal situation. Like all compromises, the solution is not perfect. None of the additional diagnoses are identical to the PAS, but they do serve a purpose in a court of law in that they are established psychiatric diagnoses that are applicable to PAS alienators, PAS children, and (on occasion) the alienated parent. Ultimately, if PAS is admitted into DSM-V, the main argument for its inadmissibility in courts of law will no longer be applicable and the need for listing these additional diagnoses in courts of law will be reduced.

References

American Psychiatric Association (1994), Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition, Revised (DSM-IV). Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association.

Boyd v. Kilgore, 773 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (Prohibition Denied)

Kilgore v. Boyd, 13th Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, FL., Case No. 94-7573, 733 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) Jan 30, 2001

Gardner, R. A. (1985a), Recent trends in divorce and custody litigation. The Academy Forum, 29(2):3-7.

_______ (1985b), Separation Anxiety Disorder: Psychodynamics and Psychotherapy. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1986), Child Custody Litigation: A Guide for Parents and Mental Health Professionals. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1987), The Parental Alienation Syndrome and the Differentiation Between Fabricated and Genuine Child Sex Abuse. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1987), Child Custody. In Basic Handbook of Child Psychiatry, ed. J. Noshpitz, Vol. V, pp. 637-646. New York: Basic Books, Inc.

_______ (1989), Family Evaluation in Child Custody Mediation, Arbitration, and Litigation. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1992), The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Mental Health and Legal Professionals. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (1998), The Parental Alienation Syndrome, Second Edition. Cresskill, New Jersey: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

________ (2001), Therapeutic Interventions for Children with Parental Alienation Syndrome. Cresskill, New Jersey: Creative Therapeutics, Inc.

_______ (2002), Parental alienation syndrome vs. parental alienation: Which diagnosis should be used in child-custody litigation? The American Journal of Family Therapy, 30(2):101-123.

rgardner.com, Articles in Peer-reviewed journals and Published Books on the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). www.rgardner.com/refs

_______, Testimony Concerning the Parental Alienation Syndrome Has Been Admitted in Courts of Law in Many States and Countries. www.rgardner.com/refs

Warshak, R. A. (1999), Psychological syndromes: Parental alienation syndrome. Expert Witness Manual, Chapter 3-32. Dallas, TX:State Bar of Texas, Family Law Section.

_______ (2001), Current controversies regarding parental alienation syndrome. The American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 19(3):29-59.

?2002 Richard A. Gardner, M.D.

REFRESH - Go to Home-Page