Please note: This article is reprinted directly from MedicalKidnap.com. It is being presented here in four installments due to length. This is the first installment. The article in its entirety can be found here: link to complete article
by Health Impact News/MedicalKidnap.com Staff
The Business Empire of “Child Protection”
Child Protective Service is big business – to the tune of billions of dollars.
Many allege that federal funding is the root of the problem with CPS, and that the real incentive is perpetuating a lucrative business employing tens of thousands of people, and not protecting children. Whenever there is evil or corruption, often all one has to do is “follow the money.” The Bible says it best: For the love of money is the root of all evil.
So, how did we get here?
The 1974 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), or the “Mondale Act,” is the federal law that birthed Child Protective Services (CPS) as we know it today. This law created a new lucrative revenue for the states via federal funds to remove children from their homes based on “child abuse,” and place them in foster care. CAPTA mandated abuse reporting by certain professions and at the same time gave them complete immunity from criminal prosecution or civil liability, even if their allegations were completely erroneous. Since “child abuse” was not even defined in CAPTA, any number of things could be construed as “abuse.”
According to Nev Moore, an advocate and writer for child services reform:
The money goes to tens of thousands of a) state employees, b) collateral professionals, such as lawyers, court personnel, court investigators, evaluators and guardians, judges, and c) DSS contracted vendors such as counselors, therapists, more “evaluators,” junk psychologists, residential facilities, foster parents, adoptive parents, MSPCC, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, YMCA, etc. This newspaper is not big enough to list all of the people in this state who have a job, draw a paycheck, or make their profits off the kids in DSS custody.
In 1974 Walter Mondale promoted the Child Abuse and Prevention Act which began feeding massive amounts of federal funding to states to set up programs to combat child abuse and neglect. From that came Child “Protective” Services, as we know it today. After the bill passed, Mondale himself expressed concerns that it could be misused. He worried that it could lead states to create a “business” in dealing with children.
Then in 1997 President Clinton passed the “Adoption and Safe Families Act.” The public relations campaign promoted it as a way to help abused and neglected children who languished in foster care for years, often being shuffled among dozens of foster homes, never having a real home and family. In a press release from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services dated November 24, 1999, it refers to “President Clinton’s initiative to double by 2002 the number of children in foster care who are adopted or otherwise permanently placed.”
In the “technical assistance” section of the bill it states that, “the Secretary [of HHS] may, directly or through grants or contracts, provide technical assistance to assist states and local communities to reach their targets for increased numbers of adoptions for children in foster care.” The technical assistance is to support ‘the goal of encouraging more adoptions out of the foster care system; the development of best practice guidelines for expediting the termination of parental rights; the development of special units and expertise in moving children toward adoption as a permanent goal; models to encourage the fast tracking of children who have not attained 1 year of age into pre-adoptive placements; and the development of programs that place children into pre-adoptive placements without waiting for termination of parental rights. (Source: Adoption Bonuses: The Money Behind the Madness )
Initially funds came from uncapped Title IV-D funds that made foster care extremely profitable, and the official belief was that abused children were better off in foster care, and for as long as possible. One of the problems with these funds is that they were highly controlled by the federal government on how the states could spend the monies.
John Van Doorn ran for San Diego Supervisor in 2010. Wanting to reform Child Protective Services, he said:
The single greatest threat to the people of San Diego County is our county’s (as well as the state’s) abuse of Title IV-D programs (Child Protective Services, Child Support Services, foster care and adoptions, VAWA, etc.).
Mandated by federal government, these programs are intended to provide a social safety net for our children and the elderly and a deterrent to domestic violence but instead, they have become a means by which our local governments extract great profits. In exchange for providing these services, the federal government reimburses local governments for the cost of providing these services—at times, greatly in excess of the cost of that service. As such, our local governments find themselves sorely tempted to provide a service where one is not necessarily warranted (since reimbursements grow as the amount of services rendered grows), and unfortunately all too often where the provision of unneeded services ends up being destructive in the lives of those “served.”
For instance, in the case of foster care, the present reimbursement to state and local government for each child taken into foster care is approximately $6000/month. Yet the foster care provider (the foster parent) receives only somewhere around $600/month. Allowing about the same for administrative costs, each child in foster care is worth about $5000/month; that’s pure profit on the bottom line! Source: original source did not link, so this shows what Van Doorn said
End 1st installment
Pick up a copy of all my works here: By Peter Weiss
This is presented here in three parts due to its length. But you can see the full article all at once in its entirety with pictures and links to the videos here:
entire story as it appears on Medical Kidnap
third and final installment of full article:
Foster Care Children and Sexual Abuse, Sex Trafficking
In the report The Corrupt Business of Child Protective Services, the late Georgia Senator Nancy Schaefer argued:
The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect in 1998 reported that six times as many children died in foster care than in the general public and that once removed to official ‘safety,’ these children are far more likely to suffer abuse, including sexual molestation than in the general population. Source.
In a 2013 USA Today article titled Protect foster children from sex trafficking, Conna Craig reports:
Recent sting operations revealed that more than half of the children being traded for sex come from foster care. The same children identified by our courts as most in need of protection from abuse and neglect are being bought and sold everywhere from truck stops and cheap motels to wealthy suburbs. They are being used, reused, and then discarded like trash.
What makes it all the more appalling is that, in the vast majority of cases, no one even looks for these children when they go missing from the system.
‘Research shows that most victims of child sex trafficking come straight from the foster care system. This is totally unacceptable,’ said Rep. Dave Reichert, R-Wash.
Reichert is absolutely correct. In order to keep the promise we, as a civilized society, have made to our most vulnerable children, we must mandate concrete, actionable steps. To begin with, let’s look at what we know: state governments admitted they could not locate 4,973 foster children at the end of fiscal year 2012. Almost unbelievably, this is one of the numbers (“Status=Runaway”) that states provide to secure federal funding.
These are real numbers, representing real children. Is anyone looking for them? Source.
Mariel Frankel, 15-year board member of Adopt-a-Family just released a film, Foster Shock, after witnessing Florida’s foster care failures as a Guardian Ad Litem. Frankel exposes how the system is more concerned with making a profit from abused and neglected children than caring for them.
Frankel says that the 2.9 billion dollar budget for child welfare in Florida is funneled into “local private, for-profit entities, whose executives often earn large salaries while warehousing children,” and yet the foster children “aren’t getting their basic needs met.” The story is told by several former foster children, now adults, who tell their stories of sexual abuse and neglect, and of not having enough to eat. Source
Foster Care has Failed Children
The system is so corrupt and beyond reform, we need to abolish it.
I have witnessed such injustice and harm brought to these families that I am not sure if I even believe reform of the system is possible! The system cannot be trusted. It does not serve the people. It obliterates families and children simply because it has the power to do so. Children deserve better. Families deserve better. It’s time to pull back the curtain and set our children and families free. – the late Senator Nancy Schaefer. Source.
The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, advocates of Family Preservation, wrote some suggestions for DOING CHILD WELFARE RIGHT: Successful alternatives to taking children from their families, from “doing nothing” in cases where an “investigated family is entirely innocent and perfectly capable of taking good care of their children without any ‘help’ from a child welfare agency,” to offering real “basic concrete help” like rent subsidies or daycare assistance for families who are struggling, keeping them together, rather than tearing them apart due to housing issues or lack of supervision. Source.
Brian Shilhavy, editor of Health Impact News/MedicalKidnap.com, firmly believes:
All federal funding for foster care and adoption should immediately be abolished. Let local law enforcement arrest and prosecute criminal parents the same as any other suspected criminal, rather than incarcerating the alleged victims by kidnapping them. Criminal parents are the ones who should be removed from homes, not innocent children.
Without the more than $20 billion in federal funding used for trafficking children, far fewer children will be taken from their homes. In cases where parents are removed with due process of law, the incentives in local communities would be to place the children with relatives, rather than the State. For the very few remaining children who have had their parents incarcerated and have no relatives, local communities can develop their own programs without federal funding, which would include adoption to parents who can afford to take care of children without the aid of federal funds.
It is time the American tax payer stops funding the U.S. child trafficking business, which is nothing more than a modern-day form of slavery.
(end of article)
Once again, the source for this story which is completely presented here but in installments is Medical Kidnap.
Pick up a copy of all my works here: By Peter Weiss
This is presented here in three parts due to its length. But you can see the full article all at once in its entirety with pictures and links to the videos here:
entire story as it appears on Medical Kidnap
second installment of full story:
Studies Show Children are Worse Off in Foster Care
The evidence continues to shine the light on the grim outcomes of foster care.
In 2007 Joseph Doyle, an economics professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, published a study which tracked at least 15,000 kids from 1990 to 2002. It was the largest study of its kind at that time.
USA Today ran a story on the report – Study: Troubled homes better than foster care. Here are some excerpts:
Children whose families are investigated for abuse or neglect are likely to do better in life if they stay with their families than if they go into foster care, according to a pioneering study. Kids who stayed with their families were less likely to become juvenile delinquents or teen mothers and more likely to hold jobs as young adults.
Doyle’s study…. provides ‘the first viable, empirical evidence’ of the benefits of keeping kids with their families, says Gary Stangler, executive director of the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative, a foundation for foster teens. Stangler says it looked at kids over a longer period of time than had other studies. ‘It confirms what experience and observation tell us: kids who can remain in their homes do better than in foster care,’ says Stangler. read the full study here
USA Today highlights some of Doyle’s findings:
Children who stay in troubled families fare better than those put into foster care. Those who:
Were arrested at least once:
• Stayed with family: 14%
• Went to foster care: 44%
Became teen mothers:
• Stayed with family: 33%
• Went to foster care: 56%
Held a job at least 3 months:
• Stayed with family: 33%
• Went to foster care: 20%
Joseph Doyle did another study, one year later in 2008, comparing children left in troubled homes with foster care children to see which group was more likely to be arrested as adults. The study looked at 23,000 children, and it found that “children placed in foster care have arrest, conviction, and imprisonment rates as adults that are three times higher than those of children who remained at home.” Read the full study here.
Image – Foster Care Prison stats infographic by Adrian Moore. Source.
In another article, National Coalition for Child Protection Reform (NCCPR) shares some case histories of children who were abused in child care, proclaiming:
But in the name of ‘child protection’ children have been beaten. In the name of ‘children’s rights’ children have been raped. And in the name of ‘erring on the side of the child,’ children have been murdered. These are the stories of some of those children. Source
The Truth About Foster Care. Source
The short video below asks whether foster care is a form of neglect, saying:
“When you think about foster homes, usually you think of them as nice places, families helping out children and providing them a safe and comforting home. However, that’s not always the case. More often than you think, children are being abused in these homes.”
Toxic Stress and Drugging Children for Profit
Toxic stress response can occur when a child experiences strong, frequent, and/or prolonged adversity—such as physical or emotional abuse, chronic neglect, caregiver substance abuse or mental illness, exposure to violence, and/or the accumulated burdens of family economic hardship—without adequate adult support. This kind of prolonged activation of the stress response systems can disrupt the development of brain architecture and other organ systems, and increase the risk for stress-related disease and cognitive impairment, well into the adult years. Source.
In the article, Family Preservation is Safer Than Foster Care, the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform (NCCPR), declares:
The failings of America’s child welfare system can be summed up by the very rationalization often used to justify the way it works today, an approach that can be boiled down to ‘take the child and run.’ You’ve probably heard it many times: Sure adults may suffer when their children are needlessly taken away, but, it is claimed, we have to ‘err on the side of the child.’ In fact, there probably is no phrase in the child welfare lexicon that has done more harm to children than ‘err on the side of the child.’
When a child is needlessly thrown into foster care, he loses not only mom and dad but often brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents, teachers, friends and classmates. For a young enough child it can be an experience akin to a kidnapping. Other children feel they must have done something terribly wrong and now they are being punished.
One major study of foster care ‘alumni’ found they had twice the rate of post-traumatic stress disorder of Gulf War veterans and only 20 percent could be said to be ‘doing well.’
How can throwing children into a system which churns out walking wounded four times out of five be ‘erring on the side of the child’? source
There is a financial benefit for the state to label children as “special needs” and “prescribe” them drugs. Katie Rucke reports in America’s Foster Care System: Test Lab for Big Pharma, Cash Cow for Caretakers?
Of the more than 400,000 children in the U.S. foster care system, it’s estimated that more than 50 percent are on some sort of psychiatric drug.
Money is part of the reason. Foster parents are paid more to take care of a child with mental health issues.
On average, a foster family earns about $17 a day for taking in a child who needs a basic level of care. But a child who is taking drugs such as antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, anxiety medications or anticonvulsant medications is worth around $1,000 a day.
And foster parents are not responsible for paying for the medicines, either, as they are covered by Social Security.
Many child and human rights advocates are concerned about the dramatic number of children who are classified as ‘special needs’ after entering the foster care system. One reason doctors, psychiatrists and therapists may not be speaking out against the unnecessary drugging of these children is because those who prescribe the drugs often benefit financially, receiving big payouts from pharmaceutical companies. Source.
Nehemiah Flynt, a former foster parent, adds:
They have an agenda to medicate as many children as they can, to label them with mental health disorders, and to stop anyone who stands in their way – at any cost. Source.
The Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) offers a search engine to check the side effects of drugs available here.
And how many children in foster care are being used in drug trials and experimentation? Without parents in the way, the state has access to unlimited “guinea pigs” and with no accountability.
Gloria Wright, from Ablechild.org, comments:
As a grandparent and a member and officer of Ablechild, a 501(C) 3 organization, I wish to bring to your attention our cry for the protection of human rights of foster children across America!
Our organization frequently hears from parents across the nation who implore us for assistance in the matter of the clinical trial/experimental drugging of their children while in state custody and in foster care. These children have been placed on clinical trial drugs without a legal advocate responsible for safeguarding their health, or their life. As minors these children are unable to opt out of these tests/experiments, the parents have been denied their right to dissent and there obviously are no procedures in place to safeguard the rights of the children. Source.
(end of second installment–final installment to follow tomorrow)
Once again, the source for this story which is completely presented here but in installments is Medical Kidnap.
Pick up a copy of all my works here: By Peter Weiss
This is presented here in three parts due to its length. But you can see the full article all at once in its entirety with pictures and links to the videos here:
entire story as it appears on Medical Kidnap
first installment of full story:
Foster Care: “Best Interest of the Child” or “Child Abuse”?
Theoretically, foster care provides a temporary loving, nurturing and safe home for children who are removed from their own families due to heinous neglect or abuse. This theory helps those involved in the system sleep good at night and feel like heroes.
Molly McGrath Tierney, the former Director of the Baltimore City Department of Social Services, gave one of the most insightful TEDx talks about the problems with the “Foster Care Industry” – an industry where children become a commodity that profits doctors, lawyers, judges, social workers, advocates, and other organizations, an industry that can only exist by taking other people’s children, an industry that damages the very children it purports to be helping. She goes on to explain the trauma inflicted on children by the foster care industry, saying:
we’re digging a wound so deep, I don’t believe we have a way of measuring it. This dismantling of families – it has enormous consequences. Kids that grow up outside of families – they don’t master the things that can only be learned in that context, like who to trust, how to love, and how to take care of yourself, and that frankly does more damage than the abuse and neglect that brought the kid to my attention in the first place.
Currently there are over 415,000 children in foster care in the U.S. today, according to the 2014 Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS).
What if you accepted that foster care was not a decision made “in the best interest of the child” but rather a financial decision made in the best interest of the state? What if you realized that the majority (75%) of children being removed from their home and placed into foster care was not due to imminent danger of abuse, but rather due to poverty, and are now being abused by the foster care system?
What if you acknowledged that many of the foster homes these children are being placed into are worse than the one from which they are removed? What if you learned about some of the stories of children who were abused in foster care, children who suffered emotional trauma from being “kidnapped” from their home, forced to take psychotropic drugs for the resulting emotional traumas they endured, physically, emotionally and sexually abused, or even used in sex-trafficking rings?
What would you do with this information?
Poverty Creates a Commodity of Children
Seventy-five percent of children being removed from their homes is due to “neglect.” But are children really being neglected, or is it the “opinions” of social workers that these children were being deprived intentionally of necessities of “adequate” food, clothing, shelter, medical care, or supervision, when in fact, the family was just poor?
The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform (NCCPR), writes in Who is in “The System” – and Why
Out of every 100 children investigated as possible victims of abuse, three are ‘substantiated’ victims of all forms of physical abuse, from the most minor to the most severe, about two more are victims of sexual abuse. Many of the rest are false allegations or cases in which a family’s poverty has been confused with neglect. Source.
Regarding poverty as a reason for child placements, Mary Callahan, former foster parent and author of Memoirs of a Baby Stealer: Lessons I’ve Learned as a Foster Mother, said in a recent article, Poverty’s Link to Foster Care Removals? It’s in The Eyes Of The Workers:
I didn’t get it. I started asking the workers why they were removed over things so minor.
One worker said, ‘There’s a difference between them and us,’ as if that explained anything. Another said, ‘Don’t worry about it. Those parents are the dregs of humanity.’ As I started meeting the parents, I actually liked most of them. I didn’t find them to be the dregs of humanity.
The biggest difference I found between them and me was that they were poor. So, it seemed to me, the children were taken because of poverty. Source.
Orphan Trains, the Forerunner to Foster Care
History repeats itself, especially if money can be made. Charles Loring Brace, founder of the New York Children’s Aid Society, conceived the “orphan trains” as a way to “salvage poor immigrant children,” moving them off the streets of the city and into “loving” homes in the country, sending them by trains to live with families who were complete strangers.
Modern-day foster care got its origins from the “orphan trains” of the mid-1800’s, the concept of moving “poor children” into “more worthy” homes. One of the main differences between the recipients of orphan train children and foster care today is that now these “loving foster families” get paid to take in these “poor children” by way of federal tax dollars.
Between 1854 and 1929, as many as 250,000 children from New York and other Eastern cities were sent by train to towns in Midwestern and western states, as well as Canada and Mexico. Families interested in the orphans showed up to look them over when they were placed on display in local train stations, and placements were frequently made with little or no investigation or oversight.
Reformers like Brace were determined to salvage the civic potential of poor immigrant children by placing them in culturally ‘worthy’ families while simultaneously reducing urban poverty and crime and supplying some of the workers that western development required. Source.
Although the children were supposed to be “treated as family members,” many of these children ended up as indentured servants. Some families could even pre-order children with certain traits. (Watch short video below.) You Tube Video: The Oprhan Trains
(end of first installment–second installment to follow tomorrow)
Once again, the source for this story which is completely presented here but in installments is Medical Kidnap.
Pick up a copy of all my works here: By Peter Weiss
A day in court costs a minimum of five hundred dollars and mostly more like a thousand dollars or more. CPS counts on that. CPS counts on most parents of the kids they steal not having any money at all, having to rely on a public defender who even if really interested in the case is so overloaded and overworked that they can’t possibly give it the attention it needs. CPS counts on not being challenged from either side, by the parents or by the court.
It was eight weeks later that we finally made it into court and by this time the damage had been done to my children. I would not know what damage until later because CPS restricted the few visits that we had. Someone was there all the time and they monitored what was said. I wasn’t allowed to ask about the foster homes and what went on there. Our touching, hugging and any sort of parental intimacy was not allowed. I was told to bring them the snacks they liked, which of course I did. But it was clear that my kids were not hungry, were not happy, were dispirited and becoming more and more despondent. I could feel that I was losing them, and this was precisely what CPS wanted.
When my little daughter cried, even though they had someone there watching us, I was not allowed to hold her to comfort her. They stepped in between at every turn, and I know now that this was all by design. It is what they do when they want kids and think they can get them.
My boy was simply bewildered. He sat quietly next to me on one side. My daughter sat on the other side, on the floor. They gave her toys to play with and told me I should have brought their favorite toys. When I told them they didn’t tell me that, that I brought snacks because they said I should, they told me I should know better and any good mother would know to bring things to please their children.
My boy was withdrawing completely. I would later find out that he was in a group home where the unimaginable was occurring on a daily basis. Yes, the unimaginable. More on that later.
So I only had a couple of visits. I was supposed to have them every week, but they didn’t get them started for three more weeks, this despite what the judge had ordered. One week the kids were unavailable, whatever that meant. They notified me about twenty minutes before I was leaving. As it was I had taken the day off work to do the visit. They knew that too. They knew I didn’t have much money, that I made just too much to qualify for a public defender.
They knew the game: keep switching everything up, beating my head up by telling me I was horrible mother, keep costing me days off so maybe I’d lose my job. They pushed every button they could push hoping to make me freak out, act out or crack.
And they were doing a good job of it too.
Every time I called my lawyer to ask a question, I was billed partial hours’ time, so a phone call of 15 minutes would cost me 75 dollars. Imagine that!
No surprise then that by the third time we were in court, now fourteen weeks later, yes, my children had been in CPS custody more that 3 months and I’d only seen them a couple of times, my retainer was almost all used up and my lawyer was asking for more money. They did a quick postponement at 6 weeks—my lawyer and I showed up only to find out that the CPS people had been called on emergency. So in effect that third time in court was the fourth day I was paying for.
I’m sure their emergency was for stealing more kids. But maybe it was just to cost me money.
Pick up a copy of all my published works here: By Peter Weiss
by Andrew Keiper, Perry Chiaramonte
Fox News
Read the full article at Fox News.
Excerpts:
The United States is again ranked as one of the worst countries in the world for human trafficking. According to a recently released report by the State Department, the top three nations of origin for victims of human trafficking in 2018 were the United States, Mexico and the Philippines.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered the Trafficking in Persons report, which is created annually by the State Department to document human trafficking in the year prior, and highlighted the growing focus that government agencies and nonprofit organizations have dedicated to stopping human trafficking.
The Department of Justice provided more than $31 million for 45 victim service providers that offered services to trafficking survivors across the country. It was a demonstrable increase; the DOJ only provided $16 million to 18 organizations in 2017, according to the report.
Over the last two months, Fox News has investigated human trafficking.
If there’s one takeaway from our reporting, it’s that the industry is fueled by an unceasing demand.
“We have a major issue here in the United States” Geoff Rogers, co-founder of the United States Institute Against Human Trafficking (USIAHT), said in an interview with Fox News. “The United States is the No. 1 consumer of sex worldwide. So we are driving the demand as a society.”
“We’re also driving the demand with our own people, with our own kids,” Rogers said. “So there are tremendous numbers of kids, a multitude of kids that are being sold as sex slaves today in America. These are American kids, American-born, 50 percent to 60 percent of them coming out of the foster care industry.”
This assertion is confirmed by the State Department’s report, which found that children in foster care, homeless youth, undocumented immigrant children and those with substance abuse problems were especially at risk to fall into the human trafficking trap.
Rogers says that because the demand is so great in the U.S., traffickers are filling that demand with an increased supply of forced sex workers.
“So the demand here in the United States is a global one,” he said. “We do have men traveling the globe to go to places like Thailand and other places in East Asia to purchase sex with kids. But, in fact, the demand is so great that the supply has needed to be filled here in the United States.”
“Because of the demand, then these traffickers are filling that demand with supply. And the demand is so great here in the United States that they’re filling the supply with our very own kids,” Rogers continued.
According to a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report, over 300,000 of America’s young population is considered at risk for sexual exploitation. It’s also estimated that 199,000 incidents occur within the U.S. each year.
Pick up a copy of all my works here: By Peter Weiss
presented here in 2 installments. Link to complete story with pictures and refernces here
We The People
by Allie Parker
Health Impact News
2nd installment
The amount of false allegations of abuse made by child abuse pediatricians is becoming, if not already, an epidemic. This epidemic, in conjunction with the blatant disregard for the Constitutional rights these families and individuals have as citizens of this country, is showing to be a recipe for injustice.
All across the country many judges are overturning Shaken Baby Syndrome convictions, for example, if only one expert witness testified on behalf of the prosecution, such as a Child Abuse Specialist, and the defense had no special witness to present medical evidence to show other reasons why a child may exhibit signs that could be interpreted as abuse, but could be other medical conditions, such as brittle bones with infantile rickets.
The Innocence Project is currently accepting cases in all 50 states where parents or caregivers have been wrongly convicted of child abuse based simply on the testimony of a single doctor, and in most of these cases they are being overturned.
This injustice towards parents is now stemming into the media. When a judge orders public forums such as MedicalKidnap.com to take down a story, they are violating the 1st Amendment.
As servants of the court and government employees, judges, prosecutors and social workers are all public servants, which make them open to any criticism, public or private, according to the 1st amendment of the US Constitution.
This also applies to the child abuse pediatricians. As physicians employed by non-profit hospitals working together with Child Protection Services and local law enforcement are also public servants.
The simple fact these physicians are working hand in hand with child protection departments and law enforcement, which includes receiving funding through contracts from these departments, makes them and the departments funding them open to any and all public criticism according to our First Amendment.
Citizens also have a 1st Amendment right to express their concerns about public employees at a meeting that is otherwise open for public comment. In Moore v. City of Creedmoor, 345 N.C. 356 (1997), the North Carolina Supreme Court recognized a potential claim for a violation of First Amendment rights when the town board refused to allow a citizen to criticize the police chief.
The court held:
[Citizens] have a right to assert a public complaint concerning the negligence of public officials and to petition the government for redress of grievances…The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment guarantees the right to criticize police officers…It should also be noted that once the government has opened a forum-such as a public meeting-to allow direct citizen involvement, it may not discriminate between speakers based upon the content of their speech. [5]
Whether it is an open forum opened by the government or social media, citizens have the right to criticize these public servants, whether they are doctors, social workers, judges, prosecutors, etc.
Not only should victims criticize the negligence by the physicians, they should also point out any and all violations to their Constitutional rights by the courts. Whether it is the prosecutor or the judge.
It is “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
We are “The People.” The people who established, and are protected by, our Constitution.
Why are so many children being legally kidnapped from families on a daily basis due to one public servant’s opinion?
It is time “The People” rise up, assert the First Amendment to the Constitution, and speak out against the negligence of the physicians who put these cases in motion, and continue to assert your right to speak out against the prosecutors, judges, and departments that further violate these rights which were set forth to protect citizens from this very thing.
“When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” – Thomas Jefferson
References:
- United States Senate, https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/ConstitutionDay.htm
- St. Lukes, https://www.stlukesonline.org/about-st-lukes
- National Children’s Alliance, Annual Report 2018 (pg. 19)
- State of Idaho Judicial Branch Supreme Court, Rule 115, https://isc.idaho.gov/irflp115
- “Criticizing Public Employees in Public”, F. Bluestein (2013)
Pick up a copy of all my works here: By Peter Weiss
presented here in 2 installments. Link to complete story with pictures and refernces here
Comments by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News
Recently, a judge in Boise, Idaho allegedly ordered a mother in court to have MedicalKidnap.com take down a picture of a Child Abuse Specialist, Dr. Amy Barton, from one of our articles, because publishing her image allegedly is “not acceptable” and violates her clinic’s policies.
The clinic is St. Luke’s Children’s Hospital CARES (Child At Risk Evaluation Services) in Boise, Idaho.
Maybe Judge Courtnie Tucker is not aware that St. Luke’s Children’s Hospital CARES belongs to the National Children’s Alliance, which in 2019 will administer a total of $10,271,000.00 in federal funds under a cooperative agreement with U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, as reporter Allie Parker will explain below.
Because if Judge Tucker is aware of this, then she should certainly understand the First Amendment of the Constitution protects Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press to publish and criticize any public servant, meaning anyone receiving public funds.
Child Abuse Pediatricians are not regular doctors. They are not hired by parents, but work together with Child Welfare programs all across the country looking for child abuse, and as such operate more like law enforcement than they do like doctors.
Therefore, if you are being accused of any wrong-doing by a Child Abuse Specialist doctor, you are free to publish criticisms of them, and if any judge tells you otherwise, the judge is on the wrong side of the law.
And this holds true for any other “public servant,” such as law enforcement, social workers, judges, and anyone else working for an entity receiving public funding.
We The People
by Allie Parker
Health Impact News
Civil rights are often violated by physicians and hospitals when accusing a family or individual of child physical or medical abuse. Prosecutors and even some judges are raising the bar by violating the US Constitution’s First Amendment.
It is becoming common knowledge that child abuse pediatricians and child protection services intimidate families and individuals. This intimidation has now entered the courts, which is a place where citizens are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, have the right to due process, and the right to a fair and speedy trial.
Unfortunately, a recent case in Idaho, clearly shows a Judge, Judge Courtnie Tucker and Prosecutor Shari Dodge, are violating the First Amendment rights of a mother and son. They are also going so far as to violate the First Amendment right of the press.
The US Constitution was made effective in 1789, and starts with “We the People.” According to the US Senate, this affirms that the government and the United States exist for its citizens. [1]
The First Amendment to the Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
However, in Idaho, Prosecutor Shari Dodge made complaints to Judge Courtnie Tucker about a Facebook page supporting a mother who is allegedly, falsely accused of medical child abuse, claiming the case involves a child (16 years old), and is “possibly” violating the Idaho Child Protection Act.
The Prosecutor also motioned for the interview, done by St. Luke’s Children At Risk Evaluation Services (CARES), which was posted by the family, be taken down, arguing the department doesn’t make those interviews public and is concerned about how it is being used.
St. Luke’s (CARES) boasts they are the only Idaho-based not-for-profit health system. [2]
It is also part of the National Children’s Alliance, which in 2019 will administer a total of $10,271,000.00 in federal funds under a cooperative agreement with U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. [3]
Judge Tucker agreed with Prosecutor Dodge, and ordered the mother to take down the interview, as well as any articles covering the case, which include those published by MedicalKidnap.com, further violating not only the mother’s First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, but also MedicalKidnap’s right to freedom of press.
Not to mention, MedicalKidnap.com, and the articles it publishes, are completely out of the mother’s control.
Furthermore, according to Idaho Rules of Family Law, procedure rule 115, “all trials upon the merits shall be conducted in open court and so far as convenient in a regular courtroom.”
The rule continues with “All trials or hearings of any court held before a judge or magistrate assigned thereto, and all judgments and orders issued by such courts shall be deemed to have been done in open court, regardless of the place held.” [4]
On July 16, 2019, Judge Tucker seems to have violated rule 115 of the Idaho Supreme Court Family Law, and violated the US Constitution’s 1st Amendment rights of both the family and the press.
A crowd gathered at the courthouse in support of the family, which included Eric Parker, President of the Real 3%ers of Idaho, who raised the question to the judge asking if a State legislator, also present in support, could stay to witness the proceedings.
A bailiff immediately prevented him from recording, and took away his phone.
The judge ordered everyone out of the court room, and those suspected of recording were taken behind closed doors and made to erase any videos.
See:
Idaho Judge in 16-Year-Old Medical Kidnap Case Orders Video and Picture of Doctor Removed from MedicalKidnap.com as Cell Phones of Supporters are Confiscated
to be continued tomorrow
Pick up a copy of all my works here: By Peter Weiss
based upon a true story
You know, they put it all on me. CPS! I have a few wonderful words for them. Not!
You would think they would listen to what the judge said. You would think that they would hasten visits with my children so that we could be together sometimes, regularly, while they were away. You would think that they would want this, you would think that they would want the truth somewhere somehow.
But they were not interested in any of that. They were not interested in my having visitation with my kids. They were not interested in what the truth was. They had, from their standpoint, two very adoptable kids, and with all my heart and soul I believe that they were planning to cut me entirely out of the picture so that they could adopt out my kids and make a fortune on them.
Later I would go on to read all about the problems with CPS. I would go on to begin to study all the cases where they did to others exactly what they did to me. In fact, while I was going through what I was going through and stuck in what I was stuck in, I was crying every day and paying a fortune to a lawyer who in effect could not really do very much for me. So I couldn’t really see what was going on. As the proverb goes, I couldn’t see the forest for the trees.
About the best thing the lawyer actually did do for me was stop me from being so much of a lunatic mother that I lost my kids permanently. In the end, his greatest function was tempering me, was convincing me that if I didn’t play the game the way they wanted me to play the game I would lose my children forever.
He told me a story about how on the thirty-first of the month, a CPS worker went to a home to see a child who was in their system but had never been removed from the home. This meant that CPS had their eye on the child. In terms of what I know now, this meant that they were biding their time and waiting until the mother screwed up in such a way that they could effect a kidnapping.
So they get to the house and the kid isn’t there. They go through the house, two CPS workers, two people who were supposed to be on the side of the parent, especially this parent who was never accused of anything, who had never done anything, whose only issue was that she was a poor single mother. They go through every bit of the house as if they own it. The house is clean and well-kept. The only thing they find that they object to is that there’s not enough food, and there’s no milk in the refrigerator. They make a big deal of telling the mother this, and the mother, very innocently, tells them that she gave the last of her money to the kids who went out to buy milk.
So they plop their butts down on the sofa and wait for the kid to return. In the meantime they lambaste the mother, who was smoking a cigarette, for having money for cigarettes but not enough money for milk.
“But I sent the kids out.”
“That’s another thing, why would you send them out alone?”
“Jesus, the boy is fourteen years old. It’s not as if he’s a baby.”
Long story short, the boy, on an IEP for being ADHD, got distracted. Bought himself a nice new pen for school and forgot all about the milk. Right then, when they got home they took them away for — neglect.
The story was meant to tell me that CPS held all the cards and I should quietly, properly, appropriately, do what they said I had to do until we could get into court and prove our case.
Pick up a copy of all my published works here: By Peter Weiss
based upon a true story
Neglect my foot!
All my life I’ve done nothing but love and cherish my kids. I made all the sensible and reasonable decisions about vaccinations and preventive medical care. They went to the doctor and dentist regularly for checkups and any and every time they were sick. My kids never knew hunger, being left alone, not being cared for. They weren’t raised by a TV. I was never drunk or on drugs. I didn’t yell at them and certainly never hit them. They had toys and clothes, and my boy, who accidentally got hit in the eye with baseball bouncing off the bounce-back screen, was in Boy Scouts and Little League. The Scout Masters knew me. The Little League coaches knew me.
So what the hell?
A whole month went by. CPS never contacted me about visitation. I called them more than twenty times and could prove it with my phone records. But at that first real hearing they just outright lied. They said they called me repeatedly to accomplish visitation but I never answered my phone. My lawyer stated that this was not true, that in fact CPS never contacted me to set up the visitation. He asked the court to request the phone records, but the judge declined to do this. When my lawyer went to show him my phone records, he refused to see them, said they weren’t necessary.
In effect, overall, CPS argued that I was a disinterested, angry and embittered mother, that I took no actions to find out how my children were, how they were doing or to even arrange to see them.
When my lawyer objected, when he attempted to present testimonials from our doctors, from our friends and my children’s friends’ parents, etc., the judge waived him off and said that there would be time for all that eventually.
My lawyer was too nice, I thought. I thought he should have taken all the paperwork we had collected and dumped it on his desk. I thought he should have asked CPS to present one single shred of evidence.
But when we discussed it later, my lawyer told me that would have been a gross mistake. He said they had evidence. They had the school reports, which we had not yet discovered were edited so as to not include what my son had told all the school personnel, each one individually, which was exactly how it happened. The reports also didn’t include my son’s friend’s statement which of course verified what my son said.
They also had the doctor’s report. Eventually my lawyer would look into this doctor and find that in all the time he worked for CPS—he didn’t work for them but was contracted by them—he had never once diagnosed something they didn’t want him to. In 100% of the initial examinations when they brought a child they’d taken to him, like with my son, he never once found anything other than abuse. Then, in 100% of these cases, when the child was in CPS care, he never once found anything other than that an accident had occurred or that the child was being excellently taken care of.
The doctor’s financial records would show he made more than 90% of his income from CPS.
The judge ordered my kids to stay in CPS custody, told CPS that at the next hearing, which would not be for another 6 weeks, he’d better see that I had been having regular visitations with my children. Then he told me through my lawyer that we’d be able to discuss how we wanted to proceed after he’d seen the reports and recommendations from CPS.
And that was it. Another six weeks before we could even discuss what would happen to my children.
