CALIFORNIA DEPENDENCY COURTS NEED TO BE OPEN LEGISLATORS TOLD

Nearly 60,000 California children are supervised by a county dependency court. But who's supervising those courts? Children's advocates and officials say accountability and transparency would be improved in cases involving child abuse, neglect and foster care placements.

Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles), who introduced the bill, said that based on the comments at the hearing, he would probably introduce a bill proposing a pilot program for open court proceedings.

"Ultimately, I believe it's in the best interest of children to have a court where the public can see both strengths and deficiencies in the system," Feuer said after the hearing. He cited Minnesota's move to open dependency courts, where, he said, no additional harm to children or their families was shown.

Edwards said the presumption that dependency court proceedings are secret leads to a closed atmosphere that does a disservice to the court and the families involved.

------------------------------------------ COMMENTS -----------------------------------------------------
In our present state, children are being taken from loving parents at will. In one horrendous case, two teen-age children were given to Commissioners Alan Friedenthal and Steff Padilla to adopt. There is huge controversie surrounding Commissioner Friedenthal's decisions in Family Court. It is awfully suspect that he was able to adopt children against the parent's wishes.

If dependancy court records were open, we may find out if certain lawyers such as Kenneth Sherman garnered favor in family law by assisting Friedenthal and Padilla in the aquisition of the two children.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for Los Angeles DCFS caseworkers, the allegations are “100 percent true.”

“I’ve witnessed DI-CSW Christina Lin (Torrance office) lie and withhold exculpatory evidence. I've seen her supervisor Minda Light cover up for her. I’ve witnessed Debra Ramirez manipulate people. It’s absolutely true that they are untrustworthy,” former DCFS employee Pendolphi said. “They intimidate and threaten parents. I’ve witnessed that first hand and I quit because I could not be the part of the corrupt system that destroys families.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This bill should be passed, it will solve much of the incompetence and dysfunction in the DCFS and court system. By allowing transparency in the children’s court system, due process and the rights of families can be restored without risking the lives of children. As it stands now, DCFS/Children’s court can take your children at their discretion without any accountability.

They do not follow any constitutional guidelines when investigating or handling cases and their agenda can be imposed on anyone, innocent or guilty of any crime. This amounts to cruel and unusual punishment in some cases, for accused parents and especially for the children that wind up being abused/further abused while in the system.

It makes DCFS and children's court accountable for their decisions and for their cases. What we have now is not working, we have empowered sometimes untrained immoral civilians with enforcement/investigation of criminal statutes and have given them powers that they are not equipped for and are not accountable for. If they are not held accountable, then the children’s court system, referees and judges cannot be held accountable either and it’s one giant corrupt and screwed up system.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Opening dependency courtsmay yield the biggest bang-for-the-buck of any child protection measure. Any solution to our current child safety crisis lies in expanding, not curtailing civil rights.

“In other words, those worthy of scrutiny could no longer hide behind confidentiality; and those who suffer false accusations silently could defend themselves with the public record.

SEN. NANCY SCHAEFER EXPOSES EVIL CPS

US Senator Nancy Schaefer was murdered several years after coming out against CPS, describing them as "Protected Empire Built on Taking Children and Separating Families"...Great, MUST SEE Video!

FEDERAL APPELS COURT FINDS DCFS TACTIC UNCONSTITUTIONAL

City: Sacramento, CA

As families gather for the holidays, a recent ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals offers hope to hundreds of thousands of parents haunted by the nightmare of unproven child abuse allegations.

For years, attorneys with Pacific Justice Institute have warned parents that, once CPS decides to investigate them for child abuse - sometimes based on anonymous tips from neighbors or vindictive ex-spouses - their names can end up on California's Child Abuse Central Index (CACI). Parents are listed on the CACI even when CPS eventually deems the charges "inconclusive" and closes its files. The CACI listing shows up on background checks for years to come and prevents parents from obtaining jobs or state licenses.

In Humphries v. County of Los Angeles, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sharply criticized the ease with which people are listed on the CACI and the obstacles which prevent their names from being removed. The court was also troubled by a study indicating that as many as half of the more than 800,000 individuals listed on the CACI "may have a legitimate basis for expungement." Calling the list "the reverse of the presumption of innocence in our criminal justice system," the court ordered the state to enact greater procedural safeguards.

PJI President Brad Dacus commented, "It is gratifying that the Ninth Circuit has acknowledged what we have been saying for years-that treating parents as criminals when they are never convicted of a crime is unjust. We call on the legislature to finally fix this broken system in a way that honors basic constitutional rights."

Karen Milam, who directs PJI's Southern California office, stated, "Every year, PJI is inundated with hundreds of calls from desperate parents who do not understand how they could be labeled as child abusers based solely on unproven suspicions. This ruling is an important step toward keeping CPS honest."

GEORGIA v. RANDOLPH

Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103(2006)is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that police without a search warrant could not constitutionally search a house in which one resident consents to the search while another resident objects The court distinguished the case from the "co-occupant consent rule" announced in United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974), which permitted one resident to consent in the co-occupant's absence. The case proved yet another battle in the ongoing contest between proponents of the "Originalist" and the "Living Constitution" philosophies on the Court (and within American jurisprudence).

Know Your Rights - You Do Not Have to Consent to a Search!

Police officers know the restrictions, and know that they are not allowed to search without probable cause. To get around this requirement, they will often ask for your consent. If a police officer asks for permission to search your car, your home, or your person - you generally have the right to say NO.

L.A. COUNTY DCFS OFICIAL FALSIFIED DEATH REPORTYS, TWO STAFFERS CLAIM!!!

The senior managers say they faced a hostile work environment after reporting the alleged wrongdoing to the department's director. County supervisors act to remove child-death investigator.

By Garrett Therolf, LATimes, September 9, 2010  

  

Los Angeles County's child welfare system, already under fire for failing to report dozens of child deaths tied to abuse or neglect, is facing allegations that an official intentionally falsified fatality reports.

   The existence of the civil allegations, filed in June by two senior managers and revealed this week after a public records request by The Times, comes to light as the Board of Supervisors acted to remove the county's independent child-death investigator, according to three sources familiar with the decision.

The existence of the civil allegations, filed in June by two senior managers and revealed this week after a public records request by The Times, comes to light as the Board of Supervisors acted to remove the county's independent child-death investigator, according to three sources familiar with the decision.   It was unclear who would replace Rosemarie Belda, who was appointed last year to the position after it had been vacant since 2006. The job, which reports directly to the supervisors, involves the politically sensitive task of reviewing child fatality cases in search of ways the county's case management errors might have contributed to the deaths.   

 The claim that some child fatality reports had been intentionally misleading was made by Cassandra Turner, a Department of Children and Family Services senior manager who said her superior "purposefully falsified at least three child fatality reports."   "These falsifications, which occurred in spite of my fervent protest, are clearly contrary to department policy," Turner wrote in a civil claim that seeks unspecified damages.    

Turner served as an administrator in the department's child fatality section at the time of the alleged falsifications. Her claim does not contain specifics about those cases. She also says in the claim that she reported the wrongdoing directly to department Director Trish Ploehn in April 2008.   

After her meeting with Ploehn, Turner said, the department failed to properly investigate the allegations and retaliated by assigning her to less-desirable duties. 
She listed Darlene McDade-White, the department's chief internal affairs investigator, as a witness to the alleged wrongdoing. McDade filed a claim jointly with Turner saying she too faced a hostile work environment and, like Turner, was subject to racial discrimination because the two women are African American.   Melvin Neal, Turner's and McDade-White's attorney, declined to offer further detail. If the county denies their claim, the two women will be free to pursue a lawsuit in court.  Asked about the allegations Wednesday, Ploehn issued a written statement: "These are serious claims and they are being taken seriously.  These claims are under investigation by the department, and our policy is not to comment on ongoing investigations." 

    
The allegations about falsifications were made more than two months before last week's revelations that the department had failed to comply with state disclosure laws. Those findings were contained in a report by Michael Gennaco, chief attorney for the county's Office of Independent Review, who found that in many cases department officials referenced deaths from abuse or neglect in confidential court filings but then left those cases off the child-death lists for public release.     

The lack of disclosure hid dozens of cases from public view, giving the false impression that far fewer children were dying of maltreatment under the department's watch. County officials have yet to establish a complete tally of improperly undisclosed records.     

The move to end the tenure of Belda, who had recommended at least 25 reform measures for Children and Family Services and the Department of Mental Health in her role as child-death investigator, was made behind closed doors at Tuesday's board meeting, according to the sources familiar with the situation.     

The previous child-death investigator was quietly dismissed in 2006 after investigating just two cases.      On Wednesday, all five supervisors — Michael D. Antonovich, Don Knabe, Gloria Molina, Mark Ridley-Thomas and Zev Yaroslavsky — refused to comment on Belda or the future of the position. A source familiar with the discussion said Yaroslavsky was the only person to speak in defense of Belda.     

garrett.therolf@latimes.com

Los Angeles DCFS Defies Law

August 31, 2010   

The state of California passed a law  requiring full disclosure of  case  files following a death in custody of the Department of Children and  Family  Services  (DCFS). After  a  few successful  applications  on  behalf  of    newspapers, DCFS has  taken to stonewalling  requests for information  about    child deaths.

They have little alternative.  Truthful disclosure would show  that the foster care system is  a killing field for children, losing  public    support and provoking  a backlash against  incumbent management.  The  child    protection system, which has  long ignored the  rights of parents and  the welfare of children is now defying the law  to conceal its wrongdoing  from  the politicians and  the public.  

Best estimates  are that US  foster  care  kills  over a  thousand children   annually.  Since the first Gulf War, that is over 20 thousand deaths, a  lot more than the number of soldiers memorialized in the photo.   

DEPENDANCY - WHAT TO DO WHEN YOUR CHILDREN ARE REMOVED BY DCFS?

One of the most traumatizing things that can happen to parents and children is to have their children removed by the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). Unfortunately, DCFS conducts interviews of parents and children without a right to counsel first. Thus, they often discover information that they can use to justify taking the children, information they would not have gotten if in the parent(s) had the right to speak with an attorney first, or have an attorney present when they were interviewed.

So what can you do? You can refuse to be interviewed or you can ask to have an attorney present when you are interviewed, either of which may not prevent DCFS from detaining the children. However, it will give them less information to plead as to why your children should be detained from you. You may also assert your 5th Amendment right to not reveal information that may incriminate you. Understand, statements you make to social workers are discoverable by District Attorneys and should your case involve criminal charges, everything you tell a social worker can be used against you in a criminal proceeding.

What you should do is immediately contact an attorney qualified to practice in Dependency Court and seek counsel as to your rights and legal options.

ADVISEMENT: The preceding is for informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as legal advice.