Advocating For Children And Families Rights

DSHS complaints hit ‘all-time high,’ ombudsman says

Rebecca Nappi
Staff writer
 
At a glance

The Office of Family and Children’s Ombudsman reviewed more than 150 child fatalities and near-fatalities in 2007 and 2008. A “fatality review” report is expected soon.

An investigation into the Colville Division of Children and Family Services is under way after Rep. Joel Kretz expressed concerns about practices there.

The 2007 and 2008 report is available at www.governor. wa.gov/ofco/reports.

Vulnerable children in Washington need to be placed in permanent, safe homes – preferably with caring relatives. And the quicker, the better.

That’s the main message in a 102-page report issued this week by Mary Meinig, director of the Office of Family and Children’s Ombudsman, an agency that investigates concerns about the Department of Social and Health Services.

Among the highlights in the 2007 and 2008 report:

The ombudsman’s office responded to more than 2,000 inquiries, received more than 1,200 complaints, and completed 521 complaint investigations in 2007 and 627 in 2008. This was “an all-time high,” according to the report, and “the Ombudsman found a higher percentage of agency violations in 2008 than in any previous year.”

The Division of Children and Family Services, which includes Child Protective Services, Child Welfare and Adoption Services and Family Reconciliation Services, received the most complaints. “The safety of children living at home or in substitute care, as well as issues involving the separation and unification of families, were by far the most frequently identified issues in complaints,” the report said.

One in eight investigations in 2007 and one in five investigations in 2008 resulted in an “adverse finding” in which the agency violated a law, policy or procedure or acted unreasonably. In some cases, no violations were found, but “harm to the child or family had occurred as a result of poor practice.”

One of the report’s main recommendations: Increase long-term placements of dependent children with competent relatives. The ombudsman continues to hear complaints from relatives who were never considered as possible permanent caregivers for an abused or neglected child. One grandparent discovered via a news report that her grandchild had been placed in foster care after the arrest of a parent. Relatives also complained of poor communication with DSHS.

In a prepared statement, DSHS responded: “It’s important to note that the Ombudsman’s office reports that it deems nearly two-thirds of the complaints it receives unfounded. We will review the report and recommendations and will be working with the Ombudsman and her staff to find ways to better protect children in this state from abuse and neglect by their adult caretakers and bring permanence to their lives.”

Reach Rebecca Nappi at rebeccan@spokesman.com or (509) 459-5496.

Washington: Democrat Gregoire didn't do enough to help CPS victims, activist says

People, please look into the candidates' records and ask them in town hall meetings or in letters what their position is on child protective services. Confront the candidates and let them know this is a real issue worthy of comment, of great interest to their constituents. You can follow up by exposing their positions on this issue in letters to the editors of news organizations in their districts or states. This is very important in the fight against CPS! --LJM

Democrat Christine Gregoire 
 

Gregoire caught flak in her Seattle appearance before the Metropolitan Democratic Club, which is keenly interested in tax reform. Activist Dave Wood bluntly asked Gregoire why she failed even to mention tax reform in her five-minute speech, and she replied that she's unwilling to talk about tax reform until the state's economy is back up and humming. 

Wood, who also thinks Gregoire hasn't done enough as attorney general to look into the alleged mistreatment of families by the state's Child Protective Services, later gave a blistering critique of the candidate: "She expects to get elected governor because she's personable and charming. ... She acts like she is running for cheerleader at a local high school. That doesn't impress me."

Investigators: Grandparents passed over in favor of foster care


03:08 PM PST on Thursday, December 11, 2008

By SUSANNAH FRAME / KING 5 News

Video: Grandparents passed over in favor of foster care
Larger screen E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip

ENUMCLAW, Wash. - From day one Doug and AnneMarie Stuth of Enumclaw adored the new baby in their home.

"It was a very exciting time. She was the center of our world," AnneMarie Stuth said.

But the Stuths aren't the baby girl’s parents; they're her grandparents. Their troubled teenage daughter had her at 16. Then she relied on her parents to help raise the baby.

"I was the first one to hold my granddaughter and I was the first one to kiss her,” Doug Stuth said. “So yeah, we have a tight bond."

When the baby was 9 months old, things unraveled. The teen mom moved out of her parents' home along with the baby. While living away from the Stuths, the baby lost weight. A doctor's appointment led to a call to Child Protective Services. The doctor reported the teenage mother let her child get dangerously thin.

“It’s like your whole world comes crashing down,” AnneMarie Stuth said.

Enumclaw police put the child in protective custody with the Stuths right away.

The grandparents raised the child for months and received glowing reports. One officer of the court wrote: "She's fortunate to have her grandparents as a safety net."

"Our granddaughter always came first,” Doug Stuth said.  “She’s a little baby. She needs someone to protect her and take care of her and that’s what we did.”

Reuniting the baby with her mother was the goal. Caseworkers placed the two in transitional housing for young moms. That didn't work. The teenager got kicked out of the programs and lost her daughter again.

KING

Later this month a judge is expected to rule on the fate of Doug and AnneMarie Stuth's grandchild, pictured here. She is now 3 years old.

This time instead of going back to grandma and grandpa, social workers put the baby in foster care. There was a court order saying the Stuths weren't a placement option. State workers and the child's court advocate had submitted negative reports about them to a judge, saying living with the grandparents wouldn't be good for the baby.

The Stuths were devastated. The child’s daycare providers gave them heartbreaking reports.

“(They tell me) that she cries for me," Doug Stuth said. “You have no idea (how hard it is)."

Why didn't the baby go back to the grandparents? Most people would think there must be something very wrong with them, such as reports of abuse or neglect. Perhaps they have criminal records, drug problems, or a history of unemployment? None of those things are true.

So we dug a little deeper. The King 5 Investigators looked at hundreds of documents written by people making decisions on the case.

A court-appointed advocate for the baby wrote the Stuths were selfish, hyper-critical, and were derailing their daughter's parenting efforts. One example cited over and over in legal papers: They gave the child a pacifier, or binky, which was against the young mom's wishes.

"You would not believe how many times that darn binky was brought up in court and in paperwork over the stupid binky!" AnneMarie Stuth said.

A social worker also wrote the grandparents refused to financially support their daughter. But we have copies of dozens of cancelled checks which show the Stuths were giving their daughter money.

They were also accused of being unwilling to drive the child for visits with the mom. But mileage reimbursement records show the state was paying the grandparents for driving hundreds of miles a month so the child could see her mother.

"I've never seen people so hell bent on destroying one family,” AnneMarie said.

Washington law is clear: If a child can't be with parents, relatives must be considered before foster care.

KING

Doug and AnneMarie Stuth were devastated when state workers put their grandchild in foster care. They wanted to care for their granddaughter themselves.

"The department (DSHS) is making greater efforts, absolutely," State Family and Children Ombudsman Mary Meinig said.

Meinig’s office investigates dozens of child custody complaints from relatives every year. She says DSHS is doing better at placing kids with relatives, but that state workers are not always following the law.

"When you have children who are not at risk and they are bonded to their relative, you want them there,” Meinig said. “You don't want them re-traumatized by removing from relatives."

The Stuths think they were flagged as trouble-makers because they complained, a lot, about what was happening. They even called their senator, Pam Roach, who rattled cages in Olympia over the case.

"I'm trying to right something that I think is wrong," Sen. Roach said. “I think it’s important that the state realize that it’s doing something very damaging to this little girl.”

Roach lobbied to get the Stuths visits with their granddaughter. They’d been told by the child’s court advocate there was a court order forbidding them to see her. But we’ve found there was no such court order. They should have been allowed to see her all along.

"It's heartbreaking why any state would want to step between a family tie like that and try to sever that bond," AnneMarie said.

A judge ordered there should be visits and last month KING 5 was there for one of them. The child, now 3 years old, lit up upon seeing her grandparents in the parking lot where the supervised visit was to take place.

"To see the excitement in her eyes and know how we feel inside,” AnneMarie said, “there's no way to put that into words."

DSHS officials couldn’t answer specific questions about the Stuths' situation because it’s part of an ongoing case. But speaking in general terms, Cheryl Stephani, who heads up all child welfare programs at DSHS, told us: “The first requirement is that any placement be in the best interest of the child.”

Stephani also says custody cases are never as simple as they appear.

"It's easy to sit back and say, oh, I know exactly how that should have gone,” Stephani said. “But when you're in the midst of it, there really are a lot of folks who have the best interests of the child at heart but there are a lot of different viewpoints."

One high ranking DSHS official thinks the case hasn’t been handled correctly. We've obtained an internal state e-mail where the administrator writes: “If we don't (place the child) with a relative there will be a lot of explaining to do."

Later this month a judge is expected to rule on the fate of the little girl. The young mother is fighting to get her back, and the grandparents support that goal. State social workers have pushed to have her adopted by the foster mother, saying the little girl is very bonded to her now.

During this turbulent year and a half, the Stuths have left their granddaughter's room untouched in their Enumclaw home. Her clothes, toys and blankets sit empty in a pretty pink room. It’s hard to go in, so they usually have the door closed.

"You look at different things and you remember, where you got it, where you were, how much she loved it," said AnneMarie. "It's a piece of your heart and life gone."

More: 

Investigators: Trial could lead to loss of grandchild forever

08:06 PM PST on Tuesday, January 6, 2009 

By SUSANNAH FRAME / KING 5 News

 

Video: Trial could lead to loss of grandchild forever
Larger screen E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip

SEATTLE -- The fate of a 3-year-old girl taken from her family and placed in foster care a year ago is about to be decided by the court system.

Last month, the KING 5 Investigators brought you the heartbreaking story of an Enumclaw toddler who was taken away from the only stable home she'd ever known and put in foster care.

AnneMarie Stuth of Enumclaw doesn't come into her granddaughter's empty room very often. Seeing her things is too painful.

“It’s a part of your heart and life gone,” said Stuth.

AnneMarie and her husband Doug helped raise their grandchild for the first two years of her life. Their daughter had the baby at 16 and needed their help.

“She was the center of our world," said AnneMarie.

The teen mom and her baby moved away from the Stuths when the child was 9 months old. Moving out didn't go well: A doctor found the teenager let the baby get dangerously thin.

KING

A judge is expected to rule on the fate of Doug and AnneMarie Stuth's grandchild, pictured here. She is now 3 years old.

Child Protective Services was called in and placed the child with the grandparents. They were seen as model caregivers: They didn’t have criminal histories, they both had good jobs and they rearranged their entire schedules so the baby didn’t have to be in daycare full-time.

A court appointed child advocate wrote several glowing reports about the job the grandparents were doing. He wrote, “(the baby) continues to thrive in the home", and "she's fortunate to have her grandparents as a safety net."

"We'd do anything for her," said Doug. “Our granddaughter always came first.  She’s a little baby. She needs someone to protect her and take care of her and that’s what we did.”

But when the baby was two, the Stuths fell out of favor with the system.

The child's court advocate and state workers told the court the grandparents were selfish, hyper-critical, and undermined their own daughter's parenting.

The judge ordered they were no longer a placement option for the child.

The baby went into foster care.

The Stuths were devastated. They got reports that the little girl was distraught at daycare.

"She cries for me," said Doug. “You have no idea (how hard it is)."

The Stuths attended a trial Tuesday in juvenile court in Seattle. The state is trying to terminate the young mother’s parental rights. Through a witness, the assistant attorney general said the teenager wasn’t mature enough or motivated enough to care for her daughter.

If her parental rights are terminated, the Stuths may never see their granddaughter again because the state wants the foster parent -- a single mom -- to adopt the child.

"It's impossible to put into words to explain to anybody that your family member, your granddaughter who you've raised since an infant could just be gone from your life in an instant," said AnneMarie.

The Department of Social and Health Services wouldn't answer our questions about the case, but a top official who’s quit the job since our interview defended the department’s actions.

"The first requirement is that any placement be in the best interest of the child and we are to look to relatives for that and we do,” said Cheryl Stephani, former Director of the Children’s Administration of DSHS. “But we can't forget that we always need to be looking at the best interest of the child."

Court records show the child is bonded with her grandparents. She makes cards and pictures for them all the time. And at a scheduled visit with her grandparents last October, the toddler’s face lit up with excitement when she spotted her grandma and grandpa.

"To see the excitement in her eyes and know how we feel inside, there's no way to put that into words," said AnneMarie.

State law is clear that if a child can't live with parents, relatives must be considered first before foster care. But in this case, the state is so committed to having the child adopted by the foster parent that they tried to seal the deal before trial.

A few weeks ago, an assistant attorney general sent a settlement offer to the young biological mom. It stated if she voluntarily gave up her parental rights and allowed the foster mother to adopt the child, she and the grandparents could visit the little girl four times a year and get two pictures of her in the mail every year.

The biological mother would not agree to those conditions and instead is at the trial, fighting to keep her child.

The court proceeding continues Wednesday.

 

Investigators: Stunning ruling opens door for grandparents

To read why we did this story, read Susannah Frame's blog.

Comments 256| Recommend 120

6:36 PM PST on Wednesday, January 7, 2009

By SUSANNAH FRAME / KING 5 News

Video: Judge rules girl may return to grandparents
Larger screen E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip E-mail this clip

SEATTLE -- There was a stunning decision Wednesday in a King County courtroom involving a custody battle the KING 5 Investigators have been following for months.

A judge has ruled a little girl taken from her home and put in foster care may be headed back to her grandparents.

The KING 5 Investigators first started looking into the custody battle because we couldn't understand why seemingly loving, stable grandparents weren't given the chance to care for the granddaughter they'd help to raise. Instead, she was put into foster care.

Wednesday, a judge agreed the relatives should have been given more consideration.

It was a defining moment in court for Doug and AnneMarie Stuth, who have been fighting for nearly two years to get their granddaughter out of foster care and back into their home.

King County Superior Court Judge Ronald Kessler ruled it may happen after all -- a move which shocked everyone in the court. 

KING

A judge is expected to rule on the fate of Doug and AnneMarie Stuth's grandchild, pictured here. She is now 3 years old.

Doug Stuth was stunned, saying the ruling “couldn’t have been better."

The baby was taken from her mom--the Stuths’ teenage daughter, Lisa Lieberman-- as an infant.  She'd let the baby get dangerously thin.

The Stuths stepped in to raise the little girl, but they fell out of favor with social workers and a different judge who ruled the Stuths were too controlling and selfish to do the job.

The child went into foster care.

At Wednesday’s trial, the state was trying to terminate the teen mom's parental rights permanently. But, the judge ruled the Department of Social and Health Services and the earlier judge on the case hadn't properly followed state law.

“The department and the dependency court in attempt to get Ms. Lieberman on track to parent failed to adequately to consider the legal obligation to consider relative placement.  I understand the reason for it but I think it was in error,” said Kessler.

“I didn’t think that this was going to happen, that’s for sure,” said Lieberman, in tears. “So happy that it did.”

The judge said he was prepared to terminate the teenager's parental rights because the state proved their case. If he would have done that, it would have meant that neither she nor the grandparents would have ever seen the child again.

But because of this error--not adequately giving the grandparents a shot at keeping their grandchild--he's giving the Stuths one week to file papers requesting custody.

And there’s another surprising twist. DSHS apparently moved the toddler out of her foster home Tuesday and placed her in an emergency foster home. No reason was given for the removal.   

Investigators: Judge gives girl back to grandparents

 

12:44 PM PST on Saturday, January 10, 2009

By SUSANNAH FRAME / KING 5 News

Video: RAW: Enumclaw couple reunited with granddaughter
Larger screen E-mail this clip

SEATTLE -- After a two-year battle, an Enumclaw couple has been reunited with their granddaughter. A judge ruled the child is leaving foster care to be with family.

"Hi, my princess," said AnneMarie as she kissed and hugged her granddaughter Friday.

It's a stunning turn of events in a custody case that the KING 5 investigators have been following for months. The ruling to place the child back with family came after an emergency hearing was called Friday afternoon before Judge Ronald Kessler of King County Superior Court. Department of Social and Health Services officials ripped the child out of her foster home two days ago, after a complaint came into the Department about the foster mother.

Doug and AnneMarie Stuth hugged and cried when the judge made his ruling.  It was an unbelievable moment for the couple who has been at bitter odds with the state for months. But Friday, the state changed its tune by actually asking the judge that the toddler be placed with the grandparents.

"This is huge. We thought we'd lose her forever," said Doug Stuth.

The little girl was taken away from her mother, the Stuth’s teenage daughter, as an infant. The mother was seen unfit to take care of the baby.

The Stuths stepped in and raised the child for months. Favorable reports about the job they were doing were presented to the court many times. Then, they lost her to foster care.

State social workers and the prior judge thought the Stuths were too controlling of their teenage daughter and their overbearing ways hurt the young mom’s chances of learning how to be a parent herself.

This decision was made even though state law mandates that relatives must be considered first before foster care when a child can't live with the parents.

KING

AnneMarie and Doug Stuth are reunited with their granddaughter in Seattle on Friday, Jan. 9, 2009 after a judge ruled the child should live with relatives instead of foster care.

The KING 5 Investigators also found misinformation was presented to the court about the Stuths by a social worker and a court appointed child advocate, which helped lead to the separation. After fighting the system for nearly two years, this complete turnaround is unreal to them.

"It means a lot today to listen to those words," said AnneMarie.

"There’s no words for it," said Doug, holding his granddaughter in his arms. "We’re going home."

The grandparents still have to be approved by a court to keep the child permanently. As for the biological mother, who’s now 18 years old, she’s still the legal parent, but is supporting the move of her child back to her parents. Her defense attorney, Ruth Warner, said after court, "We’re delighted, vindicated, because this is part of what we’ve been working toward as an alternative. If the child could not be returned to the mother, my client wanted the child returned to the family – the grandparents. We’re thrilled."

DSHS just assigned new social workers to this case, who are obviously taking a different approach to it altogether. They tell us their goal is to keep the child with family, and out of foster care. They plan on providing several services to help make that happen. They even invited KING 5 cameras to their offices tonight to videotape the reunion. The supervisor said he made the decision because they saw this as a positive step in the child’s life after all she’s been through with several different placements.

Judge Kessler ruled the teenage mom can continue visiting her child, but he made it clear that for now, the grandparents are in charge.

Investigators: Grandparents closer to permanent custody

10:45 PM PST on Friday, February 27, 2009

 

By SUSANNAH FRAME / KING 5 News

 

Video: Grandparents closer to permanent custody
Larger screen E-mail this clip

ENUMCLAW, Wash. – A little girl bounced from home to home for three years is a step closer to having a stable life.

The KING 5 Investigators have followed the child's grandparents' fight to get their granddaughter back for months, and Friday a judge made a ruling that should keep the child out of the foster system for good.

Little Alexis' world was turned upside down as a baby. Her teen mom let her get dangerously thin, so her grandparents, Doug and Annmarie Stuth of Enumclaw took over, raising the baby for nearly two years.

Then the state's child welfare system decided the grandparents weren't fit for the job.

Pegged as meddlers and troublemakers, the child was put in foster care for nearly a year and a half.

Friday in court, the state put a very different opinion on the record.

"It's our understanding that the Stuths would like to adopt the child and we think it's the best solution because this is a very young child and it's a permanent solution," said Terri Malolepsy, Assistant Attorney General.

"They made us out to be such terrible people for so long, and now to this point, it's amazing," said Doug Stuth.

Last month a judge paved the way for this reunion and the state's about-face in attitude about where the child should go, which is highly unusual in custody battles.

The court ruled the state and a different judge blew it by not considering the grandparents as caregivers long ago.

Friday in court, the judge made more rulings that should mean the Stuths – who never gave up – should be adopting Alexis soon.

"I think that's why we fought so hard, because it was so unjust and now things are going in a positive direction and we'll just keep going," he said.

The adoption is expected to happen in the next few months, finally giving stability to Alexis.

Also in court Friday, the judge terminated the young mother's parental rights, ruling she's not mature enough to parent.

But she is still in close contact with Alexis and her parents.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/389233_roach25.html

CPS needs citizen oversight

Last updated November 24, 2008 4:54 p.m. PT

By PAM ROACH
GUEST COLUMNIST

More than nine months ago I was contacted by an Enumclaw family whose granddaughter had been swept into the Child Protective Services system and was being put up for adoption. They were riddled with fear and tears. Terror is the word.

There was no accusation of child abuse. There had been an argument between the grandparents and their daughter (an unwed teenager) over differences in child rearing. The 2-year-old was put in the foster adopt system. The law that requires placement with qualified relatives was ignored and termination proceedings were started.

As this was happening, a 14-year-old girl was being held captive by her parents. Abused and starved, she weighed 47 pounds when police found her.

At 11, the girl had sought asylum. She told a teacher. CPS was called. Social workers looked at the 60-pound preteen begging for help and then, after a short interview with the family, left her in hell.

In Region 5 (Pierce and Kitsap counties) of the Division of Children and Family Services, eight children with open CPS cases have died since the beginning of 2008. Six were murdered.

And, in that region there are other open case atrocities, such as the 3-year-old whose mother blinded her with a pin.

The public sees only the headlines. The agency is fraught with mismanagement and lack of accountability that has led to tearing apart good families, maiming children and even death.

Citizens and legislative leaders need to hold this agency accountable. But, since the cases deal with the powerless and poor, the agency proceeds with impunity.

Only a few have the resources to sue the state. Last year we paid out millions of dollars in judgments. That's not enough in my mind because so many families have not had their day in court.

We need to split the monolith. The Department of Social and Health Services is too big to be accountable.

During the 2009 session, I will re-introduce my proposal of 12 years ago. The intent section will be the same, as nothing has gotten better. If passed, the $19 billion-a-year agency would be divided into four, more manageable units. We would create the departments of Children and Family Services; Public Welfare; Medical and Rehabilitative Services; and Centralized Services to include management services, research and planning, legislative and community relations and constituent relations.

I am also proposing that a "Social Services Transparency Board" be established. This citizen oversight committee could be established without legislation. But the agency does not want outside review.

The transparency boaboard would be charged with reviewing accountability measures within the department and suggesting changes that will yield a less expensive yet better outcome for the public. Specific cases should be reviewed. Public testimony would be taken. Internal accountability would be defined.

The current director of DSHS, Robin Arnold-Williams, could propose this herself. Instead, she hired a former editorial writer at $100,000 a year to spin away problems for the department.

Until fundamental changes are made, the destruction caused will continue to make headlines and overshadow some of the good work that is done.


Pam Roach, R-Auburn, is state senator from the 31st District.rd is modeled after the "Sunshine Committee" that was established to review laws that prohibit access to government records. The people have a right to know government information. And, the only way government can be held accountable is to be open to public scrutiny.

I am proposing that one legislator from each caucus and a number of citizen appointees (not DSHS heads) be members of the committee. DSHS needs direction from nonagency types. The "culture" of this agency of government is ardently resistant to citizen oversight. And, unlike every other department, there is no powerful entity with money to move forward with court appeals.

The transparency

© 1998-2008 Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Friday, November 7, 2008
The Legislature Has A Responsibility To The Public In Reigning in DSHS with the consent of Senate Leadership, a committee chair can actually use subpoena power to hold senate investigative hearings. In the case of CPS and its repetitive egregious "mishaps"...the committee chair should consider such hearings.

The legislature needs to fully grasp what is happening and not happening in this huge and powerful monolith. It is too big. There are no checks and balances. And, they work in secrecy.

This year, as a consequence of my sharing the experience of Lisa with the family, I will be introducing legislation to open up government in the area of DSHS.

I believe the agency is too big and should be divided to allow for more accountability within its own workings.

I will be proposing the creation of a "transparency board" made up of legislators and the public. The board would review cases and make recommended policy changes to the department and to the legislature.

State Auditor Brian Sonntag did a performance audit and found many things that needed to be addressed. The transparency board would watch dog DSHS to see if they are willing and in the process of making the institutional changes necessary to provide better service.

I have always thought it would be good for government to give out "satisfaction" surveys to users (citizens and taxpayers). Fat chance of that when it is so much easier just to ignore criticism and go after your critics.

If ever there was a need for a bipartisan effort...it is in fixing DSHS. Posted by Pam Roach at 8:19 AM 0 comments  
Thursday,,  "If I have posted it , You may share it "

Bill to reshape DSHS faces an uphill battle

By Whitney Cork / Herald Writer

OLYMPIA - An Arlington lawmaker made her case Thursday to break up the massive Department of Social and Health Services by creating an independent agency to handle all child welfare issues.

State Sen. Val Stevens, a Republican, outlined to the Senate's human services panel her bill to improve the state's services for children and families by creating a new agency.

"An independent agency will be more efficient and more effective," she wrote in the legislation.

Stevens' bill faces resistance from fellow senators, the leader of the service agency and Gov. Chris Gregoire, all of whom view the proposal as cumbersome and disruptive to current reforms.

"There are already a wide range of changes and initiatives under way regarding child welfare services," said Kari Burrell, policy adviser to Gregoire.

"The governor feels that reorganization of the department at this time would impact reform efforts."

Stevens' proposal for what would be called the Department of Family and Children's Services was recommended by a task force created by the Legislature in 2005 to examine the effectiveness of Washington's child welfare system. Stevens served on the task force.

The task force formed after the death of 4-year-old Sirita Sotelo of Lake Stevens. Sirita was beaten to death by her stepmother in 2005 while living with her father under state supervision.

The incident prompted public scrutiny and claims that the size and complexity of DSHS hinders the effectiveness of its children's services.

Stevens said that this standard of inadequacy has become a staple of the agency.

"There is a culture within the children's administration which does not favor the welfare of children," she said. "This agency needs a culture change."

Laurie Lippold, speaking on behalf of task force member Sharon Osborne of Children's Home of Washington, supported the legislation.

"You can change the culture best when you have a smaller entity," she said.

State Sen. James Hargrove, D-Hoquiam, was disappointed with the governor's position.

"We won't be satisfied with just doing more of the same," said Hargrove, who is chairman of the Senate Human Services and Corrections Committee, which is considering the bill.

He and Stevens said they want to discuss the issue with Gregoire.

Sen. Debbie Regala, D-Tacoma, served on the task force and opposed the recommendation for a new agency.

She agrees with the governor's position that the bill is a distraction from more worthwhile efforts.

"Rearranging the administration structure simply takes our eye off of the ball," she said.

Cheryl Stephani, assistant secretary for DSHS Children's Administration, echoed the sentiment.

"A new model to make social work consistent across the state is in development," she said. "I believe that to veer away from this current course would take child welfare reform back several steps."

Dave Woods, a lobbyist representing Washington Families United, said the focus should be on hiring and training better social workers.

"How the system is organized doesn't matter," he said. "What matters is the attitudes and training of the people who are doing the work."

Stevens said that issues of social worker training and caseloads would be addressed in separate legislation.

"This is a complex issue and there are many factors to consider," she said. "The one area I hope we can reach agreement on is the need for major culture change."

Reporter Whitney Cork: 360-352-8624 or wcork@ heraldnet.com

November 16, 2007

Updated: September 25, 2008


THE CORRUPT BUSINESS OF CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES

BY: Nancy Schaefer

Senator, 50th District

My introduction into Child Protective Service cases was due to a grandmother in an adjoining state who called me with her tragic story. Her two granddaughters had been taken from her daughter who lived in my district. Her daughter was told wrongly that if she wanted to see her children again she should sign a paper and give up her children. Frightened and young, the daughter did. I have since discovered that parents are often threatened into cooperation of permanent separation of their children.

The children were taken to another county and placed in foster care. The foster parents

were told wrongly that they could adopt the children. The grandmother then jumped through every hoop known to man in order to get her granddaughters. When the case finally came to court it was made evident by one of the foster parent’s children that the foster parents had,

at any given time, 18 foster children and that the foster mother had an inappropriate relationship with a caseworker.

In the courtroom, the juvenile judge, acted as though she was shocked and said the two girls would be removed quickly. They were not removed. Finally, after much pressure being applied to the Department of Family and Children Services of Georgia (DFCS), the children were driven to South Georgia to meet their grandmother who gladly drove to meet them.

After being with their grandmother two or three days, the judge, quite out of the blue, wrote up a new order to send the girls to their father, who previously had no interest in the case and who lived on the West Coast. The father was in “adult entertainment”. His girlfriend worked as an “escort” and his brother, who also worked in the business, had a sexual charge brought against him.

Within a couple of days the father was knocking on the grandmother’s door and took the

girls kicking and screaming to California.

The father developed an unusual relationship with the former foster parents and soon moved to the southeast. The foster parents began driving to the father’s residence and picking up the little girls for visits. The oldest child had told her mother and grandmother

on two different occasions that the foster father molested her.

To this day after five years, this loving, caring blood relative grandmother does not even

have visitation privileges with the children. The little girls are, in my opinion, permanently traumatized and the young mother of the girls was so traumatized with shock when the

girls were first removed from her that she has never completely recovered. The mother

has rights but the father still has custody of the children.

Throughout this case and through the process of dealing with multiple other mismanaged cases of the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS), I have worked with other desperate parents across the state of Georgia and in many other States because their children were taken for no cause and they have no one with whom to turn. I have witnessed ruthless behavior from many caseworkers, social workers, investigators, lawyers, judges, therapists, and others such as those who “pick up” the children. I have been stunned by what I have seen and heard from victims all across this land.

In this report, I have focused mainly on the Georgia Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS). However, I believe Child Protective Services nationwide has become corrupt and that the entire system is broken beyond repair. I am convinced parents and families should be warned of the dangers.

The Department of Child Protective Services, known as the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS) in Georgia and other titles in other states, has become a “protected empire” built on taking children and separating families. This is not to say that there are not those children who do need to be removed from wretched situations and need protection. However, this report is concerned with the children and parents caught up in “legal kidnapping,” ineffective policies, and an agency that on certain occasions would not remove

a child (or children) when the child was enduring torment and abuse.

In one county in my District, I arranged a meeting for thirty-seven families to speak freely and without fear. These poor parents and grandparents spoke of their painful, heart wrenching encounters with DFCS. Their suffering was overwhelming. They wept and

cried. Some did not know where their children were and had not seen them in years. I

had witnessed the “Gestapo” at work and I witnessed the deceitful conditions under which children were taken in the middle of the night, out of hospitals, off of school buses, and out

of homes. In one county a private drug testing business was operating within the agency’s department that required many, many drug tests from parents and individuals for profit.

It has already made over $100,000.

Due to being exposed, several employees in this particular office were fired. However, they have now been rehired either in neighboring counties or in the same county again. According to the calls I am now receiving, the conditions in that county are returning to the same practices that they had before the light was shown on their evil deeds.

 

Having worked with probably 300 cases statewide, and now hundreds and hundreds across this nation and in nearly every state, I am convinced there is no responsibility and no accountability in Child Protective Services system.

I have come to the conclusion:

  • that poor parents very often are targeted to lose their children because they do not have the where-with-all 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;

  • that all parents are capable of making mistakes and that making a mistake does not mean your children are to be removed from the home. Even if the home is not perfect, it is home; and that’s where a child is the safest and where he or she wants to be, with family;

  • that parenting classes, anger management classes, counseling referrals, therapy classes and on and on are demanded of parents with no compassion by the system even while the parents are at work and while their children are separated from them. (some times parents are required to pay for the programs) This can take months or even years and it emotionally devastates both children and parents. Parents are victimized by “the system” that makes a profit for holding children longer and “bonuses” for not returning children to their parents;

  • that caseworkers and social workers are very often guilty of fraud. They withhold and destroy evidence. They fabricate evidence and they seek to terminate parental rights unnecessarily. However, when charges are made against Child Protective Services, the charges are ignored;

  • that the separation of families and the “snatching of children” is growing as a business because local governments have grown accustomed to having these taxpayer dollars to balance their ever-expanding budgets;

  • that Child Protective Services and Juvenile Court can always hide behind a confidentiality clause in order to protect their decisions and keep the funds flowing. There should be open records and “court watches”! Look who is being paid!

    There are state employees, lawyers, court investigators, guardian ad litems, court personnel, and judges. There are psychologists, and psychiatrists, counselors, caseworkers, therapists, foster parents, adoptive parents, and on and on. All are looking to the children in state custody to provide job security. Parents do not realize that the social workers are the glue that hold “the system” together that funds the court, funds the court appointed attorneys, and the multiple other jobs including the “system’s” psychiatrists, therapists, their own attorneys and others.

  • that The Adoption and the Safe Families Act, set in motion first in 1974 by Walter Mondale and later in 1997 by President Bill Clinton, offered cash “bonuses” to the states for every child they adopted out of foster care. In order to receive the “adoption incentive bonuses” local child protective services need more children. They must have merchandise (children) that sells and you must have plenty so the buyer can choose. Some counties are known to give a $4,000 to $6,000 bonus for each child adopted out to strangers and an additional $2,000 for a “special needs” child. Employees work to keep the federal dollars flowing;

  • State Departments of Human Resources (DHR) and affiliates are given a baseline number of expected adoptions based on population. For every child DHR and CPS

    can get adopted, there is the bonus of $4,000 or maybe $6,000. But that is only the beginning figure in the formula in which each bonus is multiplied by the percentage that the State has managed to exceed its baseline adoption number. Therefore States and local communities work hard to reach their goals for increased numbers of adoptions for children in foster care.

  • that there is double dipping. The funding continues as long as the child is out of the home. There is funding for foster care then when a child is placed with a new family, then “adoption bonus funds” are available. When a child is placed in a mental health facility and is on 16 drugs per day, like two children of a constituent of mine, more funds are involved and so is Medicaid;

  • As you can see this program is ordered from the very top and run by Health and Human Resources. This is why victims of CPS get no help from their legislators. It explains why my bill, SB 415 suffered such defeat in the Judicial Committee, why I was cut off at every juncture. Legislators and Governors must remember who funds their paychecks.

  • that there are no financial resources and no real drive to unite a family and help keep them together or provide effective care;

  • that the incentive for social workers to return children to their parents quickly after taking them has disappeared and who in protective services will step up to the plate and say, “This must end! No one, because they are all in the system together and a system with no leader and no clear policies will always fail the children. Just look at the waste in government that is forced upon the tax payer;

  • that the “Policy Manuel” is considered “the last word” for CPS/DFCS. However, it is too long, too confusing, poorly written and does not take the law into consideration;

  • that if the lives of children were improved by removing them from their homes, there might be a greater need for protective services, but today children are not safer. Children, of whom I am aware, have been raped and impregnated in foster care;

  • It is a known fact that children are in much more danger in foster care than they are

    in their own home even though home may not be perfect.

  • that some parents are even told if they want to see their children or grandchildren,

they must divorce their spouse. Many, who are under privileged, feeling they have no

option, will divorce and then just continue to live together. This is an anti-family policy,

    but parents will do anything to get their children home with them. However, when the

    parents cooperate with Child Protective Services, their behavior is interpreted as

    guilt when nothing could be further from the truth.

  • Fathers, (non-custodial parents) I must add, are oftentimes treated as criminals without access to visit or even see their own children and have child support payments strangling the very life out of them;

  • that the Foster Parents Bill of Rights does not stress that a foster parent is there temporarily to care for a child until the child can be returned home. Many foster parents today use the Foster Parent Bill of Rights as a means to hire a lawyer and seek to adopt the child placed in their care from the real parents, who are desperately trying to get their child home and out of the system. Recently in Atlanta, a young couple learning to be new parents and loving it, were told that because of an anonymous complaint, their daughter would be taken into custody by the State DFCS. The couple was devastated and then was required by DFCS to take parenting classes, alcohol counseling and psychological evaluations if they wanted to get their child back. All of the courses cost money for which most parents are required to pay. While in their anxiety and turmoil to get their child home, the baby was left for hours in a car to die in the heat in her car seat by a foster parent who forgot about the child. This should never have happened. It is tragic. In many cases after the parents have jumped through all the hoops, they still do not get their child. As long as the child is not returned, there is money for the agency, for foster parents, for adoptive parents, and for the State.

  • that tax dollars are being used to keep this gigantic system afloat, yet the victims, parents, grandparents, guardians and especially the children, are charged for the system’s services.

  • that grandparents have called from all over the State of Georgia and from other states trying to get custody of their grandchildren. CPS claims relatives are contacted, but there are many many cases that prove differently. Grandparents who lose their grandchildren to strangers have lost their own flesh and blood. The children lose their family heritage and grandparents, and parents too, lose all connections to their heirs.

  • that 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. Think what that number is today ten years later!

  • That according to the California Little Hoover Commission Report in 2003, 30% to 70% of the children in California group homes do not belong there and should not have been removed from their homes.


RECOMMENDATIONS

  1. Call for an independent audit of all State Child Protective Services (CPS) and

    for a Federal Congressional hearing on Child Protective Services nationwide.

  1. Activate immediate change. Every day that passes means more families and children are subject to being held hostage and their lives destroyed.

  1. Abolish the Federal and State financial incentives that have turned Child Protective Services into a business that separate families for money.

  1. Grant to parents their rights verbally and in writing.

  1. Mandate a search for family members to be given the opportunity to adopt their

own relatives if children need to be removed permanently.

  1. Mandate a jury trial where every piece of evidence is presented before permanently removing a child from his or her parents. Open family court. Remove the secrecy. Allow the press and family members access. Give parents the opportunity in court to speak and be a part of their children’s future.

  1. Require a warrant or a positive emergency circumstance before removing children from their parents. (Judge Arthur G. Christean, Utah Bar Journal, January, 1997 reported that “except in emergency circumstances, including the need for immediate medical care, require warrants upon affidavits of probable cause before entry upon private property is permitted for the forcible removal of children from their parents.”)

  1. Uphold the laws when someone fabricates or presents false evidence. If a parent

    alleges fraud, hold a hearing with the right to discovery of all evidence made available

    to parents.

                                                           FINAL REMARKS

On my desk are scores of cases of exhausted families and terrified children. It has

been beyond me to turn my back on these suffering, crying, and beaten down individuals.

We are mistreating the most innocent. Child Protective Services have become an adult centered business to the detriment of children. No longer is judgment based on what the child needs or who the child wants to be or with whom, or what is really best for the whole family; it is some adult or bureaucrat who makes the decisions, based often on just hearsay, without ever consulting a family member, or just what is convenient, profitable, or less troublesome for the social workers.

I have witnessed such injustice and harm brought to so many 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.

“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and the needy” Proverbs 31:8-9


+ Review other Newsletters

Police to search home, river for Kansas boy missing since 1999

Story Highlights

  • Sheriff says his officers will search area near Whitewater River on Saturday
  • Attorney says parents "rue the fact" they didn't report him missing
  • Adam Herrman reportedly ran away when he was 11, after being spanked
  • Parents tell paper they thought spanking would lead police to take other kids away

(CNN) -- Authorities investigating the case of a boy who disappeared in Kansas almost a decade ago plan to search an undisclosed residence Wednesday, the Butler County sheriff said.

An age-progression photo shows what Adam Herrman would like today, as a 21-year-old man.

An age-progression photo shows what Adam Herrman would like today, as a 21-year-old man. 

Sheriff Craig Murphy would not disclose details about the residence or why authorities want to search it.

He said his department will also search on an area of the Whitewater River, in southern Kansas, on Saturday near where Adam Herrman was last seen.

Adam was 11 when he went missing in 1999. He was living in a mobile home park in Towanda, a town about 25 miles northeast of Wichita, with his adoptive parents, Doug and Valerie Herrman, authorities said.

Wichita attorney Warner Eisenbise, who is representing Adam's adoptive parents, said the couple believed Adam had run away and didn't report him missing. They "really rue the fact that they didn't" report him missing, he said Monday.

A few weeks ago, an undisclosed person contacted the Wichita-Sedgwick County Exploited and Missing Child Unit, expressing concern about Adam, the sheriff said.

The Herrmans told Eisenbise that Adam ran away frequently, the attorney said, and they believed he was either with his biological parents or homeless. Although the Herrmans did not report him missing, "they were very worried about him," Eisenbise said.

In an interview published Tuesday in The Wichita Eagle, Valerie Herrman said Adam ran away in May 1999 after she spanked him with a belt. She said she was upset but doesn't remember why, The Eagle reported.

The couple never reported Adam missing, Valerie Herrman told the paper, because they feared authorities would take Adam and his siblings away because of the spanking.

The couple adopted his two younger siblings as well, according to The Eagle.

"We love him, and we made a terrible mistake" by not reporting him missing, Doug Herrman told The Eagle. The couple said they searched the mobile home park and other areas for two days after Adam left.

"Then we came to the conclusion that the police probably have him, and they're coming to us, probably to get us in trouble," Doug Herrman told the newspaper, but the "police never came."

Authorities have searched an empty lot in the Pine Ridge Mobile Home Park where the family lived. There, police found an "answer" to one of their questions, Murphy said Monday without elaborating.

Eisenbise said that on December 15, authorities also searched the Herrmans' homes in Derby, outside of Wichita, and took the couple's computer, he said.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has released an age-progression picture that depicts Adam as he might appear now: a young man with blue eyes and light-colored hair.

Adam had been placed in the Herrmans' care when he was about 2, Murphy said Monday.

He had been named Irvin Groeninger III when he was born June 8, 1987, Murphy said, and it was not clear when his name was changed. His biological parents relinquished their rights as parents about two decades ago, and Adam and his siblings were put in foster homes, CNN affiliate KWCH reported.

"I thought what I was doing for them was in the best interest of the children, and evidently it wasn't," Irvin Groeninger, Adam's biological father, told KWCH. "If he was still in my custody, this would have never happened."

Adam's sister, Tiffany Broadfoot, 22, said she had last seen her brother about 14 years ago at a birthday party.

"He had the cutest little round face, little-bitty freckles right up here on the tip of his cheek," she told the station.

Spokesman Review

Child welfare system biased, experts claim

Disproportionate number of minorities affected


Tracy Fuentes plays with her nephew Lorenzo, 3, at her north Spokane home last month. She believes she had to overcome cultural bias to win custody of the boy. (Christopher Anderson The Spokesman-Review )

Despite federal and state laws giving preference to Native American families and tribes in Indian child welfare cases, it took Tracy Fuentes a year to win custody of her nephew after overcoming obstacles she believes were placed in her way by a culturally biased system.

"I did everything I was supposed to do," said Fuentes, 39, a single mother of Cree Indian and Hispanic heritage. She is resentful of Washington's Children's Administration, which she believes was reluctant to move her nephew out of the affluent home in which he was placed two weeks after he was born.

"They knew he was an Indian child, and they kept him in that home," Fuentes said. "They allowed the foster family to involve themselves in the case."

The Spokane Valley couple, intent on adopting the boy, admits they hired a private investigator to follow Fuentes on her first independent visit with her sister's son. Fuentes said it was just the first of several attempts by the family to discredit her.

When a court finally granted Fuentes custody of her nephew, she said, the foster father offered to pay her to renounce her claim to the boy. The foster father denies the allegation.

Toni Lodge, a member of the Indian advisory panel that heard Fuentes' case, said it is an example of the lack of compliance with the federal Indian Child Welfare Act and the lack of dignity with which Indian children are treated in the child welfare system.

"If the act was designed to prevent the breakup of Indian homes and preserve Indian culture," Lodge said, "we have gone backward."

Lodge, director of NATIVE Project/NATIVE Health of Spokane, estimated there are more than 660 Indian children currently placed out of their homes in Spokane County, where about 12,000 people claim Native American ancestry.

A spokeswoman for the Washington Department of Social and Health Services said she could not comment on the Fuentes case directly but said that the Children's Administration makes every effort to match minority children with minority homes when possible.

"Our first priority is to work with the tribes to place children with their relatives when that can be safely accomplished," said Kathy Spears, DSHS media relations manager.

A systemic problem

Though perhaps more contentious than most, the Fuentes case in many ways exemplifies a national child welfare system in which Native and African American children are disproportionately represented.

Although children of color comprise 42 percent of the nation's youth, nearly 60 percent of children in foster care are from minority families, according to an analysis prepared for the Casey Foundation and the Center for the Study of Social Policy, two organizations that advocate for children and families. Yet, the National Incidence Studies of Child Abuse and Neglect conducted by the federal government in 1980, 1986 and 1993 found that children of color are not abused at higher rates than white children. In fact, after controlling for such factors as income, black communities actually had lower rates of child maltreatment.

Poverty, substance abuse, family structure, generational trauma are all reasons for children entering the system. But even taking into consideration disproportionate poverty among minorities, for example, white children by their sheer numbers should still be more represented in the child welfare system, said Ralph Bayard, senior director of the office of diversity for Casey Family Programs.

The Casey Foundation analysis identified race as a primary factor in decisions made at each step in the child welfare system: reporting, investigating, substantiation, placement and exit from care.

Not only are the numbers of Native and African American children in foster homes disproportionate to their numbers in society, but there also is a disparity in how they are treated while they are in foster care, Bayard said.

According to the Child Welfare League of America, children of color in foster care have fewer visits with their biological families, less contact with caseworkers and fewer services overall.

Furthermore, the Casey study found that white children are four times more likely than African American children to be reunited with their families, even taking into consideration such factors as the age of the child entering the system, parental job skills or parental substance abuse.

Many sociologists, lawmakers and child welfare experts believe the disparity is the result of institutionalized racial bias.

"It's no coincidence that the community of color, particularly African Americans and Native Americans, are overrepresented," said Raymond Reyes, associate vice president for diversity at Gonzaga University. "It's symptomatic of the historical legacy of racism in this country."

Spears, of DSHS, said, "Unfortunately, all systems still retain a level of cultural bias as it relates to Native American cultural issues," but that bias exists because of flawed child-welfare research. Such data has "screened out information on Native populations due to their small representation in the general population, regardless of their overrepresentation in the child welfare system," she said, making it difficult for agencies to understand and address the particular needs of Native American children.

Tandem bills in the Washington state House and Senate this session would direct the Department of Social and Health Services to find out why minority children don't fare as well in the system and to come up with a plan to fix the problem.

Also, DSHS is required under terms of a 1998 class action to make broad child welfare reforms that include reducing the overrepresentation of minority children in the welfare system.

A continuing legacy

Perhaps no group has been more affected by U.S. child welfare policies than American Indians.

U.S. and Canadian policies of forcing Indian children into boarding schools as a means of assimilation in the 19th and 20th centuries severed ties to families, tribal culture and languages. U.S. tribal termination polices in the 1960s and 1970s further eroded these connections by forcing indigenous populations off reservations and into urban areas.

Studies conducted between 1969 and 1974 found that 25 percent to 35 percent of Indian children had been taken from their families and placed in non-Indian foster care or adoption, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

In very few cases were these children removed from their homes because of physical abuse, but rather on the grounds of neglect or social deprivation as perceived by culturally ignorant social workers and courts, according to the Child Welfare League.

Many American Indians and their advocates consider today's child welfare policies a continuation of this "cultural genocide."

In 1978, Congress passed the Indian Child Welfare Act, granting jurisdiction to the tribes, as well as establishing standards for removing children from their homes and guidelines for placing them in foster care.

The law was designed to keep Indian children in Indian homes when possible. But a nationwide dearth of such homes compared with the number of Native children in the system, coupled with a lack of awareness and training by social service agencies, has resulted in inconsistent compliance.

The state receives federal funding to place Indian children, but some tribes have their own placing agencies and receive that funding directly. The Spokane Tribe is among the largest providers of Indian foster homes in Spokane County.

The Kalispel Tribe is currently seeking a licenser and recruiter to develop its own placing agency, according to tribal spokeswoman Afton Burnham-Johnson.

Washington state works directly with the tribes to place Indian children, Spears said. In addition, the Children's Administration meets quarterly with the Indian Policy Advisory Committee, a panel of delegates from each of the 29 federally recognized tribes in Washington and five urban Indian organizations, including the NATIVE Project and the American Indian Community Center in Spokane.

A question of heritage

Tracy Fuentes' nephew, Lorenzo, was born in January 2004 to Fuentes' drug-addicted sister. With both his biological parents incarcerated, the state placed the 2-week-old child in the home of a Spokane Valley couple.

Court records show that DSHS attempted for several months to contact an uncle in Michigan, but the uncle appeared unwilling to take his nephew into his home. A year after the boy was born, there was no indication the department tried to contact any other relative.

Lodge, a member of the Local Indian Child Welfare Advisory Committee, a body established by federal law to advise on such cases, said the state has the responsibility to identify family members and should have been more aggressive in locating a relative willing to take Lorenzo.

Fuentes, a divorced mother of three living in Des Moines, Wash., believed her brother was taking the child. When that proved untrue, she requested permanent placement of her nephew.

"She should have been identified within 30 days of placement," Lodge said, and Lorenzo should have been in an Indian home within 180 days.

According to court records, caseworker Addie Merrill set up a plan for Fuentes to commute to Spokane and start establishing a relationship with Lorenzo. Merrill stated that Fuentes "is also insistent upon (Lorenzo's) placement with family and involvement in his Indian culture."

Though neither Lorenzo nor his aunt is enrolled in a tribe, Fuentes was able to document their Cree ancestry before the Local Indian Child Welfare Advisory Committee. Fuentes said her grandfather, who lived in Canada, did not enroll her mother for fear she would be taken away to boarding school.

On the other hand, the foster mother told the court that she was an enrolled Cherokee of California, a nonprofit organization that is not a federally recognized tribe.

On April 1, 2005, at the foster parents' request, Merrill asked child psychologist Carol Thomas to assess whether moving Lorenzo, who had been born addicted to heroin and was in fragile health, would be too traumatic for him. About a week later Thomas reported emphatically that it would be.

"They had the court believing that if he left their home, he could go into such a shock it might even lead to his death," Fuentes said of the foster parents.

On April 20, 2005, the Local Indian Child Welfare Advisory Committee determined that Lorenzo was Indian. Despite Thomas' report, the panel recommended he be placed with his aunt.

For the next seven months, Fuentes' visits with Lorenzo continued amid conflicting psychological evaluations of Lorenzo and his relationships with his aunt and foster parents.

Fuentes said the foster mother followed her during at least one independent visit with Lorenzo and on another occasion the parents hired a private investigator to follow her.

The foster family acknowledged that they hired an investigator, but they declined further comment, citing confidentiality agreements with the Children's Administration.

On Nov. 28, 2005, Fuentes filed a complaint with the Office of the Family and Children's Ombudsman against the Division of Foster Care Licensing. She said she had been trying since January to gain custody of Lorenzo without success despite passing several background checks and a home study. She also complained of the foster family's interference in violation of her civil rights and the rules for state licensed foster care.

In December, Juvenile Court Judge Ellen Kalama Clark granted Fuentes custody of Lorenzo and ordered a six-week transition into her home.

In a Jan 11, 2006, letter, ombudsman Keith Talbot denied Fuentes' November complaint, saying, "We have not been able to confirm that the agency act or omission about which you are complaining is a clear violation of law, policy, nor clearly inappropriate or unreasonable under the circumstances."

After Clark's ruling, Fuentes said, the foster father asked for a private meeting with her. Citing his wife's attachment to Lorenzo, Fuentes said, he offered her $30,000 up front and $700 a month for the rest of her life to give up her claim to Lorenzo.

The foster parents, who are currently pursuing the adoption of another foster child, deny offering Fuentes money.

"There are two ways to look at the Indian Child Welfare Act, and it's not always in the best interest of the child," the foster father said.

Lorenzo, now 3 years old, is thriving, said Fuentes, who has moved to Spokane, where she has relatives. The boy's occupational therapy sessions are less frequent as his development improves. He also is learning Native dance and drumming.

"He belongs with his family and in our culture," said Fuentes. "He is learning who he is."

About this project

An area-wide effort to protect and nurture our community's children.

Monday, October 27, 2008

A Losing Battle!

A mother shares her grief and dissolutionment with anyone who will listen. This letter literally went out to hundreds of people. Please take the time to offer words of kindness, support and help if you are able. Our heart goes out to this mom and her children.

I have written to each and every one of you at least once in the past year, asking for help with my CPS case. However, by this time on Wednesday, I will be just another statistic in a very broken system. And so, I am sending out this letter to ask, not for anymore help on my behalf, but to please all pull together so that travesties like this do not fall upon other innocent families that are being torn apart everyday while those who could stop them choose to look the other way.

My story is long, but I shall retell it quickly. After having my daughter removed last January, when she was 11 months old, for suspicious breaks in her arm, she was returned to me around 6 weeks later. However, I was not ready to have her returned, having been evicted from my old house and was now staying with another family and beginning to show signs of depression form having her removed in the first place. And so, within a month, I had called my CPS worker back to ask to have her placed again until I was truly on my feet.

Fighting a Losing Battle!

Homeless and Depressed

After a dark summer, in which I was hospitalized twice and remained homeless, I discovered that I was pregnant last August. I realized that I needed to turn my life around because I had now two little ones that were depending on me.

I moved back to town, began working, sought affordable housing and re-enrolled in school. I began fully complying with all CPS services. This included parenting classes, (of which I've taken 3) and therapy, (of which I've been consistently going to for one year). I also sought additional services to better myself, such as talking with a public health nurse, setting up a Hane Like home visitor through PACT and returning to church.

After my son was born, I was told by CPS that I had to remain at the homeless shelter in order to take him home from the hospital, because I would be able to be monitored by the staff. At this point, (and to this day), I had never been allowed to have an unsupervised visit with my daughter.

I want you all to know that I took excellent care of my little boy. I had already learned the basic parenting skills from raising my daughter alone, but I found my motherly love rekindled and vowed never to do anything that would bring him even close to the situation that happened to my little girl.

I watched over him liked a hawk and spoiled him to death. He was always well cared for, and was and continues to be the love of my life. He is a very happy, very healthy little boy. Until the day I die I will stand by this next statement: He should NEVER have been taken from me. Absolutely NOT. There was no reason. CPS committed a crime. He should never have been removed from my care. Never.

Just another stolen child!