Judicially Created Parental Alienation

Appeals court criticizes ‘judicially created parental alienation’ in case of baby with broken ribs

Seal of the Superior Court of PennsylvaniaA state appeals court has accused a Pennsylvania judge of “judicially created parental alienation” and a failure to provide due process when she kept a baby in “protracted foster care” after receiving no explanation for broken ribs and then terminated parental rights.

The judge, Lyris Younge of Philadelphia Family Court, abused her discretion when she refused to place the child known as N.M. in the care of a grandmother, according to the May 4 decision by the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Younge also refused to allow the child’s mother to be represented by two lawyers at once, and refused to allow introduction of expert medical reports that attempted to explain N.M.’s broken ribs, the court said.

Younge’s refusal to allow the grandmother’s care or to reunify N.M. with her parents “provided the evidentiary platform” to support social workers’ petition to terminate parental rights, the appeals court said. “In essence, this is an example of judicially-created parental alienation.”

“In short, despite the goals of the Child Protective Services Law, the trial judge seems to have done everything in her power to alienate these parents from their child, appears to have a fixed idea about this matter and, further, she prohibited evidence to be introduced that might have forced her to change her opinion,” the appeals court said.

The court reversed Younge’s refusal to place the child with the grandmother, vacated the judge’s decision to terminate parental rights and strongly suggested that, if a petition for recusal is filed, Younge “give serious consideration as to whether her apparent bias warrants that she recuse herself.”

The Legal Intelligencer covered the decision in consolidated appeals by the mother and father. According to the publication, it is the ninth time one of Younge’s rulings has been overturned on appeal, and the fifth involving an alleged due process issue.

N.M., now 2 years old, was removed from the care of her parents in April 2016 based on allegations of physical abuse, according to the decision. N.M.’s parents had brought N.M. to the doctor three times because of “fussiness.” X-rays were finally ordered and two broken ribs were found. N.M. was placed in foster care.

N.M.’s mother had suggested that N.M.’s toddler brother sometimes forcefully ran into her back when the mother was holding N.M., but a doctor thought that would be unlikely to cause a rib fracture. Testing found N.M. had a genetic variant that wasn’t believed to be a cause, though a doctor said it couldn’t definitively be ruled out. N.M. did not, however, have brittle bone disease, which could have caused the fractures.

When the parents were allowed supervised visits, N.M. would “light up” when she saw her parents, according to testimony by a social worker. The parents had complied with a plan that included parenting classes and evaluations.

N.M.’s brother was temporarily placed with the grandmother, and was eventually reunified with the parents.

When Younge refused to move N.M. to the care of her grandmother, the judge said that no one had yet confessed to the abuse and there needed to be some closure about how the injury happened. “Either someone has to cop to it or there has to be a plausible explanation” for the injuries, Younge said.

“If I leave her [in foster care] maybe I get closer to an answer as to what happened instead of moving her to grandmom. … So, I’m not going to consider kinship care.”

The appeals court noted the comments in a footnote at the end of the opinion. “While this court must take and does take the issue of abuse of a child very seriously,” the footnote said, “the fact that a trial judge tells parents that unless one of them ‘cops to an admission of what happened to the child’ they are going to lose their child, flies in the face of not only the CPSL, but of the entire body of case law with regard to best interests of the child and family reunification.

“We find that the record herein provides example after example of overreaching, failing to be fair and impartial, evidence of a fixed presumptive idea of what took place, and a failure to provide due process to the two parents involved.”

Advertisements

FOSTER SHOCK

 

Follow

 

“Foster Shock” is intended to educate the public about how Florida’s ‘privatized’ child welfare was created and how this has left to massive amounts of taxpayer dollars being spent with little oversight and no accountability.

Child Predator Services and Foster Care

This is just one example of thousands of unjust CPS abductions that happen all over the nation on a daily basis. Once again, the reason is money. . . lots of money!  Every time CPS seizes a child, it gets money from the federal government and counties can bring in thousands of dollars in excess revenue.

As New York Times best-selling author Dr. Joseph Mercola wrote in 2011:

Child Protective Services | Austin Family Law Attorney[D]id you know that the money funneled to states and child protective services actually encourages them to accuse you of child abuse and even murder, and to take your children, even if you’re not guilty, and even though they have absolutely no proof that you harmed your child?

Horrendous as it sounds, it’s true: child abuse has become a business — an industry of sorts — that actually pays states to legally abduct your children and put them up for adoption! Even more unbelievable is that, instead of pumping the money back into child protective service programs, some states actually are putting it into their general funds to help balance their budgets.

Child Protective Services has a financial incentive to take children into custody and adopt them out rather than return them. Why? They get money from the Federal government for every child in custody, and they get money if the child is adopted. So what do you think they do? For one, they are more likely to take children into custody in the first place. And second, they are more interested in taking children they can easily adopt out.

[photo]

John Van Doorn

John Van Doorn ran for San Diego Supervisor in 2010. This is an excerpt from his candidate biography “As a tireless advocate for parental and children’s rights, John van Doorn has worked publicly and behind the scenes to challenge the Board of Supervisors to clean up corruption within county agencies that deal with the welfare of our county’s children.

John’s start in advocacy began with the breakup of his marriage in 1999, a time when his children were stripped out of his life after false allegations were made in court by a county social worker. Mr. van Doorn has since prevailed in a number of Superior and Appellate Court actions and presently has an appeal pending before the California Appellate Court which addresses numerous acts of `abuse of discretion’ by a County Court Commissioner. The appeal also takes notice of actions by County Counsel that clearly demonstrate this county’s preference to obstruct legally established rights of San Diego citizens.”

For the Children. @AdoptUsKids @BlogginMamas @AdCouncil # ...Let’s take a closer look at the three sponsors of the “I Support Adoption from Foster Care” ad on the leftU.S. Department of Health and Human Services (CDC, FDA ...

 

 

Children's Bureau

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (CDC, FDA ...

Through the title IV-E Foster Care program, the Children’s Bureau supports states (plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) provide board and care payments for eligible children who are under the supervision of the state and placed in foster family homes or childcare institutions that are safe and licensed. The program is authorized by title IV-E of the Social Security Act, as amended, and implemented under the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 45 CFR parts 1355, 1356, and 1357. The program’s focus is children who are eligible under the former Aid to Families with Dependent Children program and who were removed from their homes as the result of maltreatment, lack of care, or lack of supervision.

AdoptUSKids is a national project that supports child welfare systems and connects children in foster care with families. It is a project of the Children’s Bureau, operated through a cooperative agreement between the Bureau and the Adoption Exchange Association.

About the children

Children and teens enter foster care through no fault of their own, because they have been abused, neglected, or abandoned and are unable to continue living safely with their families. (CPS gets to deem what living “safely” with a family means.)


OUR MODEL

A private, non-profit organization, the Ad Council focuses on approximately 50 national campaigns at a time, each sponsored by non-profit organizations or federal government agencies.

We work with volunteer talent from leading advertising, media, social and digital communications agencies across the country. Leveraging donated ad space and airtime, we develop integrated public service communications programs to make sure our messages reach the widest audience and have the greatest impact.

In 2015, we secured over $1.6 billion in donated media on behalf of all of our campaigns. This means on average, each campaign received $30 million in donated advertising time and space for the year.

Sponsor Organizations (Click to view) 

Behind each campaign is an issue expert: A non-profit organization or government agency. They are on the front lines and deal directly with issues our campaigns address.

Adoption from Foster Care  

OVERVIEW              

Since 2004, the Ad Council has partnered with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Children’s Bureau and AdoptUSKids to encourage the adoption of children from foster care. This national adoption recruitment campaign reassures potential parents by consistently delivering the “you don’t have to be perfect to be a perfect parent” message.

The campaign currently highlights the need for families for teens. Of the 428,000 youths under the age of 18 in the U.S. foster care system,112,000 are currently waiting for adoptive families. 43% of all children available for adoption on AdoptUSKids.org are 15 to 18 years old, yet only 5% of all children adopted in 2015 were between the ages of 15 to 18.

These lighthearted and charming PSAs reassure potential parents that teens in foster care don’t need perfection; they need the love and commitment a permanent family can provide.The PSAs direct audiences to visit AdoptUSKids.org, call 1-888-200-4005 (English), or 1-877-236-7831 (Spanish) to learn more the adoption process.

Fatherhood Involvement (2017)  OVERVIEW

86 percent of dads spend more time with their children today than their own fathers did with them. However, a majority of dad (7 out of 10) also reported that they could use tips on how to be a better parent.

The campaign PSAs encourage dads to recognize the critical role fathers play in their children’s lives through something as simple as a dad joke. The TV spots feature kids re-telling jokes their dad shared with them, highlighting that even the smallest moments fathers spend with their children can have the biggest difference in their children’s lives. All PSAs direct audiences to visit www.fatherhood.gov for parenting tips, fatherhood programs, and other resources. 


Do you really think public service announcements increase fatherhood engagement in their children’s lives if they haven’t been involved before they saw the ad? This really is a network of private associations involved with government in public/private collusion. These associations operate in the private, nonprofit sector with intent to affect the government sector, bypassing normal input from citizens and deteriorating representative government at all levels (federal, state and county). The Ad Council is able to use their extensive advertising budget to sell a government program that appears to be pro-family when the opposite is true.


RELATED

CAPTA: The Child Abuse Law Which Could Destroy Your Reputation

Help Bury Baby Alyssa

Funeral Arrangements & Burial For Baby Alyssa • Help Shavon

For: Shavon Fero
Everett, WA
Organizer: Cory Sem

Funeral Arrangements & Burial For Baby Alyssa • Help Shavon (Shavon Fero)

The Story

  • On January 12,2018, baby Alyssa who was 6 months old passed away in her sleep & away from her Mother, Shavon, in foster care. (As of today, autopsy results are still pending.) Shavon was nearing the time of reunification with baby Alyssa as of last Wednesday & taking all of the necessary steps needed to do so- due to false allegations. And within days of word from a judge who was graciously about to end Shavon’s nightmare- it all came crashing down. Tragedy struck.

At this point in time Shavon is unable to see Alyssa. Believe it or not- she has to pay to see Alyssa! $300.00. That’s not including services which will be local. Many people are questioning this tragedy because there has been no media coverage or ablility to find the story on Google. We understand that this makes people question the validity of what’s happened so- if you would like to make a donation to the actual funeral home- we are more than happy to provide you with this information. The funeral home caring for Alyssa is:Funeral Alternatives,which is in Marysville,Washington. Their contact number is: ‭+1 (888) 381-6993‬.

This is a desperate plea for help with funds to help Shavon with any additional funeral expenses & to fly Alyssa to Colorado to be properly buried where she has family. Shavon currently has no living relatives in Washington State & it is imperitive that baby Alyssa is buried where family can appropriately mourn her. To this day, baby Alyssa’s grandparents who live in Colorado have never met Alyssa. It is important that they too are able to grieve their Granddaughter & have a place to visit her that is tangible. In the near future, Shavon plans to join family in Colorado & leave Washington State. CPS was going to help with funeral expenses;then changed their minds.

With this loss comes more expenses. Currently Shavon has a vehicle that she needs help with. The vehicle needs maintenance to get back & forth to anything related to her daughter as well as her own needs. Working is obviously out of the question as we speak & for the next days- months to come. Food,gas,a cell bill… Every day expenses that we personally do not think about at times when going through a devastating loss such as your infant child. The last thing that we want her to worry about in a crisis like this- is how she will get back & forth or how she will eat or pay her cell bill for communication. But especially if she will be able to get her daughter to a State where she belongs.

I will be updating this campaign as new information comes in. Any & all funds go directly to baby Alyssa‘s mother & I personally have no financial gain for setting up this campaign. •This is the ONLY official campaign at this time for Shavon & baby Alyssa.• If you see any other campaigns- please check with Alyssa‘a family to either report or check validity.

If you are able to donate as little as a dollar- no amount is too small because it all adds up. If you are not able to donate- we understand & appreciate if you could please share the campaign.

There has been a great outpouring of love & prayers that I have personally seen. The support is beyond amazing.

Thank you all for taking your time to read this & share.

❤️~ Cory Sem

Funeral Arrangements & Burial For Baby Alyssa • Help Shavon

One More Way for Government to Get the Kids

New Ontario Law Allows Gov’t To Steal Kids From Parents Who Oppose “Gender Identity”

By Rachel Blevins

Ontario has just set a startling precedent with the passage of a new law that could lead to the government seizing children from parents who oppose the “Gender Identity” agenda.

Bill 89, the 2017 Children, Youth and Family Services Act, passed by a vote of 63-23 on June 1. The new law will have jurisdiction over child protective services, and adoption and foster care services.

One of the most notable parts of the bill is that when it comes to the state’s process for deciding which home a child should live in, it takes out the consideration of “the religious faith in which the child is being raised,” and replaces it with the child’s “gender identity” or “gender expression.”

Differences include: the current Act includes the child’s cultural background in this list while the new Act Chil the child’s cultural and linguistic heritage; the current Act includes the religious faith in which the child is being raised while the new Act includes the child’s race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

Jack Fonseca, senior political strategist for Campaign Life Coalition, warned that the new law does not just affect parents who are facing the risk of having their children seized by the state, it also affects parents who are looking to adopt.

“With the passage of Bill 89, we’ve entered an era of totalitarian power by the state, such as never witnessed before in Canada’s history,” Fonseca said. “Make no mistake, Bill 89 is a grave threat to Christians and all people of faith who have children, or who hope to grow their family through adoption.”

Another troubling aspect in the new Ontario law can be found in what the government determines to be the “least disruptive course of action.” With Bill 89, it argues for the use of “prevention services, early intervention services and community support services.”

The least disruptive course of action that is available and is appropriate in a particular case to help a child, including the provision of prevention services, early intervention services and community support services, should be considered.

In a press release on the new law, the Ministry of Children and Youth Services described the legislation as helping “children and youth across the province thrive and reach their full potential by strengthening and modernizing child, youth and family services.” It noted that the law will put “a greater focus on early intervention, to help prevent children and families from reaching crisis situations at home.”

John Sikkema, a lawyer with the Association for Reformed Political Action in Canada, criticized the bill’s clause, and said that it could do more harm than good to a child when applied.

“You can imagine a situation where, say, a child’s teacher suspects that a child is gender questioning or something and they’re not being supported in that,” Sikkema said, noting that the teacher would then “actually have a duty to report certain things to a Children’s Aid Society who would look into it further.”

As The Free Thought Project has reported on multiple occasions, the United States has its own share of problems with Child Protective Services seizing children from families whose beliefs don’t align with the state.

However, the idea of basing a child’s safety in a home off of his/her “gender identity” sets a troubling precedent in the province of Ontario, and takes legal government invasion in the home to a new level.

Rachel Blevins is a Texas-based journalist who aspires to break the left/right paradigm in media and politics by pursuing truth and questioning existing narratives. This article first appeared here at The Free Thought Project.

ANNALISE RICE INTERVIEW

Communities Digital News

Annalise Rice, 19, describes her Family Court nightmare

Richard Gardner’s controversial Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) theory was invoked in a heated Minnesota case.

IT’S HALF-PAST GET OUT!

What is a GAL? A Guardian ad Litem is an advocate for a child whose welfare is a matter of concern for the court. In legal terms, it means “guardian of the lawsuit.”


IN ESSENCE, STATES ARE INCENTIVIZED BY FEDERAL GRANT MONEY  TO CREATE SITUATIONS THAT DON’T EXIST TO GENERATE THESE FUNDS.  
   Everyone wants a piece of the federal funding pie, so you have federal, state and local government agencies, non-profit and faith-based organizations, private foundations and corporations all working together to support the efforts of these programs. We don’t need government to intervene in families and then have adults and children abused by the very system that is designed to protect them. The majority of the time, parents are in the best position to represent the interests of their children
Read more about grant funding: Healthy Marriage-Responsible Fatherhood & Faith-Based Grants…We Know What the Game Is!

Proposal: If the deficit is not funded, services to children need to be reduced by 8%. There are several considerations to be aware of in discussing which children no longer receive guardian ad litem services. Because of the Federal mandate for abused and neglected children in juvenile court, both congressional and legislative agreement would be required to remove this mandate.  Additionally, the guardian ad litem is independent from the child welfare system and often may be the only person who is assigned to the child from the beginning of the case through permanency. Eliminating mandatory guardian ad litem appointments in dissolution/custody cases would be particularly troublesome in pro se cases where the parties are proceeding without legal counsel and would greatly complicate the work of the court. (Um, I don’t think so!)

2016-17 Biennial Budget (Click to View)


Children at Risk: Foster Children’s Rights Ignored

Getting off a school bus, heading home for an afternoon snack and sitting down for homework.

McKenna Ahrenholz doesn’t complain about an average afternoon.

She has much more important ways to use her small voice in an effort to make a lot of noise.

“As early as I can remember I was in the system,” she wrote in a letter to lawmakers explaining her life while she was caught in Minnesota’s flawed child protection system. “I have been punched, starved and neglected.”

They’re big words to come from such a small person. At just 12 years old, McKenna is fighting for the thousands of foster kids across the state who don’t have a voice.

Because, in Minnesota, they’re not always given one.

“No one would listen that we wanted to stay at grandpa and grandma’s,” the letter continued. “The people who make the laws like yourselves need to hear us children who are the ones going through such a crazy life.”

McKenna and her four siblings have a lengthy history with child protection in counties all across the state.

Click to read more and view the video.http://kstp.com/news/children-at-risk-foster-childrens-rights-ignored-child-protection-mckenna-ahrenholz-childrens-law-center/4303701/


State Lawmakers Move Forward on Bill Aimed at Giving Foster Children a Voice 

March 09, 2017 06:53 PM

State lawmakers moved forward Thursday on a bill they hope will give abused and neglected foster children a voice.

The proposal stems in part from a 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS investigation that found examples of juvenile victims forced to fend for themselves, despite state law saying they’re entitled to a lawyer.

The piece featured 12-year-old McKenna Ahrenholz, who testified Thursday in front of the Minnesota House Civil Law and Data Practices Policy Committee.

Click to read more and view the video: http://kstp.com/news/minnesota-house-bill-ron-kresha-state-legislature-aims-to-give-voice-to-foster-children/4421376/

 

After 20+ Years Minnesota Guardian ad Litem Board STILL Working to Improve Complaint Process

Minnesota, Jan. 2017:  The Board that manages Minnesota’s GAL program has absolutely failed to address serious issues that have put children’s live at risk, caused children to be placed in the custody of unsafe parents and then be re-abused, and contributed to families being torn apart and children, estranged from parents…as documented in complaints raised by parents. 

Families have been coming forward for 20+ years to raise complaints about individual Guardian ad Litems in regards to unprofessional conduct, and conduct that violates their mandated duties.

Many concerns have been raised about the use of guardians ad litem. Most complaints have centered on guardian actions in family court cases, primarily in contested divorce actions. Complaints have focused on guardian bias, lack of oversight and accountability, inadequate training, and inappropriate communication between guardians and judges. Parents have also complained that there is no place to seek relief if they have a problem with a guardian.” GAL Executive Summary (95-03) February 28, 1995

Continue Reading: https://acalltoactionblog.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/mn-gal-board-complaint-process/


Click on links below to view e-mails sent to the Attorney General, Board on Judicial Standards, Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor; MN House Reps, the State GAL, Sheriff, Congressman Tom Emmer and others.

GAL Jean Hariman FIRED

Atty. General