Re: CPS failed in every state. Who can justify continuance?

[Ron]

"Fern5827" > wrote in message
...

In reference to your question, " Who can justify continuance?", well that
has a simple answer.

Every abused and neglected child in the system, the courts, the therapists,
the citizens would have to deal with these kids in their every-day lives as
these kids grow and become adults and perpetrate these same crimes on their
own children and the other people around them.

Something has to be done about the problem fern, and ignoring it is simply
not the answer. These kids grow up screwed almost from the moment they are
born. As so many here have pointed out, they represent a significant
percentage of the individuals in our nations prisons. Imagine what it would
be like if they went through the early part of their lives without
intervention of any kind, knowing nothing but violence and harm from their
own families. Not only would there be a higher percentage of them resident
in our prisons, but they would be there for even more violent crimes.

Abolishing the only system that has a chance of helping these kids is not
the answer, never has been. I have been saying that for years now. Yet
people like yourself continue to advocate just that, and for as small a
reason as an unchecked box on some inspection sheet somewhere. Even if the
states fail all parts of this dubious standard you harp on so much, there is
no other place that can address the issues that these kids. No other venue
for them to seek out to help them. No other agency, public or private, that
can deal with the volume of kids in need.

So, basically, you are just as much an idiot today as you were 4 years ago
when I made my first response to one of your inane posts. People are
supposed to grow as time passes fern, why do you insist on stagnating?

Ron

[Kane]

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 11:13:14 -0500, "Ron"
> wrote:

>
>"Fern5827" > wrote in message
...
>
>In reference to your question, " Who can justify continuance?", well
that
>has a simple answer.

Not simple enough for Fern.

>Every abused and neglected child in the system, the courts, the
therapists,
>the citizens would have to deal with these kids in their every-day
lives as
>these kids grow and become adults and perpetrate these same crimes on
their
>own children and the other people around them.

I have to ask myself what's in it for these twits to destroy society.
To foist generation after generation of damaged miserable unhappy
violent people on the population. I think I know what they want, but
don't want to believe it.

>Something has to be done about the problem fern, and ignoring it is
simply
>not the answer.

I think it is for the mentally and socially maladjusted. That IS the
answer they keep pointing to.

>These kids grow up screwed almost from the moment they are
>born.

Naw. Your wrong. About 60% are screwed up in untero.

>As so many here have pointed out, they represent a significant
>percentage of the individuals in our nations prisons.

And under overpasses, and in and out of mental hospitals, and living
next door to us.

>Imagine what it would
>be like if they went through the early part of their lives without
>intervention of any kind, knowing nothing but violence and harm from
their
>own families.

Some do. You'll find them at the above locations. Having worked in
most of them I can tell you that childhood abuse and neglect is THE
common denominator in nearly every case......and I never found a
single one, not ONE where it wasn't the case.

>Not only would there be a higher percentage of them resident
>in our prisons, but they would be there for even more violent crimes.

Either they, being the people that infest this ng with their
sickeness, or those that stand to profit, ..and both are sick, live in
protected enclaves, or they want the power that comes with a disabled
populace.

>Abolishing the only system that has a chance of helping these kids is
not
>the answer, never has been. I have been saying that for years now.
Yet
>people like yourself continue to advocate just that, and for as small
a
>reason as an unchecked box on some inspection sheet somewhere. Even
if the
>states fail all parts of this dubious standard you harp on so much,
there is
>no other place that can address the issues that these kids. No other
venue
>for them to seek out to help them. No other agency, public or
private, that
>can deal with the volume of kids in need.

The states actually had higher marks in the more critical areas.. of
safety and family services. Most passed except in the areas that have
less intense need in them.

A read of the report site on the fed web site at the URL below starts
to clear things up nicely.....as these twits having lied:

First, the most recent reporting states results for 2003...missing
states are not compiled as yet..but it gives you a picture of the
strengths areas. (identified strengths are marked with a checkmark).

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/cwrp/keyfindings2003.pdf

I believe the next document is the final summary of the 2001 - 2002
"audit" and does not say that all states failed in all categories...so
claiming "all states failed" is a patent lie.

The final chart in the PDF file gives one the sense there was mostly
compliance and strengths, in the final analysis.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/cwrp/2002cfsrresults.pdf

[[[ Rather impressive results in the seven areas of the assessment.
Even with the strongly negative criticism of the report's authors, the
areas of greatest concern are NOT on the safety end, but in fact on
the other areas. ]]]

"Findings on the Systemic Factors Table 3 shows the number of States
determined to be in substantial conformity on each of the seven
systemic factors in the CFSR.

[[[ they open with a rather positive statement, that brings into sharp
relief Fern's statement that all states "failed" and shows it to be a
lie. ]]]

States' performance was weakest in the case review system.

[[[ Case review is not an "emergency level" issue.. as important as it
is, children are not likely to be abused or neglected if it is a
weakness ]]]

In particular, they were weak in having written case plans for
children developed jointly with the child's parents and in having
timely and effective permanency hearings.

[[[ I have said before, and I'll repeat it.......in those areas where
OTHERS have control of an issue, CPS cannot force them to comply. It's
easy, and done repeatedly, in holding up proceedings by the client,
not CPS. ]]]

In addition, States were weak in having a process to ensure
termination of parental rights.

[[[ I find this one distasteful because it leaves the child in TC too
long...but it is not life threatening ]]]

Within the service array, the accessibility of services was a
particular weakness as many services are either not available
statewide or have long waiting lists or other barriers to
accessibility.

[[[ Directly attributable to ratio between the numbers trying to be
served, and the funding which has been drastically falling ]]]

Diligent recruitment of foster and adoptive families that represent
the racial and ethnic backgrounds of children in the State needing
placement was an especially weak area."

[[[ One of the most expensive items in adoption and foster budgets.
And in a population that is less and less willing to take on the
burden....as they learn over the years just how badly children are
damanged....more and more difficult to recruit. Wednesday's Child in
our area would produce 100 to 200 inquiry calls.

Today the same program is lucky to produce 5 to 15 calls. With both
producing about a 10 to 15 follow through by the callers, that is
applying to be foster or adoptive parents, and about half those
dropping out along the way, or being rejected for cause (like those
National criminal background checks Doug claims CPS can't
get)....recruitment is, per famiily that actually fosters or adopts,
extremely expensive.

>So, basically, you are just as much an idiot today as you were 4
years ago

Naw, much worse now. Fewer braincells left.

>when I made my first response to one of your inane posts. People are
>supposed to grow as time passes fern, why do you insist on
stagnating?

Can't help it. Too much chemical mixing.

>Ron

Kane