![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#221
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Doug wrote:
Why are non-victims provided "services?" Because they are removed during the investigation and it was not determined they were NON-VICTIMS until the investigation was complete. Hi, Kane, You are quite incorrect. And you are lying again. Services are usually provided families whose children have not been removed. "Usually?" More equivocating language, Doug? That's how you get started with a lie. Some are, and some aren't, Doug. Claiming I'm "incorrect" is more of your bull**** spinning. Grow up. So, the fact that services are provided does not equate to children being removed during the investigation. Of course not. It's simple ONE of the reasons. The opposite is true. And you go on to describe something not "the opposite." Removal itself is a "service," but the vast majority of families who are forced into accepting CPS services, whether they involve substantiated victims or unsubstantiated non-victims, involve children who are NOT removed during the investigation. Some are, some are not. Aren't you ashamed of yourself for reading that one of the circumstances IS, just as I've said in the past, removal during investigations? You should be. In fact, the method used to force families to accept services is the THREAT to remove their children. The threat of removal is, as you have explained, the "stick" CPS uses to force parents to accept services. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't. And we've discussed this many times. How would YOU get a family to accept "services," Doug. Get down on your knees and beg? The court says deliver services. That's what CPS is required to do. A simple check of Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) annually shows that a very small percentage of non-victim children are returned to their homes within the time frame of an investigation (60 days). Let's see the data, Doug. So it is immediately obvious that the vast majority of the nonvictims who were removed from their homes spent much, much longer in foster care. We know you are lying now, Doug, because I've posted a clear explanation, with citation, just what a "non-victim," is and is not. And it does NOT mean in all cases, or even the majority (quite the contrary) that the child was in fact not victimized. In fact, the majority of non-victims are not removed during the investigation at all. Now you want it both ways? Interesting. When are they removed? After the unsubstantiated finding. And back to yet another long resolved issue. "Unsubstantiated" does not mean the child was not a victim. This is a long standing problem in child protection...just what constitutes that label, and what it actually means. Just how long are you going to lie about this, Doug? During the investigation, parents relunctantly agree to "services" under threat of removal of their children. Some services are no more than having their child evaluated. And most cases are in fact valid reports of abuse and neglect, substantiated or not. The children stay in the home, and a safety plan is signed by the parents. As NCANDS reports, most "services" begin at this point. 30 to 60 days later the investigation is completed with a finding of unsubstantiated. And, sometime during the months that follow, the parents miss a hoop in their "safety plans" that mandated the "services." Remember the stick? Sure do. And prove that statement, please. Well, a stick is not effective unless it is used. Since the parents messed up on one "service" or another, CPS now makes good on its threat and removes the non-victim children many months after the investigation concluded with an unsubstantiated finding. Depends on what "the stick," is, Doug. And you know it. It isn't failure to brush the child's hair, Doug. It's more often a dirty UA, or failing to show for visitations with the child that was a "victim" and was removed and is in foster care. Or more criminal activity. I love how you portray the bio parents as poor helpless victims of the system, Doug. It's a lie. Children who were found by CPS itself not to be at risk of or actually maltreated are now forcibly removed from their families because mom or dad missed a hoop. Depends on what the hoop was and is, Doug. Just as I said above. That is why Dan advised members of this group never to sign a safety plan that provides "services" or remedies for transgressions the parents are not guilty of. BTW, whatever happened to your claim that the 69,000 to 109,000 non-victim children removed their unsubstantiated families annually were "siblings" of children substantiated as victims? (Which was proven false.) No it wasn't. And I did not claim all were. And whatever happened to your claim that these nonvictims removed from their homes are really children who were substantiated for some forms of risk or abuse/neglect and unsubstantiated for others? Children that were alleged to have been victims can be found to be, and still assessed as "unsubstantiated," Doug, and you know that from our past discussions and my proof from studies. NCANDS data disproves this immediately because the sum of non-victims and victims add up to the total number of children subject to investigations or assessments. Nonsense. Babble. You repeatedly try shots in the dark to explain this glaring statistic -- Nope. I've provided authoritative citations that show why it's not all simple and cut and dried as you hope to make it out to be. that tens of thousands of nonvictim children are forcibly removed from their unsubstantiated families each year. Yes, the jackbooted thugs come in with truncheons swinging and rip the little babies from their mother's arms, and there is blood everywhere. 0;- Obviously, the causal variable to removal is often not the maltreatment of the child or even that the child is at risk. Bull****, Doug. Pure unadulterated bull****. Lying through your teeth, Doug. As always. http://www.sacbee.com/static/archive...e/part_05.html http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/children/a...s/report.shtml http://preventchildabuseny.org/cpsandcourts.shtml "The caseworker and agency cannot force your family to use these services. But, if the Child Protective Services staff believes that a child needs care or protection and the family is not willing to provide it, they will petition the Family Court to order the necessary services." http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Child_Pr...arentguide.asp "What is Child Protective Services? The CPS program receives, investigates, and assesses reports of child abuse and neglect by parents, family, or household members. CPS offers services after investigations if: * children are not immediately safe from abuse or neglect; or * a reasonable likelihood exists that children will be abused or neglected in the foreseeable future and families have demonstrated that they cannot control factors placing children at risk of abuse or neglect. If needed, services are offered to parents to help them solve their problems and learn how to care for and discipline their children in ways that do not harm them or place them at risk of abuse or neglect. These services may include: * counseling, * day care, * homemaker, * evaluation and treatment, and * parenting training. " And then, of course, there is Ron's claim that all of these non-victims were removed from their homes voluntarily upon the wishes of their parents. "All?" Lying again, Doug? You have taken three shots at an explanation. No, Doug. I have argued this with you for three YEARS, and you have dodged, lied, spun, and otherwise twisted the truth. All three have been proven incorrect. Do you want to give it another shot? No, none have been proven incorrect, Doug. Not to anyone who reads the cited material I've posted for over two years here, and is objective. Would YOU like to try again? Say without the artful snipping and without the blatant lies about my past postings? 0:- -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
#222
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Doug" wrote in message ... Why are non-victims provided "services?" Because they are removed during the investigation and it was not determined they were NON-VICTIMS until the investigation was complete. Hi, Kane, You are quite incorrect. Services are usually provided families whose children have not been removed. Actually doug, you are quite incorrect. Services are provided to families AND children, both before and after removal. Removal itself is a service, for the child. "Based on data from 35 States, it is estimated that 26.7 children per 1,000 children in the population received preventive services. This results in a national estimate of nearly 2,000,000 children." "Almost 60 percent (59.4%) of the child victims received postinvestigation services. Nearly 30 percent (27.3%) of nonvictims received such services." http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/...ix.htm#prevent Ron So, the fact that services are provided does not equate to children being removed during the investigation. The opposite is true. Removal itself is a "service," but the vast majority of families who are forced into accepting CPS services, whether they involve substantiated victims or unsubstantiated non-victims, involve children who are NOT removed during the investigation. In fact, the method used to force families to accept services is the THREAT to remove their children. The threat of removal is, as you have explained, the "stick" CPS uses to force parents to accept services. A simple check of Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) annually shows that a very small percentage of non-victim children are returned to their homes within the time frame of an investigation (60 days). So it is immediately obvious that the vast majority of the nonvictims who were removed from their homes spent much, much longer in foster care. In fact, the majority of non-victims are not removed during the investigation at all. When are they removed? After the unsubstantiated finding. During the investigation, parents relunctantly agree to "services" under threat of removal of their children. The children stay in the home, and a safety plan is signed by the parents. As NCANDS reports, most "services" begin at this point. 30 to 60 days later the investigation is completed with a finding of unsubstantiated. And, sometime during the months that follow, the parents miss a hoop in their "safety plans" that mandated the "services." Remember the stick? Well, a stick is not effective unless it is used. Since the parents messed up on one "service" or another, CPS now makes good on its threat and removes the non-victim children many months after the investigation concluded with an unsubstantiated finding. Children who were found by CPS itself not to be at risk of or actually maltreated are now forcibly removed from their families because mom or dad missed a hoop. That is why Dan advised members of this group never to sign a safety plan that provides "services" or remedies for transgressions the parents are not guilty of. BTW, whatever happened to your claim that the 69,000 to 109,000 non-victim children removed their unsubstantiated families annually were "siblings" of children substantiated as victims? (Which was proven false.) And whatever happened to your claim that these nonvictims removed from their homes are really children who were substantiated for some forms of risk or abuse/neglect and unsubstantiated for others? NCANDS data disproves this immediately because the sum of non-victims and victims add up to the total number of children subject to investigations or assessments. You repeatedly try shots in the dark to explain this glaring statistic -- that tens of thousands of nonvictim children are forcibly removed from their unsubstantiated families each year. Obviously, the causal variable to removal is often not the maltreatment of the child or even that the child is at risk. And then, of course, there is Ron's claim that all of these non-victims were removed from their homes voluntarily upon the wishes of their parents. You have taken three shots at an explanation. All three have been proven incorrect. Do you want to give it another shot? |
#223
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You are quite incorrect. Services are usually provided families whose
children have not been removed. Actually doug, you are quite incorrect. Hi, Ron, Nope, services are most often provided to family members when the children remain in the home. 518,000 child victims of substantiated reports received post-investigation services in 2004 (services provided during or after an investigation). This involved 59.4% of child victims. 19% of child victims were removed from their substantiated families. And 40.6% of child victims received no services at all and remained in the home. http://tinyurl.com/h24ht Of the 518,000 child victims who received services, around 165,531 child victims were removed from the home -- which constituted the "service." 352,469 of the child victims who received services (68%) remained in the home before, during and after the investigation. http://tinyurl.com/h24ht Once again, services are most often provided to family members when the children remain in the home. 718,000 child non-victims from families unsubstantiated for risk of or actual child maltreatment received services in 2004 (27.3% of the 2,631,000 children found in CPS investigations to be non-victims). 102,609 of these non-victims were removed from their unsubstantiated families. That means that 615,391 non-victim children who received services remained in their homes before, during and after the investigation. In other words, 86% of the non-victims who received services remained in the home. http://tinyurl.com/h24ht Once again, services are most often provided to family members when the children remain in the home. Services are provided to families AND children, both before and after removal. Removal itself is a service, for the child. The "child based" statistics you quote and we both reference with the same URL counts the non-victim or child victim as receiving services if his or her family received services. Simply put, NCANDS tracks two sets of data...case based and child based. Child based data would show services provided the child if she or anyone else in case received services. "Almost 60 percent (59.4%) of the child victims received postinvestigation services. Nearly 30 percent (27.3%) of nonvictims received such services." http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/...ix.htm#prevent |
#224
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I had written:
Services are usually provided families whose children have not been removed. To which, Kane replies: "Usually?" More equivocating language, Doug? That's how you get started with a lie. Yep, usually. Specifically, 352,469 of the 518,000 child victims who received services stayed in their homes before, during and after the investigation. 68% of the substantiated families who received services involved child victims who remained in the home. http://tinyurl.com/h24ht Almost 41% of the child victims in substantiated families received no services at all and remained in the home before, during and after the investigation. http://tinyurl.com/h24ht Yet a whopping 718,000 non-victim children in unsubstantiated families were forced into services. And 102,609 of those non-victim children received the "service" of being forcibly removed from their unsubstantiated families. The vast majority of reports screened in for investigation or assessment are unfounded. 2,631,000 of the 3.4 million children investigated by CPS in 2004 were subjects of unsubstantiated findings by CPS. Yet 718,000 of these non-victim children received services. 102,609 of these non-victims were removed from their unsubstantiated families. That means that 615,391 non-victim children who received services remained in their homes before, during and after the investigation. In other words, 86% of the non-victims who received services remained in the home. http://tinyurl.com/h24ht Specifically, 68% of child victims who received services remained in the home before, during and after the investigation and 86% of child non-victims who received services remained in the home. Some are, and some aren't, Doug. Claiming I'm "incorrect" is more of your bull**** spinning. Your statement which I have proven was incorrect was: "Why are non-victims provided "services?" Because they are removed during the investigation and it was not determined they were NON-VICTIMS until the investigation was complete." Removal itself is a "service," but the vast majority of families who are forced into accepting CPS services, whether they involve substantiated victims or unsubstantiated non-victims, involve children who are NOT removed during the investigation. Some are, some are not. Aren't you ashamed of yourself for reading that one of the circumstances IS, just as I've said in the past, removal during investigations? You should be. Specifically, 68% of child victims receiving services and 86% of child non-victims receiving services remain in their homes before, during and after the investigation. In fact, the method used to force families to accept services is the THREAT to remove their children. The threat of removal is, as you have explained, the "stick" CPS uses to force parents to accept services. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't. And we've discussed this many times. How would YOU get a family to accept "services," Doug. Get down on your knees and beg? The court says deliver services. That's what CPS is required to do. Court proceedings to determine temporary custody of the victim, guardianship of the victim, or disposition of State dependency petitions were reported as being initiated to 16.7 percent of child victims in substantiated families. Court-appointed representatives were assigned for less than 13% of the child victims. http://tinyurl.com/h24ht A simple check of Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) annually shows that a very small percentage of non-victim children are returned to their homes within the time frame of an investigation (60 days). Let's see the data, Doug. I have shown you the data repeatedly. Go take a look at it again. So it is immediately obvious that the vast majority of the nonvictims who were removed from their homes spent much, much longer in foster care. We know you are lying now, Doug, because I've posted a clear explanation, with citation, just what a "non-victim," is and is not. And it does NOT mean in all cases, or even the majority (quite the contrary) that the child was in fact not victimized. Actually, "non-victim" means precisely that -- not victimized. In fact, a non-victim is a child subject of a report CPS workers have unsubstantiated. A clear explanation, with citation, of just what an unsubstantiated finding is follows: "Unsubstantiated: A type of investigation disposition that determines that there was not sufficient evidence under State law to conclude or suspect that the child was maltreated or at risk of being maltreated." http://tinyurl.com/gaksr The defination of substantiated and unsubstantiated is also found in state statutes in all 50 states and published in the desposition given the subjects of an investigation. When a family receives notice of the finding in their case, the defination of each finding is published in the notice. The statutory language of these guidelines CPS must follow, by law, is identical or very similar to the federal defination cited above. In states that use a dual-track approach that includes either investigation or assessment, non-victim children are subject to CPS concluding that "the child was not identified as a victim when a response other than investigation was provided." http://tinyurl.com/gaksr In fact, the majority of non-victims are not removed during the investigation at all. Now you want it both ways? Interesting. Never said it any other way than the above. The vast majority of non-victim children are not removed during the investigation at all. When are they removed? After the unsubstantiated finding. Yes. And back to yet another long resolved issue. "Unsubstantiated" does not mean the child was not a victim. This is a long standing problem in child protection...just what constitutes that label, and what it actually means. Actually, that is precisely what it means. Moreover, it means that the CPS workers themselves found no credible evidence to SUSPECT that the non-victim was at risk of maltreatment or actually maltreated. Just how long are you going to lie about this, Doug? During the investigation, parents relunctantly agree to "services" under threat of removal of their children. Some services are no more than having their child evaluated. And most cases are in fact valid reports of abuse and neglect, substantiated or not. The vast majority of reports investigated or assessed by CPS are found by the caseworkers themselves to be unsubstantiated. 2,631,000 of the 3.4 million children subject to investigations or assessments by CPS were unsubstantiated in 2004. The children stay in the home, and a safety plan is signed by the parents. As NCANDS reports, most "services" begin at this point. 30 to 60 days later the investigation is completed with a finding of unsubstantiated. And, sometime during the months that follow, the parents miss a hoop in their "safety plans" that mandated the "services." Remember the stick? Sure do. And prove that statement, please. Well, a stick is not effective unless it is used. Since the parents messed up on one "service" or another, CPS now makes good on its threat and removes the non-victim children many months after the investigation concluded with an unsubstantiated finding. Depends on what "the stick," is, Doug. And you know it. It isn't failure to brush the child's hair, Doug. It's more often a dirty UA, or failing to show for visitations with the child that was a "victim" and was removed and is in foster care. Or more criminal activity. I love how you portray the bio parents as poor helpless victims of the system, Doug. I was talking about the non-victim children of unsubstantiated families. Where has it be shown that the unsubstantiated parents had a drug problem to begin with, or was ever involved in criminal activity. I made reference in my statement to unsubstantiated families who were forced to jump through hoops under the threat to remove their non-victim children. Again, in such cases, the hoop would not involve failing to visit children in foster care since they have not been removed but under the threat of removal. It's a lie. Children who were found by CPS itself not to be at risk of or actually maltreated are now forcibly removed from their families because mom or dad missed a hoop. Depends on what the hoop was and is, Doug. The hoops usually come from the cookie cutter -- parenting classes, therapy. Regardless, the family was unsubstantiated and the children found by CPS to be non-victims. But before the family learns of the disposition of the case (in a letter 30 days later, which also defines all of the findings) the parents signed a safety plan mandating services. Months later, the non-victim child is forcibly removed from her unsubstantiated parents because the parent(s) did not complete services (hoops) they did not need in the first place. Again, the removal is done after the unsubstantiated finding and has nothing to do with abuse or neglect, but the failure of the parent to jump through hoops they committed to under the threat of their children being removed. If you need a stick to force services, sooner or later you have to use the stick. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
We Don Need No Steenkin' Parenting Classes | [email protected] | Spanking | 2 | March 24th 05 11:55 PM |
Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS | Kane | General | 9 | February 24th 04 06:35 AM |
Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS | Kane | Spanking | 9 | February 24th 04 06:35 AM |
We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS | Doan | General | 0 | January 31st 04 04:03 PM |
We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS | Kane | Spanking | 1 | January 31st 04 04:03 PM |