Michigan Desperately Prepares for Administrative Hearings to Expunge Names from Central Registry of Child Abuse

Contrary to what some "desperately-trying-to-look-competent" lawmakers will erroneously take credit, the law to allow for due process to expunge an individual from the Central Registry of Child Abuse stemmed from a lawsuit because these same "desperately-trying-to-look-competent" lawmakers refused to address the issue for grossly egregious reasons I shall expound upon in my book.

Michigan was sued and lost the case.

Basically, here is how Michigan has operated for far too long:

• You are anonymously reported to Child Protective Services
• Your name is put on the Central Registry
• You are charged in a court of law, without being notified, without legal representation, without being present
• Your are never notified that you have been charged
• You are never notified that your name is on the Central Registry
• If you are lucky to find out, you are denied petition for removal because you are on the Central Registry

Yes, this is actually how it works.  

There is no due process in child welfare.  You are guilty until proven innocent.

Compare the Child Welfare Central Registry to the Sex Offender Registry:

• You are charged in a court of law, with notification and legal representation
• You enter a plea
• You are afforded a trial
• You are allowed to confront your accuser
• You may challenge evidence
• You may cross examine witnesses
• You are tried by jury of your peers
• You are given a ruling, with opinion
• You are sentenced (or not) with right to appeal
• Upon appeal (depending on ruling) you must register your name on the Central Registry, only after conviction.

See the differences?

There are over 100,000 names on the Central Registry for Child Abuse, many placed solely out of conditions of poverty or inability to access medical services.

A significant percentage of those on the Central Registry have no idea their names are listed.

Michigan prepares for an onslaught of administrative petitions to remove names, beginning with Bills such as this.

The purpose of this Bill is to keep the proceedings as far away as possible from public purview as there will be nasty little secrets of Michigan administration and its contractual arms that will come out of the bowels of hell like fraudulent billing, rape, torture, suicide, murder...the list goes on.

And still, there is nothing contained in this Bill which will, if suspected or found, refer to the 

Attorney General Medicaid Fraud Control Unit for full prosecution.

The other Bill, or rather programming, is to privatize all child welfare services, absolving the State of all transgressions of law and policy by contractual entities, to place the burden of justice upon the poor who have no access to representation.

For those who are unaware of the process in Administrative Law, you have the ability to take any denial to Circuit Court, that is if you are lucky enough to find a competent attorney and a few dollars to pursue the case.

CHILD PROTECTION, CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS                                         H.B. 5198 (S-1):

                                                                                                    SUMMARY OF BILL

                                                                                      REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE

House Bill 5198 (Substitute S-1 as reported by the Committee of the Whole)

Sponsor:  Representative Michael D. McCready

House Committee:  Families, Children, Seniors

Senate Committee:  Families, Seniors and Human Services

CONTENT

The bill would amend the Child Protection Law to allow a confidential record to be made available to a Department of Human Services (DHS) employee actively representing himself or herself in a disciplinary action, a labor union representative actively representing a DHS employee in a disciplinary action, or an arbitrator or administrative law judge conducting a hearing involving a DHS employee's dereliction, malfeasance, or misfeasance of duty, for use solely in connection with that action or hearing. The disclosed information would have to be returned within 10 days after the hearing or action concluded. A recipient could not receive further disclosures while he or she retained disclosed information beyond the deadline specified for return.

The bill also would eliminate language allowing an agency to seek a court order to disclose confidential child protective services or foster care information for disciplinary purposes.

MCL 722.627                                                                   Legislative Analyst:  Jeff Mann

FISCAL IMPACT

The bill could result in minimal savings for the State and local courts, depending on the extent to which Department employees would request the information for the purposes described in the bill in a given fiscal year.

Date Completed:  12-16-14                                                Fiscal Analyst:  Frances Carley

This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©