Judiciary Ignores Custody In Child Welfare

A very interesting perspective we have here.

It seems the Center for Judicial Excellence has taken up the issue of child custody cases.

It is quite obvious these co-sponsors are not familar with all the facets of child welfare.

See, it is like this...In the video, below, there is not one mention of Child Protective Services (CPS).

There is no mention of the entire concept of Guardian Ad Litem as the first stage for termination of parental rights in the foster care system.

The issue of child custody only focuses on, well, divorce cases, basically.

There is no mention of foster care and adoption, the dark stain of our nation's history that built our great nation.

I speak upon the peculiar institution, but that is an entirely different issue, or rather the reason no one will speak upon it.

This is strickly an issue of property law, specifically, chattel law.

In all actuality, I am in stong concurrence with the Center for Judicial Excellence that child trafficking compases child welfare that the system is rigged against parents, particularly when it is privatized, devoid of any civil rights protections, and no ability to grieve, or, more intuitively, blow the whistle on the rampant amout of fraud and public corruption.

This House Concurrent Resolution skirts any issues in dealing with foster care and adoption because there are no reports, or system of recordkeeping, or avenue of recourse, or legal representation, because no one wants to know about the unspeakable horrors that go on behind the iron curtain of child welfare.

I speak upon the rapes, the beatings, the drug testing, the psychological experiements, the suicides,

the murders, the torture, the poor nutritien, the lack of education in foster care, for which the States are the legal guardian, the custodial guardian, an issue silently omitted.

Even if the term silently omitted is seen as redundant, then I believe I have gotten my point across that this House Concurrent Resolution is nothing more than posturing, because these people do not have a damn clue as to the magnitude of onerous activities perpetrated by even crueler individuals for profit.

But of course, in the spirit of fucshia, I giveth my 2 cents.

115th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. CON. RES. 72

Expressing the sense of Congress that child safety is the first priority of custody and visitation adjudications, and that State courts should improve adjudications of custody where family violence is alleged, with the except of any federal funded program in foster care and adoption.

---

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 24, 2017

Mr. Meehan (for himself, Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York, Mr. Franks of Arizona, Mr. Suozzi, Mr. Raskin, Ms. Eshoo, Ms. Speier, and Mr.Carter of Texas) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

Watch Judiciary hold one of those warm and fuzzy hearings to keep in step with its promulgation of child welfare propaganda.

Bob Goodlatte Has An Issue In Judiciary, Dark Campaign Money & Medicaid Fraud In Child Welfare

---

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that child safety is the first priority of custody and visitation adjudications, and that State courts should improve adjudications of custody where family violence is alleged in foster, adoption, or any other residential institutional program for children & youth.

Whereas approximately 15 million children are exposed each year to domestic violence and/or child abuse, which are often linked but would produced higher numbers is the same definition of domestic violence and child abuse were applied to the child welfare population under the custody of the States;

Whereas child sexual abuse is significantly under-documented, and under-addressed in the legal system and in the child welfare system;

Whereas child abuse is a major public health issue in the United States, with total lifetime estimated financial costs associated with just one year of confirmed cases of child maltreatment (including physical abuse, sexual abuse, psychological abuse and neglect) amounting to approximately $124 billion but the profit generated through 501c3 privately contracted child placing agencies of the States provides another justification over the inate systemic ability to engage in blatant fraud, to make this an affront for failing to apply the same definition of domestic violence to juvenile justice, residential institutions, foster care & adoption.

Whereas according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, federally launched, funded and tracked longitudinal research into “adverse childhood experiences” (the ACEs study) has shown that “children who experience abuse and neglect are also at increased risk for adverse health effects and certain chronic diseases as adults, including heart disease, cancer, chronic lung disease, liver disease, obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and high levels of C-reactive protein” including those foster children who are used as lab rats in psychological and medical human testing;

Whereas research confirms that allegations of domestic violence, child abuse, and child sexual abuse are often discounted when raised in child custody litigation particularly in child welfare;

Whereas research shows that abusive parents, foster parents and the staff of child welfare residential institutions, rather the States are often granted custody or unprotected parenting time by courts, placing children at ongoing risk;

Whereas research confirms that a child’s risk of abuse increases after a perpetrator of domestic violence separates from a domestic partner, even when the perpetrator has not previously abused the child due to poverty being codified as the crime of abuse and neglect;

Whereas researchers have documented a minimum of 568 children murdered in the United States in a 10-year period by a parent involved in a divorce, separation, custody, visitation, or child support proceeding, often after access was provided by family courts over the objections of a protective parent;

Whereas researchers have not documented anything dealing with rape, torture or deaths in foster care and adoption;

Whereas scientifically unsound theories such as parental alienation syndrome, enmeshment, and others are frequently applied to reject parents’ and children’s reports of abuse;

Whereas scientifically unsound theories such as opposition defiant disorder are frequently applied to reject children who report abuse in child welfare.

Whereas in cases involving allegations of family violence courts should rely on the assistance of third-party professionals only when they possess the proper experience or expertise for assessing family violence and trauma, and apply scientifically sound and evidence-based theories because this is just how privatization social impact bonds operate.

Whereas most States lack standards defining required expertise and experience for court-affiliated or appointed fee-paid professionals in custody litigation or the required contents of custody-related expert reports which means privatized 501c3s can promote their new layers of some made up programs to add on another layer of Medicaid billing in child welfare programs;

Whereas custody litigation involving abuse allegations is sometimes prohibitively expensive, resulting in parental bankruptcy, as a result of court-mandated payments to appointed fee-paid professionals, in addition to attorneys’ fees, and termination of parental rights and adoption which generates revenue for private contractors; and

Whereas the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights found that the United States is failing in its legal obligation to protect women and children from domestic violence and the fact that there is no civil rights in child welfare: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 

(1) child safety is the first priority of custody and parenting adjudications, and courts should resolve safety risks and claims of family violence first, as a fundamental consideration, before assessing other best interest factors;

(2) quasi-scientific evidence should be admitted by courts only when it meets admissibility standards for scientific evidence and be introduced by a privatized, tax exempt, quasi-governmental organization that has no obligation to document reports of fraud, waste or abuse;

(3) evidence from court-affiliated or appointed fee-paid professionals regarding adult or child abuse allegations in custody cases should be admitted only when the professional possesses documented expertise and experience in the relevant types of abuse, trauma, and the behaviors of victims and perpetrators where this definition excludes law enforcement to investigate abuse and neglect in child welfare;

(4) States should define required standards of expertise and experience for appointed fee-paid professionals who provide evidence to the court on abuse, traumatized behaviors of victims and perpetrators, should specify requirements for the contents of such professional reports, and should require courts to find that any appointed professionals meet those standards and provide opportunity for children, families and staff to engage in whistleblower activities without any form of retaliation;

(5) States should consider models under which court-appointed professionals are paid directly by the courts, with potential reimbursement by the parties after due consideration of the parties’ financial circumstances because the state court administration in child custody cases is seperate and distinct from current child abuse and neglect cases which allows for more privatizing the ability to expand a child welfare population by identifying poverty as abuse, and parents & guardians are in the child welfare system due to the fact that they meet the poverty criteria of Title IV-A and cannot afford, nor find an attorney willing to take a case that may get them blackballed; and

(6) Congress should schedule hearings on family courts’ practices with regard to the objective, fair, and adjudication of children’s safety and civil rights because civil rights do not exist in child welfare, where one is guilty until proven innocent as it takes a judicial determination to turn on the federal funding spigot.

If this ever comes up for hearing, I am willing to wager that there will be no mention of custody in child welfare.

I need to hasten the first installment of my book.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©