Michigan's New Powers

The State of Michigan has just been exposed to what Legally Kidnapped has coined as Systemsuckology.


Senator Liz Brater (D) introduced on September 29, 2010, 2010 Senate Bill 1533 (Revise court child removal power )


The substance of the bill is to increase the authority of a court to remove a child from a home and place him or her in a foster care home if the leaving the child with his or her parents presents a substantial risk of harm, is contrary to his or her welfare, the alternative living arrangement is adequate to safeguard the child.


Now, the bill has been referred to the Senate Families and Human Services Committee on September 29, 2010.  We can only pray it stays there and dies in December.


Before I address this bill, please look at the proposed revisions.

     

(8) THE COURT MAY ORDER PLACEMENT OF THE CHILD IN FOSTER CARE

IF THE COURT FINDS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

     (A) CUSTODY OF THE CHILD WITH THE PARENT PRESENTS A

SUBSTANTIAL RISK OF HARM TO THE CHILD'S LIFE, PHYSICAL HEALTH, OR

MENTAL WELL-BEING.

     (B) NO PROVISION OF SERVICE OR OTHER ARRANGEMENT EXCEPT

REMOVAL OF THE CHILD IS REASONABLY AVAILABLE TO ADEQUATELY

SAFEGUARD THE CHILD FROM RISK AS DESCRIBED IN SUBDIVISION (A).

     (C) CONTINUING THE CHILD'S RESIDENCE IN THE HOME IS CONTRARY

TO THE CHILD'S WELFARE.

     (D) CONSISTENT WITH THE CIRCUMSTANCES, REASONABLE EFFORTS WERE

MADE TO PREVENT OR ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR REMOVAL OF THE CHILD.

     (E) CONDITIONS OF CHILD CUSTODY AWAY FROM THE PARENT ARE

ADEQUATE TO SAFEGUARD THE CHILD'S HEALTH AND WELFARE.

Then it goes on...

 SEC. 14A. (1) IF THERE IS REASONABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT A

CHILD IS SUFFERING FROM SERIOUS HARM OR IS IN SURROUNDINGS THAT

PRESENT AN IMMINENT RISK OF HARM AND THE CHILD'S IMMEDIATE REMOVAL

FROM THOSE SURROUNDINGS IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE CHILD'S HEALTH

AND SAFETY, AN OFFICER MAY, WITHOUT A COURT ORDER, IMMEDIATELY TAKE

THAT CHILD INTO PROTECTIVE CUSTODY. AN OFFICER WHO TAKES A CHILD

INTO PROTECTIVE CUSTODY UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY

THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES. WHILE AWAITING THE ARRIVAL OF THE

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, THE CHILD SHALL NOT BE HELD IN A

DETENTION FACILITY.

     (2) IF A CHILD TAKEN INTO PROTECTIVE CUSTODY UNDER THIS

SECTION IS NOT RELEASED, THE OFFICER OR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN

SERVICES SHALL IMMEDIATELY CONTACT THE DESIGNATED JUDGE OR REFEREE,

AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION (3), TO SEEK A COURT ORDER FOR PLACEMENT

OF THE CHILD PENDING A PRELIMINARY HEARING.

     (3) THE CHIEF JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT SHALL DESIGNATE A

JUDGE OR REFEREE WHO MAY BE CONTACTED WHEN A PLACEMENT ORDER IS

SOUGHT FOR A CHILD IN PROTECTIVE CUSTODY UNDER THIS SECTION. IF THE

COURT IS CLOSED, THE DESIGNATED JUDGE OR REFEREE MAY ORDER

PLACEMENT IF THE PLACEMENT ORDER IS IMMEDIATELY COMMUNICATED,

ELECTRONICALLY OR OTHERWISE, TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY DEPARTMENT

OFFICE AND FILED WITH THE COURT THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY. WHEN A

PLACEMENT ORDER IS ISSUED BY A DESIGNATED REFEREE, THE ORDER SHALL

TAKE EFFECT AS AN INTERIM ORDER PENDING A PRELIMINARY HEARING.

     (4) A PLACEMENT ORDER ISSUED UNDER SUBSECTION (3) SHALL

INDICATE THAT CONTINUATION IN THE HOME IS CONTRARY TO THE CHILD'S

WELFARE AND MUST STATE THE BASIS FOR THAT DETERMINATION. THE

PLACEMENT ORDER SHALL BE SERVED ON THE PARTIES BEFORE THE

PRELIMINARY HEARING.

     (5) AS USED IN THIS SECTION, "OFFICER" MEANS A LOCAL POLICE

OFFICER, SHERIFF OR DEPUTY SHERIFF, STATE POLICE OFFICER, OR COUNTY

AGENT OR PROBATION OFFICER OF A COURT OF RECORD.

     SEC. 14B. (1) A JUDGE OR REFEREE MAY ISSUE AN EX PARTE ORDER

AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES TO IMMEDIATELY TAKE A

CHILD INTO PROTECTIVE CUSTODY AND PLACE THE CHILD PENDING THE

PRELIMINARY HEARING IF THE COURT FINDS ALL OF THE FOLLOWING:

     (A) THERE IS REASONABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE CHILD IS

SUFFERING FROM SERIOUS HARM OR IS IN SURROUNDINGS THAT PRESENT AN

IMMINENT RISK OF HARM AND THE CHILD'S IMMEDIATE REMOVAL FROM THOSE

SURROUNDINGS IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE CHILD'S HEALTH AND SAFETY.

     (B) THE CIRCUMSTANCES WARRANT ISSUING AN EX PARTE ORDER

PENDING THE PRELIMINARY HEARING.

     (C) CONSISTENT WITH THE CIRCUMSTANCES, REASONABLE EFFORTS WERE

MADE TO PREVENT OR ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR REMOVAL OF THE CHILD.

     (D) NO REMEDY OTHER THAN PROTECTIVE CUSTODY IS REASONABLY

AVAILABLE TO PROTECT THE CHILD.

     (E) CONTINUING TO RESIDE IN THE HOME IS CONTRARY TO THE

CHILD'S WELFARE.

     (2) THE ORDER SHALL BE SUPPORTED BY WRITTEN FINDINGS OF FACT.

I am going to interpret this as it was purposely written to be ambiguous.


Michigan has too many kids in its foster care system.  The state considers being poor as child abuse and neglect.  In a boiling pot of hot water for its child welfare system being dysfunctional to the point that it is on the verge of federal take over with the blatant fraud, waste and abuse of services, kiddy kickbacks...I could continue but you can just go to the National Archive On Child Welfare Fraud and look for Michigan.


Then there is the economic effect.  The state being in an economic precipitous condition makes for a decrease in employment and financial opportunities.  This means that the only place left to turn for basic needs is the state and as we all know...come on, let's say it together...

Failure to provide for the necessary needs of the child is child abuse and neglect.

What this means is, as more people turn to the social safety net, it is starting to fray because it has not been maintained.  In fact, the social safety net has been slowly stripped of some of its strongest ropes to build the foster care system.  Without any access to resources, there is no other option but to place the child in foster care.


This also hold true for medical and psychological needs.  The only place a child can obtain intensive mental health or acute care services is foster care.  Parents must go through the courts, with the petition and all.  This is called a voluntary placement.  


Of course, this voluntary placement is not a reported condition for foster care placement in the national statistics, but that is why I call those reports propaganda as they falsely document the system.


Back to Michigan and this bill.


There are situations that call for immediate intervention of youth, and that is juvenile justice.  Juvenile justice sucks, for lack of a better descriptive.  These facilities are operating on secondary provisional licensing and in some cases in Wayne County, with no license at all.  The conditions are horrific and do nothing but graduate, mostly young men, to the prison system.


Now comes healthcare reform and recovery assistance in the form of Medicaid.  Medicaid, being expanded in its scope to not only rebuild the social safety net, but to reinvest in education.  The financial carrot is dangling in the face of the state's legislators and a senator has attempted to take a bite.


From what I know and what I can analyze, this bill is an attempt to access increased Medicaid funding to benefit mostly juvenile delinquents.  That is why there is rhetoric to circumvent the warrant and investigation process for immediate removal.  The bill even states explicitly, "held in a detention facility."  Detention facility is code word for temporary foster care placement.  


Once the youth is in placement, eligibility for medical and psychological services are immediate and saves the caregivers from the horrors of Child Protective Services.


This bill looks like a youth mental health bill.


This bill looks like new rope to rebuild the social safety net and I hope they stripped it from the foster care system.


In order for a bill of this kind to be successful, Michigan will have to:

1. Accreditation: Establish a transparent process for accreditation of all state-wide child welfare/social service agencies.  Even though the example I present is based on adoptions, there needs to be a universal accreditation process;
2. State Complaint Registry: Construct a national complaint registry for any individual involved in the child protection system to have a voice.  Whether that voice is to lodge a complaint for child protection, or questionable actions and inactions of a social worker, or the child welfare agency, the people will be empowered to be the regulators.  Allow public access to this registry in the area of complaints made on child welfare/social services agencies for the purposes of publishing findings leading to contractual debarment, sanctions, prosecution and recovery of public funds;
3. Community involvement: The best practice for public awareness and education is to allow the public to be involved.  Each segment of the system should include community interaction, allowing community leaders to directly participate in the policy process.  Community involvement also includes the voice of children.  Let them always be heard. 

There is funding for this under electronic health record mandates of Medicaid but unless the state cleans house in child welfare, I guarantee if this is made law in its current form, there will be those graduates of systemsuckology would will use this increased power in the wrong way because the courts listen to people like this: