Pam Lajiness, A Michigan Unsung Hero Against Child Welfare Fraud Dies

Pam Lajiness - Life Story Digital Video

As part of my my mission to end Medicaid fraud in child welfare, I have come to recognize that I am the only person who can document the work of those tirelessly dedicated individuals who shall no longer be forever excluded from the annals of history.

Pam Lajiness is an individual who shall now be honored.

Pam was a long time investigator of the former Michigan Department of Human Services, Office of Childrens and Adults Licensing (OCAL) of whom I am proud to call my mentor into the absolutely pathetic investigative licensing process in Michigan child welfare agency licensing.

I met her through my friend and strongest advocate for Faded Families, Darlene King.

Places like Catholic Charities,  Bethany Christian Services and Wayne County Juvenile Detention should not be in operation.  The list of facilities that should never have human contact is quite extensive in Michigan, but still allowed to operate under the premise of "too big to fail" and the lack of alternatives.

It was Pam who motivated and directed me to unveil the horrors of Michigan's child welfare system of what I call the Dark Ages of Michigan.

I began to look at contracts and enforcement.  It was a quick exercise as many of the child placing agencies did not possess either.

There were many cases where children should never have been in care, but what makes matters worse is that I would attend cases in the Court of Appeals where I would be in possession of first hand information of the hellish conditions set for adoption in Michigan law.

I watched Assistant Daniel Beaton lie through his fucking teeth, in a court of law, contrary to Pam's report findings, as these reports have no weight in a court of law, to keep the secret Medicaid revenue-maximization schemes of the Michigan Children's Institute.

It was human trafficking.

Pam Lajiness and Darlene King empowered me to put together the first and only comprehensive history of the Michigan Children's Institute.

First Amended Petition of Quo Warranto by Beverly Tran

Thank you, Pam.  I will stay true to my mission and keep your legacy alive.

BTW,  Steve Yager is still a piece of shit.   <====  #DOJ

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan House Passes Medicaid Fraud Bills

Here is my question:

If the 17 christian (non-capitalization is intentional) child placing agencies can turn away prospective

adoptive persons based on sexual orientation, does it also mean these agencies can deny services to foster children based on sexual orientation also?

These faith-based, nonprofit corporations are exempt from any oversight and typically will proceed with recommendations of extended stays in foster care and termination of parental rights on the premise of whatever they consider to be moral turpitude.

What is next?  Denial based on the color of one's skin?  It could be.

Michigan Children's Institute Superintendent Bruce Hoffman, groomed by Bill Johnson, already makes such decisions when considering adoption.  Based on the Cotton doctrine, the decision to deny adoption must be proved to have been "arbitrary and capricious", not that the decision was wrong or discriminating.

No where in these Bills is there mention of the decision process.  The Bills are severely flawed because they contain prejudicial decision making, or rather, the Bills legislate the courts via prejudice.

Adoption of foster children is a federally funded service.  To deny anyone services based on a questionable internal policy is nothing short of being unlawfully discriminating.

There is no due process in child welfare.

I hope HHS financially penalizes the State, again.

Why would anyone want to "preserve" such a corrupt system which was designed as a predatory aggressor to the poor?

It is because they want the money, Medicaid dollars.  Today, it is child placing agencies, tomorrow it is Social Security.

All policies begin with children.

The faith-based angle using the Religious Freedom Restoration Act began years ago and started out of Michigan.  It failed to succeed in ratifying the Constitution.  Now, they have revamped to diffuse it State by State.

These Bills are the beginning of the dismantling of civil rights through privatization.

Pay close attention to these names:

George Darany, of Dearborn,
Robert Kosowski of Westland,
Sam Singh if Lansing, the Representative who offered amendment of 90 effectuation, and,
Harvey Santana of Detroit,the Representative who introduced the Bill.

What gets me the most is there is language to ban the state departments from regulating these agencies.

These Bills are nothing but legislated Medicaid fraud in child welfare.

Michigan House OKs bills on faith-based adoption refusal

LANSING — Faith-based adoption agencies could refuse to serve prospective parents based on their religious beliefs under a package of bills that passed the state House of Representatives Wednesday.

The bills, which would allow the agencies to refuse service to same-sex or unmarried couples if that goes against their religious beliefs, are moving as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments next month on whether same-sex marriage should be legal in Michigan and several other states in the region.

All three bills passed on 65-44 votes, with Democratic Reps. George Darany, of Dearborn, Robert Kosowski of Westland and Harvey Santana of Detroit, joining all but one Republican in voting for the package. State Rep. Mike Callton, R-Nashville, voted against the bills.

The votes came after passionate debate in the House with supporters saying the bills ensured that the state continue to offer as many adoption options as possible.

"These bills simply preserve the system we use today," said Rep. Andrea LaFontaine, R-Columbus.

"This bill is not about who can and who cannot adopt a child . it's about ensuring the most alternatives for people wanting to adopt a child." Tom Hickson, vice president for public policy at the Michigan Catholic Conference, said the bills were an important tool for finding loving homes for all children.

"Securing diversity in child placement and protecting religious liberty rights for faith based agencies will move children out of the foster care system," he said in a statement.

"Without this legislation there will likely be fewer providers, which means fewer opportunities to find homes for kids that need them."

Opponents, said the bills simply allow state-sanctioned discrimination.

"It's not just discrimination. It's writing a check for discrimination. It's state-funded discrimination," said Rep. Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor.

"The only reason you're voting for this bill is that you're blinded by your own faith." Rep. Jon Hoadley, D-Kalamazoo, one of two openly gay members of the House, said it's scary to be gay in Michigan and the adoption agency bills only contribute to that fear.

"These bills put the best interest of the agency over the best interest of the child," he said. "And it violates the constitution because it elevate some religious beliefs over others.

"Rep. Marcia Hovey-Wright, D-Muskegon, said the bills come as the nation is experiencing a sea change in attitudes toward same sex marriage and the legal rights that are afforded to newly married couples.

The state should look at how it spends its money for adoption services, she added. "The state needs to reevaluate this discriminatory policy," she said.

"I truly value what they provide in our commuities, but I disagree with them imposing their religious beliefs on everyone else."

In the 2014-15 budget year, $19.9 million in state and federal funds went toward supporting adoption agencies for adoption and foster care services, according to the state DHS. Nearly $10 million of that total went to faith-based agencies that would be covered under the religious objection bills.

The bills — HB 4188, 4189 and 4190 — now move to the state Senate for consideration. The same package of bills stalled in the Senate last year and Amber McCann, spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Arlan Meekhof, R-West Olive, said the subject hasn't been addressed by the GOP caucus yet.

Gov. Rick Snyder said last week during a call-in radio show with Michigan Public Radio that he had reservations about the bills and the impact it could have on children getting adopted.

Later in the week, he told reporters, He was in favor of children being adopted by "loving families" and "loving parents."

He didn't specify if that included same sex couples.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Just Refuses To Place Kids With Family

The matter of allowing relatives to care and adopt child family members is a continuing issue of Michigan despite there being federal law and a federal case whereby the State is being monitored.

In this instance, the Superintendent of Michigan Children's Institute, Bill Johnson, whom has been replaced by his crony Bruce Hoffman, refuses to grant adoption to the grandmother of her 3 grandchildren because she was granted custody by the lower court before MCI could throw in its 2 cents.

The issue is technical on timing as to the authority of granting the decision.

Courts of Michigan do not make the judicial decision; it is MCI, or rather the Superintendent.

A legal filing to challenge the decision of the MCI Superintendent must prove the decision was "arbitrary and capricious", not whether it was proper or improper, not whether it was right or wrong, not whether it violated an individual's constitutional right of due process, just whether an attorney can magically get inside the psyche of the Superintendent and prove the process of reading his mind in a court of law.

The standard of "arbitrary and capricious" hails from the infamous Cotton case.

The standard was then enshrined in law.

The time has come to take down that law.

PROBATE CODE OF 1939 (EXCERPT)
Act 288 of 1939

710.45 Withholding of consent by representative or court; motion by petitioner; decision by court; termination of rights; entering orders; appeal.

Sec. 45.

(1) A court shall not allow the filing of a petition to adopt a child if the consent of a representative or court is required by section 43(1)(b), (c), or (d) of this chapter unless the petition is accompanied by the required consent or a motion as provided in subsection (2).

(2) If an adoption petitioner has been unable to obtain the consent required by section 43(1)(b), (c), or (d) of this chapter, the petitioner may file a motion with the court alleging that the decision to withhold consent was arbitrary and capricious. A motion under this subsection shall contain information regarding both of the following:

(a) The specific steps taken by the petitioner to obtain the consent required and the results, if any.

(b) The specific reasons why the petitioner believes the decision to withhold consent was arbitrary and capricious.

(3) If consent has been given to another petitioner and if the child has been placed with that other petitioner according to an order under section 51 of this chapter, a motion under this section shall not be brought after either of the following:

(a) Fifty-six days following the entry of the order placing the child.

(b) Entry of an order of adoption.

(4) In an adoption proceeding in which there is more than 1 applicant, the petition for adoption shall be filed with the court of the county where the parent's parental rights were terminated or are pending termination. If both parents' parental rights were terminated at different times and in different courts, a petition filed under this section shall be filed in the court of the county where parental rights were first terminated.

(5) The court shall provide notice of a motion brought under this section to all interested parties as described in section 24a(1) of this chapter, the guardian ad litem of the prospective adoptee if one has been appointed during a child protection proceeding, and the applicant who received consent to adopt.

(6) Upon the filing of a petition to adopt a child and the motion described in subsection (2), the court may waive or modify the full investigation of the petition provided in section 46 of this chapter. The court shall decide the motion within 91 days after the filing of the motion unless good cause is shown.

(7) Unless the petitioner establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the decision to withhold consent was arbitrary and capricious, the court shall deny the motion described in subsection (2) and dismiss the petition to adopt.

(8) If the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the decision to withhold consent was arbitrary and capricious, the court shall issue a written decision and may terminate the rights of the appropriate court, child placing agency, or department and may enter further orders in accordance with this chapter or section 18 of chapter XIIA as the court considers appropriate. In addition, the court may grant to the petitioner reimbursement for petitioner's costs of preparing, filing, and arguing the motion alleging the withholding of consent was arbitrary and capricious, including a reasonable allowance for attorney fees.

(9) If the consent at issue is that required of the court under section 43(1)(c) of this chapter, the motion shall be heard by a visiting judge assigned according to section 8212 of the revised judicature act of 1961, 1961 PA 236, MCL 600.8212.

(10) The court's decision on a motion brought under this section is appealable by right to the court of appeals.

History: Add. 1982, Act 72, Imd. Eff. Apr. 14, 1982 ;-- Am. 1994, Act 239, Eff. July 5, 1994 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 409, Eff. Jan. 1, 1998 ;-- Am. 2004, Act 486, Imd. Eff. Dec. 28, 2004
Popular Name: Probate Code

Michigan Application for Leave to Appeal from Court of Appeals on Denying Relative Adoption

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Prepares to Launch God's Economic Model to End Child Poverty

Yes, Bill Johnson has slithered into another secret division of DHS. Johnson has abdicated to his trusty side-kick, Bruce Hoffman, who has taken over the throne of omnipotence.

I am guessing, as I really do not feel like finding out where he went at this particular moment, that he is doing something with child welfare contracts.

Now, how did I come to this conclusion?

Well, the Madame Maura Corrigan has stepped down as DHS Director after successfully running a game on the federal court monitor that "all is well" in Michigan child welfare.

All is not well, not even close because it seems the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has picked Michigan, under the Madame's leadership, to launch a pilot model for privatizing the entire system of child welfare, or more specifically, foster care. The pilot city is Grand Rapids and it has a long, nasty, sordid history of snatching kids via bible thumping.

When I say "bible-thumping" I specifically mean the christian child placing agencies which are all Michigan non-profit corporations.

Michigan Legislature just seriously attempted to slam a Bill down the throats of the people under the guise of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).  This Bill, mirrored from its namesake federal Act, was originally used as the backbone for the Michigan Parental Rights Resolution which was introduced for an Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  I worked on the construction of the Bill.
 
The RFRA federal case was centered on a Child Protective Service case of parents using certain plants with hallucinogenic properties in their traditional, indigenous religious ceremonies.  Parenting was transmogrified into a religious belief overnight. 

The Tea Party began to take roots as a family economic movement and I was there to witness.  It was built off the desperation of parents who had their children legally kidnapped.  These families became powerful catalysts for the extreme right wing to, predatorially, push through their "christian" subversive agendas.  Look who launched the Tea Party on "God's economy" (Michele Bachmann's reference to children @ 4:30):

As few may not know, it takes 3/4ths of the States 7 years to have a referendum to amend the Constitution.  The Parental Rights Amendment did not survive but RFRA did.

RFRA will take the same course as the Parental Rights Amendment, mark my word.  Also mark my words when I say that it just might steam roll the national level and become an Amendment as there are a series of states which have already signed on.

RFRA is not alone in its ride to becoming an Amendment.  The Hobby Lobby decision opened the flood gates for legal challenges to "religious freedom" as corporations, legal persons, now have recognized religious beliefs.

Michigan has introduced, sine die, major changes to its Non-Profit Corporation Law.  From a quick overview, I see it is now easier for a not-for-profit to set up and transfer to a for-profit.

This got me thinking that timing of the shift in Michigan child welfare leadership is not a coincidence. 

Michigan spends $1B on charter schools but fails to hold them accountable

Medicaid Expansion + RFRA + Non-Profit Corporation changes +Privatization = Corporate $$$

Charter schools do not provide special needs education but child welfare does and the money comes from Medicaid.  The federal A+PLUS Act would give direct access to CPS in viewing school records, with no oversight, to generate more child welfare cases by providing special needs services.

Every corporation is about to hire a child and no one will stop this from being a nationally diffusable model.

As of this writing, the Michigan Bureau of Adult and Children Licensing no longer has oversight of Grand Rapid child placing agencies.  Actually, no one has oversight as the pilot program of privatization has been launched.  The only way to file a complaint/grievance is through the state court because, remember, a corporation is a person, too, but soon with protected religious beliefs and the ability to dissolve at the drop of a hat to a for-profit.

Children under the auspices of the state (ie. foster care, residential institutions, juvenile justice, court child welfare cases) are not calculated in the national child poverty numbers.

This is God's economic model to reduce child poverty.

#Time2AuditGod

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Child Welfare $3.5 Million Cover Up

The following press release is what you call spin propaganda.  Others prefer to call it bullshit.


Michigan will be coming out with lots of these wonderful little announcements of how great its child welfare system is.  This is the forte' of the Ish.


Why were so many children adopted out last year?  Well, allow me to bust on its scheme.


First, it is a money making enterprise.  Agencies snatch kids. Put up marketing campaigns and adopt them out, all the while someone is making money.

Then there are the bonuses, $3,511,033.00


But, I am betting the race to adopt these kids was not fear of federal court oversight, it was fear of going to prison for committing such blatantly egregious criminal activities of fraud.  Once you adopt a child out,  the files are shredded, hiding all evidence of the fraud.


I will admit, there have been drastic changes, for the better in foster care, but, in reality, these people need to be terminated and prosecuted.


These administrators are suppose to be appointed by the Governor.  Snyder better not allow these buffoons to continue to operate the state's child welfare system.

Michigan Department of Human Services highlights child welfare improvements Contact:  Edward Woods III, Office of Communications director 517-373-7394

Dec. 7, 2010 Reforms in Michigan's child welfare system have meant more children were adopted from foster care, are receiving better mental health services and have better outcomes overall, Michigan Department of Human Services Director Ismael Ahmed said today. "DHS, in partnership with private agencies and the courts, have made significant strides in the past two years to ensure we're doing our part to help children find safe, loving and stable homes," Ahmed said. In fact, 3,030 children were adopted from foster care in 2009, more than in any other year, he said. Those reforms earned the department praise from Wayne County Juvenile Court Presiding Judge Leslie Smith. "DHS has done remarkably in terms of effecting significant change in a very short amount of time," Smith said. "I've seen improvement in addressing the mental health of children in foster care, and moving children to permanency, including adoption. The agency, and its leadership, should be commended for improving the welfare of children in Michigan." The comments come as DHS returns to court today to discuss progress made in child welfare reforms under an October 2008 consent decree. Under the agreement, DHS reports every six months on its progress; the Public Catalyst Group of Newark, N.J., monitors progress and makes recommendations for additional improvements. As of the third reporting period, which ended March 31, 2010, DHS had made significant reforms. DHS' accomplishments include a program that provides in-home services and supports to families with children who have serious emotional disturbances. Established by the Michigan Department of Community Health in 2005, the serious emotional disturbances waiver program originally was a way to use federal Medicaid funds to help children. In 2009, DHS worked with DCH to apply the waiver to 266 children in foster care in Ingham, Macomb, Saginaw, Kalamazoo and Oakland counties. The project has since expanded to also include Genesee Wayne and Kent counties. Services are used to keep children in a home in their local communities with intensive wraparound and community-based mental health services. Using the fund-matching aspect of the program, DHS dedicated less than $2 million of state money that turned into almost $6 million of service. "The waiver has reversed a trend of institutionalizing children with serious emotional disturbances, and is one example of innovation and partnership between DHS and DCH to serve the state's vulnerable children and families," said Kathryne O'Grady, DHS Children's Services Administration director. "These services mean more stability for the children and their families." Other DHS child welfare accomplishments include: Reducing the number of children in foster care from 16,545 in June 2009 to 15,023 in October 2010. In 2008, DHS and private agencies completed 2,638 adoptions and received $875,000 in federal funds for the accomplishment. In 2009, DHS and private agencies completed 3,030 adoptions - more than ever before - and were awarded a $3.5 million federal adoption incentive award for the accomplishment. In 2010, with 30 counties participating and 150 adoptions finalized, Michigan Adoption Day 2010 was the nation's largest Adoption Day event for the eighth year in a row. In 2008, there were 6,315 foster children residing with unlicensed relatives. The agreement required Michigan to move the children to licensed settings or relative homes approved for a waiver. As of October 2010, the state is in 99 percent compliance. In September 2008, there were 5,178 children awaiting reunification for more than 12 months. This group was called the "permanency backlog cohort." As of September 2010, DHS had closed more than 78 percent of the cases. In September 2008, there were 4,396 children awaiting adoption longer than 12 months. As of September 2010, DHS had closed more than 63 percent of those cases.

Will Snyder Stop Medicaid Fraud In Michigan?

Hey Rick, 


Congrats on the election but I send my condolences to you, in advance, for the inherited mess of DHS for which you are about to receive.  This wonkette is here for you.


Here is a list of administrators you need to immediately boot:

Bill Johnson, Michigan Children's Institute Superintendent


Bruce Hoffman, Michigan Children's Institute Assistant Superintendent


Mary Rossman, Michigan Children's Institute Assistant.... who knows her title.


Shut down Michigan Children's Institute (Supreme Court has been playing the hiding game on this one.)


Kate Hanley,  Her title keeps changing on the micro-org charts, she is adoption czar

and, last, on my top ten list of the status quo keepers of Michigan's Dark Secret...

Verlie Ruffin,  Ombudsman of Michigan's Children

Deal averts request for fed control of Mich. child welfare system

Catherine Jun / The Detroit News

  Detroit — A child advocacy group backed away from plans to seek a federal takeover of Michigan's child welfare system after a federal judge said she received assurances from Gov.-elect Rick Snyder that his incoming administration will make fixing the Department of Human Services a top priority.

Children's Rights, a New York-based agency, had announced earlier today that it planned to file a motion of contempt Wednesday in federal court in Detroit and ask the judge to appoint a receiver for Human Services, the agency that oversees foster care and adoption. The agency cited a progress report publicized today that showed the state was failing to comply with court-mandated reforms.

Instead, after a meeting in chambers this afternoon with U.S. District Court Judge Nancy Edmunds, attorneys for Children's Rights agreed to meet again with DHS officials in late January — after Snyder takes office — to devise a plan to get reforms on track.

"We have every confidence that they see how urgent this is," said Sara Bartosz, senior staff attorney for Children's Rights. She added, though, that she has not ruled out seeking federal intervention in the future, if necessary. "That option is out there if the system doesn't improve."

This is the latest development in the department's court-ordered overhaul of its foster care system. The department has been under court watch since the settlement of a lawsuit in July 2008 filed by the New York group, which alleged the state's system was endangering the lives of children.

Before the scheduled 2 p.m. court hearing, the New York agency had issued a statement saying it planned to seek receivership for the department, citing a court-appointed monitor's report that showed the department failed to adequately reduce high caseloads for caseworkers as well as recruit and retain enough foster homes.

The 200-page report, covering Oct. 1, 2009, to March 31, 2010, charges that DHS failed to: Ensure that new caseworkers were adequately trained before they became responsible for children and families.

Ensure that adequate staff was assigned to conduct timely and thorough child abuse and neglect investigations.

Recruit, retain and license enough foster homes and those of relative care providers.

Court-appointed monitor Kevin Ryan, of the New Jersey-based Public Catalyst Group, submitted the report to Judge Edmunds at the hearing.

According to the report, Ryan also found data-keeping and mathematical errors in state records, including how the state counts the number of children in its care. The state delayed the recording of adoption finalizations in some cases by as much as 225 days.

"Child welfare managers and staff across Michigan, in both the private and public sector, are working very hard, but their best efforts are often undone by poor planning and a lack of adequate coordination," the report stated.

This is the third update since the settlement, and comes 1½ years after reforms began. The settlement contained a five-year plan the state agreed to enact.

This is the final report before Rick Snyder takes over as governor next month. It's possible that new management will be tapped at DHS.

Anticipating the court hearing, the Michigan Department of Human Services issued a news release this morning highlighting what it says are improvements within the department.

More children have been adopted from foster care, are receiving better mental health services and have better outcomes overall, DHS Director Ismael Ahmed said in a written statement.

"DHS, in partnership with private agencies and the courts, have made significant strides in the past two years to ensure we're doing our part to help children find safe, loving and stable homes," Ahmed said.

In fact, 3,030 children were adopted from foster care in 2009, more than in any other year, he said.

Other accomplishments include reducing the number of children in foster care and expanding a program that provides in-home services and support to families with children who have serious emotional problems.

The previous report issued in March showed the state was missing significant targets, like sufficiently reducing the number of children aging out of foster care and documenting adequate responses to allegations of abuse or neglect of foster children.

At the time, the human services department was placed on a 30-day watch to get reforms on track.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20101207/METRO/12070385/Deal-averts-request-for-fed-control-of-Mich.-child-welfare-system#ixzz17T4XMO3Z

Absolutely Omnipotent

More powerful than a federal Judge, more powers than the Governor, more authority than the Attorney General, look, up in the sky!

Is it God?  No.

It's the Michigan Children's Institute Superintendent!  He is absolutely omnipotent.


 THE MICHIGAN CHILDREN’S INSTITUTE SUPERINTENDENT’S DECISION TO DENY CONSENT TO A BLOOD RELATIVE’S ADOPTION PETITION IS NOT ‘ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS’ IF THERE ARE GOOD REASONS TO GRANT CONSENT AND GOOD REASONS TO DENY CONSENT TO THE RELATIVE’S PETITION.  IT IS THE ABSENCE OF ANY GOOD REASON TO WITHHOLD CONSENT, NOT THE PRESENCE OF GOOD REASONS TO GRANT IT, THAT INDICATES THE SUPERINTENDENT WAS ACTING IN AN ‘ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS’ MANNER  By Judge Thomas E. Nelson In re Fenner-Bailey, (Unpublished #279990), 3/13/08

Domestic Relations Review Return to Calhoun County Courts Home Page

This case involves an appeal of the trial court’s ruling that the Michigan Children’s Institute Superintendent’s decision to withhold consent to appellants’ petition for adoption of their blood relative was not “arbitrary and capricious”.

The child involved had been living with the foster parents who were given the MCI Superintendent’s consent to adopt for over ½ of her 4 years of life.  She had formed a strong psychological bond with the foster parents, whom she referred to as mom and dad.  The appellants maintain that they had a similar bond with the child.  However, that does not undermine the child’s attachment with the foster parents.  Psychological attachment is not a zero sum game.

The relatives also challenged the child’s long-term therapist’s conclusions regarding the bond between the foster parents and the prospective adoptee.  They suggested that the therapist never observed the child and foster parents interact.  However, the Court of Appeals indicated that the trial court was correct in relying on the therapist who interacted with the child professionally for a significant portion of her life and at the time the relevant proceedings and placement were occurring.

The appellants also argue that the MCI Superintendent’s decision was arbitrary and capricious and did not follow the Department of Human Services’ policy manual to give preferential treatment or first choice to relatives seeking to adopt. The appellants offered no legal authority to support that argument. Furthermore, the appellants were originally given custody of the child, but they requested she be placed with the foster parents in order to promote the transition to a permanent home.

Bottom line, the Court of Appeals held that “if there are good reasons to grant consent and good reasons to withhold it, it cannot be said that the decision to withhold consent was arbitrary and capricious”.  It is the absence of any good reason to withhold consent, not the presence of good reasons to grant it, that indicates that the representative was acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner”.
Domestic Relations Review
Return to Calhoun County Courts Home Page

---

Last updated 4-2-08
Send your comments, questions and suggestions to Phil Harter at 161 E Michigan Avenue, Battle Creek, Michigan 49014 or e mail to pharter@calhouncountymi.gov

And the court never said anything about the decision being right and wrong.

The reason the appellants could not prove the Superintendent did not follow the policy manual is because the policy manual does not exist.

FOIA Michigan Children's Institute Production of Documents

The Three Fraudketeers

Well, well, well, what do we have here?  It's the Three Fraudketeers.

We have over here, Mr. Senate Bill 891 (a.k.a. Mark Jansen.)

Public Act 220 of 1935 authorizes the MCI superintendent to consent to the adoption, marriage, or emancipation of any child who has been committed to the MCI, according to applicable law. Under the bill, the superintendent's designee would have the same authority. In addition, the superintendent or his or her designee would be authorized to consent to the guardianship of any child committed to the MCI, as provided in Section 19c of the juvenile code (the section that Senate Bill 893 would amend). A child for whom a guardian was appointed under Section 19c would cease to be a ward of the State.

Over here we have Mr. Senate Bill 892 (a.k.a. Bill Hardiman)

The Adoption Code requires each parent to give consent to the adoption of a child, unless the rights of the parent have been terminated, the child has been released for the purpose of adoption to a child placing agency or the DHS, or other circumstances exist.

Consent must be given by the authorized representative of the DHS or of a child placing agency to whom the child has been released or permanently committed by an order of the family court.

Under the bill, consent could be given by the authorized representative of the DHS or his or her designee.

And last, but not least is Mr. Senate Bill 893 (a.k.a. Jim Barcia.)

Under Section 19c of the juvenile code, if a child remains in placement following the termination of parental rights to the child, the family court must conduct review hearings and permanency planning hearings. The court may appoint a guardian for the child, if it determines that doing so is in the child's best interest. The court may not appoint a guardian without the MCI superintendent's written consent. Under the bill, the court could not appoint a guardian without the written consent of the superintendent or his or her designee.

The code requires the MCI superintendent to consult with the child's lawyer guardian ad litem when considering whether to grant consent. Under the bill, that requirement also would apply to the superintendent's designee.

These are the three primary sponsors of a package of bills that would glorify legislating from the bench, but would crazy glue the lid on Medicaid fraud in Michigan's Child Welfare.

With amazing speed the Three Fraudketeers fast tracked these bills through the Senate in 56 days.  There were no announcements that the bills were even to be on the agenda of the Committee on Families and Human Services because the day they were introduced, they were referred.

In 28 days, the Committee summaries were completed by a fiscal analysts: David Fosdick who found the bills to have no fiscal impact on State or local government.  This finding alone should automatically set off the fraud alarm system because the entire purpose of these bills is to get the state to become eligible for increases in federal recovery funding.  Obviously, David Fosdick has not climbed very high on the intelligence food ladder because the Three Fraudketeers made him their prey to publish such blatant lies.

The purpose of the bills is to get the kids out of the custody of the state and into permanent placements.  The feds want this and so do we.  Since the state is very slowly, I mean at a squamulose, slithering, laggering pace, the state is..., hell, the only reform in child welfare is to make sure it does not change, so I guess fraud reform can be considered as legitimate in child welfare reform.

So, instead of providing services to reduce the rate by which children must enter care, or instead of designing legislation to regulate child welfare to end fraud, the Three Fraudketeers came up with a solution to convince the obtuse Senatorial leadership that it is impossible for the state to come into federal grant compliance, in no way, shape or form. 

Of course, one may ask: "Why have these Three Fraudketeers come together, now?"Let me tell you:

I filed the Quo Warranto.  In the State Court of Appeals, an action regarding a public official may be filed there, so I did.  I found that the State Court Rules were written with a significant procedural error when it was propped up in the 1980's; there is no ex-parte procedure.  If there is no ex-parte procedure, then it becomes impossible to execute an application in the nature of information for quo warranto.  I knew this but the Court did not, so I began my litmus test to see how far the Courts would go to cover up Medicaid fraud in child welfare and filed the action.

The Michigan Judiciary blew me away with the lengths it would go to cover up Medicaid fraud in child welfare.  Presiding Judge Michael J. Kelly, let's just say he knows me pretty well, decided, without finding of fact and conclusion of law, it would not be in his personal best interests to allow a gal her due process...again.

But, right before that  I was honored with a wonderful birthday present.   The Michigan Supreme Court Adopted amended Court Rules and a new Court Rule, all due to my lil' ol' quo warranto.  See, there is a Fourth Fraudketeer, and she goes by the name of Maura Corrigan.

The Fourth Fraudketeer

Maura D. Corrigan

Madame Fraudketeer was a party to the quo warranto, so, it also would not be in her best interest to remove Bill Johnson from the position of Superintendent of Michigan Children's Institute because she, with the greatest of frequency, advocates for Bill Johnson while cases are pending before her Court.

Basically, the Michigan Supreme Court came up with a federal revenue-maximization scheme to expedite adoptions of child wards of the state and to exterminate all evidence of Medicaid fraud in child welfare.  Superintendent Bill Johnson, according to the Court Rules, is no longer the legal guardian of over 7,000 children who decides to grant consent to adoption, he now "approves of the appointment of a guardian."

The state continues to refuse to contractual debarment, license revocation, fines, sanctions, refer violations of law to the Attorney General and continues to allow double-billing, false billing, phantom billing, kiddy kickbacks, etc.  Even though the Federal Funding Percentage for the state is 50%, when it could be 70%, it is still fiscally beneficial to state and local governments to continue its practice of fraud in child welfare. Accountability and transparency will remain strangers to the child welfare system as Bill Johnson and his newly crowned accomplice in fraud, Bruce Hoffman, will be cranking out adoptions, because once a child is adopted, there is no way to go back and find the evidence of fraud in the service files.

And that is how the Three Fraudketeers and Corrigan, got together to ram these bills down the throats of Michigan's unsagacious senate.

Artificial Dictator of Fraud

Now, what is wrong with this picture? Michigan Senate has introduced Bills 891, 892, and 893 to cover up the fraudulent activities of Michigan Children's Institute in dealing with adoption and state wards.

The Social Welfare Commission was comprised of citizens, appointed by the Governor with advise and consent of Legislature. The Social Welfare Commission would then, recommend a candidate for the public office of Superintendent of Michigan Children's Institute. The recommendation would go to the Governor to go to the Legislature for advice and consent to the appointment of the Superintendent. Once the Superintendent was appointed, the final process was to take an Oath of Office to uphold the State Constitution, which was filed in the Repository of the Great Seal.

The Social Welfare Commission was abolished in 1965 and its powers were transferred to the Department of Human Services Director.

The Superintendent, William J. Johnson, has never been appointed. As a matter of fact, he answers to no one.

The purpose of this bill is to play clean up because the Superintendent, functioning in the executive branch, was making judicial decisions in granting or denying consent to adoptions.

The Superintendent represents the State of Michigan without being elected or appointed in being the legal guardian to over 7,000 children who are wards of the state.

The Superintendent, also, can overrule decisions of other states. He is not the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children administrator, yet he assumes the duties.

The Superintendent is omnipotent because there exists no accountability nor transparency in his activities. He is held accountable to no one, not the public, not the law, and most certainly, not to the Constitution of the United States.

The bill needs to be be revised to simply eliminate and abolish the entire Michigan Children's Institute: William J. Johnson, Mary E. Rossman and Bruce Hoffman. The only useful function of MCI is to add another layer to cover up Medicaid fraud, and various other types of federal funding fraud.

Below, is an in depth examination of just one of Michigan's revenue maximizing schemes called Michigan Children's Institute.

Amended Petition


SENATE BILL No. 891

October 13, 2009, Introduced by Senators JANSEN, HARDIMAN, GARCIA, VAN WOERKOM, BIRKHOLZ, ALLEN, PAPPAGEORGE, KAHN and GILBERT and referred to the Committee on Families and Human Services.

A bill to amend 1935 PA 220, entitled

"An act to provide family home care for children committed to the

care of the state, to create the Michigan children's institute

under the control of the Michigan social welfare commission, to

prescribe the powers and duties thereof, and to provide penalties

for violations of certain provisions of this act,"

by amending section 9 (MCL 400.209), as amended by 2004 PA 470.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

Sec. 9. (1) The superintendent of the institute OR HIS OR HER DESIGNEE

is authorized to consent to the adoption, marriage,

GUARDIANSHIP, or emancipation of any child who may have been

committed to the institute, according to the laws for the adoption,

marriage, GUARDIANSHIP AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 19C OF CHAPTER XIIA OF THE PROBATE CODE

OF 1939, 1939 PA 288, MCL 712A.19c, or emancipation of minors. On such

adoption, marriage, GUARDIANSHIP, or

emancipation, the child so adopted, married, or emancipated OR WHO HAS HAD A GUARDIAN

APPOINTED UNDER SECTION 19C OF CHAPTER XIIA OF THE PROBATE CODE OF 1939, 1939 PA 288,

MCL 712A.19c, shall cease to be a ward of the state.

(2) The DEPARTMENT

shall discontinue the Michigan children's institute preliminary consent denial review

process.

THIS BILL IS ILLEGITIMATE AND A BREATHTAKINGLY INFERIOR ATTEMPT AT RULEMAKING.