Do we actually have "Parental Rights" if they are not preserved or defended?

It has been said that parental rights and family values are traditional "American values."  What are 'Parental Rights'?  Are parental rights protected because these rights are defined and codified within civil and administrative law?  When parental rights are diminished, altered, or revoked and a parent's Substantive and/or Procedural Due Process rights were not effectively preserved or observed, there is often no recourse available. This can happen without some parents even realizing that is what has occurred. It is not  uncommon for a  parent's rights to be violated as a matter of course when individuals and families come into contact with Child Protective Services, and or mental health and substance abuse treatment providers.

The average person working within these human service professions receive little to no training on how to preserve or protect the rights of people they will be serving; and just as importantly, how to avoid violating the person's rights out of ignorance...In my experience, social service and mental health professionals do not have even a basic understanding of what a client's individual rights are; nor do they have a minimal awareness of the fact that not observing the effective mechanisms codified within the law meant to preserve and defend those individual rights, means these rights are not effectively preserved; but are in fact violated with impunity. The impact this can have on any child should be of a concern to all of us, as these are people working for us.

The mandate of Child Protective Services is to preserve and foster a family's unity, with the understanding  that a family is the primary social unit within our society and that absent abuse or neglect, a parent has the right to raise a child according to the parent's self-determined morals and values. CPS is mandated to support this by providing social services which assist families who are in crisis, and also by providing foster care when children who are in immediate danger and must be removed due to parental abuse or neglect.  One of the most troubling aspects of this program is the statistic that children removed by 'child protective services,' are abused and killed at a higher rate than those who are not removed from their families. In recent years, parents who are do not consent to giving a child teratogenic drugs has resulted in CPS action, and the removal of children to enforce a prescription of psychotropic drugs; clearly an abuse of power and authority.

This is an ongoing and growing problem caused by the failure to inform/educate individuals who are state employees or state contractors how to perform the legal duties required of them and an abject failure to hold mandated reporters responsible when they fail to file reports with Law Enforcement they are required by law to file. The failure is specific to known or suspected instances of abuse or neglect which victimizes children or vulnerable adults who receive services through DSHS programs. State employees compound the crime by failing to refile the reports they are mandated by law to file. Failure to report is a gross misdemeanor crime. The individuals who commit this crime keep their jobs; the victims are left to tend their injuries with a brutal realization that they are not protected from harm. Supposedly, this is done in service to the state, to protect it from potential liability.

In this instance, "the state" is everybody except the victim(s). This strategy is hardly serving us as a society, it isn't consistent with how potential liability should be defined in such a scenario. Most obviously, allowing people who have failed to act in defense of a child and who fail to report abuse or neglect crimes, should not be in a position of any responsibility; such a person is in fact, a liability. Unless of course, society acknowledges that this approach is used because it serves to protect state employees who increase the state's potential liability for the damages caused by these same employees' ethical and criminal failures. The effect is to protect primarily agents of the state who are putting us at risk of further liability because they lack the fortitude to perform their jobs they are paid to perform. Specifically, taking care of children and vulnerable adults, directly or by performing jobs in support of that mission.

How many times have we heard that Child Protective Services or Adult Protective Services employees have failed to make legally mandated referrals to Law Enforcement for criminal investigation? Has there ever been any criminal investigations and prosecutions for this abject failure?  It seems that the only way anyone is held accountable is by the victim filing a lawsuit. Other than being legally compelled from outside of DSHS, I have never heard of a person experiencing any consequences such as losing their job or being prosecuted for Failure to Report, have you?  The lack of accountability for state employee's or assignee's  failure to perform  the legal duties required of the job; is a liability to the state. It is the individual's ethical and legal failure, which becomes the state's justification to cover up such failures which puts more children and vulnerable adults at risk, so that DSHS can avoid being found negligent and liable for damages.  This strategy ensures that children and vulnerable adults will be victimized and harmed, disabled and killed. Once they are victims, the victims are perceived as be a liability to be avoided. They are not treated as victims to whom the state owes a duty to protect from further harm, nor are they treated as crime victims and provided help to recover.

Children's Administration in effect, acts 'in loco parentis' for children and adolescents in state care, indeed they are the arbiter of who becomes a ward of the state, and who does not. When a child in state care is prescribed drugs and given the drugs without Informed Consent first being obtained from a parent; who is authorizing this be done?  If a child then sustains an iatrogenic, or "physician caused" injury, becomes disabled from the adverse effects of the drugs prescribed which have well-documented potential risks for causing chronic impairments and life-long disabilities; who is responsible? 3-year old drugged in TX
13 year old dies

I know the answer to that. No one is responsible, not the federally funded research psychiatrist, and not Children's Administration; the state pretends there is no need for accountability for harm done by agents of the state. It's impossible for me to pretend that professionals shouldn't be responsible for the harm they've carelessly caused my son.  My son is disabled as a direct result of the state's criminal negligence. According to one of the state's attorneys, the state fulfills some of it's mandated duties; but others require citizens to take legal action against the state. Not the most ethical perspective for a legal advisor responsible for ensuring state designees preserve the individual rights of their clients. This ineffective method serves more often to effectively deny a client any recourse once their rights are violated.  It's as if I've been informed DSHS employees are allowed to violate State and Federal Law, and are allowed to violate a client's individual rights in a Court of Law with impunity. When there is cause to believe crimes were committed, e.g. A well-documented written report detailing how 2 Officers of the Court and 2 mental health professionals used fraud and perjury as "evidence" in Superior Court obtaining a Court Order against a client who was seeking hopitalization---The state has a legal duty to conduct a criminal investigation on behalf of the victim.

After a criminal complaint was filed, the department  proceeded to deny it owes my son, any legal duty. The state has also proceeded to defend the criminal acts of it's designees, the Desigated Mental Health Professional, the psychiatrist, the Deputy Prosecutor, and the Assigned Counsel for the client. The state had a duty to refer a Criminal Complaint to Law Enforcement; and did not. I know I'm more than a little disgusted by the fact that public servants in the state's publicly funded social and mental health "service systems" are obviously enabled to routinely avoid being held accountable for their obviously negligent criminal conduct. I know that as a MadMother, it's more than horrifying to know there is no accountability for ethical and criminal failures of the people whom we entrust to protect children and vulnerable adults who are served by the social services "safety net."

It's not the veracity of the excuse offered in the AAG's message that most troubles me, it is the purpose of the message, i.e. to (again) deny any legal duty to a client victimized by the state's designees, no duty to investigate the Felony Crimes reported. My own perceptions are biased, but I believe my opinions are ethically and legally sound. The state's employees and it's assignees have repeatedly caused my son harm; and whether their actions were merely careless, or criminally negligent, the state enjoys an undeserved immunity. I know that no crime committed by public servants which victimized and injured  my son that I have reported has ever been investigated by Law Enforcement. That tells me that not filing legally mandated reports with Law Enforcement is the rule, not the exception--it explains why unethical behavior is so as common as it is...

There is no way in hell I will become complicit in the crimes which victimized my son. I believe to be silent in some instances is to be complicit. The major flaw in the accountability system for DSHS programs in this state, is that there isn't one. There is no accountability within DSHS; true accountability requires ethical integrity; it should not require a citizen having to take legal action against the state.

I've been living a nightmare for almost twenty years, virtually from the moment I discovered my son was victimized. My horror is compounded by the knowledge CPS had received several credible reports alleging children in the foster home my son was assaulted in, were being abused; prior to his placement there. The damage to my son has been further compounded by the criminal manner employees of the state and it's contracted "service providers" have "provided services" to my son and my family, more often than not, the services were not what was recommended or needed, and caused all of us further harm.
photo credit: weprocessweserve.com

Child Endangerment In the Custody of the State

Gabriel Myers (Credit Family Photo)

"I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. 

We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. 

Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." ~ Elie Wiesel

via hope4kidz

via The National Coalition on Child Protection Reform:


"At the heart of the criticism of family preservation is one overriding assumption: If you remove a child from the home, the child will be safe. If you leave a child at home the child is at risk. In fact, there is risk in either direction but real family preservation programs have a better record for safety than foster care.


"And even when families don’t get special help, two huge studies have found that children left in their own homes typically do better than comparably-maltreated children placed in foster care.


"To understand why, one must first understand one fundamental fact about foster care: It’s not safe.


"On every measure, children left with their own homes did better than comparably maltreated children placed in foster care. And that was true even though birth families generally got only the conventional “help” offered by child welfare agencies, not the exemplary interventions supported by NCCPR. 16


"When University of Minnesota researchers compared children left in their own homes with comparably-maltreated children placed in foster care, they too found that the children left in their own homes did better, even when the birth families got little or no help at all. 17" here


via The Northwest Foster Care Alumni Study:

“Most children in foster care, if not all, experience feelings of confusion, fear, apprehension of the unknown, loss, sadness, anxiety, and stress. Such feelings and experiences must be addressed and treated early to prevent or decrease poor developmental and mental health outcomes that ultimately affect a child’s educational experience and the quality of adulthood. Systemic orientation for all children entering foster care is proposed as a preventative intervention that addresses associated experiences of children in foster care.” here

Intervention currently means prescription of teratogenic, psychiatric drugs, this is a no substitute for meeting the physical, emotional and social needs of children and adolescents. In reality, the effects of the drugs often prevent them from learning to cope with not having their needs met; and prevents recovery.   

It is entirely understandable that a child removed from their family feel traumatized, and may have behaviors that are difficult to deal with. It is traumatic in and of itself to be taken from a familiar environment and placed in an unfamiliar environment with strangers. Children’s feelings are expressed through their actions; behavior due to feelings of confusion, loss and anxiety is often disruptive and perceived as dysfunctional. The behavior often is the natural response to the traumatic effects of being placed in strange surroundings; it is an attempt to cope. The trauma is made worse when child welfare workers prevent the child from having contact with parents or other family members; it amounts to intentionally causing unquantifiable emotional damage to a vulnerable confused child who has been removed from their home.


In the case of this child, Rachel, who was not abused or neglected and only exhibited behavioral problems as a direct result of Child Welfare’s removal from her home, feelings she was not helped to cope with about events which were beyond her ability to control or understand. She was instead, further traumatized by multiple placements and drugged with dangerous drugs in an effort to control her undesirable behavior that was a logical and natural consequence of what was done to her. The cause of her behavior was not addressed. I am certain given her age, she would have felt as if she was being punished—and in reality she must have felt rejected by the adults who were ‘taking care’ of her. This effectively invalidated her emotional distress and at her age, the events would have in all likelihood been perceived by her to have been her fault. Events which were beyond her ability to understand and cope with, caused her to misbehave and instead of addressing the root cause of her difficulties she was drugged with dangerous drugs to extinguish her behavior which was in all reality her desperate attempt to cope!


How can it have been in Rachel’s best interest to neglect a child’s emotional need for security and attachment by denying visits with her parents? Instead of addressing the cause of this pre-schooler’s emotional and behavioral difficulties, she was given neuroleptic drugs not FDA approved and not without very serious risks for harm. Child Protective Services operates in a manner that is detrimental more often than not. Children are removed from parental custody without Substantive Due Process, violating both the child’s and the parent’s Constitutional Rights.


Why this child was removed? Child welfare policy clearly states, “The removal of a child from biological parents requires a substantiation of maltreatment (sexual, physical, or neglect), not just an exposure to it (Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, 2003). Maltreatment, such as neglect, and the removal from parents (foster care) are traumatic events that can affect the immediate and future developmental and mental health of children (Bowlby, 1998) Child welfare and foster care programs are not effectively protecting the children removed from their homes—six times as many children are killed by caregivers in foster care the than are killed by family members. Child Welfare authorities acknowledged that Rachel had been neither abused or neglected. Sadly, she's been neglected and abused by people who had a duty to protect her.


Obviously, parents using illicit drugs is not something to be condoned. It is equally plain that granting Police powers and broad authority to Child Welfare workers who either ignore or do not even know or understand Due Process of Law is a Constitutional Right that they have a duty to preserve when "protecting children." In this case Child Welfare workers were grossly negligent and did not protect her; they traumatized and grievously harmed her.  It was acknowledged the reporter states that neither neglect or abuse was suspected; yet she was removed from her parents' custody, and an attempt was made to terminate her parents' rights--absent abuse and/or neglect that Federal Law requires for the state to deprive parents of their parental rights...  

I am only speculating, but I would be willing to bet this child was put on drugs because the Federal Child Welfare program allows for a higher rate of reimbursement for 'special needs' children; Rachel was worth more drugged.  The attempt to terminate her parents rights if successful, could have 'earned' the child welfare system of Texas $6,000. from the Federal government.  This sort of exploitation of children is happening in every state.  The other thing that I noticed in this report, is due to the initial removal from her parents as an infant, the child welfare department got into trouble for their neglect and for not following up on a Judge's order to seek medical attention for Rachel---It is my personal experience that child welfare workers retaliate against parents who have been successful in having them personally, or the child welfare department in general, accountable for past negligence.

Former Georgia State Senator, Nancy Schafer, prior being slain along with her husband in their garage; was on a mission to address the criminal manner in which state child welfare workers through the Federally-funded Child Welfare System removes children form their homes while abdicating their legal duty to preserve the Individual Rights to Procedural Due Process of Law of the children and their parents. Advocating for the abolition of CPS, Schafer rightly declared that matters of Law, i.e. the investigation of suspected criminal behavior; is best left to Law Enforcement. Officers of the Law are trained to conduct investigations, while preserving Individual Rights to Procedural Due Process of Law. Child welfare workers are not trained in investigative techniques, and do not seem cognizant that they are violating the rights of the children and their parents by failing to conform even to their own guidelines and policies while exercising what are in effect, police powers.  As is all too common, in this case, those involved removed a child who was not in imminent danger.  Worse, once they had legally kidnapped Rachel they did not even attempt to meet her fundamental emotional and developmental needs. Child Welfare abused and neglected Rachel after taking her from parents whom they knew did neither... 

Sadly, Rachel's  case is not unique.  On the 6th of this month I posted "The failure to protect foster children and children on Medicaid."  Those of you who read this blog regularly know that my son Isaac was abused, neglected and used in Drug Trials without consent; and he is now profoundly disabled.  What happened to my son, and what was done to Rachel is more than a failure to protect; it is the deliberate infliction of harm. In my son's case, Child Welfare workers violated both our Constitutional Rights; and no one has ever been held accountable.  More than a million dollars in Child Welfare and Medicaid Fraud were committed; I'm lucky my son is alive. Trust me, I am grateful. But, I am angry to have learned that what was done to my son was no anomaly. It has been devastating to discover it's being done to children every single day in every single state onf the Nation; and only in an infinitesimal number of cases is anyone ever held responsible.  This has to stop--it is destroying families.  It is literally disabling and killing children.  These crimes are being committed by public servants who are acting on our behalf.    Nancy Schafer videos 

In cases of neglect and abuse that result from a child welfare staff's actions/inaction, we allow the  people to keep their jobs and give them pensions for their 'service.'  Psychiatric drugging of children in distress is criminal--as both my son's and Rachel's cases clearly illustrate. How many children are we going to allow unethical professionals to drug to death with impunity?  How many are we willing to allow to be disabled, because we are sure it's not our problem to solve?  We have, as a society paid a steep price for allowing mental health and social service systems to exploit children in distress.  But the price we pay is nothing compared to the price paid by the children who are now dead.  It is negligible in comparison the price my son continues to pay for the crimes committed which victimized him as a child. The toll continues to climb with the passage of time.  Because he is an adult who is disabled because of the crimes committed against him as a child, he is vulnerable and can not effectively protect himself. What horrifies me is the people who are directly responsible including those who committed felony crimes are or were public servants working for Yakima County, the State of Washington and Central Washington Comprehensive Mental Health. I don't want revenge or retribution. It would not help my son who is 6'3" and 280 pounds to feel safe; I want my son to be able to trust people, not just his family.  I don't believe he will be able to feel safe without Justice being served.  I don't believe he's safe; and that's a heavy burden for a mother to bear...    

"The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~ Plato