Foster Care from the perspective of Baby LK.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
statebar of michigan, cps child protective services, safeguarding children, child protective services cps, child ab
Friday, 30 November 2012
Thursday, 29 November 2012
The Shocking Details of a Mississippi School-to-Prison Pipeline
The Shocking Details of a Mississippi School-to-Prison Pipeline
Cedrico Green can’t exactly remember how many times he went back and forth to juvenile. When asked to venture a guess he says, “Maybe 30.” He was put on probation by a youth court judge for getting into a fight when he was in eighth grade. Thereafter, any of Green’s school-based infractions, from being a few minutes late for class to breaking the school dress code by wearing the wrong color socks, counted as violations of his probation and led to his immediate suspension and incarceration in the local juvenile detention center.
But Green wasn’t alone. A bracing Department of Justice lawsuit filed last month against Meridian, Miss., where Green lives and is set to graduate from high school this coming year, argues that the city’s juvenile justice system has operated a school to prison pipeline that shoves students out of school and into the criminal justice system, and violates young people’s due process rights along the way.
In Meridian, when schools want to discipline children, they do much more than just send them to the principal’s office. They call the police, who show up to arrest children who are as young as 10 years old. Arrests, the Department of Justice says, happen automatically, regardless of whether the police officer knows exactly what kind of offense the child has committed or whether that offense is even worthy of an arrest. The police department’s policy is to arrest all children referred to the agency.
Once those children are in the juvenile justice system, they are denied basic constitutional rights. They are handcuffed and incarcerated for days without any hearing and subsequently warehoused without understanding their alleged probation violations.
“[D]efendants engage in a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct through which they routinely and systematically arrest and incarcerate children, including for minor school rule infractions, without even the most basic procedural safeguards, and in violation of these children’s constitutional rights,” the DOJ’s 37-page complaint reads. Meridian’s years of systemic abuse punish youth “so arbitrarily and severely as to shock the conscience,” the complaint reads.
The federal lawsuit casts a wide net in indicting the systems that worked to deny Meridian children their constitutional rights. It names as defendants the state of Mississippi; the city of Meridian; Lauderdale County, which runs the Lauderdale County Youth Court; and the local Defendant Youth Court Judges Frank Coleman and Veldore Young for violating Meridian students’ rights up and down the chain.
The DOJ’s complaint also charges that in the course of its eight-month investigation the city blocked the inquiry by refusing to hand over youth court records. Attorneys for city officials deny that claim, and say they are bound by law to protect the confidentiality of youth who’ve been through the system and so cannot share their records with the federal government.
‘Judge, Jury and Executioner’
The DOJ’s lawsuit, despite its bombshell revelations for the rest of the country, has been a long time coming. Groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center and the NAACP have been concerned about Meridian for years.
The SPLC’s inquiry into Meridian began in 2008, when attorneys started hearing reports of “horrific abuse” of youth housed in juvenile detention centers, said Jody Owens, managing attorney of the SPLC’s juvenile justice initiative in Mississippi. Advocates learned that 67 percent of youth in detention centers arrived there from the Meridian school system, Owens said. In between school and detention, students were denied access to counsel and due process, and many were never made aware of what they were even being arrested for. “The administrators were the judge, jury and executioner,” Owens said.
This practice has also appeared to target black students. Meridian, a city of 40,000 people, is 61 percent African-American. But over a five-year period, Owens said, “There was never once a white kid that was expelled or suspended for the same offense that kids of color were suspended for.”
Among the infractions that landed Green, who is black, in juvenile detention were talking back to a teacher, wearing long socks and coming to school without wearing a belt. He was behind bars for stretches of time as long as two weeks, and the real rub, his mother Gloria said, is that weekends didn’t count as days served. A 10-day suspension stretched to 14 actual days; time for Meridian juvenile justice officials apparently stopped on weekends. All that back and forth out of school and in juvenile took a real toll on Green’s education, and he was held back from the eighth grade.
“It was mind-boggling,” Gloria Green said. “My son loved school and to be kicked out as much as he was, one year he just couldn’t catch up.”
“We did everything we know to do. I went over to the school and got make-up work, and he still failed two subjects and at that point I didn’t know which way what my child was going to go.”
“We talk about the school to prison pipeline and it’s often an abstract thing,” said Shakti Belway, an attorney who worked closely with families on the Meridian case for the Southern Poverty Law Center. “But here it is literally happening over ridiculous, minor charges.” Indeed, children as young as elementary school students have been taken directly from school and forced to serve school suspensions inside a jail cell. In its complaint, the DOJ charged the city’s police department with operating a de facto “taxi service” shuttling students away from school and into youth jails.
Studying While Black
But Meridian doesn’t have a monopoly on this kind of injustice. Every which way a person can look—from elementary to high school, at a national level and on down to the most local—black students are far more likely to be punished and to be punished more harshly than all other students.
A 2010 study by Russell Skiba, a professor of education policy at Indiana University, looked at four decades of data from 9,000 of the nation’s 16,000 middle schools. It found that black boys were three times as likely to be suspended as white boys and that black girls were four times as likely to be suspended as white girls. It is a serious, endemic issue.
The federal government’s case raises troubling questions about the racial disproportionality that school discipline policies produce broadly. Zero tolerance policies, which crack down on school-based infractions with automatic, harsh punishments, are the mandatory-mimimums of the school discipline world. But whatever their merits and drawbacks, said Skiba, they shouldn’t generate racially disparate outcomes. “I think what this suit says is: Whatever you do in a school district, why would it be that there would be racial and ethnic disparities? If we’re going to choose suspensions and expulsions and police presence, why are students of color overrepresented in that?”
Research shows that if the intent behind zero-tolerance policies is to discourage misbehavior and foster good learning environments, they don’t do the job. A sweeping 2006 study (PDF) conducted by the American Psychological Association found that zero-tolerance policies don’t actually make schools safer, and in fact can work to push students away from school. If, however, the intent is to push students of color out of school, away from their educational futures and into the criminal justice system, there is also a body of evidence that suggests that zero-tolerance policies are rather effective instruments.
For Gloria Green, the lawsuit is the answer to prayers she repeated over and over when her son was going back and forth to jail. “It was degrading to me because I was like, ‘My son is not a criminal. Why is he behind bars?’ “
“I would always say, ‘Dang, I wish there was somebody that could help me,’ because I didn’t know what I could do and I was afraid that if I went to his school and stood my ground it’d make things hard for my child.” She’s fully supportive of legal action now, but not just because she wants belated justice for Cedrico. “I’m excited because I have a 13-year-old coming up in the Meridian Public Schools as well.”
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
The Impact of Sequestration on Women, Children and Families
(WASHINGTON) – This afternoon, Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) issued the following statement on the devastating impact that automatic end of year budget cuts, mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011, would have on women, children and families:
“I rise today as the voice for millions of women, children and low income families to urge my colleagues to work towards a balanced approach to deficit reduction that does not include deeper cuts to programs designed to promote and protect the health of women and children,” said Conyers.
“By eliminating nearly one billion dollars in federal funding, if implemented, this 8.2 percent across the board cut would drastically hinder access to critical health care services delivered to mothers and babies in need, stunt the impact and development of prevention initiatives, reduce vital funding for medical research, and disproportionately impact low-income and uninsured families.
“Additionally, it would significantly reduce funding for critical programs important to the development of children such as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the Title V Maternal and Child Health Services Block Grant, the Section 317 Immunization Program, the Children’s Hospital Graduate Medical Education program, the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Visitation Program, the Prevention and Public Health Fund, Safe Motherhood, and the National Institutes Child Health and Human Development. In Michigan alone these cuts would result in 20,700 mothers and young children being cut from the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and over $1 million cut from the Children’s Hospitals Graduate Medical Education program, which the state relies heavily on to train its next generation of pediatricians.
“Playing a game of chicken with budget sequestration is despicable and we must work toward a fair and plausible resolution of this issue that does not trade away the health and well being of our children.
“Furthermore, children depend on healthy moms and millions of women rely on federally funded programs like Title X Family Planning for basic health and prenatal care. However, this looming budget sequestration would jeopardize the health of these women by inhibiting access to critical health services, thereby increasing the risk of life-threatening cancer and other diseases that could have been prevented by health screenings offered through Title X services. In Michigan, 2,700 fewer women will be screened for cancer as a result of the sequestration’s cut of over $712,800 from the Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Program.
“Lastly, women’s health would not only be impacted, but also women’s economic well-being. These automatic cuts will create overwhelming job loss at a time when both men and women struggle to find work due to no fault of their own. Moreover, sequestration cuts coupled with the persistent gender wage gap is a recipe for disaster that middle and lower income families cannot afford. Therefore, I will not casually stand by while my colleagues threaten unbearable sacrifices that disproportionately impact the well being of children, women and their families. I urge that with compassionate hearts, we work together to alleviate current suffering and pursue a legislative solution that does not target non-defense discretionary programs for additional cuts.”
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
Tuesday, 27 November 2012
Is CPS Excluded From SCOTUS Ruling To Film Police
Supreme Court upholds right to film police, even in Illinois
My question is if a citizen can now record police, does this also apply to Child Protective Services?
From my knowledge, CPS, which enforces law through the executive branch, does not take oath of office, with the exception of Michigan.
What I also know is child welfare privacy laws prevent the recording of CPS events, including adjudication in certain states.
Here is my public question: Does this SCOTUS ruling apply to CPS?
http://www.ustream.tv/platform/watch-everywhere
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
My question is if a citizen can now record police, does this also apply to Child Protective Services?
From my knowledge, CPS, which enforces law through the executive branch, does not take oath of office, with the exception of Michigan.
What I also know is child welfare privacy laws prevent the recording of CPS events, including adjudication in certain states.
Here is my public question: Does this SCOTUS ruling apply to CPS?
http://www.ustream.tv/platform/watch-everywhere
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
Organizations Battle On Disability Rights For Parents
Here is an organization against disability rights.
Here is an organization in support of disability rights.
Here is a Michigan Bill against disability rights. This is why.
You make the call. Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121.
Such cases are found nationwide, according to a new report by the National Council on Disability, an independent federal agency. The 445-page document is viewed by the disability-rights community as by far the most comprehensive ever on the topic -- simultaneously an encyclopedic accounting of the status quo and an emotional plea for change.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
Here is an organization in support of disability rights.
Here is a Michigan Bill against disability rights. This is why.
You make the call. Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121.
Report: Disabled parents battling bias
Children are often taken away from disabled parents, many are denied the right to adopt
Millions of Americans with disabilities have gained innumerable rights and opportunities since Congress passed landmark legislation on their behalf in 1990. And yet advocates say barriers and bias still abound when it comes to one basic human right: To be a parent.
A Kansas City, Mo., couple had their daughter taken into custody by the state two days after her birth because both parents were blind. A Chicago mother, because she is quadriplegic, endured an 18-month legal battle to keep custody of her young son. A California woman paid an advance fee to an adoption agency, then was told she might be unfit to adopt because she has cerebral palsy.
Such cases are found nationwide, according to a new report by the National Council on Disability, an independent federal agency. The 445-page document is viewed by the disability-rights community as by far the most comprehensive ever on the topic -- simultaneously an encyclopedic accounting of the status quo and an emotional plea for change."Parents with disabilities continue to be the only distinct community that has to fight to retain -- and sometimes gain -- custody of their own children," said autism-rights activist Ari Ne'eman, a member of the council. "The need to correct this unfair bias could not be more urgent or clear."
The U.S. legal system is not adequately protecting the rights of parents with disabilities, the report says, citing child welfare laws in most states allowing courts to determine that a parent is unfit on the basis of a disability. Terminating parental rights on such grounds "clearly violates" the intent of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, the report contends.
Child-welfare experts, responding to the report, said they shared its goals of expanding supports for disabled parents and striving to keep their families together. But they said removals of children from their parents -- notably in cases of significant intellectual disabilities -- are sometimes necessary, even if wrenching.
"At the end of the day, the child's interest in having permanence and stability has to be the priority over the interests of their parents," said Judith Schagrin, a veteran child-welfare administrator in Maryland.
In the bulk of difficult cases, ensuring vital support for disabled parents may be all that's needed to eliminate risks or lessen problems, many advocates say.
The new report, titled "Rocking the Cradle: Ensuring the Rights of Parents with Disabilities and Their Children," estimates that 6.1 million U.S. children have disabled parents. It says these parents are more at risk than other parents of losing custody of their children, including removal rates as high as 80 percent for parents with psychiatric or intellectual disabilities.
Parents with all types of disabilities -- physical or mental -- are more likely to lose custody of their children after divorce, have more difficulty accessing assisted-reproductive treatments to bear children, and face significant barriers to adopting children, the report says.
One of the cases it details involved Erika Johnson and Blake Sinnett of Kansas City, whose 2-day-old daughter, Mikaela, was taken into custody by Missouri authorities because both parents were blind. The action occurred after a hospital nurse reported that Johnson seemed to be having trouble with her first attempts at breast-feeding -- which Johnson said happens with many first-time mothers.
During a 57-day legal battle, before the couple regained custody, they were allowed to visit Mikaela only two to three times a week, for an hour at a time, with a foster parent monitoring.
Since then, the family has been left in peace, said Johnson, who tries to offer support to other disabled parents facing similar challenges.
"Some parents just give up or don't have the resources," she said in a telephone interview.
A Windsor, Colo., woman with disabilities says the prejudice she encountered prompted her to go to law school, to better defend her own rights and those of other disabled parents.
Carrie Ann Lucas uses a power wheelchair and is reliant on a ventilator due to a form of muscular dystrophy. She is a single mother of four adopted children, ages 22, 17, 13 and 11, all of whom also have disabilities, including two who use wheelchairs and three with intellectual disabilities.
Lucas says she's been the subject of several investigations by child welfare officials that she attributed to bias linked to her disabilities.
"Each one of these referrals that gets accepted for investigation causes a great deal of stress, not only for me, but for my children," Lucas wrote in an email.
She said the investigations dated back to her first efforts to adopt Heather, her biological niece, in 1999, after the girl was placed in foster care. At one point in a long procedural struggle, a social worker told a judge that "there was no way that handicapped woman could care for that handicapped child."
"We are nearly 13 years later, and Heather is still doing very well," Lucas wrote.
As a lawyer, Lucas has represented many other parents with disabilities.
"I have had parents with paralysis be threatened with removal of their children, deaf parents punished for using sign language with their hearing children, and blind parents told that a social worker can't possibly fathom how they could parent a newborn," Lucas said. "When families do need intervention, it is often because the services they need are not available outside a punitive social services case."
The lead author of the new report, disability-rights lawyer Robyn Powell, says her goal was to challenge presumptions that disabled people can't be effective parents.
"Of course there are going to be some parents with disabilities who would be lousy parents -- that's the same with parents without disabilities," she said. "If there is neglect, is it due to the disability? And can it be rectified by providing the necessary support?"
Ella Callow, a lawyer with the National Center for Parents with Disabilities and their Families, said the report raises fundamental questions about America's social priorities -- given that state and federal laws value both the well-being of children and the rights of disabled people. The ultimate goal, she said, would be to promote both values by expanding support for disabled parents.
"If we really believe that families are the key unit on which society is built, then we have to enable these families to be healthy and functioning, even at public expense," Callow said. "We know foster care isn't a good place for children to be -- they do better with their own parents, at their own home."
Callow, who is based in Berkeley, Calif., said child welfare agencies need to provide more funding and specialized training with the aim of improving services for disabled parents.
"Child welfare is so incredibly underfunded, and the workers are so incredibly overwhelmed, their attitude is, 'Really, you want my attention on this?'" Callow said. "There's a tendency to think these families aren't the same as our families. But these children, when they lose their families, have the same type of grief."
Schagrin, the Maryland child-welfare official, said she found parts of the report troubling because they seemed to suggest children were sometimes removed from their families only on account of parental disabilities.
"That's not why they are taken away," she said. "They are taken away because the disability has continued to the point where there's an episode of maltreatment or neglect."
She said one recourse is to find members of the extended family -- or other types of support -- to help a parent with psychiatric or intellectual disabilities care for a child. But she said this approach could be taken too far, for example if a mother with intellectual disabilities was placed in a group home with other disabled parents.
"What kind of way is that for a child to live -- being raised by a shift of caregivers in a mom-and-child group home?" she asked. "Is that really better than an open-adoption agreement?"
Andrea Bartolo, a senior consultant at the Child Welfare League of America, said there is no question that some disabled parents encounter discrimination in the child welfare system, "sometimes inadvertently, sometimes very overtly."
Under current practices, Bartolo said, an expert assessment of a child's home life and the possible provision of services to the disabled parents might occur only after the child has been removed and "the damage has been done." Going forward, she hopes child-welfare agencies will try harder to provide support before a problem worsens, potentially reducing the need for foster-care placements.
The report praises a few states -- including Idaho, Kansas and California -- for modifying child-custody laws to the benefit of disabled parents. It urges Congress to amend the Americans with Disabilities Act to add protections for parents, and it calls on state lawmakers to eliminate disability as a distinct ground for terminating parental rights.
Christine Waters, an attorney with Legal Services of Central New York, based in Syracuse, worked with colleagues in 2008-09 in a bid to change the state law specifying that parental rights can be terminated if a parent has psychiatric problems or is intellectually impaired. Some legislators expressed support, Waters said, but the effort ultimately failed.
"Everything would look like it was going fine ... and then there would be some well-publicized, awful incident where someone who had a mental illness -- without support -- did something shocking and horrible, and a child was seriously harmed or died and we'd be back to square one," Waters said.
Waters said some child-welfare officials resisted any change, wary of being held responsible if something went wrong.
The assumption that people with disabilities can't parent "is bad for society and heartbreaking for families," Waters said. "The easy thing is to terminate the parental rights. We need to do the right thing, not the easy thing."
Disabled parents whose parenting ability comes into question often are placed at a disadvantage by parenting assessments that are inappropriate or unfair, the report says. It calls for better research to improve assessment standards and gain more knowledge about how various disabilities affect the ability to be an effective parent.
One topic worth further study, it said, is "parentification" -- the phenomenon in which children of disabled parents take on various caregiving responsibilities, even at a young age.
In Arlington Heights, Ill., Jenn Thomas, a 36-year-old mom who has cerebral palsy, says her 8-year-old twins occasionally complain about having to do a few extra chores around the house to help her.
Her daughter, Abigail, nods and smiles upon hearing this, but says for the most part, their lives are "kind of normal." For her, having a mom with a disability is just how it is, she says, shrugging.
Sometimes, they ride on the chair with her -- especially son Noah because he, like his father, D.J., is a "little person," the term used by the family and others for someone genetically predisposed to having unusually short stature. When activities are farther away, the couple has created a support network to help when D.J. is working. He drives, but Jenn does not.
"I want them to enjoy activities and not be limited because I am limited," she says. So she coordinates with neighbors to help get the kids to swimming, cello lessons or basketball practice. Or she arranges for "paratransit," a bus service for riders with disabilities and their families.
Friends also helped redesign their kitchen to make it more accessible.
The new report stresses that improved networks of support for disabled parents -- encompassing transportation, housing, health care, and outside intervention when appropriate -- should be welcomed, and not viewed as evidence that the parents on their own are incapable.
When children do face removal from their disabled parents, those parents may encounter barriers to meaningful participation in their legal cases, the report says. For example, financially struggling parents may have to rely on a court-appointed attorney with no special knowledge about the effects of disability.
Kaney O'Neill of Des Plaines, Ill., a quadriplegic Navy veteran, endured an 18-month legal battle to keep custody of her young son. Her ex-boyfriend filed for custody in 2009, when the boy was 10 weeks old, alleging that O'Neill was "not a fit and proper person" to care for the child because of her disability.
Refuting the allegation, with legal help from Ella Callow, Kaney demonstrated how she had prepared for motherhood by working with an occupational therapy program, adapting her house, securing specialized baby-care equipment, and using personal assistants to help her as needed.
"I lived in fear every single day that my son would be taken away from me," said O'Neill, 36. "In a lot of ways it made me a better mother because I felt that I had a lot to prove."
She says her son, who taught himself to climb up his mother's wheel chair into her lap, is now going to preschool twice a week and is thriving.
"If you are a parent with a disability, you don't have a role model -- you have to figure out how you're going to be a mother and overcome challenges," she said.
For disabled women who either cannot bear children or choose not to, the possible option of adoption often can be complicated. Some foreign countries, notably China, rule out disabled people as potential adoptive parents.
Elizabeth Pazdral of Davis, Calif., who wears a brace and uses crutches to walk because of cerebral palsy, said she encountered discrimination several years ago when she and her husband sought to adopt a child. She said one local adoption agency billed her an advance fee of $3,400, then advised that there were "serious reservations" about her ability to be a parent.
"I think it was dishonest to take my money and then tell me they were worried," said the 4-foot-tall Pazdral, 42, who is executive director of the California State Independent Living Council.
Initially distraught, Pazdral obtained legal help, paid for an occupational therapist to come to her house to assess her capabilities, and researched how other parents with disabilities had succeeded in raising children. The efforts paid off: The adoption agency dropped its objections, and in May 2008, Pazdral and her husband, a Stanford University physicist, adopted a baby girl named Madeleine.
"It was a huge life change -- but that's true for any new parent," Pazdral said, recounting sleep-deprived nights, higher levels of chronic pain, and the challenge of maintaining one's energy level.
"But I start with the joy I get from being her mother -- the rightness I feel," Pazdral said. "It's the best thing I have ever done with my life."
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
Sunday, 25 November 2012
CPS Targets Disabled Parents - Baby LK Report For November 25th 2012
Baby LK recaps the week in news for the child protection industry. Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
Michigan Lawmaker Introduces Bill To Interfere With Interstate Commerce
Lately there has been extreme hate speech on what is considered as "fit to parent". When I see this type of hatred being pushed by legislators, I have to stand up and do what I do best: Make them look stupid.
Ok. What we have here is a handful of Michigan Legislators who want to fantasize about what happens in the bedroom of two adults. First it was the marriage folks who claim that a single parent should not have the right to raise children. Then there are the parental rights people who believe that poverty and disability is the "governmental interest of the highest order" to deny a parent the right to raise a child.
Lest not forget the folks who believe parenting should theologically based and even based on the level of melanin of one's skin.
So now there is a movement in Michigan to add to the fitness category of parenting one's disability, religion, color of skin or sexuality.
There are three approaches to examine the constitutionality of banning gay couples the right to become foster and adoptive parents. Instead of beating the same old drum of the civil rights argument, I am going to begin with the dormant commerce clause argument.
The dormant commerce clause: Foster care is a federally funded program. People have a right to engage in business with government. Michigan Representative Kenneth Kurtz has introduced legislation that would exclude individuals from doing business with the state based upon what people may or may not do in the bedroom.
States do not have the power to regulate commerce of a federally regulated program. The case of Granholm v. Heald awakened the dormant commerce clause to let Michigan know that it cannot interfere with interstate commerce.
Is foster care interstate? Of course it is. Let's look at Michigan's powerpoint on the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children.
Michigan Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children 2012
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
Ok. What we have here is a handful of Michigan Legislators who want to fantasize about what happens in the bedroom of two adults. First it was the marriage folks who claim that a single parent should not have the right to raise children. Then there are the parental rights people who believe that poverty and disability is the "governmental interest of the highest order" to deny a parent the right to raise a child.
Lest not forget the folks who believe parenting should theologically based and even based on the level of melanin of one's skin.
So now there is a movement in Michigan to add to the fitness category of parenting one's disability, religion, color of skin or sexuality.
There are three approaches to examine the constitutionality of banning gay couples the right to become foster and adoptive parents. Instead of beating the same old drum of the civil rights argument, I am going to begin with the dormant commerce clause argument.
The dormant commerce clause: Foster care is a federally funded program. People have a right to engage in business with government. Michigan Representative Kenneth Kurtz has introduced legislation that would exclude individuals from doing business with the state based upon what people may or may not do in the bedroom.
States do not have the power to regulate commerce of a federally regulated program. The case of Granholm v. Heald awakened the dormant commerce clause to let Michigan know that it cannot interfere with interstate commerce.
Is foster care interstate? Of course it is. Let's look at Michigan's powerpoint on the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children.
Michigan Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children 2012
Since I believe I have made my point that HB 5763 and HB 5764 is unconstitutional as it violates the commerce clause, let us proceed to my second point of contention that the supporters of these Bills believe morality trumps the Constitution. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT: SEC. 5A 1 . THE DEPARTMENT SHALL NOT CONSIDER A CHILD PLACING 2 AGENCY'S OBJECTION TO PLACEMENTS THAT VIOLATE THE CHILD PLACING 3 AGENCY'S WRITTEN RELIGIOUS OR MORAL CONVICTIONS OR POLICIES IN ANY 4 SITUATION IN WHICH THE DEPARTMENT INTERACTS WITH THAT CHILD PLACING 5 AGENCY. THIS PROHIBITION INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, PLACEMENT 6 CONSIDERATIONS, FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS, CONTRACTING CONSIDERATIONS, 7 OR ANY OTHER AREAS IN WHICH THE DEPARTMENT MUST MAKE A 8 DETERMINATION INVOLVING A CHILD PLACING AGENCY. Gay foster youth: If a child placing agency decides, as a conscience choice, not to place a gay youth, then is it true a child placing agency can decide not to place a gay youth back with the family under similar reasoning of personal morality? Would this mean CPS can remove a child based upon the sexual orientation of the biological parent or relative? What an evil message our elected officials are sending to our youth. Disabilities: Instead of going into details, I encourage everyone to read this groundbreaking report from the National Council on Disabilities. Rocking the Cradle: Ensuring the Rights of Parents with Disabilities and Their Children. Parents with mental or physical challenges are having their children removed and being denied placement based upon what the Child Placing Agencies are calling a moral and conscience decision. Rocking the Cradle: Ensuring the Rights of Parents with Disabilities and Their Children I object to this Bill based upon my moral convictions to not interfere in commerce.
| ||||
| ||||
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
VA AG Cuccinelli Stops Another Million Dollar CPS Medicaid Fraud Scheme
Cuccinelli does it again!
Mental Health Service Provider Sentenced to 48 Months for Conspiracy to Commit Health Care Fraud
RICHMOND, Va. – Joseph T. Hackett, 32, of Asheville, N.C., was sentenced today to 48 months in prison, followed by a term of three years of supervised release, for Conspiracy to Commit Health Care Fraud. He also agreed to forfeit $1,570,041.60 and pay $1,570,041.60 in restitution to the Virginia Department of Medical Assistance Services.Neil H. MacBride, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia; and Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, Attorney General of Virginia, made the announcement after sentencing by United States District Judge Henry E. Hudson. Hackett pled guilty on August 13, 2012.
According to Court documents, Hackett owned and operated Access Regional Taskforce (“ART”), a Richmond-based Medicaid contracted provider of Intensive In-home Therapy Services for children and adolescents. Intensive In-home Therapy Services, one of the many mental health services offered by Medicaid in Virginia, are designed to assist youth and adolescents who are at risk of being removed from their homes, or are being returned to their homes after removal, because of significant mental health, behavioral, or emotional issues. Medicaid requires that Intensive In-home Therapy Service providers employ qualified mental health workers to provide a medically necessary service to at-risk children and adolescents.
In a statement of facts filed with the plea agreement, Hackett acknowledged that, through ART, he billed Medicaid for services that were not reimbursable because the services did not address a child’s specific mental health issues, were not provided by qualified mental health workers, and were not provided to children who were in actual need of the offered service. Hackett acknowledged that Medicaid paid ART at least $1,570,041.60 that ART was not entitled to receive. In addition, he admitted in the statement of facts that Hackett paid Creed Xtreme Marketing Concepts, a.k.a. Creed Extreme Marketing, $545,410.00 for patient referrals. The owner of Creed, Lorie T. Monroe, was sentenced on June 12, 2012 to 37 months of imprisonment for receiving these referral payments.
The case was investigated by the Virginia Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with assistance from the Virginia Department of Medical Assistance. Special Assistant United States Attorney Joseph E.H. Atkinson and Assistant United States Attorney Jessica Aber Brumberg prosecuted the case on behalf of the United States.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
Thursday, 22 November 2012
Conyers Celebrates Small Business Saturday
(DETROIT) – This Saturday November 24th, marks the second annual Small Business Saturday. Taking place between “Black Friday” and “Cyber Monday,” Small Business Saturday is designed to support small businesses and boost the economies of local communities. Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) released this statement in advance of the weekend events:
“I am proud to support the second annual Small Business Saturday, here in Detroit and across the country,” said Conyers.
“Initiatives like Small Business Saturday underscore our national commitment to rebuilding the cornerstones of America that strengthen our economy: small businesses, entrepreneurs, and a sturdy middle class.
“I wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving holiday, and hope that my fellow Detroiters support our small business community this Saturday. Together we can make Saturday a big day for small businesses.”
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©



