http://www.causes.com/causes/803130-best-interest-of-the-child/actions/1707647?recruiter_id=185080832&utm_campaign=invite&utm_medium=wall&utm_source=fb
Friday, November 23, 2012
PETITION: Best Interest Of The Child
November 22
·
Started by Sean Fitzgerald
http://www.causes.com/causes/803130-best-interest-of-the-child/actions/1707647?recruiter_id=185080832&utm_campaign=invite&utm_medium=wall&utm_source=fb
http://www.causes.com/causes/803130-best-interest-of-the-child/actions/1707647?recruiter_id=185080832&utm_campaign=invite&utm_medium=wall&utm_source=fb
Monday, November 19, 2012
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
PETITION: PROTECTING CANADIAN CHILDREN
http://www.causes.com/actions/1694059?recruiter_id=183422819&utm_campaign=invite&utm_medium=wall&utm_source=fb
PETITION: PROTECTING CANADIAN CHILDREN. My children were illegally apprehended from their mother, exactly from the place I have left them to have a visitation for 3 hours with their father!
My name is Viorica Lungu from Vancouver, BC and I want to let
everybody know that my children have been legally kidnapped by the so
called "System" of Social workers in Canada. At that time, my children
were almost 4 and 7 years old.
Three years have elapsed ever since. I am forbidden to talk to my
daughters on the phone and my children are not allowed to call me
either. I am not allowed to even see my daughters but only twice a month
for two hours and only under strict supervision and strict monitoring
of the conversation. I am a mother and I don't know if my children are
healthy, if they are properly dressed for the winter, and everything
else any mother should know about her children. I am not allowed to go
to their school and find out, first hand, how they are doing.
One might think that I am some monstrous mother whose kids are in
danger when around me. The absurdity of the situation is that all these
are happening under the circumstances in which even the social workers
reported that “it is NOT a case of child protection”, that I am an
“excellent mother” and that both children and myself, as a mother, have a
normal love and tenderness towards each other. The same position had
even the Judge in the Supreme Court of BC.
Here is my story.
On March 24, 2009, I drove as usual far enough from my place where I
live to Maple Ridge, BC, for the father to have the usual visitation
with our children. I left them at the social worker's place thinking
they will be safe. After one hour, one of the social workers called to
inform me that my children had been removed from me as of that very
moment. This was happening without even a court order! The father lied
that I alienated my children against him. However, nobody seemed to care
that, each time my children came back from their father, they were
upset and crying, on several occasions, the father twisted my older
daughter's wrist, shook her vigorously in the parking lot, yelled at
them, etc. And this was something happening on regular basis. Instead of
looking seriously and unbiased into this situation for the best
interest of the children, the social workers simply decided to remove my
children from me and give them directly to their father in the middle
of our custody battle, without warning me or trying, at least, to make
it easier on the children – as if they were nothing else but some
lifeless objects!
At the time, I asked the social worker, Maria Miem Swart, on what
grounds that decision had been taken, why she or other representatives
from the Ministry did not come to my place at least once to investigate
and see how happy my children were with me, before removing them! She
said: "There was no need to go to your place, Viorica - we know you are
an excellent mother"! So why did you steal my children from me if I am
an excellent mother? She said: "Because you don't get along with the
father” and that is why the children are “emotionally harmed”.
That was the strangest thing I could have ever heard – well, but he
does not get along with me either! So the real problem was actually, who
cared about that? What was the difference between me and him as parents
who did not get along and reached a consensual divorce? Moreover,
before everything happened, the father knew about a removal possibility
one month before (February 25, 2009) my daughters have actually been
removed from me on March 24, 2009, while I had no idea about that -
nobody bothered to let me know what was going on. So, was he
manipulating the social workers behind my back?
The social workers said in their report that alienation is not part
of their removal Act, but, in this case, they were doing it anyway
because of the high conflict between the parents! Social worker Diane
Keegan in her cross examination at the Supreme Court testified that “if
the mother will be awarded with sole custody, we will keep her in
supervised access until the children will be 18, and if the father will
be awarded with sole custody, we will drop the case against the mother
at the Provincial court”, which they did on April 26, 2010. So, again,
was he manipulating the social workers behind my back? Why all this
turmoil and hysteria? Also, at the time, the social workers and Judge
Masuhara have refused to send my children to see a Psychologist at the
Children's Hospital. I asked for this because I believed and still
believe that they are the ones who have emotionally harmed my children -
with their unfair, inhuman and sudden action of separating my children
from me as their mother, without any solid ground. They refused to give
us the section 15 for a Psychologist to assess all of us including our
children.
I am of Romanian descent and my ex-husband is of Canadian one. All
the depositions submitted on behalf of Romanians who knew me very well,
including the priest’s have not been properly considered and have been
downplayed by Honourable Mr. Justice D. M. Masuhara. He stated that
“their observations are made in the context of church services and
events” fact that was not accurate, and also that they did not know all
the issues around me and my ex-husband. I do not think that a witness is
supposed to know it all about the person/s in question. The main issue
at that time was if I was a good mother to my children - bottom line
that was what counted and still counts, nothing else. This is not a case
of criminal activities, etc. – it is just a messy custody fight. Among
the witnesses, there were a number of friends and people who knew me for
long time and saw me outside the church and who did not talk at all
from church perspective either.
I have been accused of harming my children emotionally because,
speaking Romanian to my children meant, necessarily, discrediting their
father, according to the social workers’ assumptions. Moreover, the
Ministry’s employees refused to bring a Romanian translator for
themselves in order to understand exactly what I was talking to my
children– they preferred to act in base of assumptions and…it worked.
My children are kept away from everything that is called Romanian
under the pretext that all that is Romanian brings about “emotional
harm” to the children. The father complained so, and the Social Services
adopted an attitude accordingly.
In base of this experience, I and everybody else have to understand
that, in a mixed marriage between a Canadian and other ethnical party,
be it Asian, Sikh, Russian, Italian, etc., having the child exposed to
the other spouse ethnic culture and language means or causes emotional
harm ….Very strange! My children were and, presently, are still
prohibited to go to the Romanian Orthodox Church, and through this
decision, once again, the honour, values and standards of a whole decent
and hard-working community is trivialized and diminished. This is not
the first time that this kind of discrimination happened in Canada. In
the 60’s a similar attitude (this time against the French language)
pushed Quebec on the brink of secession, until bilingualism was adopted
Canada-wide. A more recent experience is that of the “Residential
Schools” for First Nations, which were closed only in 1996; in these
schools, students were severely punished if they spoke a language other
than English.
On the other hand, I believe that this is a means of psychological
pressure over my children used by their father and blind authorities to
have my daughters forget about me, about what is Romanian in themselves,
to despise that part in themselves and to suppress it. How would you
feel? How would you call this?
If I am to turn the tables and think like their father did and
social workers and judge Masuhara did, then WHO can tell me that I am
NOT demeaned, put down in front of children when I am not with my
children – meaning, actually, most of the time? In base of the precedent
created, I am entitled to think that what I was suspected of and
forbidden to in base of the social workers’ assumptions and hearsay, now
it is done onto me. Then, how is the father better than me and what did
the system encourage?
In other words we could also summarize the core of the situation
like this: “what I (father and those allowing this happening) am
allowed, you(that is myself) are not”
I am not an alcoholic, I am not a drug-addict, I have never been put
in prison or charged with any wrongdoing, I have never left my children
alone, I have never ever emotionally or physically harmed my children.
Then, what am I?
I am a woman, I am not of Canadian descent, I dared to disagree with
what was going on including the procedure of the system – so, here I
am, a piece of garbage who can be thrown, together with my children,
from one corner to another, from one “master” to another, together or
separated from my own children as others please.
I must be supervised like a criminal when talking to my children.
Everything I say or said had and has to be interpreted and trivialized
by some officials and/or their father who knows to manipulate the
system.
As a parent and person, I was humiliated, challenged, outraged,
tripped all over, and stripped out of any personality. One of the social
workers mentioned in her report that it was weird that I kept my
daughter on my lap during my two-hours visit. Even that was strange! In a
tentative to discourage me, another one, Mrs. Maria Miem Swart, dared
asking me how did I pay my lawyer, “did you sell yourself?”…When I draw
the attention in Court about this she apologized saying that that was
her odd way of “joking” and Judge Masuhara quickly accepted it
accordingly and that was it. It is unacceptable for a Government
official to use such expressions to insult me and get away with it!
What should I do next?
Regards,
Viorica Lungu
http://www.causes.com/actions/1694059?recruiter_id=183422819&utm_campaign=invite&utm_medium=wall&utm_source=fb
Monday, November 5, 2012
PETITION: Protect Parents Constitutional Rights
PETITION: Protect Parents Constitutional Rights and Stop The Kidnapping by CPS agency's
March 21 · Started by Parents Rights
To: CPS Agency's, U.S. Congress, and Parents
By the signature of each
individual on the said petition, We hereby are demanding with respect
that Parental Rights be ratified into the U.S. Constitution in
accordance with the 14Th amendment. We also respectfully demand that
congress investigate all CPS county, state , and federal agencies...See More
http://www.causes.com/causes/658845-parents-rights-know-your-rights-and-fight-for-our-kids/actions/1634970?recruiter_id=78805840&utm_campaign=invite&utm_medium=wall&utm_source=fb
Our KIDS, Our, LOVE, Our FUTURE!
Each year U.S. Children are taking from loving families as a gain of
profit. Majority of these children are not abused, mistreated, or
neglected. Under our 14th amendment right All persons born or
naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they
reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any
State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.
By signing this petition we are urging Congress to Ratify Parental Rights and stop the malicious and false ways. These CPS Agencies are tearing apart loving families, and causing emotional and physical stress to children and loved ones.
The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect in 1998 reported that six times as many children died in foster care than in the general public and that once removed to official safety , these children are far more likely to suffer abuse, including sexual molestation than in the general population.
IT IS UP TO US TO SAVE OUR CHILDREN AND OUR FUTURE. LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD, AND BRING OUR CHILDREN HOME.
By signing this petition we are urging Congress to Ratify Parental Rights and stop the malicious and false ways. These CPS Agencies are tearing apart loving families, and causing emotional and physical stress to children and loved ones.
The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect in 1998 reported that six times as many children died in foster care than in the general public and that once removed to official safety , these children are far more likely to suffer abuse, including sexual molestation than in the general population.
IT IS UP TO US TO SAVE OUR CHILDREN AND OUR FUTURE. LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD, AND BRING OUR CHILDREN HOME.
More Actions from Parents Rights .... Know your Rights, and Fight for our Kids
http://www.causes.com/causes/658845-parents-rights-know-your-rights-and-fight-for-our-kids/actions/1634970?recruiter_id=78805840&utm_campaign=invite&utm_medium=wall&utm_source=fb
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Petitioning Massachusetts Governor, Sign Today
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ma-recall-county-probate-and-family-court-judge
The Governor of MA: RECALL COUNTY PROBATE AND FAMILY COURT JUDGE!
Petition by
Hull, MA
MASSACHUSETTS COUNTY JUDGE SHIELDS CORRUPT BEHAVIOR!
Massachusetts county judge shields corrupt behavior and judicial
misconduct by holding hearings simultaneously in two separate
courtrooms. County judge simultaneously held hearings for the” haves
and have nots”.
In order to shield attorneys and represented litigants from hearing and witnessing a motion to recuse the county judge. The county judge held hearings in two separate courtrooms. While the county judge’s judicial case manager checked in and process non-represented litigants in a courtroom on third floor of the county courthouse. The county judge held hearings for attorneys and represented litigants on the fourth floor of the county courthouse.
The attorneys and represented litigants were shielded from hearing the motion to recuse the county judge which exposed corruption and judicial misconduct, such obstruction of justice, partiality, unlawful ex parte communications, suppression of evidence, denial of due processes; child trafficking; extortion, “robe rage”; and violations of both Massachusetts General laws and federal laws.
This county judge thought so little of the unrepresented general public, and considered them ignorant to the facts of the motion to recuse.
The hearings for the “Have Nots” started 10:30am, after waiting to be heard since 9am.
September 24, 2012
Adrienne McGlone
Massachusetts
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ma-help-get-child-home
http://www.alexissneedshelp.blogspot.com/
The county judge attempted to shield and coverup wrong-doings; on September 24, 2012, The county Judge blatantly conduct covert hearings denying the public right and access to information regarding the Commonwealth judicial system.
MASSACHUSTTS MOTHER ORDERED JAILED! NO HEARING, NO PROBABLE CAUSE!
Could you contact the following, and inquire as to why this Mother being ordered to weekend jail? No probable cause; 19 years US Military Service. DCF has returned Alexiss home; Now, judge is ordering Mother to jail.
Please bombard the following entities with calls and emails:
Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct (617) 725-8050
Governor Deval Patrick (617) 725-4005
Massachusetts Justice Paula Carey (617) 788-6600
Representative Stephen DiNatale (617) 722-2676
Members of Massachusetts Committee on the Judiciary
Russell.Holmes@mahouse.gov
Jennifer.Flanagan@masenate.gov
stephen.dinatale@mahouse.gov
Richard.Ross@masenate.gov
ALS0, please continue reading, signing, and circulating the petition, need 700 signatures.
THANKS, AND GOD BLESS,
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ma-help-get-child-home
http://www.alexissneedshelp.blogspot.com/
September 20, 2012
To: FBI, Boston Division
Regarding my documented complaint and exposure of the criminal activities and corruption of the Plymouth County probate and Family Court judge; I have made both the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct and Massachusetts Probate and Family Courts chief Justice Paula Carey aware of the criminal activities and the lawlessness of these officials.
Pursuant to Massachusetts General Law chapter 211B, section 10, the Chief Justice has power and authority for oversight and accountability to discipline these judges’ wrong-doings. Further, the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct also has power and authority, pursuant to Massachusetts General Law chapter 211C to discipline wrong-doings of these judges.
I have made both of these entities aware of the corruption within the Plymouth County Probate and Family Court and the wrong-doings, which includes suppression of evidence, records tampering, denial of due processes, obstruction of justice, ex parte communication; illegal incarceration, contrived and excessive fines, extortion, child trafficking, violations of federal laws (Title 18, Servicemen’s Civil Relief Act rights, Amendment rights 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th); Massachusetts general laws chapters 119; 208, §31A; c.209 (all criteria); c. 215, §34B; c. 220, §13B; c.261, §27C(2); and c.265, §13K; violations of the canons 1, 2, and 3 of the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct; retaliation; and colors of law abuses.
The initial judge in the case was disqualified from the case by the Massachusetts Commission of Judicial Conduct, and had committed fewer infractions then the current residing judges.
However, the corruption is condoned and runs deep, such as the fact that the father is being represented by counsel from the law firm that the previously disqualified judge founded; and I am being ordered to paid this attorney legal fees. Next scheduled court hearing October 23, 2012.
Sincerely,
Adrienne McGlone
Adrienne McGlone
22 Vernon Street
Fitchburg, MA 01420
(339) 499-8726
adriennemcglone@verizon.net
“All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing.”
MASSACHUSETTS CHILD TRUMATIZED, SUFFERING FROM PTSD
August 28, 2012
Although, Alexiss, 6-years old, is home, it was 27-days before she saw anyone in the family after being taken and placed in a Massachusetts Department of Children and Family foster home. Within 27-days, Alexiss had lived in two different foster homes.
Alexiss is traumatized, suffering from PTSD, and receives Trauma Focused Therapy.
When the therapist asked Alexiss did she see her dad while she was in the foster home, Alexiss replied, “yes, but it was the wrong dad.” When the therapist inquired, “How was it the wrong dad”? Alexiss replied, “I didn’t know him”. (At the time, Alexiss did not know her biological dad; dad chose fine money, the courts were ordering Mother to pay him for the last five years over establishing a relationship with Alexiss).
During play, Alexiss informed her Lego Friends in her Butterfly Beauty shop; “I lost my live.” I am hoping she does not loss her little mind. Alexiss, as a way to deal with the trauma; has locked all the pain and suffering away; and does not talk about the ordeal. With the trauma focused therapy we are praying to unlock this ordeal for Alexiss to be free.
Please continue to read, sign, and circulate Alexiss’ petition. Alexiss’ ordeal has to have some oversight and accountability. Alexiss needs 1000 signatures!
PLEASE READ, SIGN, AND CIRCULATE FOR ALEXISS!
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ma-help-get-child-home
http://www.alexissneedshelp.blogspot.com/
Alexiss’s Mom,
adriennemcglone@verizon.net
PLEASE HELP GET Oversight and Accountibiity for Alexiss' suffering, , CALL Governor Deval Patrick (617) 725-4005, Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct (617) 725-8050, and Massachusetts Probate and Family Court chief Justice Paula Carey (617) 788-6600; and Massachusetts elected officials.
OVER 100 DAYS MASSACHUSETTS CHILD CONTINUES TO HELD HOSTAGE BY COUNTY JUDGES
The county judges are misappropriating taxpayer dollars and state services by using Massachusetts DCF to detain this child for reasons other than intended by law; further these judges are in violation of Mass General Law 119, and have abused their power.
Massachusetts Mother appeals to Governor Deval Patrick, Massachusetts Health and Human Services Secretary Bigby, and Massachusetts Chief Justice of Probate and Family Court, Chief Carey; for the return of her six years daughter, who was unlawfully removed from the mother and in placed in the Department of Children and Families custody by a county Probate and Family court judge. The removal of Alexiss from her mother was in violation of Massachusetts General Law 119 which give judges authority to remove a child from a home in the event of neglect and abuse. However, the county judge used the law to remove the Alexiss because the mother refused to follow an order that placed the Alexiss in danger.
The county judge, in placing the Alexiss in DCF custody for reasons other than those stated by law has misappropriated state funds and services. The mother, in the past, filed a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct, and a previous county judge in this case was disqualified from the case for child endangerment. Since this time, current county judges in this case have continued to write unlawful orders that continue to deny the best interest of the Alexiss by forcing the mother to allow unsupervised visit with the biological father, who has a criminal record of sexual assault, rape, and kidnapping (Superior Court District Attorney Katherine Cappelli); recorded allegations of child molestation involving his stepdaughter; imprisonment for domestic violence; years of heroin use; discharge from the military for alcohol/drug rehabilitation failure; and who has mental health issues.
In the onset of this case, the disqualified county judge had ordered the mother to allow the child unsupervised overnight weekend visits with the father who was participating in a drug rehabilitation program and residing in a men’s half-way house. The county judges denied the mother’s request for a home-study; alcohol/drug evaluation; mental health assessment to ensure unsupervised visits were appropriate; and further denied Alexiss a Guardian Ad Litem. The biological father who is from Baltimore Maryland was in Massachusetts to participate in a drug rehabilitation program when he was charged in Superior court with sexual assault, rape, and kidnapping of a Kingston woman.
Currently, Alexiss has been in a foster-home for over 45 days, and has only been allowed to see the mother and family one hour a week, with the weekly hour visit commencing three weeks ago. The Mother states during the weekly one hour visits, the Alexiss’s responses are depressed for the first 15-30 minutes; and the visits end in tear jerking heartbreak, with Alexiss and mother in tears.
Further, the county judges continue to hold Alexiss hostage in order to buy time to wiggle their way out of violations of the Mother’s rights under the Servicemen’s Civil Relief Act.
PLEASE HELP GET Oversight and Accountibiity for Alexiss' suffering, , CALL Governor Deval Patrick (617) 725-4005, Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct (617) 725-8050, and Massachusetts Probate and Family Court chief Justice Paula Carey (617) 788-6600; and Massachusetts elected officials.
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ma-recall-county-probate-and-family-court-judge
In order to shield attorneys and represented litigants from hearing and witnessing a motion to recuse the county judge. The county judge held hearings in two separate courtrooms. While the county judge’s judicial case manager checked in and process non-represented litigants in a courtroom on third floor of the county courthouse. The county judge held hearings for attorneys and represented litigants on the fourth floor of the county courthouse.
The attorneys and represented litigants were shielded from hearing the motion to recuse the county judge which exposed corruption and judicial misconduct, such obstruction of justice, partiality, unlawful ex parte communications, suppression of evidence, denial of due processes; child trafficking; extortion, “robe rage”; and violations of both Massachusetts General laws and federal laws.
This county judge thought so little of the unrepresented general public, and considered them ignorant to the facts of the motion to recuse.
The hearings for the “Have Nots” started 10:30am, after waiting to be heard since 9am.
September 24, 2012
Adrienne McGlone
Massachusetts
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ma-help-get-child-home
http://www.alexissneedshelp.blogspot.com/
The county judge attempted to shield and coverup wrong-doings; on September 24, 2012, The county Judge blatantly conduct covert hearings denying the public right and access to information regarding the Commonwealth judicial system.
MASSACHUSTTS MOTHER ORDERED JAILED! NO HEARING, NO PROBABLE CAUSE!
Could you contact the following, and inquire as to why this Mother being ordered to weekend jail? No probable cause; 19 years US Military Service. DCF has returned Alexiss home; Now, judge is ordering Mother to jail.
Please bombard the following entities with calls and emails:
Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct (617) 725-8050
Governor Deval Patrick (617) 725-4005
Massachusetts Justice Paula Carey (617) 788-6600
Representative Stephen DiNatale (617) 722-2676
Members of Massachusetts Committee on the Judiciary
Russell.Holmes@mahouse.gov
Jennifer.Flanagan@masenate.gov
stephen.dinatale@mahouse.gov
Richard.Ross@masenate.gov
ALS0, please continue reading, signing, and circulating the petition, need 700 signatures.
THANKS, AND GOD BLESS,
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ma-help-get-child-home
http://www.alexissneedshelp.blogspot.com/
September 20, 2012
To: FBI, Boston Division
Regarding my documented complaint and exposure of the criminal activities and corruption of the Plymouth County probate and Family Court judge; I have made both the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct and Massachusetts Probate and Family Courts chief Justice Paula Carey aware of the criminal activities and the lawlessness of these officials.
Pursuant to Massachusetts General Law chapter 211B, section 10, the Chief Justice has power and authority for oversight and accountability to discipline these judges’ wrong-doings. Further, the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct also has power and authority, pursuant to Massachusetts General Law chapter 211C to discipline wrong-doings of these judges.
I have made both of these entities aware of the corruption within the Plymouth County Probate and Family Court and the wrong-doings, which includes suppression of evidence, records tampering, denial of due processes, obstruction of justice, ex parte communication; illegal incarceration, contrived and excessive fines, extortion, child trafficking, violations of federal laws (Title 18, Servicemen’s Civil Relief Act rights, Amendment rights 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th); Massachusetts general laws chapters 119; 208, §31A; c.209 (all criteria); c. 215, §34B; c. 220, §13B; c.261, §27C(2); and c.265, §13K; violations of the canons 1, 2, and 3 of the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct; retaliation; and colors of law abuses.
The initial judge in the case was disqualified from the case by the Massachusetts Commission of Judicial Conduct, and had committed fewer infractions then the current residing judges.
However, the corruption is condoned and runs deep, such as the fact that the father is being represented by counsel from the law firm that the previously disqualified judge founded; and I am being ordered to paid this attorney legal fees. Next scheduled court hearing October 23, 2012.
Sincerely,
Adrienne McGlone
Adrienne McGlone
22 Vernon Street
Fitchburg, MA 01420
(339) 499-8726
adriennemcglone@verizon.net
“All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing.”
MASSACHUSETTS CHILD TRUMATIZED, SUFFERING FROM PTSD
August 28, 2012
Although, Alexiss, 6-years old, is home, it was 27-days before she saw anyone in the family after being taken and placed in a Massachusetts Department of Children and Family foster home. Within 27-days, Alexiss had lived in two different foster homes.
Alexiss is traumatized, suffering from PTSD, and receives Trauma Focused Therapy.
When the therapist asked Alexiss did she see her dad while she was in the foster home, Alexiss replied, “yes, but it was the wrong dad.” When the therapist inquired, “How was it the wrong dad”? Alexiss replied, “I didn’t know him”. (At the time, Alexiss did not know her biological dad; dad chose fine money, the courts were ordering Mother to pay him for the last five years over establishing a relationship with Alexiss).
During play, Alexiss informed her Lego Friends in her Butterfly Beauty shop; “I lost my live.” I am hoping she does not loss her little mind. Alexiss, as a way to deal with the trauma; has locked all the pain and suffering away; and does not talk about the ordeal. With the trauma focused therapy we are praying to unlock this ordeal for Alexiss to be free.
Please continue to read, sign, and circulate Alexiss’ petition. Alexiss’ ordeal has to have some oversight and accountability. Alexiss needs 1000 signatures!
PLEASE READ, SIGN, AND CIRCULATE FOR ALEXISS!
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ma-help-get-child-home
http://www.alexissneedshelp.blogspot.com/
Alexiss’s Mom,
adriennemcglone@verizon.net
PLEASE HELP GET Oversight and Accountibiity for Alexiss' suffering, , CALL Governor Deval Patrick (617) 725-4005, Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct (617) 725-8050, and Massachusetts Probate and Family Court chief Justice Paula Carey (617) 788-6600; and Massachusetts elected officials.
OVER 100 DAYS MASSACHUSETTS CHILD CONTINUES TO HELD HOSTAGE BY COUNTY JUDGES
The county judges are misappropriating taxpayer dollars and state services by using Massachusetts DCF to detain this child for reasons other than intended by law; further these judges are in violation of Mass General Law 119, and have abused their power.
Massachusetts Mother appeals to Governor Deval Patrick, Massachusetts Health and Human Services Secretary Bigby, and Massachusetts Chief Justice of Probate and Family Court, Chief Carey; for the return of her six years daughter, who was unlawfully removed from the mother and in placed in the Department of Children and Families custody by a county Probate and Family court judge. The removal of Alexiss from her mother was in violation of Massachusetts General Law 119 which give judges authority to remove a child from a home in the event of neglect and abuse. However, the county judge used the law to remove the Alexiss because the mother refused to follow an order that placed the Alexiss in danger.
The county judge, in placing the Alexiss in DCF custody for reasons other than those stated by law has misappropriated state funds and services. The mother, in the past, filed a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct, and a previous county judge in this case was disqualified from the case for child endangerment. Since this time, current county judges in this case have continued to write unlawful orders that continue to deny the best interest of the Alexiss by forcing the mother to allow unsupervised visit with the biological father, who has a criminal record of sexual assault, rape, and kidnapping (Superior Court District Attorney Katherine Cappelli); recorded allegations of child molestation involving his stepdaughter; imprisonment for domestic violence; years of heroin use; discharge from the military for alcohol/drug rehabilitation failure; and who has mental health issues.
In the onset of this case, the disqualified county judge had ordered the mother to allow the child unsupervised overnight weekend visits with the father who was participating in a drug rehabilitation program and residing in a men’s half-way house. The county judges denied the mother’s request for a home-study; alcohol/drug evaluation; mental health assessment to ensure unsupervised visits were appropriate; and further denied Alexiss a Guardian Ad Litem. The biological father who is from Baltimore Maryland was in Massachusetts to participate in a drug rehabilitation program when he was charged in Superior court with sexual assault, rape, and kidnapping of a Kingston woman.
Currently, Alexiss has been in a foster-home for over 45 days, and has only been allowed to see the mother and family one hour a week, with the weekly hour visit commencing three weeks ago. The Mother states during the weekly one hour visits, the Alexiss’s responses are depressed for the first 15-30 minutes; and the visits end in tear jerking heartbreak, with Alexiss and mother in tears.
Further, the county judges continue to hold Alexiss hostage in order to buy time to wiggle their way out of violations of the Mother’s rights under the Servicemen’s Civil Relief Act.
PLEASE HELP GET Oversight and Accountibiity for Alexiss' suffering, , CALL Governor Deval Patrick (617) 725-4005, Massachusetts Commission on Judicial Conduct (617) 725-8050, and Massachusetts Probate and Family Court chief Justice Paula Carey (617) 788-6600; and Massachusetts elected officials.
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ma-recall-county-probate-and-family-court-judge
Friday, November 2, 2012
1,000,000 People for Better Lives for All Persons With Autism!
Petitioning The President of the United States
Petition by
St. Louis, MO
As a mother of a high-functioning daughter, diagnosed with an autism
spectrum disorder and as a person, myself, with what I am convinced is
an undiagnosed autism spectrum disorder who is still in search of
answers for my life, I am passionate to see funds be released to provide
more services of different kinds for adults with autism. When many of
us think of autism, the first picture that comes to mind tends to be of a
child. There are many, growing funds for a wide variety of autism
services for children and teenagers. Enthusiasm is high for early
childhood intervention. During the school years, children and teenagers
are entitled to a wide variety of special education services. This
entitlement ends when they reach the age of majority. After the age of
18, adults with autism and the families who care for them, are pretty
much on their own with limited direction, support or resources. Autism,
whether we speak of classic, more severe autism or the
higher-functioning forms of autism, is a lifelong developmental
disability. Even when children are fortunate enough to get early
childhood intervention and make strong progress because of it, they do
not "outgrow" autism and likely continue to need support services.
http://www.change.org/petitions/1-000-000-people-for-better-lives-for-all-persons-with-autism
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Petitioning Tennessee Department of Child Services
http://www.change.org/petitions/tennessee-department-of-child-services-remove-dcs-shroud-of-secrecy?utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition&utm_term=6793484
Tennessee Department of Child Services: Remove DCS' shroud of secrecy
Petition by
Clarksville, TN
Tennessee DCS Administrative policy 14.13, entitled Confidentiality of Child Protective Services Cases - http://www.state.tn.us/youth/dcsguide/policies/chap14/14.13.pdf
NEEDS TO BE CHANGED to remove DCS’ shroud of secrecy which they claim
is to protect the family’s privacy, but which is used by DCS to ditch
their responsibilities and accountability.
(I) change Section A, Release of CPS investigative information, from: 1. CPS investigative information “MAY” be released to the following personnel: to: 1. CPS investigative information “SHALL” be released to the following personnel:
a) Employees or individuals responsible for supervising or administering the DCS Office of Child Safety; DCS Internal Affairs and all other DCS employees with a need to know;
b) Contractor or providers involved in delivering services to the family;
c) Professionals providing case consultation;
d) Local state or federal law enforcement agencies investigating a report of known or suspected child abuse or crimes against children; and
e) Any state licensing agency that licenses programs serving children that can provide a justification for a need-to-know.
(II) change Section A, Release of CPS investigative information, from: 2. Upon consultation and approval of DCS Legal Counsel, investigative information “MAY” be shared with other agencies, professionals and individuals that includes, but not limited to:, to: 2. Upon consultation and approval of DCS Legal Counsel, investigative information “SHALL” be shared with other agencies, professionals and individuals that includes, but not limited to:
a) Child’s primary caretaker or parent with any custodial rights,
b) Child Abuse Review Team (CART),
c) Child Protective Investigation Team (CPIT),
d) Foster Care Review Board (FCRB),
e) Professionals who are providing treatment for the child, the perpetrator, or the non-offending parent,
f) Teaching professionals or child care providers,
g) District Attorney General or U.S. attorney (or authorized assistants) representing the judicial district involved in the case,
h) Court holding jurisdiction over a case, including divorce cases,
i) Grand jury, by subpoena,
j) Guardian ad litem assigned to the child,
k) Other persons as ordered by the court,
l) Other state or federal agencies investigating cases of child abuse or neglect,
m) State and local Child Fatality Review Teams,
n) Probation or parole officers preparing pre-sentencing or other court related reports or supervising probationers or parolees,
o) Individuals, who are conducting scientific and governmental research on child abuse and neglect, provided that the Department has formally approved such research.
An article in the “Tennessean” entitled “DCS provided inaccurate data on child abuse, commissioner says” is available at http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012310100098 . Also see DCS chief to review processes on child abuse reports, http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012310050030
DCS plays fast and loose with the welfare of defenseless children, then hides behind a shroud of "confidentiality" aka a shroud of secrecy/unaccountability. Children whose cases are classified as NOT severe abuse are left to wallow, because, as a DCS worker stated to me, they are concerned with cases where children/babies have been thrown against a wall, but anything less than that is not of a concern to them. Even severe cases are classified at a lower rating, and I believe this is another tactic to avoid work. How many abusers start out with severe abuse, or do they normally start small and progress as the perpetrator gets away with it?
DCS relies on their shroud of confidentiality to not do their job, and to keep hidden the fact that THEY DO NOT DO THEIR JOB. I say, we need to remove that shroud and change their implementing guidance from "may" to "shall" SO THAT THEY ARE ALWAYS ACCOUNTABLE and know that someone outside of their agency is looking over their shoulder making sure they are doing their job for the benefit of abused/neglected children in Tennessee, no matter what degree of abuse/neglect is occurring.
(I) change Section A, Release of CPS investigative information, from: 1. CPS investigative information “MAY” be released to the following personnel: to: 1. CPS investigative information “SHALL” be released to the following personnel:
a) Employees or individuals responsible for supervising or administering the DCS Office of Child Safety; DCS Internal Affairs and all other DCS employees with a need to know;
b) Contractor or providers involved in delivering services to the family;
c) Professionals providing case consultation;
d) Local state or federal law enforcement agencies investigating a report of known or suspected child abuse or crimes against children; and
e) Any state licensing agency that licenses programs serving children that can provide a justification for a need-to-know.
(II) change Section A, Release of CPS investigative information, from: 2. Upon consultation and approval of DCS Legal Counsel, investigative information “MAY” be shared with other agencies, professionals and individuals that includes, but not limited to:, to: 2. Upon consultation and approval of DCS Legal Counsel, investigative information “SHALL” be shared with other agencies, professionals and individuals that includes, but not limited to:
a) Child’s primary caretaker or parent with any custodial rights,
b) Child Abuse Review Team (CART),
c) Child Protective Investigation Team (CPIT),
d) Foster Care Review Board (FCRB),
e) Professionals who are providing treatment for the child, the perpetrator, or the non-offending parent,
f) Teaching professionals or child care providers,
g) District Attorney General or U.S. attorney (or authorized assistants) representing the judicial district involved in the case,
h) Court holding jurisdiction over a case, including divorce cases,
i) Grand jury, by subpoena,
j) Guardian ad litem assigned to the child,
k) Other persons as ordered by the court,
l) Other state or federal agencies investigating cases of child abuse or neglect,
m) State and local Child Fatality Review Teams,
n) Probation or parole officers preparing pre-sentencing or other court related reports or supervising probationers or parolees,
o) Individuals, who are conducting scientific and governmental research on child abuse and neglect, provided that the Department has formally approved such research.
An article in the “Tennessean” entitled “DCS provided inaccurate data on child abuse, commissioner says” is available at http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012310100098 . Also see DCS chief to review processes on child abuse reports, http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012310050030
DCS plays fast and loose with the welfare of defenseless children, then hides behind a shroud of "confidentiality" aka a shroud of secrecy/unaccountability. Children whose cases are classified as NOT severe abuse are left to wallow, because, as a DCS worker stated to me, they are concerned with cases where children/babies have been thrown against a wall, but anything less than that is not of a concern to them. Even severe cases are classified at a lower rating, and I believe this is another tactic to avoid work. How many abusers start out with severe abuse, or do they normally start small and progress as the perpetrator gets away with it?
DCS relies on their shroud of confidentiality to not do their job, and to keep hidden the fact that THEY DO NOT DO THEIR JOB. I say, we need to remove that shroud and change their implementing guidance from "may" to "shall" SO THAT THEY ARE ALWAYS ACCOUNTABLE and know that someone outside of their agency is looking over their shoulder making sure they are doing their job for the benefit of abused/neglected children in Tennessee, no matter what degree of abuse/neglect is occurring.
Petition Letter
Remove DCS' shroud of secrecy
Tennessee DCS Administrative policy 14.13, entitled Confidentiality of Child Protective Services Cases - http://www.state.tn.us/youth/dcsguide/policies/chap14/14.13.pdf NEEDS TO BE CHANGED to remove DCS’ shroud of secrecy which they claim is to protect the family’s privacy, but which is used by DCS to ditch their responsibilities and accountability.
(I) change Section A, Release of CPS investigative information, from: 1. CPS investigative information “MAY” be released to the following personnel: to: 1. CPS investigative information “SHALL” be released to the following personnel:
a) Employees or individuals responsible for supervising or administering the DCS Office of Child Safety; DCS Internal Affairs and all other DCS employees with a need to know;
b) Contractor or providers involved in delivering services to the family;
c) Professionals providing case consultation;
d) Local state or federal law enforcement agencies investigating a report of known or suspected child abuse or crimes against children; and
e) Any state licensing agency that licenses programs serving children that can provide a justification for a need-to-know.
(II) change Section A, Release of CPS investigative information, from: 2. Upon consultation and approval of DCS Legal Counsel, investigative information “MAY” be shared with other agencies, professionals and individuals that includes, but not limited to:, to: 2. Upon consultation and approval of DCS Legal Counsel, investigative information “SHALL” be shared with other agencies, professionals and individuals that includes, but not limited to:
a) Child’s primary caretaker or parent with any custodial rights,
b) Child Abuse Review Team (CART),
c) Child Protective Investigation Team (CPIT),
d) Foster Care Review Board (FCRB),
e) Professionals who are providing treatment for the child, the perpetrator, or the non-offending parent,
f) Teaching professionals or child care providers,
g) District Attorney General or U.S. attorney (or authorized assistants) representing the judicial district involved in the case,
h) Court holding jurisdiction over a case, including divorce cases,
i) Grand jury, by subpoena,
j) Guardian ad litem assigned to the child,
k) Other persons as ordered by the court,
l) Other state or federal agencies investigating cases of child abuse or neglect,
m) State and local Child Fatality Review Teams,
n) Probation or parole officers preparing pre-sentencing or other court related reports or supervising probationers or parolees,
o) Individuals, who are conducting scientific and governmental research on child abuse and neglect, provided that the Department has formally approved such research.
An article in the “Tennessean” entitled “DCS provided inaccurate data on child abuse, commissioner says” is available at http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012310100098 . Also see DCS chief to review processes on child abuse reports, http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012310050030
DCS plays fast and loose with the welfare of defenseless children, then hides behind a shroud of "confidentiality" aka a shroud of secrecy/unaccountability. Children whose cases are classified as NOT severe abuse are left to wallow, because, as a DCS worker stated to me, they are concerned with cases where children/babies have been thrown against a wall, but anything less than that is not of a concern to them. Even severe cases are classified at a lower rating, and I believe this is another tactic to avoid work. How many abusers start out with severe abuse, or do they normally start small and progress as the perpetrator gets away with it?
DCS relies on their shroud of confidentiality to not do their job, and to keep hidden the fact that THEY DO NOT DO THEIR JOB. I say, we need to remove that shroud and change their implementing guidance from "may" to "shall" SO THAT THEY ARE ALWAYS ACCOUNTABLE and know that someone outside of their agency is looking over their shoulder making sure they are doing their job for the benefit of abused/neglected children in Tennessee, no matter what degree of abuse/neglect is occurring.
Tennessee DCS Administrative policy 14.13, entitled Confidentiality of Child Protective Services Cases - http://www.state.tn.us/youth/dcsguide/policies/chap14/14.13.pdf NEEDS TO BE CHANGED to remove DCS’ shroud of secrecy which they claim is to protect the family’s privacy, but which is used by DCS to ditch their responsibilities and accountability.
(I) change Section A, Release of CPS investigative information, from: 1. CPS investigative information “MAY” be released to the following personnel: to: 1. CPS investigative information “SHALL” be released to the following personnel:
a) Employees or individuals responsible for supervising or administering the DCS Office of Child Safety; DCS Internal Affairs and all other DCS employees with a need to know;
b) Contractor or providers involved in delivering services to the family;
c) Professionals providing case consultation;
d) Local state or federal law enforcement agencies investigating a report of known or suspected child abuse or crimes against children; and
e) Any state licensing agency that licenses programs serving children that can provide a justification for a need-to-know.
(II) change Section A, Release of CPS investigative information, from: 2. Upon consultation and approval of DCS Legal Counsel, investigative information “MAY” be shared with other agencies, professionals and individuals that includes, but not limited to:, to: 2. Upon consultation and approval of DCS Legal Counsel, investigative information “SHALL” be shared with other agencies, professionals and individuals that includes, but not limited to:
a) Child’s primary caretaker or parent with any custodial rights,
b) Child Abuse Review Team (CART),
c) Child Protective Investigation Team (CPIT),
d) Foster Care Review Board (FCRB),
e) Professionals who are providing treatment for the child, the perpetrator, or the non-offending parent,
f) Teaching professionals or child care providers,
g) District Attorney General or U.S. attorney (or authorized assistants) representing the judicial district involved in the case,
h) Court holding jurisdiction over a case, including divorce cases,
i) Grand jury, by subpoena,
j) Guardian ad litem assigned to the child,
k) Other persons as ordered by the court,
l) Other state or federal agencies investigating cases of child abuse or neglect,
m) State and local Child Fatality Review Teams,
n) Probation or parole officers preparing pre-sentencing or other court related reports or supervising probationers or parolees,
o) Individuals, who are conducting scientific and governmental research on child abuse and neglect, provided that the Department has formally approved such research.
An article in the “Tennessean” entitled “DCS provided inaccurate data on child abuse, commissioner says” is available at http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012310100098 . Also see DCS chief to review processes on child abuse reports, http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012310050030
DCS plays fast and loose with the welfare of defenseless children, then hides behind a shroud of "confidentiality" aka a shroud of secrecy/unaccountability. Children whose cases are classified as NOT severe abuse are left to wallow, because, as a DCS worker stated to me, they are concerned with cases where children/babies have been thrown against a wall, but anything less than that is not of a concern to them. Even severe cases are classified at a lower rating, and I believe this is another tactic to avoid work. How many abusers start out with severe abuse, or do they normally start small and progress as the perpetrator gets away with it?
DCS relies on their shroud of confidentiality to not do their job, and to keep hidden the fact that THEY DO NOT DO THEIR JOB. I say, we need to remove that shroud and change their implementing guidance from "may" to "shall" SO THAT THEY ARE ALWAYS ACCOUNTABLE and know that someone outside of their agency is looking over their shoulder making sure they are doing their job for the benefit of abused/neglected children in Tennessee, no matter what degree of abuse/neglect is occurring.
[Your name]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)