|
Post by Dean Robinson on Jul 31, 2007 9:34:35 GMT -5
Family Attorney Blows the Whistle on State Child Protective Services Agencies By Bill Hahn Created 2007-07-10 21:53
Practicing family attorney Gregory Hession confirms child protective service agencies engage in abusive, deliberate and dirty tricks motivated by federal funding.
Follow this link to the original source: "Families Separated by the State [1]"
COMMENTARY:
Every year thousands of families are forcibly separated from their children based on unsubstantiated or outright false allegations of child abuse. Gregory Hession, a practicing constitutional and family law attorney in Mass., says that for these families, the nightmare has only begun.
Children in child protective services (CPS) have been abused, wounded, brain washed, drugged, adopted out and some have even died. Hession has represented scores of these families and has dedicated himself to exposing CPS abuses and reuniting loving, deserving families. He documents CPS abuses in the July 23, 2007, issue of The New American magazine.
Hession's articles highlight true stories of families who have been targeted by CPS agencies. All the families discussed are Hession's clients.
Hession writes that state CPS agencies continually yank children out of good, loving homes based on flimsy allegations of child abuse. He asserts that the child protection business generates so much money, and employs so many social workers, therapists, lawyers and other professionals, that it needs a steady flow of cases to keep all of these workers employed. In Mass., the cost of these state services totals into the billions of dollars, which the state can leverage to obtain prodigious quantities of federal reimbursement monies.
In 2005, more than 3.3 million reports involving 6 million children were made to state child-abuse hot lines. The vast majority of these eventually proved to be untrue. Statistics from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services show 40 percent of allegations are initially screened out. Of the remaining 60 percent, nearly two-thirds of child-abuse investigations are unsubstantiated. Yet, more than 500,000 children are currently in foster care and another 300,000 or so are forcibly removed from their homes by the system every year.
Hession states that genuine child abuse obviously does exist and those involved in its practice need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, he writes that most people would likely disagree with CPS in how it defines abuse or neglect. Families are attacked for home-schooling or spanking their children, for not overseeing all play activities, or for when a child has an accident. Only a small percentage of the 3.3 million reported cases annually prove to be genuine abuse, and the system does a bad job of sorting it out.
The articles conclude that millions of children are imperiled by this imperious, abusive CPS system, which works quietly without much public scrutiny. Change will likely come only when the cruelties have been exposed, and the public reaffirms that raising children is the responsibility of families, not the state.
for more on Hession, read the news Reality has posted,
even if they do find out the parent did nothing wrong, it is a system that does not back up, quote Dave Brown, Ottawa Citizen he was shut up, his name is mention in Hansard in Oueens Park on his writings in the paper on CAS faliures.
|
|
|
Post by Dean Robinson on Jul 31, 2007 9:42:23 GMT -5
everything is Domestic Violence,, today, and what happens to the children, even if mom or dad patched it up, even if it was just a few angry words, ALL couples, gay, straight and other, if you have never argued with your partner your to stupid or lying and a great doormat for someone. Today many children are living in hell, because mom and mom disagreed, and it might have been loud, or mom called the police, to have other mom cooled off, in comes the SW, and goodbye babies. Dare I say onto the real violence with no protection. How has this saved anyone, I want the statics and so should you. The murder , suicide of the two people from London, sad and tragic, both worked in Domestic Violence, does that not alarm anyone?
dont forget about the two cops that are dead there as well
Then of course make it much worse, introduce Bill 117:
read what Law Times writer Rob Martin had to say on Bill 117:
"We are falling into the abyss of allowing hysteria to drive our public policy agenda. The leading source of hysteria today is domestic violence. This hysteria has led to a number of seriously misguided acts, as various persons have attempted to demonstrate their commitment to 'doing something' about domestic violence...
... it's wrong, says Mr. Martin: "This bill is classic police-state legislation and violates just about every constitutional principle that anyone with even a minimal familiarity with our Constitution might think of..."
Train AGs in Rudimentary Law by Rob Martin (Rob teaches constitutional law at the University of Western Ontario).
Also Dave Brown, senior reporter- Ottawa Citizen:
"Just in time for Christmas, Ontario Attorney General Jim Flaherty has presented a gift-wrapped monster called Bill 117 that effectively removes the Charter rights of half the population -- the male half.
Gone with the flick of a quick vote are fundamental procedural rights and the presumption of innocence.
The vote was held in the Ontario legislature late Monday. The new law gives special courts powers that appear to circumvent the Criminal Code and the Charter of Rights..."
these are postings from CCW.
and since they need to be made avaliable to as many people as posible Ive put them here
|
|
|
Post by Dean Robinson on Jul 31, 2007 9:50:30 GMT -5
in this post Im assumming they are talking about Jeffery Baldwin the CAS placeed the child with his grand perant that had been convicted years earlyer for the death of one of there own. at the time of the death the CCAS was invovled with this family. when Jeffery died he was under the supvision of the CAS, the child died of stavation and other complications. if the child was under supervision the Worker would have noticed the feeces on the wall in his room. let alone the ten frigging other people living in the house.
|
|
|
Post by Visitzkidz on Jul 31, 2007 16:06:16 GMT -5
This attorney and other such as him should be applauded and their voices heard all over Canada AND the U.S.
My haighter hadher arm broken,and her butt belted in care, temporary care, and the CAS worker said she had no obligation to check on her frequently or the foster parents while she was there.
If this doesn't scare the heck out of the general public, it shold.
"Let's clean up this mess," as one Prime Minister said in the mid-60's..Thanks for this very informative material.
Soundlike a good piece of information to build a class action suit.
Viz
|
|
|
Post by fixchildrensaid on Jul 31, 2007 19:09:16 GMT -5
everything is Domestic Violence,, today, and what happens to the children, even if mom or dad patched it up, even if it was just a few angry words, ALL couples, gay, straight and other, if you have never argued with your partner your to stupid or lying and a great doormat for someone. Today many children are living in hell, because mom and mom disagreed, and it might have been loud, or mom called the police, to have other mom cooled off, in comes the SW, and goodbye babies. Dare I say onto the real violence with no protection. How has this saved anyone, I want the statics and so should you. The murder , suicide of the two people from London, sad and tragic, both worked in Domestic Violence, does that not alarm anyone? dont forget about the two cops that are dead there as well Then of course make it much worse, introduce Bill 117: read what Law Times writer Rob Martin had to say on Bill 117: "We are falling into the abyss of allowing hysteria to drive our public policy agenda. The leading source of hysteria today is domestic violence. This hysteria has led to a number of seriously misguided acts, as various persons have attempted to demonstrate their commitment to 'doing something' about domestic violence... ... it's wrong, says Mr. Martin: "This bill is classic police-state legislation and violates just about every constitutional principle that anyone with even a minimal familiarity with our Constitution might think of..." Train AGs in Rudimentary Law by Rob Martin (Rob teaches constitutional law at the University of Western Ontario). Also Dave Brown, senior reporter- Ottawa Citizen: "Just in time for Christmas, Ontario Attorney General Jim Flaherty has presented a gift-wrapped monster called Bill 117 that effectively removes the Charter rights of half the population -- the male half. Gone with the flick of a quick vote are fundamental procedural rights and the presumption of innocence. The vote was held in the Ontario legislature late Monday. The new law gives special courts powers that appear to circumvent the Criminal Code and the Charter of Rights..." these are postings from CCW. and since they need to be made avaliable to as many people as posible Ive put them here Do you know when that Bill 117 was passed, Dean?
|
|
|
Post by bizzi on Jul 31, 2007 20:07:42 GMT -5
read what Law Times writer Rob Martin had to say on Bill 117:
"We are falling into the abyss of allowing hysteria to drive our public policy agenda. The leading source of hysteria today is domestic violence. This hysteria has led to a number of seriously misguided acts, as various persons have attempted to demonstrate their commitment to 'doing something' about domestic violence...
... it's wrong, says Mr. Martin: "This bill is classic police-state legislation and violates just about every constitutional principle that anyone with even a minimal familiarity with our Constitution might think of..
Well yeah that is what corrupt and nazi governments do. Only the real stupid people and their kids in Canada think we still live in a democracy.
They have made being homeless a crime... that was step 1 Then they laxed many laws and allowed the streets to get violent and drug infested, that was step 2 Then they said Anyone anywhere is capable of anything. That was step 3...
Now the only freedom people have is to go out and spend their money. If your poor... we just have to try to stay out of the rest of their way....
Come on !!! Three cheers for democracy.....
|
|
|
Post by mconn on Aug 1, 2007 15:10:43 GMT -5
The lawyers object Canadian Bar Association denounces Maclean's cover story Macleans.ca staff | Jul 30, 2007 | 5:53 pm EST
The Canadian Bar Association has "condemned in the strongest possible way" the latest Maclean's cover story, claiming the article "paints a distorted, one-sided and sensationalized picture of the legal profession."
Entitled "Lawyers are rats," the article is an interview with Philip Slayton, an ex-Bay Street lawyer and former law professor, who recently authored the book, Lawyers Gone Bad: Money, Sex and Madness in Canada's Legal Profession. In the interview (excerpted here), Slayton says his aim was to "extract general ideas [surrounding the legal profession]: the amoral nature of legal practice, the gross deficiencies of the regulation of lawyers, the sense of misery that pervades the legal profession."
He attacks the legal profession on several fronts. "It has become a business: interested in profit, not interested in making judgements, not interested in providing access to poor people or even middle-income people," a practice that can be "fundamentally undemocratic," he says. Continued Below
"The average lawyer in a big firm practice faces the requirement to put aside whatever kit bag of values, principles and ethics he may personally subscribe to and concentrate on making it possible for clients to do what they want to do," he says. Padding bills is “common practice” among lawyers, he says, while also criticizing the disciplinary process of Canadian law societies as "deeply flawed.”
In response to the article, the Canadian Bar Association has posted a statement calling the article “a broadside against the legal profession that doesn’t tell the whole story.”
“By cherry-picking the worst cases of lawyer misconduct, the article has tarnished the reputation of thousands of professionals who are honest, hard-working, and community-minded people,” CBA president J. Parker MacCarthy says in the statement. Lawyers who break the law “are subject to the law and all its penalties," he adds. On her blog, Toronto lawyer Melissa Kluger notes that Slayton "goes out of his way to make it clear on the first page of Chapter 1 that only a few lawyers are dishonest and that the majority of lawyers 'behave honestly, serving their clients, profession, and community well.'" "Looks like Maclean’s might have skimmed over that disclaimer," she adds. In the Macleans interview, while Slayton says lawyers probably can't "be comforted by the idea that in some small way [they've] improved the general state of society," he adds that "the legal practice is very diverse, and there are lots of different kinds of people practicing law, and this is not true of all of them."
Update 1:47pm...Comments are piling up on Kluger's blog in response. Accusing Maclean's of "taking a cheap shot to sell more magazines," Michele Allinotte writes: "I am proud to say that I am a lawyer. I went into law because it is a helping profession and I know none of my clients would agree that 'lawyers are rats.'" "It’s an outrageous attack on the profession, and it demands an answer. Every lawyer I’ve spoken to about this is outraged, and rightly so," adds a poster claiming to be Jordan Furlong, editor-in-chief of the CBA's own magazine. Adds "an actual lawyer": "I agree that many Bay Street (or Howe Street) lawyers are rats or worse, but that is just a side-effect of life in a big law firm. The vast majority of lawyers are decent folk who are not interested in the greed and bootlicking that is the lot of lawyers at big firms. Big law has some serious problems, and everyone in the profession knows it. Please don’t tar us all with the same brush." Then this from a "former legal assistant": "As someone who was a legal assistant for 13 years, I assure you I have seen it all. And, if it wasn’t the lawyers or the other staff, it was the clients. From the lawyers: displays of obsessive-compulsiveness... to breaches of confidentiality.. to sexual harassment... to verbal abuse... to having counsel for the other side purport to give me instructions on a file... I foolishly endured it all. Then there were the clients - the inappropriate personal comments ('Are you gaining weight?') and verbal abuse generally consisting of yelling and screaming at me over the phone or in person, usually after they received their bill. I cannot believe I lasted 13 years but after having to take two stress leaves, it was time to pack it in."
|
|
|
Post by Felipe Ruzicka on Apr 4, 2016 2:35:33 GMT -5
Thought-provoking piece ! For what it's worth , others are searching for a NY DTF ST-100 , my husband encountered a fillable form here goo.gl/Mrg1jH.
|
|