"The List": Guilty Until Proven Otherwise

Google Images

We all know about the national sex offender registry... did you know that almost every state has a child abuse registry and now it's going national? The only difference is that to make the national sex offender registry you have to be convicted... to make the child abuse registry all you have to do is be accused. Then it's up to you to exonerate yourself and we all know the impossibility of proving a negative. Once you make this registry it's almost impossible to get off. " Parents can end up on a “central registry” of child abusers even if the allegations are unsubstantiated. Many see the registry of a gross violation of civil rights, and for good reason. Wexler proposes recommendations to address these concerns:"

 No one should be listed in a central register of alleged child abusers, and no allegation should be substantiated, until, at a minimum, the family has had an administrative hearing conducted by a hearing officer outside of the child welfare agency. The standard of proof should be “clear and convincing.”

All states have massive databases listing everyone caseworkers suspect of being a child abuser. Most databases also include the names of people even when the accusation was determined to be “unfounded.”

This poses enormous risks to children. Anyone can be declared a child abuser based on no more than a caseworker’s guess. All she has to do is check a box on the form. Then the accused must fight her or his way out.

In some cases, there is no way to fight your way out at all. Some states allow for no appeal of this decision. In other states, the appeal process is long and cumbersome.Yet a listing in a central register can have profound consequences….

As always, CPS agencies will claim that any curb on their power to effectively blacklist anyone they choose will compromise their ability to protect children. In fact, depriving people of employment based on rumor and innuendo is enormously harmful to children.

• Obviously, if a parent can’t get work, that will affect his or her children.
• If information based on little more than a caseworker’s guess is allowed to pile up in secret files, sooner or later some CPS worker is likely to claim that there is a “pattern” and use that as the basis to take away the children.

Children need protection from the mindless piling up of rumor and innuendo in files about their families. This is particularly true when unfounded reports are kept. 

One problem is that the bar is set so low for abuse and especially neglect that virtually every parent is surely guilty of something in the state's purview. For example, in the past, I cited a case in Michigan where children were removed because of three dirty dishes in the sink. It sounds ridiculous but it's far more prevalent than you could imagine... and once on the list, always on the list. We all know that CPS will gop to any length to further their own agenda- including falsifying evidence. Richard Wexler of the NCCPR has some proposed safeguards- that CPS is understandably fighting tooth and nail- that would protect families:

 All interviews conducted by CPS personnel in the course of child maltreatment investigations – not just interviews with children – should be, at a minimum, audiotaped, and preferably videotaped.

Interviewees must be informed that their statements are being recorded. Information from any interview that is not taped should be inadmissible in all court proceedings. 

So too should testimony from "anonymous sources." In many cases parents have their lives destroyed and their children stolen on rumors and innuendos. People who file false charges should be prosecuted, not protected by a veil of anonymity. So too should CPS workers who present falsified evidence... Perjury is still a crime.

 A basic tenet of communications theory is that people tend to hear what they want to hear or what they expect to hear. Everything we hear is filtered through our life experiences, our beliefs, and our prejudices.

There is no excuse not to require that every interview done by a CPS worker in the field be, at a minimum, audiotaped and every interview done at a CPS office or similar facility be videotaped

As important as requiring taping itself is a requirement that interviews that are not taped be treated, in effect, as though they don’t exist.

In criminal cases, evidence obtained improperly cannot be admitted – no matter how compelling that evidence may be. The requirement is an attempt to be sure that police are scrupulous about the rights of citizens when they gather evidence.

If taping is “required,” but notes from interviews that were not taped still can be used in court, it is an invitation for apps to “fail,” workers to “forget” and batteries to “die” on a regular basis. 

Standards of proof must also be changed... like I said, three dirty dishes should not be sufficient proof for removal of children. " The standard by which a parent can be “substantiated” as abusive or neglectful is low, and as we have seen repeatedly in our investigations, parents may be essentially declared guilty without any real evidence required. Wexler takes issue with this and proposes that the bar be raised:

The standard of proof in all court proceedings should be raised from the current standard in most states, “preponderance of the evidence,” to “clear and convincing.” The standard also should apply when a worker decides to “substantiate” alleged maltreatment.

There are few punishments one can inflict on a child that are more severe than needlessly tearing away her or his family. And yet, when it’s time for courts to decide to place a child in foster care, they do not apply the standard used to convict someone accused of murdering a child, “beyond a reasonable doubt,” or even the middle standard, “clear and convincing” evidence.

Instead, courts in most states apply the lowest standard of proof, “preponderance of the evidence.” As we noted at the start of this report, this is the same standard used to decide which insurance company pays for a fender-bender.

This is beyond ridiculous, we are talking about the lives of children, that are inevitably destroyed in foster care, or driven into the child trafficking pipeline- surely we can do better. I'll leave you with this picture of "Devani" who was serially raped at 3 and abused so badly that all of her toes had to be removed... Then I'll let the NCCPR have the last word until next time.

T he bottom line of all of these recommendations is that we must protect the Constitutional civil liberties of parents. The recommendations fall into several basic categories which already apply to alleged criminals accused of even the most heinous of crimes:

• open and transparent courts,
• quality representation, and
• actual evidence required before deciding guilt and tearing apart the family.

It is incomprehensible that parents are not already afforded these same rights, when what is at stake is more important and valuable than anything else – our children.In doing so, we will then ensure that children are indeed protected, who may have more to fear from the state than they ever did from their parents. 

http://medicalkidnap.com/2018/11/26/murders-rapists-and-terrorists-have-more-rights-to-due-process-of-the-law-than-parents-accused-of-child-abuse/