"No Cause for Concern": Says State

Child sex abusers held together with abused. Could there be a better recipe for disaster when child sex abusers are being held in the same institution with abused children? They beat them and regularly dope them up to "quiet them down" and ignore their pleas for "mercy." They hire the cheapest staff they can find, people who can be had for $20,000 a year or less. People with no training and in some cases, abusers themselves. And the state "sees no cause for concern." This is the kind of "protection" that is offered to "abused children" from 9 up in Nashville, Kentucky. Is it the same elsewhere? An anonymous worker who actually works there is complaining and when they figure out who she is, she'll no longer work there because "the inmates are running the asylum." Not the kids, the adults. The fact that state officials see "no cause for concern" itself concerns me. I can only pray that none of my family ever gets sent there. Think about how many adult sex offenders they are creating there. How about those who become serial killers because of their treatment in this facility? I think this facility should be closed immediately and most of its staff imprisoned. (Nashville Scene, 12/13/07)

"Child Protector" Arrested for Child Abuse

If she found a mother beating her child with a belt so badly there were still marks on her body a month later, she'd have her arrested for child abuse and the child would be taken from her immediately. But she works for the "child protectors" (under whatever name they use), so even though she, herself, has been arrested, she still works for them and draws a paycheck. "I have never abused my children," says Cylenthia Clark, who is in obvious denial. What does it take for this agency to fire somebody? They destroy the lives of other parents for a lot less. (Protected & Murdered, 3/14/07)

Another Foster Child Murdered

Ken Taylor got mad at one of his many foster children, so he murdered him. There were many complaints against him for neglecting his foster children before that, but they were ignored by the "child protectors." His foster children were coming and going freely at all hours, and some were even breaking into homes in the neighborhood and stealing things. Complaints were sent to the "child protectors" and were routinely ignored. At one point, a "child protector" spokesman claimed to be "unaware of any problems" in the home. "Unaware." After many complaints. I predict that this incident will be "investigated," that DCF will claim "not enough money to keep track of foster homes," and "not enough people (a result of not enough money) to check them out, DCF will get an increased budget, a few "small fry" in DCF will be fired or "reassigned" (a bureaucratic way to get rid of wrongdoers without punishing them) and life will go on. It will be "business as usual" until the next foster child is murdered by a foster parent. Then we'll do it all again and another foster child will be buried. (Knoxville News-Sentinel, 11/29/07)

Corrupt Child Protectors

Elsewhere we tell you about an article written by Nancy Schaefer, candidate for the Senate, after she was alerted by a victimized grandmother. But there was way too much information in that article to be covered here in one item. This item is about the general corruption and racketeering prevalent in child protection services (whatever they call them) nationwide [Worldwide, if you ask me. -RT]. Here's what Sen. Schaefer said: "In one county in my District, I arranged a meeting for thirty-seven families to speak freely and without fear. These poor parents and grandparents spoke of their painful, heart wrenching encounters with DFCS. Their suffering was overwhelming. They wept and cried. Some did not know where their children were and had not seen them in years. I had witnessed the 'Gestapo' at work and I witnessed the deceitful conditions under which children were taken in the middle of the night, out of hospitals, off of school buses, and out of homes. In one county a private drug testing business was operating within the DFCS department that required many, many drug tests from parents and individuals for profit. In another county children were not removed when they were enduring the worst possible abuse. Due to being exposed, several employees in a particular DFCS office were fired. However, they have now been rehired either in neighboring counties or in the same county again [It was all done for "window dressing" -RT]. According to the calls I am now receiving, the conditions in that county are returning to the same practices that they had before the light was shown on their deeds. Having worked with probably 300 cases statewide, I am convinced there is no responsibility and no accountability in the system." It's about time ONE senator figured things out. Maybe the world will begin to see the "Gestapo" tactics that are being regularly used against mostly innocent families while the "child protectors" ignore other cases where there is REAL child abuse for lack of time and personnel (They use this situation as a "fund-raiser" when they're caught out.). (Sen. Nancy Schaefer, 11/16/07)

Legally Kidnapped

This article was written by Nancy Schaefer, candidate for the Senate, and is on her web site's main page. But since that could change quickly, I went to this blog, which reprinted it in full: "My introduction into child protective service cases was due to a grandmother in an adjoining state who called me with her tragic story. Her two granddaughters had been taken from her daughter who lived in my district. Her daughter was told wrongly that if she wanted to see her children again she should sign a paper and give up her children [Which if she did, would net the "child protectors" anywhere from $9,000 to $12,000 in "fees" from the feds. -RT]. Frightened and young, the daughter did. I have since discovered that parents are often [Almost always. -RT] threatened into cooperation of permanent separation of their children. The children were taken to another county and placed in foster care. The foster parents were told wrongly that they could adopt the children. The grandmother then jumped through every hoop known to man in order to get her granddaughters. When the case finally came to court it was made evident by one of the foster parent’s children that the foster parents had, at any given time, 18 foster children and that the foster mother had an inappropriate relationship with the caseworker. In the courtroom, the juvenile judge, acted as though she was shocked and said the two girls would be removed quickly. They were not removed. Finally, after much pressure being applied to the Department of Family and Children Services of Georgia (DFCS), the children were driven to South Georgia to meet their grandmother who gladly drove to meet them. After being with their grandmother two or three days, the judge, quite out of the blue, wrote up a new order to send the girls to their father, who previously had no interest in the case and who lived on the West Coast. The father was in 'adult entertainment' [porno -RT]. His girlfriend worked as an 'escort' [prostitute -RT] and his brother, who also worked in the [porno -RT] business, had a sexual charge brought against him." This is the kind of thing "social services" does all the time, and they call it "protecting" the children. It's interesting to note that the oldest child said the "foster father" had molested her, but nothing seems to have been done about it. (Legally Kidnapped, 11/30/07)

Italians Take U. S. Soldier's Children

This while she was on a mission. "On Oct. 13, police in Pordenone, Italy, took away Staff Sgt. Kris Wylie's daughters -- Leighlora, 7, and Lillian Ann, 5 -- from the custody of her Italian fiancé at their off-base home while Wylie was on a mission outside of Italy. They were put in the Italian version of Child Protective Services. 'You think of the children themselves in a strange place with strangers,' said Bob Benson, of White Bear Lake, Minn., a suburb of St. Paul. 'Fortunately they can speak the language, but they aren't with their parents; they were just ripped away, no reasons given, no paperwork, no nothing.' [So what else is new with "child protectors" everywhere? -RT] Italian authorities have charged Wylie, 28, with three counts connected to the maltreatment of children, according to Tech. Sgt. Michael O'Connor at the Aviano Air Force Base in Aviano, Italy." We've always treated our soldiers the best way we know how, but apparently the Italians don't. At least, not when the parent(s) are not Italian. The "child protector" mindset (everywhere) is a strange one. (World Net Daily, 10/20/07)

Step-Father Kills Girl

"Baby Grace" wouldn't say "yes, sir" and "no sir." So he killed her. I know obstreperous children can be trying, but this girl did nothing that required a "death sentence." The mother and step-father have been arrested. I publish this because I've been criticized as being "unalterably against the "child protectors." I'm not. I AM "unalterably against" their penchant to carry EVERY "investigation" to the "bitter end," even after finding proof it is not "sustainable," so they can "maximize" the amount of money they get from the government at every juncture (they even have seminars on how to do this). Statistics (theirs, though buried) show that more than 90% of all "reports" of child abuse are "unsustainable." But they continue to spend a lot of time on them, robbing themselves of the opportunity to ferret out REAL child abuse such as this. The picture on the right is an artist's rendering they used in the search for this tiny girl, beaten to death by a (no doubt brave) man. The drawing is amazingly like the real picture, although it unfortunately looks like a ventriloquist's dummy. (AOL News,11/29/07)

Another Foster Parent Kills Child

This is happening way too often, and when it does, the "child protectors" lay on the mildest possible sentence. There will no doubt be an "investigation," which the "child protectors" (or the State) will run, after which they will claim too much work (this guy had 12 kids in his home) and too little money. In other words, they'll use this as a "fund-raiser," as usual. Notice only a couple of the other kids in his "home" were removed after he killed this kid. I predict that this story will NOT make the national news. It will be kept as a "local story" so as not to alert Americans nation-wide as to what happened. This boy was obviously a "handful," from the story told. But being a handful didn't rate a death sentence. This is yet another story to illustrate the fact (born out by their own figures, albeit buried) that kids are much more likely to be hurt or even killed in "the system" than they ever were at home. (The Tennesean, 11/27/07)

Gay "Foster Parents" Accused

No, they're not "legal" foster parents. But the "child protectors" thought they were a good choice to "care" for a child after his mother died. But they consistently abused him until he ran away and told the authorities (not the "child protectors") what they were doing to him. He's now back in the custody of the "child protectors." There's no telling who will get to abuse him next, while in their "care." This is nothing against their "gayness," but I wouldn't turn ANY defenseless child over to the "tender mercies" of this duo. This is yet another case where the child was in more danger while "in the system" than anywhere else. (ABC News, 11/27/07)

"Shaken Baby Syndrome" Exposed as Fraud

We've heard a lot about "shaken baby syndrome" recently and there's even an ongoing television commercial about it that runs sometimes several times an evening. But now we hear it has been "over diagnosed" so as to criminalize parents. The same seems to be true of "Munchausen's Syndrome." These, and other scams are routinely used by the "child protectors" to criminalize parents so they can take their children, ultimately (they hope) to terminate their parental rights and put them up for adoption. It is a not-very-well-known fact that every child they take gains them the payment of a fee from the government at every juncture while the child is "in the system," for no matter how short a time. And if they can adopt them out, they get a BIG fee for each child. Such incentives lead to further incentives by the agency to the "workers," who can earn them by stealing more children. (London Sunday Times, /07)

Profane Justice

This book, written by one of the premier activists for children and families, and against the "child protectors," who do more damage to, and abuse more children by ripping them from the loving arms of their parents, to put them "in the system" where they are twice as apt to be abused or sexually abused than they ever would be at home (by their own figures) is a "must read" for anyone who has children because every one of you are targets for the "child protectors," who have no concept of law. They "define" for themselves just what the "law" is with regard to child abuse and take the child as a first option, not the last. Then they take you into their "captive courts" which allows their opinions to be regarded as fact. If they target you, you can count on a multi-year fight that costs you a lot of money, even if you win, as we did. Then they bill you for some amazing amount of money for "the cost of child care" while they were "in the system." This ignores the fact that they get paid by the feds at every juncture. They get paid for every child "in the system," no matter how short a time. If they manage to wrest parental control from the parents and successfully put the child up for adoption they get paid $4,500. If the child is a "special needs" child (and what child isn't "special needs" after being "in the system" for a while?) they get $6,500. And to create a "special needs" child, all they have to do is check the appropriate box on a federal form. This book gives you many tips on how to rebuff them and beat the efforts of the "child protectors" to take your children and criminalize you while making a profit. (Easy Book Search,)

Child Sex Abuse in Foster Care

It's a proven fact that children in foster care are TWICE as apt to be abused and/or sexually abused in foster care than they ever were at home with their parents, who usually love them and want to protect them. There is a firm of lawyers now who are DEDICATED to this, who tell us, "The number of children in foster care who are the victims of sexual abuse is alarming. In our experience advocating for children in foster care since 1984, we have found that the overwhelming majority of staff responsible for children in foster care do not have the information, skills or training necessary to respond to the needs of sexually abused and abusing children. As a result, agencies are often not able to provide proper intervention for these children. In fact, agency clinicians repeatedly ask Lawyers For Children to provide them with treatment information and resources. Once in foster care, sexually abused children are particularly vulnerable to repeated incidents of abuse. Many factors within the foster care system contribute to their increased risk, such as multiple transfers, rapid staff turnover, and lack of appropriate treatment and clinical services." We're putting this link on our "Child Protector Watch" site. (Lawyers for Children,)

Child Protection -- Double Shakedown:

When the "child protectors" come after you, you're gonna pay -- whether you're guilty or not. You'll either pay a portion (in taxes) of the many different "fees" they get from the feds at every juncture (they get a set fee for every day a child is "in the system," no matter how long), or they'll bill you some astronomical amount for "The cost of child protection," even though those costs have been more than amply paid by the feds. And if they can successfully terminate your parental rights and put the children up for adoption, they get from $4,500 to $6,000 PER CHILD ($6,000 for "special needs" children (ALL children are "special needs after being "in the system" a while). My son WON his fight with them (with the help of my prior experience when they stole my two boys without being able to prove abuse on either my wife or me) but he was still billed several THOUSAND dollars for "the cost of child protection," and he paid, against my advice, to end it. Now they have him marked "hands off" because he cost them $50,000 MORE than they got from the feds (or the "extortion" they perpetrated on him later). (Freedom Magazine,)

Another Child Murdered in Foster Care

Chandler Graftner was intentionally starved to death by his foster father. He was awarded custody only because of his contribution to Chandler's brother's conception a long time ago. I say he and his live-in girlfriend INTENTIONALLY starved him to death because he could not have starved to death accidentally in the four months between the child protectors' last visit (at which they declared him "healthy") and his death of malnutrition (unless the child protectors hid his condition, which is possible). He had been confined to a closet and not fed for a LONG time. God knows, there were enough "signals," including one from a school nurse that was also dismissed) even if you don't include his cryptic plea to his grandmother that his foster father was going to "hurt me,' A claim the child protectors dismissed out of hand, as they always do with FOSTER PARENTS. Foster parents, being "part of the system," are usually not suspected of child abuse, even though the child abus . . .er, uh, protectors' own figures prove that more children are abused and killed in FOSTER care than ever at home. Predictably, the "child protectors" hide behind the "confidentiality" law so they won't have to answer questions. I would think the "confidentiality" would end when they kill the child. As is usual, there will be an "investigation," at which they will whine about "not enough money" and "not enough people" to do the job right. Then they will get a bigger budget (using incompetence as a fund-raiser as usual), this death (as with all the others) will be "swept under the rug," they'll get a bigger budget, one or two lower level employees will be fired or transferred, and life will go on, business as usual, for everybody except Chandler. That's the way it always is, including the year I was on the Governor's Committee on Child Abuse and was "frozen out" when I submitted a report on how to improve it for real. After that, I couldn't get a straight answer as to where and when the next meeting was to be held. Later that year the committee published its findings. The child protectors got a bigger budget, a couple of lower level people "had to go" and things went on, business as usual. They depend on the gullibility and short memory of politicians. The child protectors are so well entrenched, and have everybody so well conditioned, they can do this. (Source: Rocky Mountain News, 5/12/07)

Janet Reno: Chief Among Illicit Prosecutions

Former attorney General Janet Reno continues to run her mouth for money, all over the country, instead of being imprisoned for prosecutorial misconduct in at least one case we can prove: "Charged by Reno's office in 1984 with child molestation, Grant Snowden was convicted on the manufactured testimony of one such child, who was 4 years old when the abuse allegedly occurred. Snowden, the most decorated police officer in the history of the South Miami Police Department, was sentenced to five life terms -- and was imprisoned with people he had put there. Snowden served 11 years before his conviction was finally overturned by a federal court in an opinion that ridiculed the evidence against him and called his trial 'fundamentally unfair.' [typical of most "child protector" trials -RT] In a massive criminal justice system, mistakes will be made from time to time. But Janet Reno put people like Snowden in prison not only for crimes that they didn't commit -- but also for crimes that never happened. Such was the soccer-mom-induced hysteria of the '80s, when innocent people were prosecuted for fantastical crimes concocted in therapists' offices." The "child protector" system is out of control, fueled by "bonuses" paid by the federal government at every juncture. These agencies are paid for every day a child is "in custody," even if no charges are ever able to be brought against the "target" (which is unusual, the way they manufacture them). (Source: Ann Coulter, 8/29/07)