Translate

Follow by Email

Sunday, April 29, 2012

A WIN on the War Against the Abuse of Power and Human Rights

A message of hope to start the week:

Former Liberian president Charles Taylor is finally being brought to justice; the quotes in italic's are taken from Dumisani Muleya's article found in full here: http://allafrica.com/stories/201204280152.html

This article covers the why behind the lesson's to be herald in the age of the world wide Internet full of Communication; it is this, the abuse of power and human rights is unacceptable and we the people of this world are not going to tolerate oppression under any disguise to our world neighbors or at home.  The time for Child Protection Services and Governments  "The world over, leaders often abuse office with reckless abandon, forgetting one day they would be held to account in a court of law or court of public opinion."

This ruling should give the repressed hope because it  "....sends an important message to high-ranking state officials; no matter who you are or what position you hold, one day you will be brought to justice for your crimes."

"...the arrogant lack of remorse and failure to embrace truth and reconciliation by the brutal perpetrators beyond their choreographed phoney remarks and insulting gestures."   Will be brought forward, toleration of oppression is not long lasting.

"the Taylor verdict shows, those in power NOT JUST  in Zimbabwe must not think they are untouchable because the day of reckoning will come, maybe sooner rather than later."

"All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression."    Thomas Jefferson

To: Dumisani Muleya's thank you for your well reasoned and compelling message to world leaders in your coverage of the long anticipated justice coming to the victims in Zimbabwe. dmvc

State Gives Limited Time for Recovery to NH Homeowners for Tax Relief DP-8

"If the people cannot trust their government to do the job for which it exists - to protect them and to promote their common welfare - all else is lost." BARACK OBAMA, speech, Aug. 28, 2006

Low and Moderate Households - Applications are ONLY being accepted from May 01, 2012 through June 30, 2012; unless you apply during that time you will not be entitled to a refund from the State.

Go to the Department of Revenue Administration: http://www.revenue.nh.gov/forms/low_mod_program.htm the form you want to fill out is DP-8 http://www.revenue.nh.gov/forms/documents/DP-8_SF1.pdf

Follow the instructions provided, keep hitting tab to get to the next box to fill in; it is set up to compute the entire application for you; it is only 3 pages long and 4 pages of instructions most of which will be computed for you as you go through the form.  Attach your 2011 federal income tax returns and the final 2011 property tax bill; this must be POSTMARKED NO EARLIER THAN 5/1/2012 and NO LATER THAN 6/30/12 for this refund.

Nothing to lose fill it out it might be enough for a fun activity; if you don't its very unclear what the government will use it for.  Next year google DP-8 around the same time of year.  The NH Government does not widely disperse information and does not automatically refund.

Saturday, April 28, 2012

Sean's Story - A Father's Love

This is a story that would befit Plato's teachings "Let parents bequeath to their children not riches, but the spirit of reverence."

A parent divided from their Child, by another parent is intentional interference the parent child relationship and bond - parental alienation and its wrong; this father and son story shows that a parent's love for their child is finally fulfilled after 5 years of numerous trials and tribulations and it covers the Child's adjustments dealing with separation anxiety, and overcoming attachment disorders through therapy and love.  All understandably not an easy road, it is a road that a child and parent continue to build on in their lives together, always looking over their shoulder but, through it all helping other families bring their children home http://bringseanhome.org/.

A child who doesn't know why his father is not in his life, taken to another country and told someone else was his father. Whenever, he asked questions about his real Dad he was denied the real answers, and suppressed his longing to know so he wouldn't be disappointed never knowing his real father was doing everything possible to be in his life. 

This Dateline Story is filled with international suspense, adjustment, a parents determination to never stop fighting for their child and the child's view that it should have never taken as long as it did. Hear the full story by Dateline here
Check out this great MSN video: Preview: 'Sean's Story'

Happiness is in the simple act of children and parent's sharing time together.

In America, parental alienation is an ongoing epidemic directed at both mother's and father's and the courts do not always know what to do or instead hope the situation will correct itself; however, by not enforcing their own orders for visitation or responsibility with sanctions; the courts are hardly making a difference in the best of the child.  This case is a perfect example of what should be done to help children reunite with the estrange parent and work towards keeping a relationship with the alienating parent, it in facts chastises and corrects lower court decisions not promoting the influence of both parents in their children's lives.

Another Child's story is about how a Child should not be lead to feel that unsupervised visits with his mother will fail before they have even started, without a period to adjust McIntosh and McIntosh 226-2000-DM-00927. The father’s behaviors as contained in the court record and in GAL’s report are contrary to the findings in Miller v. Todd (March 31, 2011) where the NH Supreme Court raised the question of and sited the following:

"... whether Todd (like the Father, in the above Matter) has benefited from (his) misbehavior. In Begins v. Begins, 721 A.2d 469, 470-71 (Vt. 1998), the Children’s relationship with their Mother deteriorated following the parents’ separation due to the fact that the Father unfairly blamed her for … problems and made disparaging remarks about her … The trial court concluded that the boys’ hostility toward their Mother, encouraged and fueled by their Father, precluded an award of custody to Mother. Id. at 471. Although the court found that Father did not “deserve to win custody,” it concluded that it had no choice but to award custody to him. Id. (quotations omitted). The Vermont Supreme Court rejected such reasoning. Id. at 472. As the court stated: Although obviously well intended, the court’s decision effectively condoned a parent’s willful alienation of a Child from the other parent. Its ruling sends the unacceptable message that others might, with impunity, engage in similar misconduct. Left undisturbed, the court’s decision would nullify the principle that the best interests of the Child are furthered through a healthy and loving relationship with both parents. Id.; see Mack-Manley, 138 P.3d at 528 (trial court found Children’s best interests not served by ignoring … unsubstantiated Child abuse and neglect allegations); Young, 628 N.Y.S.2d at 963 (trial court’s decision noticeably silent as to … false allegations and it was clear the court failed to consider evidence that …. willfully interfered with a parent’s relationship with the Children)… Vacated and remanded. DALIANIS, C.J., and DUGGAN and CONBOY, JJ., concurred. "

Miller Vs. Todd Full Text here: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0ByTPLCn0VjpSSUZRa3lwRVFOeUU

Without preserving the parent/child relationship wherever possible the threat to the child's best interests is best highlighted as assessed by Oscar Wilde "Children begin by loving their parents: after a time they judge them; rarely, if ever, do they forgive them."




Friday, April 27, 2012

THE DETAILS ON THE CPS "LIST" IS OUT

WHAT THE U. S.GOVERNMENT, CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, DOES AND CAN DUE TO PARENT/FAMILIES
AT ANYTIME
This piece refers to case in the New Hampshire Ct. System where parents were charged for alleged services by the State and/or contacted by Child Protection Workers
We all have heard about the "Client List" where "Johns" who hired prostitutes made the list; justice yes, however, when a unfounded case or case against a parent gets expunged it makes the results of being on this list devastating and they get to pay for it in more ways than one:
       The Plaintiff, (herein Pl.) brings forward new information directly or indirectly related to this matter and disputes the reasoning in the Court’s (herein Ct.) Orders on a Writ of Certiorari to the extent that the pleadings, applicable law and ambiguity contained in the District Ct. Orders remains unresolved as follows:   (abbreviations are standard bluebook abbreviations used in law: Mot. is Motion)
 The questions manifest themselves as follows: 
a.       Are parents entitled to a fair and accurate account of what they are being billed for, including what was paid by each parent, federal grants and other TANF/ Federal Title IV funding that were reimbursed to the State at 75%; no matter how lack lustrous a States Service plan may be?
b.      Does the RECORD support the State pushing an Assented to Mot. for Reimbursement against the Pl. when no past Order clearly defined their right to do so?  
c.       Did the State attach the Pl. [’s] pay without a proper Ct. Order justifying his actions? And/or was the attachment by the State precluded at the time, because the Pl. appealed and an Order from the District Ct. clearly bars the 1/7/2011 by the State? 
d.      If the State had the ability to attach the Pl. [’s] pay in 2011, with the Order signed in 2009; why is it the Pl. [’s] fault and why is she being held in contempt of a Ct. Order when it was the State who failed to follow the Order to attach her pay in 2009; really, shouldn’t they be held in contempt?  
e.       Did the State apply the incorrect number of weeks for recovery in the Assented to Mot. and the resulting attachment of her pay? 
These are the Pl. [’s] unanswered questions on appeal/Writ of Certiorari and due an answer by virtue of the full review alleged to have been conducted of the District Ct. file; 

The Order of this Ct. articulates how an individual may be responsible for payments to the state in a clear and coherent manner; albeit it fails to address the facts, the ambiguous Orders of the lower Ct., and the unanswered questions it left behind, identified above; 
1.      ¶ 1. a., a full accounting has not been disclosed; a handful of unsupported documents, that a professional accountant cannot decipher is not a disclosure; records submitted to the Ct. by the Child Support Division show the attachment as NOT paid to the State; but, to the Father for unknown reasons, relevant in this matter; a TANF payment was receive as some payment when neither party was illegible for it at the time; all amounting to a denial of due process and/or fraud; 
2.      ¶ 1. b.  The Assented to agreement was signed because the Pl. was advised by the State that an Order for reimbursement existed in the District Ct. RECORD, undisputed by the State; albeit a review shows no clear Order for reimbursement to the state exist in the RECORD, as a result, the Assented to Mot. is a product of Fraud in the procurement by the State; “The average parent would be at a loss when faced with problems of procedure, evidence, or cross- examination." Danforth v. State Dep 't of Health and Welfare, 303 A.2d 794, 799 (Me. 1973); whether or not it was appropriately pleaded by the pro se litigant, the Pl., clearly signed without knowledge of the illegalities’ contained within, or notification of her rights; Furthermore, State Employee Reimbursement Department as an Officer of the Ct. had no immunity, “…when violating a Constitutional right, … for they are deemed to know the law" Owens v. Independence 100 S.C.T. 1398, 455 US 622;  
3.      ¶ 1. c. Disregard, or over looked due to the ambiguous Orders of the District Ct. is the fact that the State filed an untimely Mot. to attach the Pl. [’s] pay and was denied the right to attached on12/20/10 by Judge Leary Ex. B; also, part of the District Ct. file under “review”; the District Ct. indirectly recognized the Pl. [’s] De Novo Appeal in Ex. B part 2; denied and recognized as a Writ of Certiorari here, highlighting the State failure to comply with Ct. Orders; 
4.      To the extent that any arrearages were/are or may be deemed payable as Ordered in the District Ct. record; the Pl. is indigent/ hardly able to pay current fee’s deducted from her weekly pay checks since 1/7/11; ¶ 5 indicates that alleged arrears should be considered satisfied since an attachment should only have occurred after appeal/review;   
5.      ¶ 1. d. It is inconceivable that the Pl. should be held in contempt for non-payment when the Assented to Order of 2009 was the ordered used by the State in 2011 to force an attachment of  her pay; hardly, the Pl. [’s] fault that the State’s lack of accountability and/or due to incompetence lead to their neglect in attaching her pay in 2009 as Order by the Ct.;  
6.      ¶ 1. e. If the Assented to Mot. is enforced as Ordered, by virtue of the Ct. [’s] definition of a Writ of Certiorari, a “full review of the record” would have to give weight to the District Ct. Order of 11/18/2010 Ex. A.  where the Judge indisputably recognized the Pl. [’s] objection and went so far as to state: “Ms. XYZ is correct that the State’s right to recovery is limited under NH RSA 169-C:27 I (c)”; recognizing the Pl. [’s] position  that the computed amount of weeks by the State of  “627” was erroneous and inconsistent with the law under NH RSA 169-C:27 I (c); “Courts are not bound by an officers interpretation of the law under which he presumes to act” Hoffsomer v. Hayes, 92 Okla. 32, 227 F. 417; The failure of the District Ct. to cure the defect it recognized opposes the standard that “Judges must maintain a high standard of judicial performance with particular emphasis upon conducting litigation with scrupulous fairness and impartiality. 28 USCA § 2411; Pfizer v. Lord, 456 F.2d 532; cert denied 92 S Ct 2411; US Ct App MN, (1972)”;   
     
If the Pl. was advised of her rights at the start or any stage in this matter, by the State, presumed to know the laws under which they act; it is highly unlikely that the Pl. would have signed a document doubling what would be lawfully recoverable, without coercion through the State.   
      Due to the ambiguity of the law in of itself the timing for recovery is not specific; to allow for  the absolute maximum recovery period it is computed as follows at $6.50 a week; 5 months x 4.33 in 2005 = 21.65 weeks; 12 months in 2006 = 52. Weeks; 11 months in 2007  = 47.63 weeks; + 4 years per Statute = 208 weeks for a Total of 329.28 weeks as the maximum recovery period. 
      The Assented to Mot. was utterly false; the average person, would have confidence in the State’s ability to be factual and would NOT have agreed to pay double what was allowable by law; even if an appropriate Order existed for payment; a reasonable person may have agreed to the 329 week maximum with the existence of a Order supporting it; but, it is more than likely a person of limited means would have evoked their right to a hearing if they felt the assessment of the ability to pay was beyond their means; the standard of assessment, has never been disclosed;  “A prosecutor doesn't have absolute immunity if he fabricates evidence during a preliminary investigation, before he could properly claim to be acting as an advocate, see Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259, 275 (1993), or makes false statements in a sworn affidavit in support of an application for an arrest warrant, see Kalina v. Fletcher, 522 U.S. 118, 129-30 (1997). Furthermore, as prosecutors and others investigating criminal matters have no absolute immunity for their investigatory conduct, a fortiori, social workers conducting investigations have no such immunity. See id. at 126.”  
7.      If the State‘s Assented to Order is enforced; an Order from this Ct. needs to clearly state and correct that the $ a week is for a period not to exceed “329 weeks from the date of 1/7/11 as reasoned in ¶ 6. to settle the inappropriate attachment by the State with the Pl. [’s] employer; taking $ a week, including a weekly administrative surcharge of $ for a period of 627 weeks, commenced on 1/7/11;
8.      It should further be reiterated that the State’s incompetence and denial of due process, in informing the Pl. of her rights in this matter extends beyond the proceedings leading to financial liability; including but not limited to her name being added to the central registry under NH RSA 169-C:35 V.  And the possibility to expunge under NH RSA 169-C:35 IV as early as 2006; the proceeding to expunge the RECORD was done only when the Pl. [’s] pursued a legal education, to enabled her  to identify her rights and pursue a Pet. to Expunge granted on 1/15/10, Ex. C 
The Plaintiff in this matter was not advised of her rights as required her 5th 6th and 14th amendment rights. And NH RSA 169-C:34 Duties of the Department of Health and Human Services. – VI. At the first contact in person, any person investigating a report of abuse or neglect on behalf of the department shall verbally inform the parents of a child suspected of being a victim of abuse or neglect of the specific nature of the charges and that they are under no obligation to allow a social worker or state employee on their premises or surrender their children to interviews unless that social worker or state employee is in possession of a court order to that effect. Upon receiving such information, the parent shall sign a written acknowledgement indicating that the information required under this paragraph was provided by the person conducting the investigation. The parent and department shall each retain a copy of the acknowledgment.  
9.      As a result, this Ct. is put on Notice that the relevance of ¶ 8.  in this matter, is due to the fact that the State’s reckless incompetence and/or malicious intent affects the Pl. [’s] ability to pay; on or about 3/29/12, a source (ps.S. Thank You) disclosed that the State had obstructed her ability to gain employment in her field of 20 years, by keeping her name on the Central Registry after the Petition was granted on 1/15/10 Ex. C; The Pl. sought proof by mailing a Central Registry Name Search, on 3/29/12 Ex. D; as of the date of this Mot. it remains unanswered in “writing by DHHS”; Nonetheless, the Pl. pursued the matter further by calling the Central Registry @ 603-271-4455 on 4/19/12 @ 2:10 PM and was informed that the State had not removed her name from the Central Registry; precluding her from employment in field for the period of 2006 through 2012 and causing public embarrassment for positions that had been applied to, that required a Central Registry Release after the Expunge Pet. of 2010 and of course was denied; and will continue to be denied employment in her field until such a time as her name is removed in writing from the Central Registry; as such they are liable for defamation of character and the decrease in her salary due to being removed from the industry she was trained to work in without merit; solely due to the State’s malicious act of incompetence and/or willfully and knowingly failing to follow and/or implement standard procedures to remove her name from the Central registry after it had been expunged by a Ct. of competent jurisdiction;
Here it should be noted that the call showed that any parent merely looked into by the State may be on that Central Registry; call to be sure; it is only suppose to be for those found guilty of Abuse and/or Neglect and it can be expunged one year after your told you made the list, oh, oophs that’s only if your social worker is actually competent, and informed you in writing you made the list;

Th The Phone Call:
Moreover, the incompetence of this office is seen in the call itself; Pl. hello, I am calling to see if you received my name search request? Name, yes, was it mailed? Pl. Yes.  Yes, but No, oh hold on, I only send out the ones that are not on the list this is on my supervisor’s desk can I transfer for you? Pl. yes, please and her name XYZ, ok. Again repeat of above and previous party said you had it, when will it be mailed out indicating the name is still on the registry? They said really, well we are busy we get over 150 calls a day, I had someone out a couple of weeks ago, next call there are only two people part time; Pl. how long does it typically take for a response? A week really, Pl. well it was sent to you 3 weeks ago.  Well, I was out, you get the picture  two calls involved over a 5 day period resulting in the same person relaying the above and following contradictions: I have been here for 12 years, I have been here only 2 or 3 years,;we had problems with the computer system, we have all new people; they hardly ever have someone that gets the decision turn over, the district court offices don’t follow procedures to have people removed, they add people who shouldn’t be added, people added should get notice; we destroy files once they are entered, we probably have it in the file; Pl. can you send in your orders to prove you shouldn’t be on the list? No. the district office and court have to file the standard procedure and do it; Pl. what?! really ??? Are you kidding me? Can you send me what they should have done so I can get it corrected? I guess but I can't locate it right now we're busy.Ah, ok so the Pl. should just continue to have their life on hold, I guess. and then Well you could send me a copy of the order and I can locate it in the file; last week the file was destroyed after entry into the computer systems now it exists and remove you, if its in the file. The file she didn't keep?? But could you send me the release again we don’t have it. Pl. What? Last Thursday you said you had it. Well, it could be in the file to go out.  Pl. what do you have to do to get it corrected a Civil Suit? Well you could let the district office know. Pl. In case they are obviously not on board with the rules; are the procedures on line? Oh no it’s interoffice; and I was out last week; Pl. can you email them to me so I can go to the court to get it corrected? Well I’ll try they must be around here somewhere …. Can you send your release again, I don't think we got it. Sure how about by email the first one was wrong so the Pl. had her stay on the phone until both parties were sure it went through, even though they clearly had it the week before. And then she said oh, I can't tell you on the phone if your on the list. Pl. What?You already did!  Send me it all in writing by email. Oh we can't send privileged information by email. Pl. Send it USPS, but I want it.
The Kicker
Well you'll be off in 7 years; Pl. hmm you didn't know who I was last week.  The Problem with this will be covered seperately look for The List NH RSA 169:C:35...
Results after each call;

  with a Government Department under the branch of Health

and Human Services because it’s all 
                              Yup, Confidential - Top Secret…

10.      The financial issues before the Ct. are of broad public interest due to the interests in the funding of Federal and State monies involved; the State cannot hide behind the confidentiality act for these issues, due to that little thing we have called the Freedom of Information Act; we pay taxes and so on so knowing how are taxes are spent both in state and federal, how the funds are dispersed and spent, the Pl. acknowledges the Confidentiality of the Central Registry piece; but it doesn’t really appear that the rest is confidential………unless of course you say so ,which you will, because that’s what your told to do not necessarily law but whatever……there are ways around that too; it's called Freedom of expression Free Speech whether or not its in the Court records I suspect I have kept the pieces like which court, which Judge is sitting on this, the DHHS workers and such names out but the facts as stated as they are, are what they are.
WHEREFORE, the Respondent respectfully requests a Honorable Court Order something reasonable and uncomplicated because this isn’t really isn't that complicated:  
A.    Order the State to distribute to every Judge and DHHS Attorney the proper procedures to follow when removal from the Central Registry is a result of an appropriate ruling; further consider the need of an audit to ensure there are no other victims and correct people wrongly included;
B.     Dismiss the Civil Contempt due to the numerous errors acted out by the State;
C.     Make a clear cut Order that indicates the Pl. is responsible for $ a week for a period not to exceed 329 weeks, from the original date of attachment;
D.    Dismiss the Order to reimburse the DHHS Reimbursement Unit;
E.     Order a hearing on the merits;
F.      Grant such other relief as the court deems just and equitable.         

CERTIFICATION:  I hereby certify that a copy of the above Mot. has been mailed to an assistant Attorney General for the State Reimbursement Unit, et al., on this   th day of April.  This of course is not meant as legal advice in any way just commenting on the obvious; be forewarned the snarky → meaning the not quite as snide as I would like remarks are my own and were not included in the pleading that this may or may not refer to or that may or may not really exist. The Information and Facts are real unfortunately.

For Parents who have ever had contact with DCYF check here:


NHDCYF Central Registry
129 Pleasant Street                        http://nfpcar.org/eBook/Off.htm   getting off the
Concord, NH 03301                             registry for parents – National Foster Parent Coalition for   Phone: (603) 271-4455                        Allegation Reform

NH Central Registry Name Check form to sign get notarized and send certified to be sure they can't say they don't have it http://www.dhhs.nh.gov/hr/documents/registry.pdf which they will because they probably won't and/or they lost it.

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

THE ULTIMATE BLUNDER

Psychologists, Courts, Child protection workers, Guardians


Aristotle once said: All human actions have one or more of these seven causes: chance, nature, compulsions, habit, reason, passion, desire. 

Understanding the individual is in recognizing every soul has a purpose, a reason for being, finding the nerve to recognize and act on the obstacles in your path, doesn't require a psychologist, it requires finding one person and it only takes one who believes in you; who pushes you to take chances; “Everyone’s a prisoner until they ask questions and find the answers.” "Socrates"

Finding the answers your looking for in a person that has the same causes for existence as you do? Psychology/Psychiatry is the only medical profession that allows their members to treat ailments that their very boards do not recognize and provide drugs to treat these ailments, be very wary of the drugs it offers your children.    

Fraud, oh I mean, Freud once said "Analysis does not set out to make pathological reactions impossible, but to give the patients ego freedom to decide one way or another.

Meaning all psychologist's react and act within a realm of undefined measures against what is reality as their ego dictates; where analysis does not make pathological reactions "impossible"; analysis by the Psychologist/Psychiatrist "does make reactions pathological" - because Freud also once said "Every normal person, in fact, is only normal on the average. His ego approximates to that of the psychotic in some part or other and to a greater or lesser extent."

That being said or analyzed; whenever a social worker pushes a Court to get a psychological assessment on any one to submit to a court, be prepared because, the father of modern psychology Freud said "every" normal person, even the most rounded upstanding citizen is psychotic in some part or other that would include; the person testing, the social worker, and the Judge, ALL of whom will have a number of "pathology's"; because not to have them would in fact be deemed abnormal; the problem comes in when a social worker and/or a Judge tries to interpret test results behind closed doors - an area where only gray can exist, that becomes twisted and obscene upon the observer, over the dissection, because the Father of modern psychology says so.

What the courts do not ascertain and cross exam is that All human actions have one or more causes and they do not bother to acknowledge which one it was chance, nature, compulsions, habit, reason, passion, desire? What triggered it? What feeds into the formula in a forum that accepts heresay without factual evidence?  How do you determine the fitness of parent, when a report done by some person who has viewed/interviewed the person for a few short hours against a standardized test with results tested and formulated around inmates; really the average person may have run into a chance exception, or wasn't truly in their nature, a compulsion caused by trauma, a habit, inability to reason at precise moment, driven by blinded passion or desire, lack of education, and then for what purpose what is the why? Perhaps it was for none of the above because not enough question's were asked on ALL sides; what if it never existed - they are innocent and in a state of turmoil due to separation from their child is that exam still valid?  What if a Child is separated from their parent should their outward behavior be ruled as unacceptable and should they be drugged to prevent them from asking about their parents, family, siblings and friends? That would be expecting and accepting the improbability that the child's behavior doesn't stem from grief, depression, anguish and loss.

Now what about that truly evil person who should not be a parent - the one who knows how to take the standardized test and it shows that their nature, compulsion, habit, ability to reason, passions and/or desires, as well as their education does NOT support the findings and real facts we all come to associate with the American Justice system; because they are completely disregarded by the Judge? What if the child shows no sign of friends ever visiting that parents home, that they are not allowed to talk about what goes on in that home, that they are unable to call friends or meet with them outside of school? Is that not a sign of a bigger issue? What if they are told that they can't not participate in sports or other events because they have to see the other parent? Is that not a form of control?

Behind closed doors the truth is buried and when they realize their mistake it gets buried deeper until they Child protection workers like the vulture/abusive parent start to believe their own fabrications.
The fact is everyday in the United States and other countries children are taken away from their parents or not being kept safe because a standardized test, that the testers, Child protection workers and the Judge who ordered them would show at least multiple pathology's on or be deemed abnormal if they took it - is being used and reasoned as a tool to say they will do harm in the future; or sadly to ignore the facts the real undisputed facts and say a child and eyewitness's are lying. Or that the child's disclosure against the innocent parent while living with the abusive parent is true without any facts to support it; unless they obtain the real facts found in therapists records never checked that show the child never said any of the things relayed to the Court, because the therapist started to believe one parent or favor one parent over another and disregarded their daily notes that documented what the child really said. Notes that the Courts and DCYF workers seek to surpress.

Oscar Wilder once said: "In all matter's of opinion, our adversaries are insane"

Children's worst adversaries are the Child Protection Service Worker, uneducated Guardian's acting on their behalf and Judges ALL purporting to be acting for the greater good; when children become wards of the State their Warden is the State as their guardian, subjecting them to unspeakable conscience shocking realities, being drugged, put in homes with no where to go when they turn 18, without resources, without direction and all because up to the age of 18, the State received Federal Funding up to 75% to employ the CPSW, GAL and Judge who took them away from their natural families and it needs to be stopped; because the child who needed help is not getting it and living in waste.

“We must always think about things, and we must think about things as they are, not as they are said to be.” George Bernard Shaw

Looking at things as they are, if the government practice is right and just for these children why do we need laws to reinstate parental rights? http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/22/title22sec4059.html 

Push your legislators to adopt open courts for accountability and laws such as Maine's to correct the injustices that are occurring around the United States and your very neighborhood now. http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml 

For more information see the Citizens Commission on Human Rights report http://www.cchr.org/ it is not good.
Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. C. S. Lewis

Friday, April 20, 2012

Verdicts Sweeping the U.S. oppossing Oppression momentum opens Court Rooms

"At a time when we're having to take such difficult decisions about how to cut back without damaging the things that matter the most, we should strain every sinew to cut error, waste and fraud." (David Cameron)

Notable Lawsuits against the Department of Health and Human Services Departments and that of Child Protection Workers range from 1.2 million to 30 million per case; yet the government in each State is still not getting the message to correct their error, waste and fraud:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Protective_Services  Notable lawsuits http://newsok.com/okfuskee-county-jury-returns-4.55-million-verdict-after-counselor-failed-to-report-admitted-abuse-by-mother/article/3657723#ixzz1rPvy7nHm  Future Cases on what a Jury will give a Fit Mother deprived of Custody because the Child's Counselor and Father Lied and other cases where CPS workers said they thought there would be harm in the future; or misled Courts to deny grandparents rights and get a personal bonus or feed their over inflated deprived egos; will hopefully ensure open Court Rooms in New Hampshire in the Future.

http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=G039045&s=CA&d=45035 Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick v. County of Orange this case went for appeal by State and was denied; 4.9 million dollar verdict stands - These and other cases are leading to some but not ALL States Opening their Court Rooms to ensure accountability:

http://www.kentucky.com/2012/01/12/2026293/judges-say-kentucky-juvenile-courts.html
http://www.ncjfcj.org/content/view/198/242/
Pennsylvania
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2011/11/stop_child_abuse_secret_courts.php California
http://www.nctimes.com/news/opinion/columnists/greenhut/greenhut-judge-right-to-promote-court-openness/article_59f47952-b8f3-5b80-98c7-9a51ee8fc407.html#ixzz1mDm5LIRI  A Judges input on the corruption and mismanagement of the Child Protective Services as A government Agency. 

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011FogartyHardwick/04CertDenied/prweb5261414.htm http://freethechildrencoalition.webs.com/precedentcases.htm http://www.ctkidslink.org/publications/welf04confstatute11.pdf-12  12 other States

Sadly, the  RULES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE -- FAMILY DIVISION SECTION 4 -- ABUSE AND NEGLECT 4.1 Scope:

The family division has jurisdiction in RSA 169-C Child Protection Act cases.

4.2 Attendance of Non-Parties: Any party wishing to bring other persons to hearings held in RSA 169-C cases shall first obtain permission of the Court, either by written motion in advance of the hearing, or upon oral motion at the beginning of the hearing. Such other persons will not be allowed into the hearing until the Court approves the request. Such persons shall not be entitled to participate but may do so with the permission of the Court. See RSA 169-C:14.

4.3 Open Hearings Pilot Project: Other than in those counties in which the legislature has adopted a presumption of open hearings, hearings under RSA 169-C are closed to the public. In those counties in which hearings under this chapter are presumed open, parties to the action must inform the court in writing before any hearing, or orally and on the record at the beginning of any hearing, if they believe the hearing should be closed to the public, in full or in part. See Chapter Law 134 (2006) pertaining to open hearings in Grafton, Rockingham and Sullivan Counties.

This N.H. Rule above, is in conflict with the Law under NH RSA 169-C:14 Hearings Not Open to the Public. Shows that the Court's remain closed because the division of Child Protection is the one who informs the Court in writing and/or orally they believe the hearing should be closed to the public and the Judicial System so orders that is, which means the law is frivolous and without merit.

If Legislators simply changed the above referenced law to replace "NOT" WITH "ARE" open, it would reasonably cure the issue. This recent article http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120417/NEWS06/704179937/-1/news06  sums up Attorney General Delaney of New Hampshire's attitude toward Families and was best stated by House Speaker O'Brien in reference to Delaney he is “more interested in playing politics than administering justice.”

"For the most part fraud in the end secures for its companions repentance and shame." (Charles Simmons) However, it never adequately compensates the victims in these cases; how do you possibly compensate a parent who due to fraud has lost countless moments in their child lives? Including but not limited to their first day in a new school, the first point in a game, their every day discovery's and growth, being first on the scene to soothe a bruised knee or mean comment, to share in their everyday moments of growth and discovery's working to ensure their happiness as a child. "This" is not replaceable, any parent who doesn't realize all of these moments in their child's life good and bad is a deprived fool.

"A clear and innocent conscience fears nothing." Elizabeth I

Thursday, April 19, 2012

7. Due Process - Access to Records - Supreme Ct. Preliminary Ruling - Right to an Attorney

First Supreme Court Order on Release of Parental Records from a NH RSA 169-C Matter

"A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference." Thomas Jefferson

When you read this order please note the Supreme Court is sure to recognize the "Confidentiality Clause" under NH RSA 169-C:25; however, the Justice who signed it is not disclosed; it will be interesting to see if they uphold the law and their own rules covered and duly noted in Due Process Blogs 1-6. Otherwise, like the parental right to a court appointed attorney it may have to be pushed further.

Parental Rights to an attorney were taken away by the NH Supreme Court in July 2011 and remain unresolved and undecided by the Supreme Court it was previously given to parents under NH RSA 169-C:10

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0ByTPLCn0VjpSVUJXZ2tIOThQUGs

To learn more about a parents 6th amendment right to an attorney as grounded in their 14th amendment right of being deprived the liberty of ones child read up on it here:

Williams and Mary Law Review @
http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2013&context=wmlr

Individual States can not take away rights guaranteed by the Federal Government they can only enhance them.

It would appear that the Department of Children Youth and Families under the direction of the Department of Health and Human Services in conjunction with the New Hampshire Judicial System's closed door proceedings and the secrecy in hiding behind their Confidentiality Clause is exactly what our founding fathers hoped to dispense with.

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." Thomas Jefferson

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

NH Legislative Redress Challenge's AG Delaney to prove Accountability

This article http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/324225/grievance-panel-strikes-back?CSAuthResp=1334754241%3Alcemtepsafm32lur215ku4kdr1%3ACSUserId%7CCSGroupId%3Aapproved%3AACDE6E99ACA7DFAC2B5C001F6AC930A3&CSUserId=94&CSGroupId=1shows that Attorney Delaney is using the same adjectives his Child Protection Workers (CPSW) use to describe parent's demanding their rights. Such as antagonistic, boundaries of authority, all coincidentally identical to the arsenal of toolbox phrases uttered by state workers against parents demanding their due process rights in relationship to their children and simple accountability.  Obviously, this type of power trip starts at the top with Delaney and works its way down and is acted out contrary to state and federal laws through the CPSW towards the parents they railroad behind closed doors.

The Concord Monitor who accepts advertising and large payments from the Department of Health and Human Services of course trivialized the committee's inquiry as simply a "spat between the Speaker O'Brien and AG Delaney" over the following questions, the italics are my suggestions to de-escalate Delaney:

1. Under what DCYF policy does it state slandering parents and family members is allowed in order to place a child in foster care?
What polices does DCYF have in place to prevent state employees from state employees simply slandering parents to get a ruling to place a child in foster care?

With the standard of guilt as "more likely than not" and not beyond a reasonable doubt; perhaps legislators should simply raise the bar to include real evidence the chance to confront the unknown accuser etc.

2. Under what DCYF policy does it state the assessment worker has the right to falsely state in her affidavit that the mother's labor was induced due to complications, when it wasn't induced?

Does DCYF have standard polices and procedures for investigating abuse and neglect under NH RSA 169-C:3-a and in line with  NH RSA 169-C:34 Duties of the Department of Health and Human Services; what mechanism is in place to deter those who abuse discretion and do not follow the protocols by acquiring and relaying real evidence? 

• Under what DCYF policy does the worker have the right to threaten a parent into signing a case plan, telling the parent if she doesn't sign, she will never see her child again?

Does DCYF again same as 2. but additionally, Does DCYF have policies of rewarding social workers for obtaining findings against a parent; that would affect their judgment and coerce or demand that a parent sign a case plan?

Ps. here they do have a bonus merit system; an interoffice memo from an accountable CPSW wouldn't hurt; set up a throw away email account send and close account,erase browsing session and contribute anonymously.

"Delaney told O'Brien he was instructing state employees not to answer the committee's questions because he believed their true purpose was to harass and intimidate" one would have to image that the true purpose of Delaney is continue business as usual and not be accountable for his departments activities or measures to ensure accountability.

For a first hand account of the Press Conference see;

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Points and Authorities in N.H. Family Law Cases

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" Albert Einstein

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/indexes/search.html type in your RSA and find the official details of the law.

NH Judicial Branch forms for family law matters; parties agree and file all to expedite;
http://www.courts.state.nh.us/superior/forms/forms.htm#civil_equity

http://www.nhd.uscourts.gov/oo/search.asp find rulings in a higher court than NH Supreme Court - States can only enhance your rights they can not take them away;

http://www.courts.state.nh.us/rules/sror/sror-h3-35.htm General NH rules on provisions for discovery;

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/ check on New Laws being worked on my legislators and plan to attend and voice your concerns;

http://definitions.uslegal.com/e/ex-post-facto-law/ you can not be charge when the law became effective after the act;

http://www.howtodothings.com/electronics/a1942-how-to-block-your-cell-phone-number.html for those for whom you do not want to have your phone number

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/write-or-call  appears to be an appropriate venue to further voice your concerns;

http://www.nhbar.org/publications/archives/display-news-issue.asp?id=1226 You never know, they often work through new laws and have helpful information for the Pro Se person the idea is to search;

http://www.judicialchildabuse.com/  This program has good insights into Stopping Judicial Child Abuse;

For those who mistakenly think all things on the Internet are a free for all check; http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/cease-and-desist-letter.html

Great Article on your rights or the pubic right to access government information from the Florida Attorney Generals office;  http://www.myfloridalegal.com/sun.nsf/sunmanual/DABDAF419A85B75185256F94005BB88B

Understanding "Contempt of Court" in the Family Court Room and dispelling myth's
http://www.nhfamilylawblog.com/articles/parenting-rights-responsibilit/  this lawyers site has some great information in the Family Law Arena;

Write  a persuasive demand letter, argument, etc. start here:
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/write-winning-demand-letter-29858.html

Keep searching ... All the problems of the world could be settled easily if men were only willing to think. The trouble is that men very often resort to all sorts of devices in order not to think, because thinking is such hard work." Thomas J. Watson

Thursday, April 12, 2012

6. Due Process - Record Requests - Parents

Whenever, your motion is denied for something that appears so obvious that the court should be giving it to you as shown in Due Process blogs 1-5. File a Supreme Court Appeal; it can be expensive however, you can apply to have the fees waived by filling out an affidavit of assets found on their site; this is a format for NH and do not be discourage if they tell you it is suppose to be the opposite of whatever you submit; it is to deter you from filing; simply hand it in early and hand it back as they request.  To save time, since they are basically similar forms, you'd think they'd just rule on it accordingly. However, the would be time management and/or effective organization something the Court's in New Hampshire have not yet accomplished:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0ByTPLCn0VjpSeEtFdlBqdUhkeWc

Questioning Government Ethics - Massachusetts vs. NH

What is happening to Children in Foster Care and/or Children of Parents who are being denied the right to know about the care their child is receiving? The answers are morally and ethically reprehensible.

1.8 million lawsuit settled in 1998 for testing on Children was obviously nothing compared to the income these government run agency's are collecting.

The following links will make the hardest critic question the ethics and moral obligations of the United States and State to State ethics in regards to children! This Child and many other's have been and continue to be treated to Electric Shock Treatments at the Judge Roteberg Center in Canton, Massachusetts.
http://brianajoyce.com/pressreleases/un-finds-shock-treatments-judge-rotenberg-center-canton-be-torture 2010 article

http://www.educationnews.org/ednews_today/59610.html Even after this Federal Investigation this place is still open; why? -
"In 1994 the center changed its name to the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center "to honor the memory of the judge [who] helped to preserve [the] program from extinction at the hands of state licensing officials in the 1980’s."[1] It has 900 employees and annual revenues exceeding $56 million, charging $220,000 a year for each student."

New Hampshire and other State's Children drugged

with pharmaceutical cocktails

Testing of Mind Altering Drugs on Children goes on in the Foster Care System, In NH St. Charles Children's Hospital, and Philbrook Center in Concord alleged to be involved as well. After reviewing documents from several families in this state whose children were taken from them, children were sent to the one of these Center's. and /or while in the Care of Social Workers all ended up having some form ADHD; the families swear their children had no behavior problem's prior to State intervention.  These Children may have been upset simply because they were taken from their families; obviously to simple an analogy to be comprehended by alledged professionals.  Many of the parents stated their children where put on Tenex and/or Adderall some were not told what drugs their children were taking; DCYF told them they had custody and could make decisions that the parents were not privy to by Child Protection Workers; they were also told not to share any information about their child's care or their interaction with DCYF or they would be jailed; due to the confidentiality clause they continue to hide behind NH RSA 169-C:25 III.

adhdtesting.org/adderall www.adhdtesting.org/adderall.htm "At present, there has been no experience with long-term Adderall therapy in children. However, other amphetamine-based medications have been known to ... This drug has been used in a medication known as Obetrol, made in the past by Rexar and developed for "diet control." It is a single entity amphetamine and known to be addictive in Adults - why are they giving it to children; because they receive more federal $$$ money when a child is identified as having a disability and in just 20 - 40 years without intervention we will find out the results of those tested; unless we demand answers NOW. Children, are just as likely to become addicted to this drug and many other's for news report's on these issues and other incidents see: http://unhappygrammy-grandparentsblog.blogspot.com/2011/12/foster-kids-drugged-with-massive_20.html

If your child has been needlessly drugged contact http://www.cchr.org/  and file a complaint.

Yesterday may have been too early to Act, if it is to be corrected and stopped it is up to us to make sure it is; today is that day; write to congressmen in All States and let them know we are not accepting this abuse, tomorrow is to late.

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Governor Lynch and Attorney General Delaney hide behind the Transparency Curtain

If you google "Governor Lynch and Transparency" you will find a surprising amount of article's about his alleged transparency in New Hampshire Government. As a woman my intuition tells me that George Jean Nathan had the right idea he said "What passes for woman's intuition is often nothing more than man's transparency." In this case it's obvious there is none!

The recent article on NH Attorney General Delaney feeling badgered by the Legislative Branch seeking transparency in the Department of Health and Human Services as well as the Department of Children Youth and Families certainly shows that Governor Lynch is just a talker without action as shown below:

Surprised, speculating as to whether or not Lynch actually does not live up to true transparency here are some example's:

Government Reform - Governor John Lynch - NH.gov www.governor.nh.gov/initiatives/reform.htm Governor Lynch continues to work to improve government through reforming laws, improving efficiency, and increasing transparency. If the Attorney Generals office can't answer questions there is no transparency on Ethic's as purported here by Lynch

Governor Lynch Puts State of New Hampshire Monthly Spending ... www.governor.nh.gov/media/news/2010/061810-transparency.htm Jun 18, 2010 – CONCORD - As part of Governor John Lynch's continuing efforts to improve state government transparency and accountability, the State of ... Any minor accountant can tell you without debits/credits income/expenses shown the Governor's office can't offer transparency

Priorities and Initiatives | New Hampshire Governor John Lynch www.governor.nh.gov/initiatives/index.htm  Governor Lynch has established four major initiatives; Economy, Healthcare, ... through reforming laws, improving efficiency, and increasing transparency. Again,only one side the government side is shown

John Lynch - Taxes www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profiles/Governor/New...Lynch/.../Taxes/ Governor Lynch has put his business experience to work reforming state government, reducing state spending, increasing efficiency and transparency, and ... Again,only one side the government side is shown where have taxes been decreased to reflect the reduction in state spending, efficiency and/or transparency?

Governor Lynch Ignores Transparency Obligations - Save the New ... savethejua.blogspot.com/.../governor-lynch-ignores-transparency Oct 21, 2010 – Governor Lynch Ignores Transparency Obligations. Campaign ads running in the Governor's race suggest that John Lynch is a "very nice man. Nice men don't always tell the truth

Governor Lynch's Claims That He Has Been Open and Transparent ... savethejua.blogspot.com/.../governor-lynchs-claims-that-he-has-been ...Mar 18, 2011 –
Claims and Reality are two different forms of identifying transparency

Governor Lynch's Claims That He Has Been Open and Transparent on the JUA is Not Supported By Fact. Reproduced below is a letter from the ... New Hampshire - Transparency Projects www.transparent-gov.com/Lists/State/WebDispForm.aspx?State=NH  It would help if the public was actually able to see results with the tools provided here

Transparency Projects ... New Hampshire Transparency Sources ... Gov. Lynch Announces Increase In Unemployment Benefits For NH Citizens · Gov.
New Hampshire Institute for Health Policy and Practice - Patrick ... www.chhs.unh.edu/nhihpp/staff/miller.htm ...information technology and exchange to support Governor Lynch's Executive Order. He currently leads the Initiative's transparency reporting efforts focused on ... a newly updated site

Governor Lynch Gives Final State of the State Address: Full ... www.nhpr.org/.../governor-lynch-gives-final-state-state-address-full-...Jan 31, 2012 –
Governor Lynch Gives Final State of the State Address: Full Transcript ... our commitment to citizen involvement, democracy and transparency. Now from the above it is obviously that Lynch is not providing transparency

New Hampshire state government salary - Sunshine Review  http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/New_Hampshire_state_government_salary Governor, $113834, John Lynch ... The salary of New Hampshire's governor ranks 35th among U.S. governors' salaries. ... The state's transparency website launched in December 2010 includes a page to search what each state employee is ... This is actually useful especially in divorces when one side may want to be as transparent as the States Governor...

Write Lynch http://www4.egov.nh.gov/governor/goveforms/comments.asp and tell him to address the Redress of Greivance Concerns and let him know I said:
"Transparency is not the same as looking straight through a building: it's not just a physical idea, it's also an intellectual one. Helmut Jahn, World Famous Architect  

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Public Integrity lost on Infamous Attorney General Delaney

"The mission of the Attorney General's department is to serve the people of New Hampshire with diligence, independence and integrity by performing the constitutional, statutory and common law duties of the Attorney General as the State's chief legal officer and chief law enforcement officer, to seek to do justice in all prosecutions, to provide the State with legal representation and counsel of the highest quality, to protect the State's environment and the rights of its consumers, and to provide supervision and leadership of New Hampshire law enforcement." or so it states on their website http://doj.nh.gov/

In an article on 4/9/12; http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120409/NEWS06/704099953 By TED SIEFER
Where all reader conments have been deleted lends support to the following:
This article brings forth the notion that:

Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. Author: Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis

Attorney General Michael Delaney of NH was quoted in the above article as "criticizing a recently established legislative committee for asking questions and demanding answers from his staff" the redress of grievance committee has been looking into NH Citizens complaints for almost 5 years now; and has been trying to restore public trust and confidence in our public institutions, by following up numerous on citizen complaints, a great majority against the Attorney General's office for covering up their employees fraudulent activities.

Delaney would like the public to believe that asking his office for some accountability is in and of itself a strain.  Over the last year, the impact the Redress of Grievance Committee has had, has been little to none on qualifying "the State's effort to protect the health and safety of New Hampshire's children,” because Delaney refuses to be and/or refuses to hold his departments accountable to the public he is suppose to serve.  This failure could be because his position is not that of  an elected official but an appointment by a NH Governor.  Therefore it is unlikely that he will act as AG Coakley of Massachusetts with a Public Integrity Division that addresses: "Corrupt public employees ....Crimes that have a corrosive or harmful effect on public confidence in our government and other trusted institutions, including such crimes as perjury and obstruction of justice." http://www.mass.gov/ago/bureaus/criminal/the-public-integrity-division-folder/ which is why the Redress of Grievance Committee has come into existence and has in the last year been given the power to demand answers, accountability and under the leadership of Speaker O'Brien restore public confidence in areas such as Delany's Division for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF).

Delaney is also quoted as writing his employees are prohibited from responding to allegations against them/their departments activities "due to strict confidentiality rules, which “are important to protect our children and ensure the integrity of our child protection system.” However, and perhaps redundantly it would rather mean that the "Prohibition" is in fact to cover up his departments activities. The House voted last month "to grant subpoena power to committees, with the approval of the Rules Committee and the House speaker. The move was prompted by the grievance committee's efforts to get information from DCYF."

The reference in this article to Delaney and Speaker O'Brien "disputes in recent years" attempts to gloss over the fact that this division is unaccountable to the public they are suppose to serve and and in fact a menace to the children in their care who have been put into the foster care system not for their own benefit; but to benefit drug studies with the State as their warden giving consent, and to collect federal money that when looked at under the NH RSA 169-C can be seen as a multi layering scheme now invested in a non-profit the "Children's Trust Fund":

[RSA 169-C:39-c repealed by 2010, 195:3, effective on the date that the New Hampshire Children's Trust certifies to the secretary of state, the state treasurer, and the director of the office of legislative services that the trust has been formed as a private New Hampshire voluntary corporation and has been qualified by the Internal Revenue Service as a section 501(c)(3) entity.]
    169-C:39-c New Hampshire Children's Trust Fund. – 

Most notably the attorney general's refusal to participate and respond, comes after the Federal Government performed Audits that show they are NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL LAW see http://www.acf.hhs.gov/.

Delaney objects to qualifying an answer to  “Under what DCYF policy does it state slandering parents and family members is allowed in order to place a child in foster care?” Which perhaps word to create friction in affect means "What practices are in place so that CPSW's are not fabricating evidence to meet their goal of placement?"  The "substantial commitment of state legal resources" is used to cover up the fraudulent and/or knowingly malicious acts of individual actors within DCYF.  Instead of correcting the many complaints brought to his attention, Delaney continues to engage in rhetoric to keep closed door proceedings that only protect his workers and deny due process to the families and children of NH for ulterior intent.

Support your state legislators who get paid a $100 a year and are going out of their way to protect your interests; write to your congressional state representatives to give them added support in their efforts to demand accountability! https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

People often say that, in a democracy, decisions are made by a majority of the people. Of course, that is not true. Decisions are made by a majority of those who make themselves heard and who vote - a very different thing. Author: Walter H. Judd

 

Monday, April 9, 2012

Two Little Boys - Child Protective Services - Nuclear Research performed on Children part 2

Reference to post on 4/8/12; an anonymous source provided me with the name of one of the homes in Massachusetts doing Nuclear Research on Children; looking down the hallway of hell.

The ominous view is that of the hallways now in decay of the Walter E. Fernald State School, in Waltham Ma. a school that was and is still publicly funded; experiments conducted on Children by representatives of Boston's Harvard University and MIT funded in part by the "Quaker Oats Company" resulted in http://tech.mit.edu/V117/N65/bfernald.65n.html a settlement of  1.85 million dollar's for "some" albeit not all the Children tested on; nor does it take into consideration that State Child Protection Service workers allowed children to be bribed and gave consent for the majority of residents to have the testing performed on them.

Wiki on the Fernald School quotes an unusually tame version of the events at the school http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_E._Fernald_State_School#cite_note-MIT-8 the suit heavily went towards MIT as shown in their own coverage.  What this shows is that the records of Child Services were of course lost.  Just as the due process series in this blog shows they often do with documents that are incriminating towards them. 

Thanks to Governor Deval Patrick of Mass. this facility and it's long history of harming people will rightfully be put to rest; the PBS documentary "Front Wards, Back Wards" directed by W.C. Rogers describes some of the horrors going on in this facility, it's hard to believe some residents family's fought to keep this place open. To find out more about Unethical human experimentation go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentation_in_the_United_States and cross reference your sources to reports finally released by the US government the extent of the research is staggering and we will find out about the current testing in 40 years if you do not speak up now and save countless lives. For further abuses check on the testing world wide by American pharmaceutical companies!  The results are sickening.


Oppression is always in the dreariest of places.....

                                              Keep asking questions the truth is closer than you think.