BISHKEK — Kyrgyz authorities have detained several individuals over the sale of newborn babies, including one case in which hospital staff falsely told parents that their child had died at birth.
In 2015, a 26-year-old man in the northwestern Naryn region was detained for trying to exchange his 5-month-old daughter for a goat.
Last year, three women were detained in Bishkek for allegedly arranging the sale of a 3-month-old baby for 10,000 soms (about $150).
Earlier this year, a woman in the Chui region, outside the capital, was detained by police after reportedly trying to sell her three children for 80,000 soms ($1,150).
“Perhaps [doctors and other medical workers] do this out of need,” said Ainura Altybaeva, a parliament deputy. “Whatever it is, that by no means justifies their criminal actions.”
Child Protection Services have become big business (6:54)
Income generated from selling a new born or baby: http://www.americanadoptions.com/adopt/why_does_private_adoption_cost_so_much_money
Adoptions specialises in private domestic adoptions of healthy newborns for adoptive couples. In 2015-2016, our average total adoption cost for our two adoption programs were:
• Traditional Program: $44,000 – $48,000
• Agency-Assisted Program: $38,000 – $41,000
Adopting a child from foster care is often funded by the state, and in most cases there are few or no fees.
working with a private agency to adopt a healthy newborn or baby or to adopt from another country can cost $5,000 to $40,000. Some agencies have a sliding scale based on the prospective adoptive parent’s income.
Our self-help mothers’ group receives calls daily from desperate women whose children or grandchildren have been removed or are being adopted against their will – forced adoptions are the highest in Europe – on speculative and biased assumptions of “emotional harm and neglect”.
In a recent ruling, Judge Mostyn was scathing about a “44-page witness statement” by a Carmarthenshire social worker “very long on rhetoric … but very short indeed on any concrete examples of where and how the mother’s judgment had been deficient”. Examples of “emotional harm” he rejected as “inconsequential and trivial” included failing to take her son out for ice cream and to arrange for him to have the hair cut he liked.
What drives social workers to prioritise taking children on such heartbreakingly spurious grounds? The practice follows the money. Tickle says that “half of the country’s entire public spending on children is going on those 73,000 children [in care]”. But she doesn’t say that 80% of children’s homes and 40% of foster care have been privatised. Thus millions are spent on feeding an increasingly privatised and growing child protection industry: over £2,000 a week for each child in institutional care; at least £450 per week for foster care.
The law offers a humane alternative. Section 17 of the Children Act 1989 instructs local authorities to provide support, including financial, to families so they can stay together; the Care Act 2014 entitles disabled mothers to extra help. But these provisions are hardly ever applied. Thus the “corporate parent” is paid vast sums to replace the impoverished mother (86% of austerity cuts have fallen on women). The way the law is implemented is an abuse of power and must be stopped. Nina Lopez Jones Support Not Separation Coalition, Anne Neale Legal Action for Women, Kim Sparrow Single Mothers’ Self-Defence
USA STATE ADOPTION FUNDING • The Adoption Incentive Program was extended for three years to September 30, 2016 and authorised at $43 million per year • Changes include: • Inclusion of a guardianship benefit incentive • Gradual transition to an incentive based on a state’s rate of adoptions (the number of adoptions divided by the number of children in foster care at the end of the previous fiscal year), rather than a flat numerical increase over a numerical baseline • Allows states up to three years to spend incentive payments and requires states not to use incentive payments to replace any existing child welfare funding
Beginning in fiscal year 2016 (2015 adoptions), the bonus payments will be calculated as follows: • $5,000 per placement for increases in the adoption rate • $4,000 per placement for increases in the guardianship rate • $7,500 per placement for increases in the rate of adoption or guardianship for children 9 to 13 • $10,000 per placement for increases in the rate of adoption or guardianship for children 14 and older
• Existing system: if baseline total adoption baseline is 1,000, and the next year 1,000 children are adopted there is no increase • New system: if there are 1,000 adoptions and 5,000 children in foster care in the base year, the adoption rate is 20%. In the next year if there are 1,000 adoptions and 4,000 children in foster care, the adoption rate is 25%. The bonus would be $5,000/child times the increased number of children — 200 for a total of $1 million dollars. • Ohio has not received an Adoption Incentive Payment since 2003
• The baseline rate will be the previous year’s adoption rate or an average of the last three years’ rates, whichever is lower • If all of the funds appropriated are not earned, the law enables HHS to award states for timely adoptions. Those states that have an average length of stay in care before finalisation of less than 24 months would equally split any remaining funds • 2014 (2013 adoptions) remained the same, with bonus for overall increases in adoption, increases in adoptions of children nine and older, and increases in special needs adoption.
•2015 (2014 adoptions) will be a hybrid, with the bonus earned being half of what the state would have earned under the old system and half of its earnings under the new system. •2016 (2015 adoptions) will be based on the previous year’s adoption rate or an average of the last three years’ rates, whichever is lower
Children Die At Alarming Rate In For-Profit Foster Care (15:53)
Mentor, part of Civitas Solutions, a large corporation selected and paid foster mother Elizabeth Osei. Now she is in jail awaiting a murder trial in the morphine overdose death of the three-year-old boy that the company, The Mentor Network, placed in her care. Mentor paid only a $500 fine for failing to “ensure adequate supervision” of the child who died.
Mentor is controlled by a giant private equity firm and trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the name Civitas Solutions. As BuzzFeed News has previously reported in a series of stories, Mentor turned privatised foster care for children into a cash cow [using state funding] across the country.
At its height, the politically influential corporation provided foster homes for about 4,000 children nationwide in 15 states. Since the first BuzzFeed News report on Mentor a year ago, the company has pulled out of the child foster care industry in seven states, but still runs foster care operations in eight. The company has said it pulled out of the states because of business decisions unrelated to the news coverage.
In 2013, 2-year-old Alexandria Hill was murdered in Texas by her Mentor foster mother, who violently swung her into the floor. In 2012, a 2-month-old baby died in a Massachusetts foster care home run by Mentor in a case that the state initially ruled to be neglect. The neglect finding was later overturned. In 2011, two Mentor foster fathers in Maryland were convicted of sexually abusing their foster sons. One of those foster fathers had for 10 years been molesting children Mentor placed in his care — and the company had continued sending children to his home despite repeated warnings.
Workers told BuzzFeed News that Mentor sacrificed child safety because it pushed so hard to meet profit goals. States and local governments pay the firm to select, train, and hire foster parents, to place children with those parents, and even to hire the caseworkers who are supposed to look after the children’s welfare. More broadly, Mentor has been accused of overlooking criminal backgrounds of foster parents and ignoring warning signs. In Texas, the company ranked dead last among large foster care providers, based on the number of severe violations found by state inspectors. Investigators in Illinois found “a culture of incompetence” at the company.
To cope with that investigation, the company has hired lobbyists who used to work for the senators leading the probe and a high-powered Washington lawyer who specialises in handling Congressional investigations.
Under New Labour policy, Tony Blair, Prime Minister of Britain, changed targets in 2000 to raise the number of children being adopted by 50 per cent to 5,400 a year.
The annual tally has now reached almost 4,000 in England and Wales – four times higher than in France, which has a similar-sized population.
Blair promised millions of pounds to councils that achieved the targets and some have already received more than £2million each in rewards for successful adoptions.
Figures recently released by the Department for Local Government and Community Cohesion show that two councils – Essex and Kent – were offered more than £2million “bonuses” over three years to encourage additional adoptions.
Four others – Norfolk, Gloucestershire, Cheshire and Hampshire – were promised an extra £1million.
This sweeping shake-up was designed for all the right reasons: to get difficult-to-place older children in care homes allocated to new parents.
But the reforms didn’t work. Encouraged by the promise of extra cash, social workers began to earmark babies and cute toddlers who were most easy to place in adoptive homes, leaving the more difficult to-place older children in care.
As a result, the number of over-sevens adopted has plummeted by half.
Critics – including family solicitors, MPs and midwives as well as the wronged families – report cases where young children are selected, even before birth, by social workers in order to win the bonuses.
“Love Children – Love a Fostering Career”
You could be a foster carer in 4 months time!
There’s never been a better time to start on the road to a new career as a full or part time foster carer.
YOUR FOSTERING ALLOWANCE
• Private Fostering agencies pay a fostering allowance for each foster child.
• The allowance pays for the foster child’s day to day care.
• Fostering agencies also pay foster carers a professional fee.
• The fee is an income payment for the foster carer.
• The allowance and fee average a total weekly minimum payment of £450 for each child.
Breakdown of foster care pay
How much are foster carers paid?
Foster care pay rates are not regulated by the government so each private agency or local authority can decide how much they pay their carers. This lack of regulation is why underfunded councils can pay the minimum recommended rates and why private agency rates can be much more generous.
Foster carers are classed as self-employed and earn a weekly fostering allowance for each child or young person they look after. The amount of allowance paid depends on the type of care and the age of the child or young person.
About Private (Independent) Agency allowances
On average, national Private (Independent) Fostering Agencies pay a basic weekly fostering allowance and fee of £450 per week, for all ages of foster children. The payment is generally the same for short and long term placements.
Example of income
Foster carer with one foster child Cindy is a foster carer looking after 11 year old Joe. She has just started fostering and receives a payment of £450 per week.
For the year, Cindy is paid:
(£450 x 52 weeks) = £23,400
Taxable income = £0
Total paid = £23,400
Income tax exemption
Foster carers are entitled to an income tax exemption up to a certain amount for their fostering.
The amount has two parts:
• A fixed amount to cover capital costs initially set at £10,000 per year
• An additional amount per child, initially set at £200 per week for a child up to the age of 11 years and £250 per week for a child aged 11 years and over.
This government initiative is to make sure carers are not unfairly taxed on the costs they have to meet through fostering.
For more information contact HM Revenue and Customs.
The Mentor Network’s “falsely” claimed its child death rates were in line with the overall foster industry, the committee said. In fact, the committee’s report claims Mentor’s child death rate is 42% higher than the national average.
Of the 86 reported deaths, BuzzFeed reports 23 were classified as “expected” (which may mean the child had an illness) and 62 were “unexpected.” One death was unclassified. Mentor told BuzzFeed that it conducted more than 13 internal investigations, despite the committee’s findings. The company’s owner, Civitas Solutions, Inc., reported $1.4 billion in revenue last year. The report detailed cases in which a foster mother with Mentor allegedly murdered her 2-year-old foster daughter, and another in which a longtime foster father sexually abused the young boys he took in through Mentor, despite a “series of red flags.”
Alford is asking the General Assembly to approve her agency’s request for nearly $51 million in added money in the state budget that starts July 1, primarily to hire more than 250 caseworkers to help overworked staffers.
“We can give you money (to hire new caseworkers),” responded state Sen. Katrina Shealy, R-Lexington. “But we’ve given you the money year after year, and we can’t hire the ones that we’ve given you the money for two years ago.
“That money is still sitting back there that we gave you to hire caseworkers two years ago, and we haven’t hired those caseworkers. That’s why these numbers are like they are.”
Alford said Social Services is able to hire caseworkers. But, she added, “We’re having trouble keeping them.”
Social Services is charged with protecting children under 18 years old from abuse and neglect. However, for years, a shortage of caseworkers has crippled the agency, which has been under scrutiny by the General Assembly for failing to properly oversee children in its charge who later died.
Alford said the rise in cases is having a “dramatic” effect on her agency’s ability to keep its often-overworked caseworkers. Almost 8 percent of those positions now are vacant, and, Alford said, about 9 percent of the agency’s caseworkers are handling 50 or more cases, roughly twice the recommended number.
Child “protection” is one of the biggest businesses in the country. We spend $12 billion a year on it.
The money goes to tens of thousands of a) state employees, b) collateral professionals, such as lawyers, court personnel, court investigators, evaluators and guardians, judges, and c) DSS contracted vendors such as counsellors, therapists, more “evaluators”, junk psychologists, residential facilities, foster parents, adoptive parents, MSPCC, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, YMCA, etc. This newspaper is not big enough to list all of the people in this state who have a job, draw a pay check, or make their profits off the kids in DSS custody.
In this article I explain the financial infrastructure that provides the motivation for DSS to take people’s children – and not give them back.
In 1974 Walter Mondale promoted the Child Abuse and Prevention Act which began feeding massive amounts of federal funding to states to set up programs to combat child abuse and neglect. From that came Child “Protective” Services, as we know it today. After the bill passed, Mondale himself expressed concerns that it could be misused. He worried that it could lead states to create a “business” in dealing with children.
Very few children who are being used to supply the adoption market are hollow-eyed tykes from Appalachia. Very few are crack babies from the projects. [Oh… you thought those were the children they were saving? Think again]. When you are marketing a product you have to provide a desirable product that sells. In the adoption business that would be nice kids with reasonably good genetics who clean up good. An interesting point is that the Cape Cod & Islands office leads the state in terms of processing kids into the system and having them adopted out. More than the inner city areas, the projects, Mission Hill, Brockton, Lynn, etc. Interesting…
For every child that DSS can get adopted, there is a bonus for them of $4,000 to $6,000.
But that is just the starting figure in a complex mathematical formula in which each bonus is multiplied by the percentage that the state has managed to exceed its baseline adoption number. The states must maintain this increase in each successive year. [Like compound interest.] The bill reads: “$4,000 to $6,000 will be multiplied by the amount (if any) by which the number of foster child adoptions in the State exceeds the base number of foster child adoptions for the State for the fiscal year.”
The adoptive parents may collect cash subsidies until the child is 18. If the child stays in school, subsidies continue to the age of 22. There are State funded subsidies as well as federal funds through the Title IV-E section of the Social Security Act. The daily rate for State funds is the same as the foster care payments, which range from $410-$486 per month per child. Unless the child can be designated “special needs,” which of course, they all can.
According to the NAATRIN State Subsidy profile from DSS, “special needs” may be defined as: “Physical disability, mental disability, emotional disturbance; a significant emotional tie with the foster parents where the child has resided with the foster parents for one or more years and separation would adversely affect the child’s development if not adopted by them.” [But their significant emotional ties with their parents, since birth, never enter the equation.]
Additional “special needs” designations are: a child twelve years of age or older; racial or ethnic factors; child having siblings or half-siblings. In their report on the State of the Children, Boston’s Institute for Children says: “In part because the States can garner extra federal funds for special needs children the designation has been broadened so far as to become meaningless.” “Special needs” children may also get an additional Social Security check.
The adoptive parents also receive Medicaid for the child, a clothing allowance and reimbursement for adoption costs such as adoption fees, court and attorney fees, cost of adoption home study, and “reasonable costs of food and lodging for the child and adoptive parents when necessary to complete the adoption process.” Under Title XX of the Social Security Act adoptive parents are also entitled to post adoption services “that may be helpful in keeping the family intact,” including “daycare, specialised daycare, respite care, in-house support services such as housekeeping, and personal care, counselling, and other child welfare services”. [Wow! Everything short of being knighted by the Queen!]
What an interesting government policy when compared to the welfare program that the same child’s mother may have been on before losing her children, and in which she may not own anything, must prove that she has no money in the bank; no boats, real estate, stocks or bonds; and cannot even own a car that is safe to drive worth over $1000. This is all so she can collect $539 per month for herself and two children. The foster parent who gets her children gets $820 plus. We spit on the mother on welfare as a parasite who is bleeding the taxpayers, yet we hold the foster and adoptive parents [who are bleeding ten times as much from the taxpayers] up as saints. The adoptive and foster parents aren’t subjected to psychological evaluations, ink blot tests, MMPI’s, drug & alcohol evaluations, or urine screens as the parents are. I can’t help but wonder why we don’t give this same level of support to the children’s parents in the first place? According to Cornell University, about 68% of all child protective cases “do not involve child maltreatment.” The largest percentage of CPS/DSS cases are for “deprivation of necessities” due to poverty.
A good breakdown of the situation – facebook comment:
“Ok I think it is time I broke it down for some of you who still have your head in the sand. What I am about to tell you know that all of your legislatures know this as well. Do don’t let them fool you that they don’t as I can prove for a fact that some of them do. The are in possession of the proof I know, because I personally gave it to them. I know you guys have seen this pamphlet before as a copy of it still rests on my facebook page but is now set to friends only. This pamphlet actually used to be on the Governments own website. It was part of the whole new transparency in Government. They just didn’t expect someone to come along and really read it and they were right most people don’t. However once I started sharing the link everywhere they took it down. Unfortunately for them I had already printed it. Now pay attention to these short but important details and know that this is something you should be complaining to your legislatures about. Let them know that you know and that you know that they know. Stop pretending it is not real as it is not helping the children at all. In fact by ignoring this many children are being daily put at risk strictly for the money involved. It’s not really about the children and their safety anymore and it hasn’t been for a very long time. Now here is a big key point in this pamphlet to understand.
#1 The starting price for each child picked up is $8,000
#2 An extra $4,000 is added for each special criteria that child falls under.
Now let me give you an example and it is all explained in the pamphlet.
Little Johnny gets picked up $8,000
Little Johnny’s mother is a single parent $4,000
Little Johnny is more than one race $4,000
Little Johnny is special needs $4,000 their description is very broad.
Little Johnny is also disabled like in a wheel chair etc. $4,000 it is a different category then special needs. These are disabilities that require some type of special equipment. Wheel chair, tube feeding machine etc.
Now when you add all that up Little Johnny is now worth $24,000 just for pick up this is before foster care etc. even begins to kick in.
Now this money is given to Oklahoma for every single child that gets picked up. Most on average are worth $20,000 upon pick up it just depends on what all criteria they fall under. This money comes directly from the Social Security Administration in Washington D.C. This has been going on for years in all 50 states. Now is it any wonder Social Security is broke? They are spending it faster then employees can now “pay in.”
FAT CAT CARE Parents who’ve lost kids in shadowy secret courts slam ruthless millionaires cashing in on UK’s fostering crisis
The UK’s £1.7billion foster industry has seen a growth of firms backed by huge private equity funds raking in taxpayers’ cash. They are cashing in on the anguish felt by parents who lose their children into care.
Thousands of parents across the country are being dragged into secretive courts each year where social services are removing children in record numbers.
High-profile cases have sparked public outrage such as one in June when a judge blasted social workers after they removed a boy, aged eight, from his mother’s care because she did not take him for an ice cream.
Last month we revealed how the latest figures showed children taken into care jumped by 34 per cent to more than 10,000 in a single year for the first time.
And hairdresser Jill Goss told The Sun how her ten-week-old baby daughter Alyssa was placed into permanent care after a doctor’s visit to check a swelling on her arm revealed a tiny fracture. The 31-year-old, who now lives in Spain with her six-year-old son Loiq, said of the businessmen making millions from children being taken into care: “It’s completely wrong and doesn’t put the child first.
“They shouldn’t be making all this money from placing children in foster care – it’s just an industry and in my case it was not for the benefit of Alyssa at all. I still think about her every day.”
The rise in child care removals by councils – which last year overspent by £800million on child social care – means they are increasingly forced to pay higher fees to place children taken from families by social services.
In some areas reports show these private placements can be as much as 92 per cent higher than council rates or £19,000 extra for the taxpayer for each child.
“Should we really be taking money out of the foster care system and putting it into the pockets of these businessmen?”
One founder of a £1billion private equity fund which owns a number of fostering agencies through huge amounts of debt is a super-rich socialite understood to be worth hundreds of millions of pounds.
Stefano Bonfiglio, 54 – ex-partner of TV presenter Trinny Woodall – lives in a five-storey £15million mansion in west London owned by a holding company based in a shady tax haven.
His wedding to ex-Goldman Sachs banker Carolina Gonzalez-Bunster featured in Vogue magazine and was attended by Hillary and Bill Clinton.
The Italian’s firm Stirling Square Capital Partners (SSCP) – said to have £1billion invested across the globe and run by investment bankers – boasts on its website of ploughing cash into military hardware manufacturers.
The equity fund’s portfolio includes the National Fostering Agency, Acorn Care and Education’s fostering firms and at least two military hardware companies AD Industrie and Mettis Aerospace – which makes missile and torpedo parts.
The agencies earned £15million in profit last year from fostering and care – money which campaigners say should be going back into the system.
Turnover for the National Fostering Agency grew by an extraordinary 46 per cent last year to more than £100million.
The equity fund – which paid £435million for the two care businesses – also uses a holding company called SSCP Spring Holdings SCA based in Luxembourg to route cash out of the UK.
Even still the company’s highest-paid director doubled their salary from the previous year from £319,000 to £650,000 with £455million of debt due to be paid back after more than one year.
SSCP founder Mr Bonfiglio’s rents a £15million London pad which is owned by a holding firm called Wastom Holdings based in the British Virgin Islands tax haven, according to Land Registry documents.
Speaking at their home this week, his wife Carolina said: “We rent this house.”
Another large fostering agency Partnership in Children’s Service (PICS) is owned by a London-based private equity fund called Sovereign Capital.
The agency, which is reportedly on the market again for more than £100million, is made up of several care companies fosters more than 1,000 children around the UK.
On a turnover of £37.7million the company offset £2.6million in loan interest payments and finance costs to make a loss of £60,000.
The foster group’s ultimate owner Sovereign Capital, which claims to manage almost £1billion of funds, was founded by investment banker Andrew Hayden who lives in a mansion in Tonbridge, Kent, which he paid just under £2.5million for in 2005.
Jill, originally from Reading and who lost her baby daughter Alyssa at 10-weeks-old to foster carers, said: “I used to have visits with the foster carer and Alyssa but she was sometimes dirty and not in the best condition.
“The carer had three foster children and two of her own so they were struggling to cope – the older children ended up looking after the kids too.
“It’s completely wrong – people wouldn’t believe this is how the system works until they have dealt with social services.
“It’s been horrendous for me and nobody can imagine the pain you go through as a mother.”
A 2016 report found eight of the largest private foster agencies had made £41million in profits.
Fostering agencies advertise the amount of cash to be made from taking children with some offering £3,000 “golden hellos” to carers if they leave their councils and join them.
On the website for Compass Fostering, owned by private equity group Graphite Capital, it says a carer would receive £18,980-a-year for a 14-year-old boy but £36,216 if he was “exhibiting problematic sexual behaviour”.
The average fee for an in-house council foster carer is £475 while agencies known as IFAs charge almost double at £798, according to an independent government review earlier this year.
Cllr Anntoinette Bramble, chair of the Local Government Association’s Children and Young People Board, said: “A recent government review highlighted that eight commercial fostering agencies were able to make more than £40 million in profits in just one year.
‘Treated like CATTLE!’: Vulnerable children are being auctioned online by councils inviting private firms to bid for up to £7,000-a-week for their care
• New report found councils offering contracts for vulnerable children online
• Details about age, previous abuse history and gang involvement included in ads
• Children in private care can cost over £7,000, while council-run care is cheaper
• Local authorities have blamed lack of money and funds for their shortcomings
Children in care are being ‘treated like cattle’, as councils have invited companies to compete in online bidding wars for contracts worth up to £7,000-a-week.
A new report found some councils in England and Wales are putting personal details of vulnerable children in adverts online – including if they were sexually abused or involved in gangs – while inviting bids from private firms for their care. Local authorities typically source placements for children in their care through supply agreements with privately run providers but an increasing number of cases require specialist treatment.
A lack of supply bids has led to councils using an online bidding process in order to get the highest bidder.
Children’s care homes are under pressure as private companies are taking over and charging councils more than £7,000 a week – more than £360,000-a-year per child – for residential placements.
Knowsley council admitted the ‘level of personal information… was unnecessarily detailed’ and has since removed the adverts. They added that the adverts had become part of standard practice.
Getting the human inventory is the next obvious step. The products must be of acceptable quality to ensure the business prosper. New born babies are the most valued commodity. Simply no reinvention is needed, because of no previous life cycle, and for this reason babies are in high demand. Cute, preferably un-abused toddlers are easily brainwashed to accept new caretakers, because of their physical dependencies, which makes them second in the adoption demand. Children with illnesses provide greater state funding and increases foster carer income, so these children are third on the demand list – illnesses are even invented for this money. Ideally the child’s parents are mostly; working class who are financially restrained; single struggling parents; culturally different parents; religious parents; expat or immigrant parents.
CPS advocate [requesting permission to lie to get children ] in Court Cases, Everyone Should Know of this Danger.
Wading into a sensitive area of child welfare, a California appeal court panel has ruled that county officials can remove a dangerously incorrigible child from the home even if the parent has responded appropriately to the behaviour problems.
The Orange County, Calif Social Services Agency, Child and Family Service Division, was established to protect children from violence, exploitation, abuse and neglect.
The Agency’s purpose is supposed to be…. To strengthen families and promote the well-being of children through prevention, intervention, education and advocacy.
Unfortunately, the Agency failed that mission, when two Orange County Social Services agents Marcie Vreeken and Helen Dwojak filed false reports and suppressed evidence to illegally remove Deanna Fogarty’s two daughters, ages 6 and 9, from her custody, in February 2000, based on the social workers false information.
Vreeken and Dwojak lied to the court that Deanna Fogarty (a former Miss California), claiming that “the children required continued detention due to a substantial danger to their psychological and emotional health, despite knowing there was no such danger.”
It took Deanna six years and hundreds of thousands of dollars later to regain custody of her children. By then, her daughters were teenagers. And it costs the citizens of Orange Country $10.6 Million dollars
Former CPS Investigator Exposes CPS’s Tactics, Kidnapping, and Corruption (21:39)
A judge has taken the extraordinary step of naming social workers who took part in an attempted “cover up” to keep five children [in foster care] from living with their parents.
One social worker’s report was rewritten by a colleague and a manager to present the parents in a poorer light, Judge Mark Horton found. He also accused social workers of lying under oath.
In an scathing ruling, the judge condemned the conduct of social workers at Hampshire County Council involved in the case, which related to five Portsmouth siblings aged between three and 16 in foster care.
Wanted By The State: Your Children. Sweden.
(13:43) Published on Mar 3, 2013
Your government can confiscate your children for any reason or no reason at all. Your children are property of the state and you are only their breeding bed. Your kids can be confiscated even before they are born, if the “progressives” don’t like you.
Norway ‘is taking foreign children away from their parents because it has the highest rates of inbreeding in the world’: Country forced to deny claims after another Lithuanian child is taken into care
• A Lithuanian talk show has accused Norway of seizing foreign children
• Claimed they were needed to combat ‘world’s highest rate of inbreeding’
• An ‘expert’ said fresh blood was needed to strengthen genetic material’
• Lithuanian Gražina Leščinskiene’s son was taken into care early this year.
• An ‘expert’ on the controversial service told show host Rūta Mikelkevičiūte that the country needed fresh blood to combat its rates of inbreeding which she said had led to high rates of babies being born with birth defects.
Earlier this year, Lithuania’s Gražina Leščinskiene hit local headlines after her son Gabrieliaus was taken into care by Norway’s Child Protection Service.
She claimed he had been taken from her after displaying what was deemed to be ‘sexualised behaviour’ by authorities, which included frequent visits to the toilet and sniffing his hands. She is still fighting to have her son returned to her.
Do social workers target the Poor? [2:25]
NORWAY – Woman in Norway who were beaten by their husbands should not count on help from authorities, but they even risk that if Norwegian child care authorities will hear about it, they will take their children permanently away and put the child in to the foster home.
This is what Alexandra Hassselstrom has experience, that Norwegian child care found out she was beaten before, by her husband and they took away her children to different foster homes because of that (even though she is remarried with another man, they refuse to give her her children back).
This also happened to children of Czech mother Eva Michalakova and to many other children too.
Irina Bergseth Frolova, a Russian woman living in Norway, had found out that her ex-husband, a Norwegian citizen, as well as his friends and relatives, had been raping their four-year-old son. When she reported this to police, the reaction of authorities was for all normal human beings with norman human feelings incredible! They took her son away from her and refused to give him back to her.
What is also strange is that Alexandra (and many other women from whom Norway has stolen is a foreigner (Swedish).
Mother’s are often allowed to see their children only few times a year for a few minutes (as Mrs. Michalokova), they are not allowed to show any feelings, they may not hug or kiss their own children or cry in front of children.
Norway is prohibiting mothers of stolen children to talk with their own children in their native language.
NORWAY – After a series of highly charged custody disputes, the oil-rich Scandinavian country now faces accusations of cultural insensitivity at best and child theft at worst, as increasing numbers of immigrant children are being seized by officials and handed over to Norwegian foster families. Of 6,737 children taken in 2012 — the latest available data — some 1,049 were immigrants or born to immigrant parents. That compares to 744 children of immigrants taken away, of a total of 5,846, in 2009.
The authorities insist they’re acting in the best interests of the children. But their perceived heavy-handedness has stirred diplomatic disputes with several eastern European countries and India. Statistics show that children born abroad are more than three times as likely to be removed from their homes as native Norwegians, with nearly 3 percent of foreign-born children in foster care.
CANADA – The numbers are staggering. Indigenous — First Nation, Inuit and Métis — children under 14 make up 52.2 per cent of all children in foster care. There are 4,300 First Nation children under the age of four in foster care across the country. In Manitoba, there are 10,000 children in care.
Four months ago the children were in the care of the father’s cousin Marisa Sutherland and her husband Christopher Justa.
The father’s band on his mother’s side, the Mowachaht/Muchalaht First Nation on Vancouver Island, signed off on the arrangement. Sutherland and Justa, who have two children of their own, moved from a three-bedroom apartment into a rental house to accommodate the children and bought a van. Then it all came crashing down after police showed up at their door five days before Christmas, one of them with a battering ram. The agency seized the children without informing the Mowachaht/Muchalaht First Nation.
BRITAIN – The women to whom it has happened say their lives are ruined for ever – and goodness knows what longterm effect it has on the child.
Most never recover from this trauma.
Imagine a baby growing in your body for nine months, imagine going through the emotion of bringing it into the world, only to have social workers seize the newborn, sometimes within minutes of its first cry and often on the flimsiest of excuses.
Yet this disturbing scenario is played out every day.
The number of babies under one month old being taken into care for adoption is now running at almost four a day (a 300 per cent increase over a decade).
In total, 75 children of all ages are being removed from their parents every week. More chillingly, parents have been told by social workers they must lose their children because, at some time in the future, they might abuse them.
One mother’s son was adopted on the grounds that there was a chance she might shout at him when he was older.
Are the financial bonuses offered to councils fuelling the astonishing rise in forced adoptions?
John Hemming, a Liberal Democrat MP campaigning to change the adoption system, said yesterday: “I have evidence that 1,000 children are wrongly being seized from their birth parents each year even though they have not been harmed in any way.
“The targets are dangerous and lead to social workers being over-eager.” Encouraged by the promise of extra cash, social workers began to earmark babies and cute toddlers who were most easy to place in adoptive homes, leaving the more difficult-to-place older children in care.
As a result, the number of over-sevens adopted has plummeted by half.
“We hear it every day because you know Manitoba has the highest rate of newborn apprehensions in all of Canada,” said Morgan, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs’ Child and Family Advocate for First Nations..
Manitoba also has the highest number of Indigenous kids in care. According to the province there are approximately 11,000 kids in care with 90 per cent of those being Indigenous.
In Manitoba apprehension rates are the highest in the country. It is estimated a newborn child is apprehended every day.
FORCED ADOPTION EXPOSED ~ EU Parliament March 2014 Sabine K McNeil (6:29)
Revealing the child trafficking in barnevernet/the cps(Norway) (3:11:10)
Spokeswoman Beverley Beech insists: “Babies are being removed from their mothers by social workers using any excuse.
“We strongly suspect this is because newborns and toddlers are more easily found homes than older children. They are a marketable commodity.
“I know of social workers making up stories about innocent mothers simply to ensure their babies are put up for adoption.
“Suitable babies are even being earmarked when they are still in the womb.
“One baby was forcibly removed in the maternity ward by social workers before the mother had even finished the birth process and produced the placenta.”
Her words may be emotive. But are they true? Six months ago, I wrote an article about a young couple – who must remain anonymous because of family court law – fighting for the return of their three-year-old daughter.
She was taken within weeks of birth and is about to be adopted.
Astonishingly, a judge has issued a Draconian order gagging them from revealing anything, to anyone at all, which could identify their daughter until her 18th birthday in 2022.
Immediately after the article was published, I heard from 35 families whose children were forcibly removed.
The letters and e-mails continue to arrive – coming from a wide range of families across the social classes (including from a castle in the heart of England).
An e-mail from one father said: “Please, please help, NOW. We are about to lose our son . . . in court tomorrow for final disposals hearing before he is taken for adoption … we have done nothing wrong.”
Another father calling himself “James” rang to say his wife’s baby was one of eight seized by social workers from hospital maternity units in one small part of North-East England during one fortnight last summer.
A Welsh man complained that his grandson of three weeks was earmarked for forcible adoption by social workers.
The mother, a 21-year-old with a mild learning disorder, was told she might, just might, get post-natal depression and neglect her son.
To her great distress, her baby was put in the care of Monmouthshire social services within minutes of birth.
The grandfather said: “Our entire extended family – which includes two nurses, a qualified nanny and a police officer – have offered to help care for the baby.
“I believe my grandson has been targeted for adoption since he was in the womb.”
A Worcestershire woman told how her daughter’s baby was snatched away by three police officers and two social workers who came to the door of her house.
The girl has now been adopted.
The mother’s failure? She was said to be too young to cope.
Yet – a little over a year later – she had another baby, a boy, whom she was allowed to keep, in the same home and with the same partner.
Why on earth did she have to lose her little girl?
The grandmother emotionally explained: “All the family came forward to offer to help look after my granddaughter, and all of them were told they were not good enough.
“The social worker told us to forget her. He said: ‘She is water under the bridge.’
“We think they wanted her for adoption from the beginning.”
No wonder she, and thousands of other parents, want a shake-up of the heartbreakingly cruel adoption system which has ripped apart so many families – and which continues to do so.
Mother had newborn baby taken from her by social services (0:35) For missing an appointment she arranged for herself for her phobia of spiders.
Traffic (2014) (UK) (BANNED) (1:50:17)
Emma Ibbitson Producer Of “Traffic”, The Film The Government Doesn’t Want You To See! (29:18)
Emma Ibbitson, The Producer Of “Traffic 2” The Film Every Parent In The Country Must See. (1:28:34)
Social Services Said “Stop Making Your Documentary Or You’ll Never See Your Daughter Again”. (29:59) (Emma Ibbison’s video of how state kidnapped her children is now removed).
It all started when Tori’s 3-year-old son told her something inappropriate happened to him when he was with their father. The couple is divorced.
Tori followed the law and reported it to DCS.
“I was interrogated for two to three hours with no videotape, no attorney present,” Harper said. “I was a little intimidated, but at that time I still didn’t think I had done anything wrong when I realised they were investigating me.”
Remember, there is no allegation against Tori Harper, yet DCS asked her to surrender her kids on the spot and relinquish custody during the investigation.
“There was no way I was going to give strangers custody of my children even for a day or two especially with that going on,” Harper said. “I wanted my children.”
The next day she said DCS secretly went to Williamson County Juvenile Judge Sharon Guffee and asked for an ex parte order to get custody of the kids. The judge signed the order even though Tori wasn’t present to defend herself.
DCS claimed Tori Harper was mentally unstable…
“I’ve never had a speeding ticket,” Harper said. “I have no mental health history. I’m a good mom. I love my kids.”
Her lawyer, family law specialist Connie Reguli, said this is standard practice, and it is nasty stuff.
“For people who don’t know what e x-parte means it is behind the back,” Reguli said. “They knew Tori. They certainly had an opportunity to get a psychiatric evaluation before the court. Instead they get an ex-parte order to get her children in custody of DCS. DCS can do whatever they want to them. They obviously didn’t want Tori or her lawyer there.”
The only consolation was that Tori’s parents would be the foster parents during the investigation. When they all went back to court, Judge Guffee ordered Harper and her parents be drug tested even though none of them had any drug history.
Her father couldn’t get to the drug test because he was keeping the kids and didn’t have car seats. Harper said DCS locked herself and her mom in a room after their drug tests and told them they would send a squad car out with the boys’ car seats so Harper’s dad could go take the drug test.
Once police finally arrived at the home, they brought a new court order signed by Judge Guffee giving DCS custody of the kids, who were going into foster care that night.
“The things that these people did to our family was so against our fourth amendment rights,” said Tori’s dad Tom Naïve. “I said boys you got to go with the policeman and so I watched them walk to that police car and get in the back of the police car. All I could do is go inside and blow up and blow up. I was helpless.”
The oldest boy Ethan still remembers that night.
“I was scared,” Ethan said. “When I got in the car, I started crying. They told me my grandpa didn’t want me. He had never told me that. It hurt my heart.”
This family without a single allegation of abuse or neglect or even a failed drug test lost their two boys to DCS.
“There is nobody that knows me that would say there is anything I love more than being a mom,” Harper said. “But one thing I know is I am a good mom, a good mom and I love my kids so much.”
So what was DCS and the court hinging this removal on? That Tori Harper was mentally unstable. She got an independent psychological evaluation and passed flying colours; doctors, dentists, records, report cards, high test scores formed a lazer-focused rebuttal to DCS and Williamson County Juvenile court.
DCS dismissed the case and Judge Guffee returned the children to Harper. The children were in state custody for two months.
Family law attorney Connie Reguli said this story may sound shocking, but it is common.
“Criminals have more rights and protections than parents,” Reguli said. “Once they have your children in the system they are in total control…and while this may have a happy ending. There are scars and trauma, real trauma.”
“So when i got my son back, keep in mind he always held my hair when I would sing him to bed every night,” Harper said. “Well when he was in foster care he was so upset that he would pull his own hair in bed, and he ended up with a big bald spot.”
Her son Andrew now believes in monsters and holds his mom’s hair, praying they will never come back.
DCS said the law prohibits it from commenting on specific juvenile case but pointed out that all of its actions were approved by a judge. Tennessee judges are also prohibited from discussing cases.
Social services stealing babies before birth (11:48)
UK – Social workers who made a 35 year old Italian mother to give up her baby after a forced caesarean is required to explain themselves to Britain’s top Family Judge. In a highly unusual intervention, Sir James Munby has demanded to know why the girl should not be reunited with her mother. As per Fabio Roia, the most senior Judge in Milan, it is an unprecedented ‘act of extreme violence’ that could not have happened in Italy…
This story is being recirculated but it is important as it shows the length state representatives can go to acquire babies for ideological and economical agendas. Many may not be aware but something very similar happened here in Australia in the early 1970s. The notorious Dr. Harry Bailey had his heavily pregnant and drugged patient transported from his Deep Sleep Therapy Hospital to Crown St Women’s Hospital. He performed a caesarean that produced twin girls. The mother 20 years later visited Dr. Geoff Rickarby trying to find out what happened to her babies. Dr. Rickarby so shocked by what the mother told him searched the hospital’s microfiche and found that twin girls had indeed been taken from the mother by Dr. Bailey. In Bailey’s biography it notes that Bailey adopted twin girls. Why has no-one ever been made accountable for these crimes? In places where there is no transparency and no accountability the most egregious crimes are committed – it seems with impunity.
A mother has been told she will be jailed if she continues to criticise social workers who forced her three-year-old son into adoption.
The woman was taken to Hull Family Court over posts she made on Facebook.
Judge John Dowse warned her she would face prison for contempt if she posted anything further about the case in the next five years.
She had her three children taken away by North East Lincolnshire social services after temporarily resuming a relationship with a violent partner who had been jailed for domestic abuse.
She later took out an order to stop his intimidation, but claims social workers had already earmarked her son for adoption, rejecting offers of help from relatives.
She said: ‘I understand the concern, but adoption is supposed to be the last option.’
The woman is also battling for access to her older children.
She added: ‘Because I haven’t played ball over the adoption they are trying to take every part of my life away.’
The authority says adoption decisions are made by the courts with ‘the welfare of the child the paramount consideration’.
A woman from Singapore, who was in financial difficulty with her husband, (the family’s problems came on the radar of the authorities in UK Birmingham, where they lived, after the husband lost his job in 2013) had two of their children taken away in August 2015 and placed in foster care while she was living in Britain.
The woman, who held a Singapore identity card and is said to be of South Indian origin like her husband, fled to Singapore and gave birth to their third child in Singapore in December 2015 and has lived there since.
The UK court heard that the mother returned [fled] to Singapore when she was 38 weeks pregnant. This was a month after the local authorities in Britain started proceedings during her pregnancy to remove her third child at birth, to also be placed [up for sale] into foster care.
The authorities there said the couple used their children – a boy, seven, and girl, five – to demand welfare benefits and even coached the daughter to claim that social workers had sexually abused her in 2015 – In August 2015, the children were removed from the parents and placed in foster care to prevent further absconding after they had earlier tried to flee to Glasgow but returned to Birmingham [note: from Birmingham to Glasgow and back to Birmingham is not termed “absconding” but simply travelling]
“The father’s extreme behaviour was exhibited as early as May 14, 2014 when he threatened to jump into the river off a bridge together with the children if a new house and financial assistance were not provided,” noted Judge Keehan.
[Note: Council and the Foster care system now financially benefits from this couple’s children.]
“Neither parent accepts that there are any deficits in their parenting or any reason why the children should live separately from them.” Justice Keehan concluded if the children remained in long-term foster care and that the father has contact. The claim is that he and his wife would do everything to “undermine the placement” and be wholly incapable of supporting the children. [Whom a stranger/s is now being paid by the same government to support?]
On the evening of November 4, 2006, 12-year-old Chaunell Roberson would be lying intubated in hospital, in a coma, having just had a stroke.
Despite thousands of pages of medical records, the doctors who were caring for Chaunell would accuse her mother of fabricating her daughter’s illness in order to draw attention to herself.
On September 3, 2008, because of a complaint filed by Banner Desert Medical Center, Arizona’s Child Protective Services would take Chaunell into custody.
Chaunell was put in a home—as court documents would later allege—with an incompetent and inappropriate foster mother who would refuse to let her see a doctor even though she complained of being in pain, would smoke and drink in front of her, and would forbid her from contacting her court-appointed lawyer. For a year and a half Chaunell, separated from her family, would send emails and letters begging to come home.
Chaunell’s complicated health problems would worsen while in state custody: She would visit the school nurse 32 times in a 5-month period, be put under a suicide watch and spend four weeks in a locked psychiatric ward, and be hospitalised with bacterial meningitis for five weeks.
Then, on September 19, 2009 Leanna Smith’s lawyer would file a lawsuit against Banner Desert Medical Center, as well as Barrow Neurological Institute, where Chaunell had also been treated, naming also Child Protective Services, the State of Arizona, and several of the doctors and professionals who had been involved in her daughter’s care.
Twenty months later, in what many close to the case believe was retaliation for the lawsuit and an attempt to intimidate Leanna into dropping it, CPS would come to Leanna’s apartment and take her younger daughter, Jameelah Smith, away.
Did Leanna and Darrell Smith lose custody of their youngest daughter because they were really unfit parents and Jameelah would be safer with another family? Or were they being punished for their disagreements with the doctors and the hospitals, and for refusing to stay quiet about medical mistakes made in their older daughter’s care?
Six years ago, seven year old Dominic Johannson was forcibly taken from his parents by Swedish officials – without a warrant or evidence of a crime. What they objected to was the fact that Domenic’s parents were home-schooling him. Not that home-schooling was illegal in Sweden … authorities just… didn’t like it.
ADF International took on the case in 2010 – and has been fighting for the Johannson family ever since. In 2009, Christer Johansson, a micro-engineer by trade, and his Indian wife Annie, approached their local school authority in anticipation of their family moving to India to fulfill their life-long dream of doing missionary work with orphanages. They explained to the school principal that they did not know for how long they would be in India but wanted to ensure that their son Domenic received a proper Swedish and Indian education while traveling. At the time in Sweden, home education was a legal option for children of Domenic’s age under these circumstances.
What happened next was inexplicable. As the family was on board the plane headed for India, police and social service workers came on board the aircraft and abducted Christer and Annie’s only child from them without just cause, without any accusation of abuse and without a warrant. Parental rights ignored Annie and Christer wasted no time in launching legal proceedings in an effort to get their son back. ADF International and the Home School Legal Defence Association (HSLDA) provided the family with legal support and pursued legal remedies in Sweden. But in December 2009, a Swedish court ruled that the government was within its rights to seize the child and keep him in foster care. ADF International and the HSLDA also filed a case with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on the right to homeschooling, but the Court rejected the application.
Parents v State Care and Family ViolenceVictims (00:00-19:20 applicable to this case)
[French google translation] I am Moriah Varner and my fiancé is Chris Silva. I was raised in foster care myself. OCS and a few local Police have torn my family apart for 3 generations.
They have manipulated and done illegals things to adopt my kids and are lying to the judge. IF YOU BELIEVE I & CHRIS AM STRONG ENOUGH TO RAISE OUR KIDS please I ask for support to show the judge. If you need more answers before you will sign find me on Facebook I will discuss my family’s story and the systems abuse effects. Give me my kids back and spend money and time on kids who need help, whose parents are unable to care for them.￼
by Amanda Boorman – an adoptive parent and the founder of The Open Nest.
As an individual that has needed support from health and social care for my adopted and fostered children I have first-hand experience of how traumatic it can be to see yourself reflected in a way that criticises you for something you haven’t done, or that takes your words or experiences completely out of context.
Me being determined to receive the support my adoptive and fostered children needed, did not make me popular with Social Service and it would not be exaggerating to say it made me unpopular. This is reflected in some file recordings and the minutes of some multi-agency meetings.
We eventually got the support the children deserved through official complaints.
My experience of asking for help and being misrepresented was in part what motivated me to contact my adopted and fostered children’s parents despite their very negative appearance in social work files and reports.
I wanted to meet the children’s families and see their truths from my viewpoint and perspective. It turns out the families weren’t as dangerous as I had been led to believe.
There were multiple injustices done against them. Injustice was also done through the omission of facts that would elicit any empathy towards them. Positives about their families and family history were not featured at all.
An example to illustrate poor recording is that we discovered our daughter’s mum wasn’t a prostitute, as had been suggested in the files.
This misrepresentation of opinion as fact was due to our daughter’s dark-coloured skin and her brother’s light-coloured skin. It was suggested that their father most probably wasn’t the ‘real’ father to our daughter.
As it happens, our daughter looks just like her dark-skinned mum and her brother looks like his light-skinned, red-haired father.
Had the children not seen the files until they were adults these facts would have been harder to view as just an opinion as their father died during their late childhoods.
Mom goes into hiding (4:59)
Published on Mar 10, 2015
A local baby at the centre of a wild child abuse case is now among Michigan’s most wanted kids. Little Naomi Burns has been taken into hiding by her mother, who fears authorities will take the child from her. An attorney for Brenda Burns is calling this legal terrorism. Brenda has been cleared of all abuse allegations, but when her attorney told Child Protective Services workers last week to stop contacting Brenda, CPS went to court, demanding an address for the child.
The ten missionaries, led by Silsby, flew to the Dominican Republic on January 22, chartered a bus, and arrived in Haiti on January 25. The NLCR’s [New Life Children’s Refuge “charity”] leader, Silsby, explained that she had a letter from Dominican officials authorising the transfer of “orphans” to the hotel in Cabarete. They were stopped by a policeman, who explained that their actions were illegal.Undeterred the group set out to collect “orphans” from the devastated town of Calebasse (or Callabas) and from the slum of Le Citron in Port-au-Prince. 33 children (20 from Calebasse and 13 from Le Citron) were put under “the mission’s” care. On the night of January 29, the missionaries were arrested while trying to cross the Dominican border without proper authorisation. They denied any wrongdoing and maintained that they were doing God’s will by helping “orphaned” victims of the earthquake. The children were sent to the SOS Children’s Village orphanage in Croix-des-Bouquets, a suburb of Port-au-Prince, and it became clear that most (if not all) of them were not “orphans”. NLCR missionaries maintained that they were told that the children were orphaned. In turn, people in Calebasse and SOS Children’s Villages accused the missionaries of lying about their intentions. Nine of the ten missionaries were later released, but NLCR founder Laura Silsby remained incarcerated in Haiti. By the time she went to trial on May 13 the charges had been reduced to “arranging irregular travel” and the prosecution sought a 6-month prison term. On May 17, she was found guilty and sentenced to the time served in jail prior to the trial.
Jen Absolutely amazing. I wish I had this article, just as a warning, to the DCS Investigator and County Sheriff Deputy who came on private property and took my children without evidence or a shred of paperwork. That policeman couldn’t even look me directly in the eye when he said “DCS doesn’t need a warrant or paperwork.” Meanwhile, he wouldn’t be able to search/seize anyone’s home or car without a warrant. Lying sacks… All of them.
The calls come after Norfolk County Council’s children’s services department – branded inadequate in an Oftsed inspection two years ago – suspended a team manager over allegations he removed a child without evidence of deliberate harm.
The Norfolk Foster Carers’ Association (NFCA) said it had been contacted by dozens of parents making similar claims over the last four years.
West Norfolk MP Henry Bellingham and North Norfolk MP Norman Lamb said both have been contacted by constituents claiming children have been removed from their care on the basis of apparently dubious evidence.
Federally Funded Gov. Kidnaper – Laurie Lee, CPS. caught on video
CPS Takes Child After Mom Gets 2nd Opinion
State CPS takes attorney’s kids in retaliation for defending mother! Defence Evidence disappears!
10 Things You MUST DO if CPS Comes to Your House [ 0.00 – 7:50(CPS) total 19:27] Children kidnapped for reasons of eczema and mother not wanting to use steroid cream.
Shilo Christiansen: This is my beautiful wife and daughter, Misty and Shyloh.
CPS has kidnapped our daughter and ripped us apart when all we want is Shyloh back home with her mommy where she belongs. She is being abused where she is and intentional ignorance on the part of CPS keeps her there for the sake of $$$. But thousands of cases exactly like ours cause trauma to children everyday. Our voices need to raise against family courts, against all abuse upon our children and our loved ones.
When California parents Leah Beabout and Christopher Vega asked for medical evidence before doctors remove their 2 year old daughter’s kidney, the hospital called Child Protective Services and seized custody of their child.
Meanwhile, little Grace Alleluia Beabout-Vega underwent major surgery on Thursday, January 25, 2018, that may not have been necessary, one which her parents only agreed to under great duress and the threat of never getting their daughter back.
Leah and Chris are thankful that the surgeon at UCLA Mattel Children’s Hospital did not remove their daughter’s kidney yesterday, even though that was the hospital’s plan. Doctors did a biopsy during the surgery, but the parents say that could have been done as a minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery rather than the major surgery which has left a scar across her entire belly.
According to Leah Beabout:
I brought my daughter Grace Alleluia to the ER on vacation. Two weeks later, she has NO MOTHER, NO diagnosis, NO symptoms other than having lost 2 lbs, a large incision in her belly and a PORT hole in her chest for chemo she might not even need, a catheter in urinary tract, a breathing tube!??
A child who has never even had a baby-sitter before has been separated from her parents at what may be the most frightening time in her life, the very time that she needs her mommy and daddy the most.
The hospital just didn’t want us interfering with what they wanted to do and we were asking too many questions.
Children’s Aid Worker Threatens Family (3:58)
CAS Ends Access Visit Before it Ever Began!!!! (9:41)
TOOK THEIR 3 CHILDREN (17:42)
Norway’s stolen Children? The story of Natasha & Erik (6:59)
Forced Adoption UK RT documentary (49:38)
Christmas ruined by Social Services (13:35)
Update on newborn taken from mother by CPS (2:37)
UK Social Services Takes Child From Womb (1:04)
CPS False Allegations, Altered Files Confirmed – OIG, News32 Investigations P1-3 2006-07 (15:09)
The truth about Child Protective Services (10:35) Child Protection Social Service Worker Wistleblowers testify at 8:50
1 of 2 – Child Protective Services Predators and Corruption – Senator Nancy Schaefer
2 of 2 – Child Protective Services Predators and Corruption – Senator Nancy Schaefer
CPS Makes Shocking Allegations at 2 Moms (6:02)
2.5 thousand children forcibly adopted through secret courts (3:50)
Published on May 21, 2015
Against their will: The controversial practice of forced adoption at the behest of social services is facing widespread criticism at home and abroad. RT’s Daniel Hawkins interviews one family affected by the policy.
She mentioned coverage in The Oregonian/Oregonlive about a case in Redmond in which two parents, both with lower than average IQs, lost custody of their children over concerns that their limited cognitive abilities made them unsafe to parent. In December, a Deschutes County judge dismissed the state’s jurisdiction over couple’s 10-month-old boy. This month, the same judge denied the state’s request to terminate their parental rights to their 4-year-old son.
Attorneys for the state argued in court that the parents, Amy Fabbrini and Eric Ziegler, were unable to parent. Examples given in testimony included that they had to be told to put sunscreen on the baby’s arms, their home smelled of dog, and their choice of snacks was criticised. After they provided chicken nuggets during a supervised visit with their toddler, the state argued the fried food was unhealthy. “Tremendous gratitude to that judge and tremendous apologies to that family for the disruption, [torture for years] that they went through on simply the basis that they had an intellectual disability,” Gelser said. “I cannot imagine losing my children on the basis of my intellectual disability that I chose to give my children chicken nuggets.”
Forced Adoption Video BBC One Inside Out 2nd feb 2015 (18:31)
Camera records CPS encounter
Published on Mar 12, 2015
A mother who is in hiding after being cleared of abuse charges had an encounter with CPS recorded by police.
Recording of Police & Social Services Kidnapping Santiago 06.02.16 (1:22:33)
Published on Apr 24, 2016
On the 6th February the Police and Social Services – Paula Thomas & Colin McPherson- arrived at our friends house where Iolanda, myself and our baby Santiago were. We went there for support and to arrange a Private Midwife to check our baby over. The first thing the Social worker Paula Thomas said, was we needed to sign a contract of expectations – we did not sign. The social worker used the Police force to coerce us into taking our baby to the hospital – no paper work was given. They went to the hospital and the hospital refused to release their baby for two weeks and then in a secret court hearing without their parents present, forcefully removed their parental rights. All based on gossip, scare mongering and even put an amber alert out for “abduction” of the baby.
CHILD WELFARE / AKERSHUS
A family resident in Ås recently found that the child welfare office with a large number of police officers arrived at their home to retrieve the family’s 12-year-old son. The mother of the family filmed the show and posted it on Facebook:
“Our son was picked up by police and social service in the afternoon yesterday. I was looking to retrieve the post when three child welfare workers as well as 2 police officers came from their hideaway place behind a car. They just rolled in without any legal reason. This is a case that started when we returned to Norway after living in Canada in recent years. We came home to Norway as economic refugees. There is a difficult financial situation in Canada right now, so we had no choice. Entering Norway we met at NAV in Ås municipality where I was born and raised. In the meeting room there were two advisors from NAV and one from the child welfare office in Ås municipality. We were placed in a cabin in Vestby municipality, 10 kilometres south of Ås. The child welfare and NAV in Ås showed no concern that we had to go all the way to Ås, and no worries that we lived in a cabin without any kind of schooling around for our son, as well as no socialisation with other children. After a month in a cabin we got our own apartment in Ås and our son started at Åsgård school. It took a long time before the problems started again, but this time it was the school that began to harass us that our son was uneasy all the time. We tried to tell them that he needed follow-up in Norwegian grammar and other subjects since he had been schooled in Canada in recent years. Then the child welfare was announced by the school and everything started again. Neglecting, a school that did not try to understand what our child needed. Just before Christmas last year we were called in to a school meeting where they demanded that we signed a letter to the PP service in Ås. They said that some we did not sign under would they notify the child welfare again. I signed, but they had notified the child welfare nevertheless. The child welfare has been with us several times and we have been in countless meetings with those in Ås. When the school started again in January, we took our son out of school, and advised school and responsible in the municipality that we wanted to home school our son. That was what made them take the decision to take our son. They said that we had not received any formal approval from the municipality and that our son will not receive socialising with other children.”
Public Testimonies Exposing DCFS/CPS Fraud & Misconduct (38:57)
These are clips never before seen on Youtube, gathered from various sources but mainly Los Angeles County Council Meetings: http://bos.lacounty.gov/Board-Meeting…
Update on newborn taken from mother by CPS
CPS takes five kids from couple; supporters say it’s a mistake (1:52) Published on Apr 1, 2015
CPS Steals Children for Profit – Your Tax Dollars in Action! Published on Aug 12, 2010
Short video detailing abuse of power by Child Protective Services – CPS. Highlights financial incentives to steal kids and place them on drugs. Contains multiple news clips and interviews from families that CPS stole the kids from, & includes the late (possibly murdered) Nancy Schaefer. (10:57)
CPS False Allegations, Altered Files Confirmed – OIG, News32 Investigations P1-3 2006-07 (15:09)
Newborn baby taken from mother because of a poppy seed bagel
Cops Take Baby From Parents for Getting Second Medical Opinion?! (7:56)
They lost custody of their kids for making them do too much homework, couple says (7:24)
Children and Youth Services lies to a judge to take a Homeschooler’s Children (15:05)
Yesterday CPS went and took my great nephew (7 months old) from his grandma who has temporary custody, the worker told her that she had gotten word that his mom and dad were living there, which they are not. They had no paperwork and when she asked to see some paperwork the cop, that CPS brought with them, told her it wasn’t the time and made her hand him over. He is 7 months old and they didn’t ask any questions about his feeding schedule, foods he eats, allergies, etc. What steps can she take now? Also they have two other family members that are listed as emergency care givers if needed and they have both been approved by CPS but when they call to find out what is going on and why he isn’t being placed with one of them they are being told they can’t give them any information.
Yesterday at 4:38 PM
How a mom lost 5 sons to corrupt CPS——— One day my sons and I just got back from the grocery store. I was bringing in groceries back and forth into the house and my 2 yr old son. The blonde curly haired one in the middle. He slipped out the door and was found in the neighbours yard right next door. They called the police, who brought Cps because they didn’t know who he belonged to. I had a panic attack and the social worker then claimed I was under the influence of drugs and they wanted to leave my sons alone in my home with just another social worker while they took me to do urine drug test. I told them that wasn’t going to happen. It was 6 in the evening. I calmly told them I was about to make my sons dinner and if they wanted to drug test me they can bring one to me at my home or I’ll gladly go down and take one first thing in the morning. But they refused to do it my way so instead they took all 5 of my sons that evening and I was charged with child neglect. My son now thinks it was all his fault, at visitation a few weeks after they where taken, he tells me. Momma… me.. go home…with u. Me…no…go outside. It broke my heart and I cried and cried. By no means was it actually child neglect it was just an unfortunate event that could have happened to any good mother.
CPS Office Threatens Mother due to Anti CPS Facebook Account (5:22)
Mother’s children illegally taken by child “protection” services are now being threatened by Authorities to keep quiet on social media or you don’t get your children.
Australia branded ‘child-stealing capital of the Western world’
Domestic Violence NSW policy manager Sophie Trower told of a woman whose children were kept from her after her jaw was broken by a violent partner, because case workers deemed her “too pretty” and therefore likely to get into another abusive relationship. This was despite the fact the agencies dealing with the woman and her two children in their out-of-home care placements recommended reunification “after incredible strength, resilience and hard work to improve safety and wellbeing by the mother had been clearly documented”.
Mary Moore, convener of the volunteer Alliance for Family Preservation and Restoration, told the NSW parliamentary committee yesterday that children were being taken into care based on the opinion of case workers where no harm had occurred “but because they have concerns the child might suffer harm in the future, and they’re then in care until age 18”.
Ms Moore, whose submission described Australia as “the child-stealing capital of the Western world”, said a lack of regulation in child protection “breeds an environment of incompetence, misconduct and corruption experienced daily by children and families”.
She described cases where pregnant women entered hospital to give birth in full expectation of being able to take their babies home afterwards, only to have the infants seized immediately and unexpectedly without even being allowed to suckle them.
Friends of the Prince family were horrified when DHR seized the baby of Dee and Rodney Prince’s 14 year old granddaughter in June. While the man accused of raping her sits in jail accused of raping 3 other underage girls, the young mother and her twin brother have also lost their freedom and remain in DHR custody. The 14 year old twin brother of the young mother experienced that first hand this past week. He was taken out of his grandparents’ home at the same time his twin sister and her new-born baby were taken into custody. Social workers seized the twins’ cell phones 3 days after the teens were taken from their home. The young man has been in a foster home separate from his twin sister, with 2 counties between the county he was placed in and the county where his life, his friends, and his family were. The foster family gave him a cell phone to use, but he was only to use it for playing games.
Last week, the foster father reportedly found links to porn sites on the phone of the 14 year old twin brother. The act which many view as fairly normal curiosity on the part of a normal adolescent boy is apparently being seen by the child protectors as a very big deal, and he was quickly whisked away by DHR for a “psycho-sexual evaluation.” According to the Save Braelon’s Family Facebook page, the youth is now “being accused of being a sexual predator because he accessed pornography on a cell phone!”
The young twin has now been allegedly taken to a group home in yet another county late Friday night. He was able to contact home as he arrived, and he said that the place was a “prison for kids.” That was the last time that anyone has heard from him.
Meanwhile, his twin sister and baby Braelon remain in the group home they were taken to after they were seized from their family. Health Impact News has learned that the postpartum care that the young mother received at the hands of the state was very poor. Since she has been taken from her home, her freedom has been severely limited.
She has been doing chores at the group home since the very day she arrived, which was a mere 4 days after giving birth to her baby.
Normal new moms have friends and loved ones drop by to bring meals and give a hand, but this young mom has been isolated from every support she has ever known.
Her phone calls have allegedly been limited, and the calls she has been able to have are monitored. She has been given no privacy.
DHR worked hard to cause the newly recovered baby to be circumcised against his mother’s wishes. After a petition and an outcry that was heard all around the world, the circumcision was stopped.
Mother accuses CPS of fabricating evidence in lawsuit (2:41)
Baby Taken From Parents Parents Says They Were Seeking 2nd Opinion – Megyn Kelly (9:15)
Baby Taken Away By Police! – CPS In After Parents Seek 2nd Opinion – Kelly’s Court (7:11)
CPS Takes Custody of 4 Month Old at Hospital, Parents call it Medical Kidnapping (2:29)
EX- CPS worker tells all (2:01:45)
2.5 thousand children forcibly adopted through secret courts (3:50)
Georgia Senator Nancy Schaefer Exposes Child Protective Services Criminality (12:53)
Debbie Gravel i could not get [custody of] my granddaughter but can work with kids in DCF custody and monitor their family visits
Movie: A young mother hands her children into what she thinks is a childcare centre while she finds a new home, but returns to find that they have been adopted out without her knowledge. Based on the true story of Georgia Tann
Tennessee Children’s Home Scandal Oprah Show (1991)
Tennessee Children’s Home Scandal News Report 1-12-92 (13:51)
Georgia Tann: Memphis Baby Adoption Scandal.
CPS wrongful removal of Baby – 1st Report
Social Workers forced adoption (33:00)
Not long ago several members of Edinburgh council were jailed for their part in the building repairs scandal , hundreds of thousands swindled from honest people , old ladies bullied into selling their home to met the so called costs , stripping elderly of life saving as they have my father . fraud , theft, corruption its normal practice for this shower of scum . after I spoke out about the fraud and theft by Edinburgh council my son was removed from my care without any warning or wrong doing on my behalf and I have been refused contact since August, please help me fight for justice
Examples of the incredibly harm inflicted by abnormally and coldly “killing off” a child’s family:
Alison Corcoran added 4 new photos.
January 28 at 3:01pm
Please everybody read this beautiful mothers living nightmare that she and her beautiful son have had to go trough. ￼😢
Mother: “So I just want to say something to show the reality of forced adoption – against an innocent child and parent. These 2 pictures are of my son . 1 taken just a couple of weeks before he was stolen and one relatively recently. I think it’s clear a picture speaks a 1000 words and these certainly do. 2nd – I have gone from a blissfully happy mum to being a suicidal train wreck. I know a lot of you will say I shouldn’t do it and I am sorry but the reason I am saying this is for any body on this page who may still be a supporter of social services I want you to see what you have done to me and my son so I will also put 2 recent ish pictures of me. Even now I am currently on a section in a mental health ward as I still can’t cope with the loss. I have yet again tried to kill myself and I still feel like that every day. As a warning though to anyone else thinking about overdosing – I now have a life long disability (September this happened) I O’D after court and fell off the bed and now have permanent ulnar nerve damage in my left arm – I can’t even wash my hair – and I have steroid injections in my hip that I lay unconscious for days on. I still cry every day and I am haunted by the happy memories of my life with my son. I can’t do anything without expecting him to be standing next to me, smiling and laughing. Every morning I wake up and cry knowing he is gone and will not come back. And to rub salt in the MH services mostly think that what I have gone though is not a reason to have support. Not traumatic enough. Finally to the very small amount of people who have given me grief in the past thinking I don’t understand the loss of a child to ss- trust me I do. And every day when my heart breaks and I think it can’t break anymore it breaks again and again and again. The same as my sons every time we say goodbye (after court allowed visits). I have said this before but I pray that something happens to put a stop to forced adoption – it makes me burst into tears every time I hear another mother /father has /is going through the same thing. For me this is the worst pain in my life. Thank you for reading and I am sorry it’s a distressing post but I want people to see the reality.
BY GERI PFEIFFER
Fall….my thoughts turn to “Our Jakie” at one of those awful visits with caseworker, Holly Masters Litton sitting inches away from us(so close I could smell her), in a cubicle food stamp office that was 8 feet by 8 feet (maybe). She would sit there and stare at me trying to intimidate as we played games and tried to have fun. It didn’t take her long to figure out I can’t be intimidated.
This type of psychological warfare and manipulation is common from the caseworker to the families of origin.
Intimidating, belittling, manipulation of facts, lies, estrangement and deceit in an attempt to gain psychological control of the #TAKEN child, IS the status quo of the caseworker.
While this is happening, a permanency planning supervisor (Leilyn Hall) is the person structuring the timetable for forced alienation and assimilation into the “Foster provider” environment. There is EVERY possibility that the Foster provider is actually an adopter shopping for their family.
The CASA is a person appointed by the court to assist in the facilitation of this forced removal. Under the guise of the “respectability of the court” our CASA, Nicole Hall, did not have to do much more than copy the exact words of the caseworker to further facilitate the forced alienation of our Jake from 63 family members of origin. I want to include here that my son was never found to be a “perpetrator”. I was the one accused of abuse, not him.
The judge, Luke Duel, is the person who presides over this fiasco of “Justice”, I would only find out much later that decisions made by family court judges are based in federal funding incentives for Foster warehousing and completed adoptions. As long as a child is “in services”, the county the case originates out of receives title IV-E and federal adoption incentives.
In my first meeting with Jake’s 11th Foster placement, no sooner did she say “hello” to me and I said “hello” the very next sentence out of her mouth was “We would keep him”, as if she were asking my blessing. My next sentence to her was, “Jake has a family”. The reality though was that she and her husband had waited too long to have their family and at 40 adoption was her only option. Careers were firmly in place, well established lives, now they could afford a child. Her experience as a counsellor for children and an expert witness in court, allowed her testimony and desire to be Jake’s mother preclude EVERY truth in the case. She wanted to build her family, Jake was her first “foster placement.
I recently found out there is a good possibility that Jake’s first name has been changed, erasing the identity of my beloved grandson entirely. Jake is a baptised Catholic, a fact DHS, the judge, AND the adopters ignore. My grandson was born and given his name by his mother and father, sanctioned in the church of his birth,#JakeDenzilCumpian and now has been effectively erased by medication and the ill will of all parties mentioned…for profit.
I will add that when I contacted Deputy Director of DHS, Amy Whitton, and carefully described events as they unfolded, she told me, “This may be true, but everything we do is WITHIN the law”.
These players all have a role in the termination of your parental rights along with the District Attorney (the lawyer for CPS) and the court appointed attorney (the courts way of silencing you).
I don’t often allow my mind to ponder the people involved in the confiscation of Jake. When I think about the 3 years of hell I have endured since Jake’s confiscation on Halloween Day, I have carefully compartmentalised my grief and psychotic rage into boxes, placed on a shelf in a dark closet of my mind, behind a carefully locked door. I don’t dwell on the little boy who took my hand on the porch that day as I reached out to him so he would not trip on his costume (I, of course, had to get a picture and then reached up to assist him down). The little boy who took my hand and said, “Thank you memaw for my costume”. But Halloween comes around and I relive every single second of that day….on a morning like this….when the leaves are falling and there is a chill in the air… every detail! The horror of being accused of abuse and jailed, the lies and deceit to come, the stripping of my humanity by each person involved in the process. Two years of hell to be robbed of justice at the very end when that chicken shit district attorney stood down on the child abuse charges because he knew he could not win AFTER they had terminated my rights and Jake had been sold to his “new family”.
Jessie Simpson carries with her a baby photo of her five-year-old son. Besides closing her eyes to evoke the memories of him she holds dear, looking at the photo is likely to be the only way she will see his face again. She does not know where he is, what he is doing or what his legal name is now after he was removed from her care by the local authority four years ago, when he was 16 months old, and adopted.
“They took my life,” the heartbroken mother says. “Since he’s been gone, I’ve been gone with him. I haven’t got the words to explain it. I’m grieving for a child who is still alive.”
Simpson recalls how the situation escalated “from zero to 100” instantly, where she went from never having had any contact with children’s services to her son being forcibly taken by police after a brick was thrown through her window by a family member. He remained in foster care while a complex legal process got under way. Simpson, meanwhile, moved more than 100 miles away from home and severed all ties with her family to prove that she would do anything to get her baby back and keep him safe. She would make the almost 10-hour round trip by train to see her son in a child contact centre four times a week, but this was eventually stopped because, she says, the social workers believed her baby was “at risk of abduction from all members of the Gypsy community. They said the biggest risk of all was that I would return to my family because I’m a Gypsy from a close-knit community. They asked me if I was having contact with any Gypsies in the new area I lived in, if I’d attended any local weddings or parties. Everything I’d done [moving away], I’d done for my son but it didn’t mean anything.”
Simpson goes as far as to say that she lost her child not because of alleged neglect but as a result of prejudice because she is an English Romany Gypsy. And her belief appears to be borne out in a new study shared exclusively with the Guardian, which reveals that since 2009, government figures show the number of Gypsy or Roma children in care in England has surged by 933% and those of Travellers of Irish heritage by 400%. Over the same period, the overall number of children in care increased by an average 19%.
Anne Miller, an Irish Traveller, says she endured “institutional racism” when she applied for a special guardianship order for her grandson, who is now eight years old, after his mother could no longer care for him. The local authority initially refused the order, citing reasons including concerns over the child’s development. A psychologist’s report suggested her grandson was not meeting his cognitive and emotional milestones because he was living in an Irish Traveller culture. “The document said my grandson’s abilities were culturally determined,” says Miller.
She was told to move away from her family and community. She did what was asked of her and now lives isolated, without her support network, and with the backing of an advocate and a barrister, who challenged the negative reports, she was allowed to look after her grandson. “But nothing was done about the racist things that were said,” says Miller.
For Mark, now 42 and Nicky, 35, their ordeal began when their children, who for legal reasons can be referred to only as Child A, Child B and Baby C, developed feverish colds in October 2003.
While the eldest, three-year-old Child A, shook it off, as did the three-month-old Baby C , their middle child B, who was two, remained poorly.
After several visits to their GP, the couple took him to a hospital minor injuries unit from which he was referred to another hospital. A hip bone inflammation was diagnosed and Child B was admitted.
Nicky recalls: ‘The next day the paediatrician told us they had discovered an unusual fracture on his ankle, that a body scan had revealed several more, and they were investigating. I was relieved. Frankly, I wanted every possible thing to be done for my son.
‘We were taken into a side room by a doctor and several nurses. One said nastily, ‘There is a name for the condition you have, Nicky.’ I couldn’t understand what she meant and when I asked she replied, ‘You have Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy [a condition in which a parent harms their child, seeking the thrill of medical attention].’
The couple had been wrongly accused by a cabal of social workers of abusing the three children, and the secretive and sometimes sinister Family Courts agreed, ordering that the children should be taken into care and then adopted.
A subsequent court case exonerated the Websters, but by then, the damage had been done. Having been snatched from their natural families, it was deemed that it wouldn’t be in the children’s interest to be removed (or rather snatched) from their new adoptive families.
Today, in their first full account of the heart-breaking saga that came close to destroying their family completely, the Websters are forced to confront the truth: that they might never see their missing children again. Their oldest daughter is 15, their two sons now 13 and 11.
‘I will for ever hear the final words my five-year-old daughter cried as she was taken away from me,’ says Nicky. ‘She wept uncontrollably, calling out, ‘Why can’t I come home with you, Mummy. Is it because I was bad?’
‘Those words are branded on my heart. What mother could hear her child screaming for her yet have no option but to turn her back and walk away?’
Child B remained in hospital. ‘He was holding up his arms to me, begging for a hug and I was told I couldn’t touch him,’ Nicky recalls. ‘It was utter anguish. And all the time the nurses were glaring at us, clearly convinced we were child-batterers. It was surreal. We couldn’t keep pace with what was happening.’
For the next six months all three children remained in emergency foster care. Then, suddenly, social workers announced that adoptive parents had been found. The Websters battled to at least have their children adopted within the family circle, but officials insisted that they were to live outside the extended family.
Nicky, unable to stop crying, was taken outside by social workers and told her tears were ’emotional abuse’. Their children’s cries echoing as they drove away.
At least 200 children were separated from their families in the 1980s, and they came from this region in the southeast of the country. It wasn’t because of a famine, a hurricane or an earthquake, but because of an incredibly effective “adoption machine” that was put in place by a network of Quebec missionaries and adoptive parents.
Jean Lacaille, the Quebec missionary at the heart of this wave of adoptions, now admits that he was actively looking for “people that had a large family and with a sick child” to fill the desires of Quebecers who wanted to become parents.
Such targeting of families that were poor and might be willing to give up their child for adoption was legal in the 1980s in the Dominican Republic. Today, however, such methods would be considered to be human trafficking under national laws that are much more strict.
Father Lacaille, like other missionaries and actors involved at the time, said that he was acting in good faith. But faced with a growing demand, he lost control.
“It snowballed. And even if we were in the Dominican Republic, the snowball grew pretty fast,” he admits.
Father Lacaille recognises that his goal was not so much to save Dominican babies but to “offer a service” to Quebecer parents in search of children who contacted him over several years, starting in 1978.
The couples came from all corners of Quebec, from Sherbrooke to Abitibi and Sept-Iles. When Luce Pelletier brought her son Miguel to Quebec in the fall of 1982, there were at least six other children with them aboard the airplane. An adoptive father, who spoke on the condition that he not be identified, confided that he felt ill at ease to see so many children getting off the airplane at the same time.
“It became an adoption machine,” admits Yves Bécotte, former chairman of the board of Monde-Enfant. He explained that Luce Pelletier “walked through the villages” to in search of families “in such a way that the number of children that were adopted from the region of Hato Mayor doubled or tripled. It was a lot for a little organisation that didn’t even have an orphanage.”
Miguel and Rosa Ramirez had five children. The youngest was very weak. His stomach was infested with parasites that put his life at risk, his Dominican doctor concluded. At two years old, the child ate next to nothing, as if his body was incapable of absorbing food. The medical treatments were expensive, and Miguel and Rosa didn’t have the money to pay for them.
The couple was visited by a missionary and by Luce Pelletier, an adoptive mother who was organising adoptions and who would soon become the director of the Quebec adoption agency Monde-Enfant.
“She promised us that in Canada our son would receive the treatments he needed,” Miguel recalled. “She told us that he would surely come back to visit within a couple of years.”
Miguel and Rosa left the meeting convinced. They gave up their youngest son, persuaded that he would have otherwise soon be dead.
In Quebec, the paediatricians could find no evidence of intestinal parasites, according to the boy’s adoptive father.
“The platelets they used at the Dominican hospital may have been contaminated or else there was a mix-up in the medical reports,” he said.
11 October 2018
I know everyone keeps messaging to ask how I am getting on. It was a 4 day thing. It ended today and apparently yesterday the judge had already made up her mind. The stress is over but The PAIN will NEVER be! She’s being adopted! I’ve lost my case lost my daughter! My life and my soul! I was made to take down everything off facebook during court proceedings?! Why should I not be able to post pictures of MY daughter or say how DISGUSTINGLY MISTREATED I’m being! Asking for some help support and guidance as I did not get it anywhere else! Me and MY DAUGHTER are being punished and serving a life sentence for me having mental health?! Please where is the justice system! I haven’t just ticked boxes I’ve gone above and beyond and more! It was inevitable no matter what I done they knew what they were doing!! Am I perfect by all means not at all?! Have I messed up and made mistakes along the way?! Of course?! Am I a perfect human being or supermom?! No far from! But I have changed dramatically since giving birth to the one thing I always wanted and thought I never could have! I have never caused her no harm, I never would! I’ve drained myself and made myself ill doing all I can to prove I will be there best mum to MY DAUGHTER I can possibly be. But of course it was never enough! I’m Empty and I’m done! Forget you little girl I will not. I can not even begin to comprehend and explain a pain and trauma like it. I’ve been through a lot in my life but this is something I physically mentally and emotionally can not deal with by far the worst thing imaginable! How I’m suppose to close my eyes at night knowing that’s it and all over I’ll never know! I hear your happy where you are and I’m glad! Just sorry It wasn’t with me! I’m sorry I let you down! I’m sorry I didn’t do more. I’m sorry they let you down and didn’t do more. I’m sorry I couldn’t say goodbye one last time, I’m sorry you’ve been put through all this crap. I’m sorry you will feel mummy didn’t want you, but I did! I swear I tried! I’m sorry I couldn’t be your mother! But I will forever and always be your mum and you will forever and always be my little girl, and the best friend I never had! I will cherish you always, and miss you and think of you and hear you and smell you every single day I breathe! I will never be the same and the biggest part of me has gone and will remain until we meet again. I love you more than I’ve loved anything or anyone my whole life. I’ll be seeing you.. 💔💔♥️💔♥️💔♥️
When I’m ready I will share my story and hopefully stop anymore forced adoptions!!
An example of authorities and experts opinions on the psychological trauma of ripping children out of their known environment into an unfamiliar environment. The effect on the children described as, “full of trauma, difficulties and could have severe consequences,” are words used by experts! The following case is used in a reversed scenario. Instead of ripping children from their parents into foster care, this case was a process where a child was being taken away from a kidnapper and returned to the biological mother.
In December 1997, a woman is alleged to have stolen a baby from a bedroom in a family home in the poor Philadelphia suburb of Frankford, and started a fire to cover her tracks.
The baby’s mother, Luzaida Cuevas, was told that night that her baby died in the fire. But, 6 years later, as she was watching the face of a girl (6 years old) playing at a birthday party something clicked. What she saw before her was her own face, her own dimples – the girl could be none other than her daughter, the baby she was told had died six years ago. DNA proved her right, it was her child.
American social services recommended that the reunification of the family be part of a slow process, but the state governor decided the child should be given back to her real family “as soon as possible”. Experts say this may well be a mistake.
Late last Monday night, Delimar arrived at her new family home. “I’m at my real home,” the child told reporters. Asked how she felt, she replied with a giggle: “Happy.”
But will it be that easy? Child welfare experts and psychologists predict not. Her world has been turned upside down. Suddenly she has no access to the woman whom she has always thought of as her mother, the siblings she thought were her siblings, or the grandparents she is said to have cherished. Her brutal separation from that previous life may lead to insecurities and confusion. Not only that, but the girl who knows herself as Aaliyah Hernandez has been brought up speaking English; her real mother is a Spanish-speaker with only a slight grasp of English.
Jillian Lindon, a clinical psychologist specialising in working with children, says a girl of six would be unlikely to understand what has happened to her.
“She has been separated in a really precipitate way from her parents and her family. [The kidnapper and that family] I would expect she will suffer considerable grief. What this little girl is going to have to do is take on board not only a new mother but also what has happened,” she says.
“It will be quite traumatic and could have severe consequences for her and her ability to form attachments. How can she trust anybody after this? How can she reattach to this mum? How does she know somebody is not going to come along and remove her?”
Professor David Messer of London Southbank University’s department of child psychology says: “One very important thing is that, generally, if the child can keep in contact with the previous person who has been looking after them, then it’s not so sudden a change, full of trauma and difficulties. To be separated from that person is going to be quite difficult.”
Abusing children as a weapon to punish parents. Immigrants’ “up for grab” children:
The Department of Homeland Security formalise the abhorrent practice of detaining the children of asylum-seekers separately from their parents. Immigrant families apprehended at the southwest border already endure a deeply flawed system in which they can be detained indefinitely. In this immigration system, detainees too often lack adequate access to counsel. But to unnecessarily tear apart families who cross the border to start a better life is immoral.
Sadly, such separations are already happening. The Florence Project in Arizona documented 155 such cases by October and other immigrant advocacy organisations report that children are being taken away from their parents. If the secretary orders this practice to be made standard procedure, thousands of families could face unnecessary separation.