There has been a lot of CPS news here lately. Some bad, some maaaaaybe good.
The bad: CPS is at it again. A 5-year-old girl named Stevie Rolick was recently taken from her home in Ventura when a relative who lived there was allegedly caught with drugs. Even though the parents weren't suspected, the girl was taken by CPS and put in a foster home where she was picked on by older kids. The caseworker incorrectly said in her report that the parents had been arrested. The father was required to take parenting and drug classes and to attend AA meetings. This has gotten a little attention because the father secretly recorder an interview with CPS. He also filmed the poor conditions in the foster home. CPS wanted to get the tapes. Ventura County Superior Court issued a gag order which required the Rolicks to remove the videos from the internet.
The maaaaaybe good: There is a bill in the state Assembly that would require CPS to record its interviews. It was put forth by our Assemblyman, Tim Donnelly. It's called Sammy's Law, after the case of Sammy Nikolayev, who was taken last year after his parents sought a second opinion. The seizure got a lot of attention because the mother had filmed it. I hope the bill passes. It would massively help to determine whether someone is guilty or innocent. There would be fewer mistakes. Police stations across the country have started to require recording of interrogations. Why not CPS? The Welfare Directors Association opposes the bill because, according to them, it would hinder their efforts to move quickly on cases. I don't see how that would happen. It might even save time, since someone would just be able to copy the interview down in the report, instead of trying to piece it together later.
My nephew's parents objected to the things CPS attributed to them in the report of their first interview. The second time they were to be interviewed, they borrowed our tape recorder. CPS cancelled the interview.
Here's another thing: an audit of CPS was just completed. It found many inconsistencies in the reports, as well as slowness in making risk assessments. More supervision has been recommended.
This is greatly needed. What happens is that CPS investigates a call, they decide if the child should be taken, they present their report at the Juvenile Dependency Court, and then the parents are told what they need to do to get their child back. The parents don't need to be charged with a crime to lose a child. My nephew's parents weren't. Their only charge came three months after their son had been taken. They were never charged after the second time, and that was the time he disappeared. Due process is being ignored. I hope that the system will be reformed.
The bad: CPS is at it again. A 5-year-old girl named Stevie Rolick was recently taken from her home in Ventura when a relative who lived there was allegedly caught with drugs. Even though the parents weren't suspected, the girl was taken by CPS and put in a foster home where she was picked on by older kids. The caseworker incorrectly said in her report that the parents had been arrested. The father was required to take parenting and drug classes and to attend AA meetings. This has gotten a little attention because the father secretly recorder an interview with CPS. He also filmed the poor conditions in the foster home. CPS wanted to get the tapes. Ventura County Superior Court issued a gag order which required the Rolicks to remove the videos from the internet.
The maaaaaybe good: There is a bill in the state Assembly that would require CPS to record its interviews. It was put forth by our Assemblyman, Tim Donnelly. It's called Sammy's Law, after the case of Sammy Nikolayev, who was taken last year after his parents sought a second opinion. The seizure got a lot of attention because the mother had filmed it. I hope the bill passes. It would massively help to determine whether someone is guilty or innocent. There would be fewer mistakes. Police stations across the country have started to require recording of interrogations. Why not CPS? The Welfare Directors Association opposes the bill because, according to them, it would hinder their efforts to move quickly on cases. I don't see how that would happen. It might even save time, since someone would just be able to copy the interview down in the report, instead of trying to piece it together later.
My nephew's parents objected to the things CPS attributed to them in the report of their first interview. The second time they were to be interviewed, they borrowed our tape recorder. CPS cancelled the interview.
Here's another thing: an audit of CPS was just completed. It found many inconsistencies in the reports, as well as slowness in making risk assessments. More supervision has been recommended.
This is greatly needed. What happens is that CPS investigates a call, they decide if the child should be taken, they present their report at the Juvenile Dependency Court, and then the parents are told what they need to do to get their child back. The parents don't need to be charged with a crime to lose a child. My nephew's parents weren't. Their only charge came three months after their son had been taken. They were never charged after the second time, and that was the time he disappeared. Due process is being ignored. I hope that the system will be reformed.
No comments:
Post a Comment