CA CA - Hannah, 16, Devonte, 15, & Sierra Hart, 12, Mendocino County, 26 March 2018 #3

[enelram]

As much as we want to try and figure out what went on within this family, one huge factor that we may never get
enough information to truly understand is what is the childhood family and upbringing of both Jen and Sarah.

We're in such shock trying to explain and understand what happened here, but, IMO, a lot of missing info is concerning
Jen and Sara's family of origin.

Were either of them adopted or products of foster care? Seems to me, neither were able to adequately bond or
really love others, especially these children. There's a big difference in professing love and hugs and actually behaving
using loving behavior. I saw very little loving behavior from these parents. Lots of words, little in actions.

What was the method/style of discipline in their birth family? Was Jen abused as a child? Probably, IMO.
We know that neither chose to continue having a relationship w/ parents or siblings or extended families of origin.
This tells me they had an inability to form lasting relationships. They did not know how and they chose to separate
themselves from this. Were they both abused and or not loved and nurtured by their birth family? Probably.

If anything is shown to us here, my opinion is that the adopters Jen and Sara were not suitable parents. I believe they were both deficient in their ability to deal with the problems of young adoptees. They also did not understand the concept of seeking help from others when you have a problem. They did not understand that they needed more
education to understand and deal with the day to day problems of the children.

It appears to me the parents' style was devised to maintain order and a disciplined home despite sometimes chaotic
behavior from the children. I also saw no effort that we know of to encourage the children to grow and become
individual, healthy, stable personalities. What I see is young people encouraged to become mini-me in the political
areas, protesting etc. far too early for the children to understand or have a choice in these endeavors. In this area, the children were used as a tool.

I believe Jen and Sara were really protesting for their own perceived injustices that they had faced throughout their lives. I think they both came from very confused, less than ideal families and their own sad upbringing is reflected
in how they chose to live their lives and how they chose to end their lives. Unfortunately they acquired 6 little mini-me's
who never had a choice in all this. If you want to understand the dynamics here, you'd have to look at the parental families. And we will probably never get that picture.

 

[cybervampira]

Mendocino Sheriff tweet:

https://twitter.com/mendosheriff/status/982077990338052096?s=21

 

[human]

As much as we want to try and figure out what went on within this family, one huge factor that we may never get
enough information to truly understand is what is the childhood family and upbringing of both Jen and Sarah.

We're in such shock trying to explain and understand what happened here, but, IMO, a lot of missing info is concerning
Jen and Sara's family of origin.

Were either of them adopted or products of foster care? Seems to me, neither were able to adequately bond or
really love others, especially these children. There's a big difference in professing love and hugs and actually behaving
using loving behavior. I saw very little loving behavior from these parents. Lots of words, little in actions.

What was the method/style of discipline in their birth family? Was Jen abused as a child? Probably, IMO.
We know that neither chose to continue having a relationship w/ parents or siblings or extended families of origin.
This tells me they had an inability to form lasting relationships. They did not know how and they chose to separate
themselves from this. Were they both abused and or not loved and nurtured by their birth family? Probably.

If anything is shown to us here, my opinion is that the adopters Jen and Sara were not suitable parents. I believe they were both deficient in their ability to deal with the problems of young adoptees. They also did not understand the concept of seeking help from others when you have a problem. They did not understand that they needed more
education to understand and deal with the day to day problems of the children.

It appears to me the parents' style was devised to maintain order and a disciplined home despite sometimes chaotic
behavior from the children. I also saw no effort that we know of to encourage the children to grow and become
individual, healthy, stable personalities. What I see is young people encouraged to become mini-me in the political
areas, protesting etc. far too early for the children to understand or have a choice in these endeavors. In this area, the children were used as a tool.

I believe Jen and Sara were really protesting for their own perceived injustices that they had faced throughout their lives. I think they both came from very confused, less than ideal families and their own sad upbringing is reflected
in how they chose to live their lives and how they chose to end their lives. Unfortunately they acquired 6 little mini-me's
who never had a choice in all this. If you want to understand the dynamics here, you'd have to look at the parental families. And we will probably never get that picture.

It makes me wonder what the motivation was for adopting six. The first three seemed to cause problems because a six year old was hit with a belt, If you can’t handle three, what makes anyone think they can handle six?

The cash sounds good although it is only $27,000 a year for ten years. But then again, it is tax free. Still, if you double it which probably is the amount if taxes were taken out, $54,000 plus the salary of Sarah at $53000 is not hat much for a family of eight.

 

[Blue5591]

As much as we want to try and figure out what went on within this family, one huge factor that we may never get
enough information to truly understand is what is the childhood family and upbringing of both Jen and Sarah.

We're in such shock trying to explain and understand what happened here, but, IMO, a lot of missing info is concerning
Jen and Sara's family of origin.

Were either of them adopted or products of foster care? Seems to me, neither were able to adequately bond or
really love others, especially these children. There's a big difference in professing love and hugs and actually behaving
using loving behavior. I saw very little loving behavior from these parents. Lots of words, little in actions.

What was the method/style of discipline in their birth family? Was Jen abused as a child? Probably, IMO.
We know that neither chose to continue having a relationship w/ parents or siblings or extended families of origin.
This tells me they had an inability to form lasting relationships. They did not know how and they chose to separate
themselves from this. Were they both abused and or not loved and nurtured by their birth family? Probably.

If anything is shown to us here, my opinion is that the adopters Jen and Sara were not suitable parents. I believe they were both deficient in their ability to deal with the problems of young adoptees. They also did not understand the concept of seeking help from others when you have a problem. They did not understand that they needed more
education to understand and deal with the day to day problems of the children.

It appears to me the parents' style was devised to maintain order and a disciplined home despite sometimes chaotic
behavior from the children. I also saw no effort that we know of to encourage the children to grow and become
individual, healthy, stable personalities. What I see is young people encouraged to become mini-me in the political
areas, protesting etc. far too early for the children to understand or have a choice in these endeavors. In this area, the children were used as a tool.

I believe Jen and Sara were really protesting for their own perceived injustices that they had faced throughout their lives. I think they both came from very confused, less than ideal families and their own sad upbringing is reflected
in how they chose to live their lives and how they chose to end their lives. Unfortunately they acquired 6 little mini-me's
who never had a choice in all this. If you want to understand the dynamics here, you'd have to look at the parental families. And we will probably never get that picture.

Totally agree!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Blue5591]

I'm just going to assume you've spent very little time with people who have adopted children out of situations like that if you think long term trauma or behavioral issues are something you can't assume or are uncommon. No one is justifying abuse because of this. But it's just sort of basic child development. Being abused while the brain is developing does not typically lead to healthy and resilient children with no long term problems.

I think there is a real disconnect in your comment to readily admit the children must have been through "a high level of abuse and or neglect" but that no one has the right to assume it lead to any long term issues with the children. Sorry, but children are NOT that resilient. And all the research out there substantiates this. Why would anyone attempt to downplay the long term effects of childhood neglect and abuse?

We can't simultaneously want children removed from abusive situations and then try and deny the long term effects of that abuse on the children. It doesn't absolve anyone who further mistreats them by admitting the long term difficulties they face! But it's not fair to anyone to deny the problems. It's especially not fair to the children. It's only acknowledgement of the issues and needs that helps insure that these children and their families get the support they need. And, yes, the families need support. The act of adoption doesn't actually automatically qualify any adult to deal with the psychological needs of children who are abused.

Families who adopt and the children they adopt need MORE long term support and care. And they need it in large part due to the very high rate of long term issues due to any previous abuse.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK195987/

https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubpdfs/long_term_consequences.pdf

Yessss!!! People need to seriously think long and hard before they adopt children who may have been born to addicted mothers and who were neglected and abused. The issues are real and there is usually lifelong effects on the child. Many times for those who were born th o moms who drank and/or a used drugs, mental health issues come out even more so once they go through puberty.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[human]

For kids with FAS, they do bot have abstract reasoning skills. So when rhey leave the concrete reasoning stage and should go into abtract at the middle school age, they become lost. Their peers have moved on and school becomes too complex.

With FAS, actual parts of the brain are missing

https://www.mofas.org/resource/areas-of-the-brain-affected-by-prenatal-alcohol-exposure/

 

[enelram]

Yessss!!! People need to seriously think long and hard before they adopt children who may have been born to addicted mothers and who were neglected and abused. The issues are real and there is usually lifelong effects on the child. Many times for those who were born th o moms who drank and/or a used drugs, mental health issues come out even more so once they go through puberty.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I wonder how much of this information is provided to potential adoptive parents. ?? Or are potential parents so enamored with acquiring children that they overlook these future problems?
Thanks for you enlightening comments, Blue. I agree with you.

 

[enelram]

Yessss!!! People need to seriously think long and hard before they adopt children who may have been born to addicted mothers and who were neglected and abused. The issues are real and there is usually lifelong effects on the child. Many times for those who were born th o moms who drank and/or a used drugs, mental health issues come out even more so once they go through puberty.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Besides the potential problems caused by maternal habits during pregnancy, there's also some problems that
can be caused by the father's unhealthy sperm. Father's age at conception has been one area studied as older
men may not have healthy sperm. Also general health and substance abuse including anabolic steroids may
affect sperm health according to what I've read.

So there's many unknowns when adopting children. It's a huge undertaking that should not be taken lightly. Then
factor in the difficulties of adopting children of a different race and "inexperienced" parents who have never been through raising their own children without the potential problems that these 2 women encountered with the
unknown backgrounds of the children.

 

[kizzykat]

Another article with details about the subsidies & adoptions from a San Antonio paper. (It's worth a read, at the link scroll below the "you must be a subscriber" to see more. Snippets below):

"The Harts lived in Minnesota when the six children were adopted from Texas foster care. Siblings Abigail, Hannah and Markis were adopted in 2006 from Colorado County, west of Houston, according to DFPS statements. The second sibling group, Sierra, Jeremiah and Devonte, were adopted from Harris County in 2009.

Months before one of the adoptions was finalized, a report was made that Jennifer Jean Hart hit her 6-year-old with a belt. It’s not clear whether Texas child protection officials were notified.

Most families that adopt Texas children out of foster care get monthly payments — ranging from $400 to $545 per child — to help cover costs of care until the child turns 18, according to DFPS. Jennifer Jean Hart received a $1,897 payment each month, with the most recent dated March 2, according to the state comptroller. Five of the Hart children are minors, while one is 19."

https://www.expressnews.com/news/lo...volved-in-fatal-California-crash-12813777.php

 

[enelram]

I'm curious - Is there any mandatory psychological testing done on potential adopting parents?

Do people just apply and get approved? Barring any current substance abuse or criminal convictions, is that all that;s
investigated?

Is the 'system' so overloaded that they approve people without thoroughly checking on their suitability?

Any personal experiences here?

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

http://www.crimeonline.com/2018/04/...harts-age-may-have-been-miscalculated-police/

Info on identifying the kids and incorrect info regarding one child’s age.

Apparently there were multiple cell phones, and not all have been located yet according to that news link:

He said that authorities have not located all of the cell phones that belonged to the Hart family, but that they are still able to track the devices for any activity. There has been no cell phone activity since March 26. Investigators are continuing to examine surveillance footage taken at a grocery store in Fort Bragg, California, where Jennifer Hart was seen on March 25, to help determine if all of the family members were together at the time.

 

[kizzykat]

Deadly Hart crash stands out for experts who study family annihilators


If the investigation confirms the suspicion, the case would be the latest example of what criminologists call family annihilators, cases in which family members kill an intimate partner and their children. Those left behind – family, friends, the public – are left to wonder what would drive a person to commit such a ghastly crime.
Domestic violence experts and criminologists say the circumstances surrounding the Hart family's crash appear to be unusual. Guns are overwhelming used by family annihilators, but driving a vehicle off a coastal highway was described as "bizarre" by one researcher.
The story does, however, bear at least one hallmark of some other mass family killings: The Harts had a documented history of child abuse, and experts say it's likely there was an undercurrent of spousal violence as well. Also, as in the Kroeker slayings, a common thread could be present: No clear motive may ever emerge.
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2018/04/post_296.html

 

[HeidiTX232]

I think it's fair to make a distinction here. I agree that the children must have went through and or faced a high level of abuse and/or neglect before being adopted if they went through the system.

But not all abuse leads to trauma. There is no evidence that they suffered serious physical or psychological injury let alone developed behavioral issues before the Harts adopted them. Any thing that alludes to that is assumed. And these assumptions are being used as foundations for hypothesizing why these women were not able to be better parents, or what could have incited their actions and abuse toward the children and it's not fair. Like I said, I'm tired of it and it's unsubstantiated.


IMO

There IS evidence. The biggest evidence is that the state of Texas found it necessary to broaden their search for parents to include out of state placement. The state does not do that willy-nilly!

During the case, the children would have been with whatever foster home(s) would take them. They would have started a search for an adoptive home by the time the parental rights were terminated (though many times, foster families adopt). It would have started in the same region then statewide. They may have tried something like a news segment (forever families, Wednesday’s Child, etc). Eventually, they would have opened it up to photolistings like TARE and adoptuskids.org. However, even then, Texas families would have taken priority for a number of reasons.

This was a fairly young sibling set. For the state to have chosen an out of state family, it was because they couldn’t find one in Texas. Some being male and black sadly likely contributed to the reasoning; but I almost guarantee these kids had multiple placements, behavior issues, were at risk of being split up even.

And resiliency (as people talk about regarding kids in this situation) is a myth. Kids really ARE harmed by substance exposure, multiple homes, abuse, neglect, etc. There is information out there how a simple investigation causes trauma. Add removal from the home, visitation (and missed visitation), various foster homes (goodness knows what quality), ending visits, etc. Every move sets kids back six months! New schools, monthly visits by agency/caseworker/casa/lawyer, crazy foster care rules, new neighbors/churches/friends. It is all a LOT and every child IS impacted, often greatly.

I don’t know how long you have been involved with this population; but I can tell you that I’ve lived with a LOT of these kids. It is terribly sad what they’ve gone through and will carry with them. Even when they can’t consciously remember, their little bodies and brains still respond like they do even when they’ve made extreme progress in many ways. So sure they come along in some ways, thrive even in many ways. But they didn’t just bounce back and in some ways they’ll pay the price for what their original families and CPS has done to them for the rest of their lives.

AGAIN, absolutely NO excuse for abuse by the adoptive family! I am not giving them excuses to have progressively gone down the path of beating, withholding food, and now murder. Sadly, who knows what else JH did. There is NO excuse for any of that.

But I do think, in order to keep these things from happening more (and it happens too often), we need to be honest and upfront about what it is like to parent children from hard places and why. We also need to destigmatize it so when families are in over their heads they can keep seeking out help and actually finding it. We need better support for these children and their parents.

By the end, the family had already pulled in and were likely unreachable. But what if we had caught them early on? Would they have accepted respite, other role models, school, different therapies, etc earlier on if they didn’t have to feel threatened?

What if it were safe for families to admit how hard it is, that they weren’t prepared, that they over-extended, that they are scared, that they’ve made mistakes, that they need help, that they really aren’t saints, that they can’t keep putting on this face in public?

Maybe we can save the next adopted child before CPS is called out, before kids are abused, before yet another is killed.

 

[Aescwynn]

Another article with details about the subsidies & adoptions from a San Antonio paper. (It's worth a read, at the link scroll below the "you must be a subscriber" to see more. Snippets below):

"The Harts lived in Minnesota when the six children were adopted from Texas foster care. Siblings Abigail, Hannah and Markis were adopted in 2006 from Colorado County, west of Houston, according to DFPS statements. The second sibling group, Sierra, Jeremiah and Devonte, were adopted from Harris County in 2009.

Months before one of the adoptions was finalized, a report was made that Jennifer Jean Hart hit her 6-year-old with a belt. It’s not clear whether Texas child protection officials were notified.

Most families that adopt Texas children out of foster care get monthly payments — ranging from $400 to $545 per child — to help cover costs of care until the child turns 18, according to DFPS. Jennifer Jean Hart received a $1,897 payment each month, with the most recent dated March 2, according to the state comptroller. Five of the Hart children are minors, while one is 19."

https://www.expressnews.com/news/lo...volved-in-fatal-California-crash-12813777.php

That article states that it is "likely" that the incident with the belt happened within the trial period for the adoption of the first set of siblings. This is when the two of them (allegedly) lied and said that the child fell down the stairs. The police closed the case. I know that hindsight is 20/20 and I know next to nothing about the case except what I read in the paper, but I have tears in my eyes at what seems to be warning flags everywhere.

 

[HeidiTX232]

I also wondered if the bio families had recognized the children and what they must be going through. Despite what may have happened 10+ years ago, my experience tells me these family members DO love their children even if they were unable to raise them appropriately.

I have contact with my children’s bio families but that isn’t normal in foster-adopt cases. I also think about how some day my kids are likely to seek out more contact with bio family. I sure want them to be able to say that we tried our best to be a great family. They may still have struggles (no doubt, sadly), but I don’t want it to be because of anything we’ve done or not done.

 

[enelram]

Deadly Hart crash stands out for experts who study family annihilators


If the investigation confirms the suspicion, the case would be the latest example of what criminologists call family annihilators, cases in which family members kill an intimate partner and their children. Those left behind – family, friends, the public – are left to wonder what would drive a person to commit such a ghastly crime.
Domestic violence experts and criminologists say the circumstances surrounding the Hart family's crash appear to be unusual. Guns are overwhelming used by family annihilators, but driving a vehicle off a coastal highway was described as "bizarre" by one researcher.
The story does, however, bear at least one hallmark of some other mass family killings: The Harts had a documented history of child abuse, and experts say it's likely there was an undercurrent of spousal violence as well. Also, as in the Kroeker slayings, a common thread could be present: No clear motive may ever emerge.
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2018/04/post_296.html

per this article....Campbell, a professor and researcher at Johns Hopkins Univ. School of Nursing said,

" Abusers often hurt loved ones because of trauma in their own childhood."

I wholeheartedly agree, Jen was a very damaged individual who should never have been 'given' 6 little souls.

 

[Starkville]

Deadly Hart crash stands out for experts who study family annihilators


If the investigation confirms the suspicion, the case would be the latest example of what criminologists call family annihilators, cases in which family members kill an intimate partner and their children. Those left behind – family, friends, the public – are left to wonder what would drive a person to commit such a ghastly crime.
Domestic violence experts and criminologists say the circumstances surrounding the Hart family's crash appear to be unusual. Guns are overwhelming used by family annihilators, but driving a vehicle off a coastal highway was described as "bizarre" by one researcher.
The story does, however, bear at least one hallmark of some other mass family killings: The Harts had a documented history of child abuse, and experts say it's likely there was an undercurrent of spousal violence as well. Also, as in the Kroeker slayings, a common thread could be present: No clear motive may ever emerge.
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2018/04/post_296.html

A female being a family annihilator is rare — if, by “family annihilator” we mean they killed their child plus spouse. So Paula Yates is not a family annihilator but John List is. Does the fact that Jen killed herself disqualify her from being a “family annihilator”? It doesn’t, to me.

A female driving a car into water in order to kill her children isn’t rare. I was able to locate several cases with a simple google search.

As with jumping off a building or bridge, it doesn’t take any expensive or difficult equipment. Once you start, you can’t back out. Water is an extra layer of fatality; if you survive the impact, the water will cause drowning. There’s a question of intent, preserving the killer’s reputation as a “good mother”: “maybe it was an accident, maybe she didn’t mean to kill her kids” The killer doesn’t have to be face-to-face with their victims and watch them die, or bleed.

 

[SATA]

I also wondered if the bio families had recognized the children and what they must be going through. Despite what may have happened 10+ years ago, my experience tells me these family members DO love their children even if they were unable to raise them appropriately.

I have contact with my children’s bio families but that isn’t normal in foster-adopt cases. I also think about how some day my kids are likely to seek out more contact with bio family. I sure want them to be able to say that we tried our best to be a great family. They may still have struggles (no doubt, sadly), but I don’t want it to be because of anything we’ve done or not done.

I think that is a good thing long term.
Your children may - or may not - need to know where they come from later in life. They should have that option as far as possible.
Kudos to you.

 

[HeidiTX232]

I'm curious - Is there any mandatory psychological testing done on potential adopting parents?

Do people just apply and get approved? Barring any current substance abuse or criminal convictions, is that all that;s
investigated?

Is the 'system' so overloaded that they approve people without thoroughly checking on their suitability?

Any personal experiences here?

The process is amazingly intrusive and, yet, terribly flawed allowing for all sorts of inappropriate foster and adoptive homes to be approved.

Some people do have to have a psych eval; but it really isn’t common. Certain diagnoses, certain past histories, etc could make it where a person is asked to get one. But usually, they’d just be asked for a letter of fitness from their doctor, therapist, psychiatrist, etc.

The paperwork we did was extensive. And then the person writing your home study asks you those same questions or clarifying ones (“Mrs H, you stated that your father ____; what have you done to address the resulting consequences of that?”). The questions include everything from your own upbringing to your experience with children to your sexual activities to financial considerations. There are questions about any past drug usage, criminal activity, household moves, child abuse investigations, psych history, etc.

They talk to every family member in the home as well as most other children (if grown, living with another parent, etc), parents, and get references (work, neighbors, church, etc).

The home is inspected with state guidelines in mind (fire extinguishers, meds kicked up, shampoo not left on the side of the tub, potatoes not on floor of pantry, no standing water, etc).

Background checks include local criminal, FBI, CPS, and domestic abuse calls. If you haven’t lived “here” long enough, they will also do so for previous addresses/states.

It’s all very intrusive. But outside of where there is outside documentation (therapist, criminal check, etc), it’s also largely on an honor system. I mentioned that I tried pot twice when I was 18, for example; but who would have known had I not? Obviously, if I were some crazy causing an issue with a neighbor, I wouldn’t have asked that neighbor for a reference. Whatever. you get the idea.

Anyway, most people would qualify as long as they don’t have any huge things going on, state they’ve dealt with the past, and state they will follow the rules.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

Re Heidi's post above:

What if it were safe for families to admit how hard it is, that they weren’t prepared, that they over-extended, that they are scared, that they’ve made mistakes, that they need help, that they really aren’t saints, that they can’t keep putting on this face in public?

Some good questions. But we also need to consider that society and its supportive message of 'safety' is not always at issue, here. To a deeply disturbed or narcissistic parent it's never safe to let others know the truth of your basic human imperfection. (Assuming such a parent could even acknowledge it herself.)