Discussion in 'Located Persons Discussion' started by scaredtopost, Nov 27, 2017.
Good post and i fully agree.
I'm not following you. What on earth does the local school district have to do with Mariah's death?
The Judge may have slapped AW. But if there truly was a conflict of interest in 2016 on the part of CPS, I think the Judge would also demand a full investigation.
it is one of the charges he is sitting in jail for.
I would imagine education of these issues would be of help when abused children feel there is no help out there for them. Not Mariah because she was too young to go to school, but children in school that can relay the pain of abuse for themselves and perhaps their younger siblings, and obtain help through their school counsellors, that could also notify the authorities of any problems like that their students might be having. JMO.
I never thought about it before but I wonder how many schools hold discussions about this? Truthfully I have a feeling it is probably non-existent. I'm not even sure if schools still have discussions about "good touch, bad touch" with the students. With how reactionary some parents are these days with any sort of sexual talk I'd be willing to guess schools have stopped it.
What charge is that? If you're referring to the abuse allegations, he isn't in jail for that, he's sitting in there currently for robbery and concealing a body.
And I'm still baffled by your post because the brothers of Mariah are ages 5 and 10 and there is no evidence whatsoever that they conveyed their abuse to their teachers. I think children of abuse live with terrible fear of their accusers and nothing will change that fact.
My friend was a social worker, and a single mother of 3 kids. Her kids were in public school and she sometimes ended up awkwardly being sent to check on families that she knew through local sports activities or school etc.
She lived in a small town where everyone knew everyone so it was hard to keep totally separated from her clients.
What is so difficult about reading posts on this thread?
Didn't she still have the ethical duty of raising conflict of interest when it arose?
It has nothing to do with it. Sorry about the confusion. Just trying to see something positive come out of this nightmare.
Sent from my SM-G935R4 using Tapatalk
I doubt there is anything positive which will come out of this nightmare. Everyone seems in CYA mode.
You must not have ever been poor. To someone in AW's situation a $4000 to $7000 retainer, might as well be $100,000 or a million. They are obviously not well educated, probably don't have very high paying jobs, living paycheck to paycheck, with very little/none or bad credit, and no way to go about getting that kind of money. I don't mean that as a criticism but as a reality of how they probably live from what we know of the situation. A retainer fee basically gets them nothing. To get the lawyer to actually do any work and go to court will cost that much money again or more and how can he afford that? I assume that Heather's children live with them, so he has them to support plus having to pay KW child support for the three children. NC needs to revise their laws because they make child custody disputes a needlessly outrageously expensive process.
Sadly North Carolina is not a state you want to be living in when you get a divorce and get into a child custody battle. I have a nephew that spent almost two years getting a divorce and fighting for custody of his two young daughters in North Carolina and it cost him just over $25,000 when all was said and done. It was hard for him to come up with that kind of money and he is a very well paid IT guy. His ex-wife abandoned him and his children by moving out of the house and did not see their children for almost 8 months, and some of the things she did before the final custody hearing should have automatically made her an unfit mother.. North Carolina is such a "mommy state" that it was still hard for him to get custody of his two girls.
After observing what he had to go through I can absolutely understand why AW was frustrated with DFACS and released the documents. It may not have been the wisest thing to do but I can sure understand it. His worst fear for his children had just been realized with Mariah's supposed disappearance and ultimate death. As far as the oldest child goes, I gather from reading the documents that because of some unknown incident, he already has some restrictions about being around other children, so that information would have already been out there to some extent, if AK and KW were seeing to it that the rules were followed. JMO
One of my concerns are how many local parents have read the documents and now will no longer let the oldest son play with their children based on information regarding him that is in those documents.
The part about the social workers incident is worded strangely, I don't think it was the social workers child involved - I think he is saying he had to notify social worker of incident after the friend contacted him because Kristy had not taken care of it so that person called law enforcement.
Yes, she had to back out of making any decisions. But she often went to an address, not realizing that she would 'know' the kids or recognize them from the park or t-ball games. So many last names and blended families so she didn't always know the family name she was sent to check on.
But if she is sent to a home on an emergency wellness check, and she has to ascertain whether there is food and clean environment or not, and she happens to recognize the face of one of the children from a ball game, she cannot really stop the entire emergency order and make note of that because it is not the important issue at the time. The issue is whether or not the children were in imminent danger.
She can excuse herself from further work on the case, but sometimes you get pulled into situations where you might know one of the family members from the local area.
in cases of conflict of interest, the conflict needs to be disclosed immediately, imo. I don't care if they recognized the children from Scouts, Brownies or Church. No exceptions. None of these social workers are out in the field working by themselves.
Do you think there is a conflict of interest because you have seen a child and recognise his/her face? May have been in the same class as your own child? I have been in that situation and I didn't deem it any conflict of interest. I would have if I had been friends with the child's parents, but I was not.
You disclose the conflict of interest and let the court or the parent decide whether they want you to proceed.
I live in a small town so I could see this happening. If the person is an acquaintance in passing, that one just sees at a school function, that's one thing. If the person they are checking on, is someone they meet for lunch, and their kids play together, and have sleepovers, that is entirely different, and should be called in to the office, as soon as is feasibly possible, so as not to jeopardize a case.