Parental rights vs. child safety (Was there any reason Josh was awarded visits?)

New Posts

cocomod said:
One change that I think should be made is also in the training of 911 personnel. I think that when a CPS worker calls in (while on the job), it should automatically be considered an emergency. A CPS worker with the care of small children should not have to explain why she considers the situation an emergency when a "supervised" visit has gone wrong.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100% on this. What CPS worker is going to call 911 just for the fun of it? It would be an absolute, last resort to do such a thing. Like you said, it should be and automatic top tier emergency.
 
gwenabob said:
I agree with you 100% on this. What CPS worker is going to call 911 just for the fun of it? It would be an absolute, last resort to do such a thing. Like you said, it should be and automatic top tier emergency.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Don't get me wrong, I understand the temptation for LE officers and support personnel to become a little jaded where DV is concerned. I'm sure that dispatcher has a tough job sometimes too, trying to triage calls and separate real "emergencies" from less urgent matters.

But I encountered that same dismissive attitude the first time I sought police assistance for DV. From his station, the officer saw my car pull into the parking lot. He saw a very anxious woman get out of the car and take a puff on a cigarette and toss it onto the icy blacktop before getting her toddler out of his car seat. (Bad, I know. I didn't usually smoke when my son was in the car - but I didn't usually get beat up either.) On a late December night when most 3 year olds would be in bed, and many mothers might be celebrating Christmas with friends, family, or coworkers, he saw a mother balancing her baby on her hip as she navigated the ice, leaving no free hand to wipe the tears still clinging and quickly freezing on her face, walk into the police station and say words that took her three years to get up the courage to say "I. Need. Help."

How did this officer respond? Before I could tell him what brought me there (what did he THINK brought me trudging through snow, crying, with a toddler late at night - a sudden urge to go caroling?) - he yelled at me for a good two minutes about littering. When I was finally able to tell him what my problem was, his attitude wasn't any more sympathetic. I guess because I was already displaying more crazy courage than I'd ever had in my life, I just came out and said "You know, is there someone else I could possibly talk to about this?" To my astonishment, he actually went back and got another officer - who I must say was completely professional and much easier to deal with.

I thought a few times of writing a letter to the chief and just letting him know how I was treated, and although I probably should have, I didn't. I get the frustration of officers who deal with DV regularly. Especially when they go to the same address multiple times because a victim leaves only to run right back over and over. But on the other hand, when you are so skeptical or jaded that it impairs your ability to deliver help, (still burns me to hear on that tape about the dispatcher telling her about "actual" emergencies his officers needed to handle that day) it's easy to see why there are some bad outcomes like this too.
 
Bless you Irish for your courage and for your safety!
 
cocomod said:
I do not believe that anyone needs to sensationalize this case. It has been sensational for quite some time without adding any additional non-factual aspects to it. Does the media exploit the worst aspects. Absolutely, they are looking for ratings. However, this case just continues to get worse and worse.

The question posed on this thread is whether Josh's rights should have been greater than the rights of the child to be granted safety.

These children were in danger with Josh. The CPS determined that he needed therapy. I will reiterate that the kids were taken out of the home and away from Josh because he lived with a sexual pervert. He had these two innocent, young children in a home that was considered a danger to him. Add to that, LE were trying to determine if Josh was involved in any of the *advertiser censored* found in the home. He was now part of another criminal investigation. CPS had EVERY right to take those children and look after their welfare. Where I think they failed, is they should have made the therapy happen BEFORE he had any visitation rights.

Josh did not comply with what was asked of him. If you read the reports, he was asked to help CPS talk to the children in a comforting, yet straight forward way about SP being arrested. Instead, when the children get into the room, he goes off on a rant about the "Mormon" police making up things about SP and taking him away. The CPS worker was unable to get him to stop. From this ONE instance alone, I think that CPS should have considered stopping his visitation until he had therapy and evaluations from a mental health professional. They had already determined that his decisions were not always in the best interest of the children.

It sounds to me like many people, including some in power, are asking for a full investigation into the CPS handling of Josh's case. http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=19308982 "the Washington state senator is again calling for changes."

One change that I think should be made is also in the training of 911 personnel. I think that when a CPS worker calls in (while on the job), it should automatically be considered an emergency. A CPS worker with the care of small children should not have to explain why she considers the situation an emergency when a "supervised" visit has gone wrong.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but just wanted to clarify a couple of things. . . . it was not a CPS worker that Josh was ranting in front of - it was the Children's Therapist meeting the children and Josh for the very first time.

The visitation Supervisor (EG-H) was not a CPS employee, she works for an agency that was contracted by CPS to supervise the visits. The Visit Supervisors do not have "Doctorate Level" training and knowledge of Personality Disordered parents and how to therapeutically interevene as was clearly outlined in the Psych Eval. Poor EG-H was set up for failure (IMO), as was the Child's Therapist when CPS didn't follow the Psychologists recommendations for the parent/child contact. It is not clear to me that the Psychologist understood how the visits had been handled previously and the difference between visitation with the children and Therapeutic visits only with the children.
 
It seems to me that one obvious problem is accuracy in prediction.

Sure, there are profiles of domestic murder-suicides that are accurate in that almost every domestic murder-suicide fits the profile. The problem is that so do quite a few other people who never go on to commit murder-suicide.

So what level of certainty do we, as a society, require in order to take away someone's parental rights, either temporarily or permanently? While also keeping in mind that children, even abused and/or neglected children, do suffer trauma when removed from their parents.

What level of "oops, made a mistake, this person is actually an acceptable parent" are we willing to tolerate in the name of keeping the children safe? And how many children are we willing to needlessly traumatise based on an imperfect prediction?

The problem with outrageous cases like Josh Powell is that they focus the spotlight in one place, which tends to block out the whole picture (which involves collateral damage).
 
SuziQ said:
Josh Powell should never have been granted visitation, Coxes argue in hearing
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...ranted-visitation-Coxes-argue-in-hearing.html
Click to expand...

Thanks so much for posting this link! Chuck Cox is an AMAZING job of speaking at this hearing and he was 100% correct. JP WAS given too much credence and every ridiculous demand he made was given credence. They did bend over backwards to accommodate JP when they knew he was a murder suspect and that this *advertiser censored* was found on his PC.

He told the group Thursday that Charlie and Braden did not want to go to their father's house on the day they were killed. And for the first time, Cox said he believed Braden was "afraid" of his father.

WOW. Poor little Braden. When the SW said that Braden had "stubbed his foot" the last time he was at SP's house, I thought that odd because that week at court, JP was attempting to make a big deal out of Braden's burnt foot (from the hot water) which happened at the Cox residence. I do not think Braden stubbed his foot (who stubs the whole foot anyway -- a toe, yes, a whole foot?), but I suspect JP perhaps stomped on it or pushed something heavy in Braden's foot's path in a hallway or something where the SW could not see. I think he wanted to make Braden's foot worse so the courts would think he was not safe at the Cox's. Or maybe the sadistic you-know-what wanted to cause Braden injury for enjoying living with his grandparents. But the SW remembered he "stubbed his foot" and cried out in pain and she remembered how much his foot was bothering him. But I'll bet Braden knew his father hurt him. The $%#($*((!!
 
I'm recalling reading an in depth article once as to what led to Washington no longer sealing records. I will try to find it and post it here if anyone is interested.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...d-visitation-Coxes-argue-in-hearing.html?pg=3

(snip)
DSHS knew about the *advertiser censored* on Josh Powell's computer two months before the images arrived in Washington for officials to review and knew that he was the subject of a murder investigation.
"I'm continually amazed with all new documents, about who knew what and when they knew it," Downing said, apparently referring to the nearly 1,000 pages of documents DSHS released last week. "Clearly there was enough information to recommend a change in visitation."
Bremner also made reference to the search warrants served by West Valley police and other Powell-related court documents in Utah that a judge ordered to be sealed and have remained secret.
"We know in Washington state we don't allow records to be sealed," she said, while noting that records can't be sealed just because a case is high profile.
 
I was looking at this timeline: http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_19904768?source=pkg and was thinking it might have been better if the judge had placed the kids in a undisclosed foster family due to various issues both families were having with each other and especially since there was a mutual harassement order for Mr. Cox and Josh Powell. 20/20
 
Sulamith said:
I was looking at this timeline: http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_19904768?source=pkg and was thinking it might have been better if the judge had placed the kids in a undisclosed foster family due to various issues both families were having with each other and especially since there was a mutual harassement order for Mr. Cox and Josh Powell. 20/20
Click to expand...

I don't think the restraining order against Mr. Cox was warranted. He did nothing to deserve it. I believe all the harassment was from the Powells. The judge was just trying to be a King Solomon and keep the peace.
 
SuziQ said:
I'm recalling reading an in depth article once as to what led to Washington no longer sealing records. I will try to find it and post it here if anyone is interested.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...d-visitation-Coxes-argue-in-hearing.html?pg=3

(snip)
DSHS knew about the *advertiser censored* on Josh Powell's computer two months before the images arrived in Washington for officials to review and knew that he was the subject of a murder investigation.
"I'm continually amazed with all new documents, about who knew what and when they knew it," Downing said, apparently referring to the nearly 1,000 pages of documents DSHS released last week. "Clearly there was enough information to recommend a change in visitation."Bremner also made reference to the search warrants served by West Valley police and other Powell-related court documents in Utah that a judge ordered to be sealed and have remained secret.
"We know in Washington state we don't allow records to be sealed," she said, while noting that records can't be sealed just because a case is high profile.
Click to expand...

BBM - do we have access to these released documents? Anyone know of a link?

Here is an interesting view . . . "Why did they even recommend supervised visitation between Josh and the boys? Washington Child Protection officials told ABC’s 20/20 that the reason for supervised visitation was because the child protection agency determined that the Powell family case plan goal was reunification. The box on the DSHS bureaucratic form was checked for reunification with Josh and his boys. Once a goal has been established by child protection officials, it is very difficult to change. Incredibly, to effectuate this goal, supervised visitation would occur twice a week with the “person of interest.”

http://yorechildren.com/
 
http://mynorthwest.com/108/633727/Chuck-Cox-expects-more-from-Child-Protective-Services

I thought you all might like to hear and read about Mr. Cox and his testimony at our State legislature this week. He is upset, and rightly so, that the state (CPS, judges, etc) all believed JP without thoroughly investigating what/who he really was. Another problem in this state, is no grandparent rights on the books. The main goal here was to reunite JP with the kids without regard to his being investigated for the disappearance and probable murder of their mother. I can't believe that we could see what could happen, but those in charge couldn't. I am saddened and sickened.
 
Hearsay info . . . I will not be quoting my source so take it or leave it as you wish.

Child Protection Administratiors in Washington State believe this case will have National implications when the investigation is completed. It is highly likely that all of the States will re-evaluate their policy and practices, with this specific case in mind.

Years after child fatality reviews have been completed, CPS continues to hear further information not previously disclosed that they are hoping to incorporate into the lessons they learned.

For anyone wishing to learn more about recommendations made to CPS from the Washington State Ombudsman prior to this case, I have provided the following link to those documents: (scroll down to Reviews for specific cases)

http://www.governor.wa.gov/ofco/reports/default.asp
 
wenwe4 said:
Hearsay info . . . I will not be quoting my source so take it or leave it as you wish.

Child Protection Administratiors in Washington State believe this case will have National implications when the investigation is completed. It is highly likely that all of the States will re-evaluate their policy and practices, with this specific case in mind.

Years after child fatality reviews have been completed, CPS continues to hear further information not previously disclosed that they are hoping to incorporate into the lessons they learned.

For anyone wishing to learn more about recommendations made to CPS from the Washington State Ombudsman prior to this case, I have provided the following link to those documents: (scroll down to Reviews for specific cases)

http://www.governor.wa.gov/ofco/reports/default.asp
Click to expand...

I hope so. Just today, we read about this case, where news reports say DFS was aware of the children's situation for 6-7 years. Another "clan" with a shared pathology.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/11-children-removed-texas-home-abuse-case-15758608#.T0wqFOZvpaU
 
wenwe4 said:
Hearsay info . . . I will not be quoting my source so take it or leave it as you wish.

Child Protection Administratiors in Washington State believe this case will have National implications when the investigation is completed. It is highly likely that all of the States will re-evaluate their policy and practices, with this specific case in mind.

Years after child fatality reviews have been completed, CPS continues to hear further information not previously disclosed that they are hoping to incorporate into the lessons they learned.

For anyone wishing to learn more about recommendations made to CPS from the Washington State Ombudsman prior to this case, I have provided the following link to those documents: (scroll down to Reviews for specific cases)

http://www.governor.wa.gov/ofco/reports/default.asp
Click to expand...
-------------
As long as we are focusing on reform, I'd also like to see changes made in the way "shelters" for domestic abuse are run. I put that word in quotes because from what I've seen and experienced, some of them are run like prisons for victims.
 
concentric said:
-------------
As long as we are focusing on reform, I'd also like to see changes made in the way "shelters" for domestic abuse are run. I put that word in quotes because from what I've seen and experienced, some of them are run like prisons for victims.
Click to expand...

Concentric, I agree. Concerted efforts in Washington State CPS system have been made toward no longer punishing the victim. Historically, the Perp. of DV (ie: Mom's Paramour) would be asked to move out of the home and the Victim (ie: Mom) would be told she would be charged with child neglect if she allowed the Perp. access to her children.

I have seen some of those shelter's myself and it makes me sick to see boys over the age of 12 being forced to stay alone at the Men's shelter, while their Mother and siblings are allowed to stay at the "Women's shelter".

Requirements to stay in the DV shelters are often extremely restrictive and most people do not do well living in structured housing. Often families are so bruised, broken, and fearful they are simple shells of their former selves. Most arrive feeling hopeless, helpless and doomed. They have gone from one situation where they had no control over any part of their lives to yet another one with different rules. Not sure that is the best way to empower victims to take back control.

Again, balance between structure needed to keep multiple families living together in one location to allowing victims to regain the very things they were deprived of . . . (ie: freedom to make decisions on their own, stabilizing and nurturing themselves and their children, etc).
 
"Disturbing images were also found in the packet of documents. One was reportedly drawn by Josh Powell when he was a teenager. It's entitled "Daddy Mormon Basher," and shows a man wielding an axe, with a devil a surrounded by people.

Another image titled "Don't Play With Me" was allegedly drawn by one of the Powell boys recently. It's unclear who or what is depicted in the picture, but it's clearly sinister in nature."

http://www.abc4.com/content/news/sl...details-in-Powell/yWABHuHaaEGLEzXuPE_Uwg.cspx
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 52 more.
Total: 4,192 (members: 53, guests: 4,139)

Online statistics

Members online
53
Guests online
4,139
Total visitors
4,192
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,621
Messages
17,972,058
Members
228,845
Latest member
butiwantedthatname
Back
Top