The Zahra Project

[kalekona]

(Salem, I have a question kinda along the same lines).

What areas of CPS do you feel needs to be changed and why? If address alerts won't work for example, what would?

I think about our teachers here in my state. They've told me many times that they are governed by certain laws that make teaching less effective.

My mother was a sexual and domestic abuse victims advocate in your neck of the woods-- Salem actually and even she was a mandated reporter. And that isn't limited to just the state she lives/works/volunteers in but anywhere she witnesses abuse.

It isn't any different here in WA.

I know much of the problem with CPS is simply not enough funding,not enough workers and FAR to many unfounded reports- how are they suppose to decide which reports need follow up and which don't? There just isn't enough staff, time or funding to check them all out.

WA had laws changed and harsher penalties initiated for abuse cases- We have a Homicide by abuse charge that is meant to be used for cases where death occurs after long term abuse, torture- Maximum sentence is 26 years (but I have seen it doubled in an exceptional sentence) But I have seen the charge used less than a dozen times since it was enacted.-- My point is we changed laws and punishment as well as DSHS procedure and yet we still have kids that fall through the cracks--
More Laws, more paper work more of any of the changes suggested here will not solve or help the problem because EVERYTHING boils down to the human ellement. A human has to look at these reports and use there gut to make a final decision about which call to take seriously.

As for permanently removing children from parents involved in drug use- seems that thought comes from someone who has no experience with drug addiction and the complexities that are involved. It simply isn't a black or white issue.

 

[NC Analyzer]

BBM While I totally get that you are bound by sometimes very cumbersome paperwork and follow up requirements on cases you feel are unfounded, retaliatory, or just sexual curiosity, not all cases where Bobby touching Suzie ARE a waste of time. I had an experience wherein I caught a female relative (age 6) engaged in very explicit sexual behavior with my then 3 year old son. I reported. The activity I saw was not curiousity but was extremely graphic and specific sexual act being performed on my child. I did not report this incident lightly. I understood the can of worms I was opening and the spotlight I was placing on our families. Turns out the female "peretrator" had been engaging in this sort of very graphic sexual acting out since the age of 3 and it had never been reported or investigated as the adults around the child assumed it was simply "playing doctor (simple normal sexual curiousity).

This young child was interviewed and would never divulge the what, who, when of what caused her to act out in this way, but I assure you, something or someone did. That female relative is a grandchild. I lose sleep to this day worrying that she has been or may continued to be abused by someone.

So while I hear your frustration, and I do not envy you having to try to do your job effectively with the strictures you must operate under, I bristled a bit when I read the BBM.

I am sorry if this is off topic. To bring things back to the Zahra project, I think it is an admirable goal. I also think it could be ineffective if the founders of the project do not really do the research to discover exactly what things are already in place but not enforced, are good ideas in theory but would not work in practice, etc. I really hope that they get good input from a number of different agencies that cross paths in the interest of protecting children and take the information garnered from these experts into cosideration when making their proposal.

In Zahra's instance, we had a situation where EB was apparently well versed in her "rights" and familiar enough through her past history with DSS to know how to evade the investigation that was most probably being done on her regarding Zahra. I think that is what this project hopes to deter in future. The gaps or holes in protection we, the public, perceive in the system that was unable to prevent this tragedy.

My own personal thoughts are, I think DSS needs to be in the child protection business rather than in the family reunifcation business. That may not be a popular stance but it is mine. I am not suggeting that parents never get their children back. I am suggeting that the years spend trying to foster kids while parents who have no interest in following their plan or attending the assigned parenting classes or in general do not take any of the steps required of them to reunite with their children until the eleventh hour are a waste of taxpayer money and valuable time for those children. Suddenly, when the child is situated in a long term placement or hevean forbid, someone wants to adopt them permanently, low and behold, mom is in a big ole rush to be a parent, after years of blowing off this child. I wish that agencies like DSS were more about the child's best interest and less about the parents rights. I do understand that parents rights must be observed but wish the scales weren's so tipped in their favor and were more about the child's rights.

tlcox: There is a BIG difference between normal childhood curiosity and sexual abuse. An experienced investigator has been trained to recognize the difference. I agree 100% that if a child is acting out in a sexual manner there is more going on than "normal childhood" curiosity and it needs to be looked into. The child acting out has likely been exposed to inappropriate sexual activity or has witnessed it (possibly *advertiser censored*). This is not what I was referring to. I'm sorry for your son's experience and I'm glad you reported what happened, but that isn't what I was referring to.
I also agree that we don't need to be in the business of family reunification...unfortunately, that isn't "our" business. That "business" is court mandated because of the laws in this country that dictate parental rights that take priority over the children. I, and most of my co-workers wish we could prevent reunification in MANY cases, but we are ordered to work with these parents to reunite them with their children. I wish it was different. Change this and you will get a large support group from DSS workers (probably not the higher ups...they are in the business of politics...we are not) We have to work with these people, most of them don't follow a case plan and even when they do, its only a bandaid/temporary solution...most will return to their pre-removal status because they can. And it starts all over again...
I will no longer comment on the ZP because I have nothing favorable to say.

 

[NC Analyzer]

tlcox: I also wanted to add...Reunification is NOT a part of child protection. As I mentioned, I'm an investigator. I am not a case manager. Case Manager's are the second team that comes in when the investigator determines that abuse or neglect has occured or is likely to occur and they work with the family to develop a case plan to KEEP the family together. If a child(ren) is/are removed at the investigative phase, they are moved to Foster Care and the Foster Care workers are ordered by the court to develop a plan to reunify the family. I won't do case management or foster care for that reason. I don't have the patience for some of these people. I would rather be the one to remove the children and move on. I'm in the business of child protection...even though my co-workers and the court is not.

 

[NC Analyzer]

kalekona: you said "As for permanently removing children from parents involved in drug use- seems that thought comes from someone who has no experience with drug addiction and the complexities that are involved. It simply isn't a black or white issue."

I absoutely agree with that as well. Please let me clarify, I believe parents who abuse/neglect their children BECAUSE they place their needs for drugs/alcohol before the needs of the child should have the child removed, unless (big unless) that parent(s) asks for help, recognizes they have a problem, want to recover, show remorse, wish they could be a better parent, etc. People have to want recovery and its fairly obvious when they do. And no, I have never (nor will I ever) remove a child just because mom or dad (or both) smoke a little pot...away from the child...recreationally, etc. Nor will I remove a child whose parents have a few beers/drinks to many and got a little drunk one night, or have a few beers on the weekend. These are not people with a "problem". Especially if they are adequately providing for the child's needs and there is no abuse/neglect in the home. I don't like to remove people's kids...its a stressful, time consuming job that I would just as soon do without. On the other hand, when I have denial, "I don't use drugs", "nothing wrong with me", etc. and they buy drugs or alcohol before they pay bills or buy groceries...we have a problem. I don't care if its pot or not...if it comes before their kids, its all over if I'm the investigator. That's my stand. You can't help those who don't want help. But I can help their kids.

 

[WhyaDuck?]

Just for anyone that is interested, we have a thread for discussing how CPS could be improved. I have not read there lately, but here is the link: Overhaul of Social Services? Stop these tragedies before they happen??? - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community


On another note: NC - I am hearing your frustration and I can relate. I often work with social workers and I know they are frustrated.

There are things that can be done to make the system work better. We just need to identify them and then get them implemented.

I think any proposals have to work with the constitutional rights of the parents, be compassionate, yet responsive, and protect the kids. There are a lot of kids out there that need protection.

Salem

ETA: I apologize for popping in and out all the time. It seems everytime I come to this thread, RL wants my attention. I will be back

I'm going to bump this link as an avenue of general CPS discussion, as the topic of this thread is the Zahra Project. Also, feel free to start threads in the Jury Room or the Tots forums, as appropriate.

 

[NC Analyzer]

I have a question to go with the post above. I see these things being a problem as well. Who do we go to, to get these and other issues resolved. Is it considered a US government or state government issue? Does each state have different guild lines?

The answer to your question is yes...each state has different guidelines. This is why you will see some states in the hot seat for CPS problems when other states have less publicity. They have developed a "newer" or better practice and implemented it to reduce the numbers. This has gone on since CPS began and will continue I suspect. New rules, better practice cannot save every child. As another poster stated...the human element is key.
The answer to your other question is every state determines their own policy and within that policy, each agency is allowed to implement their own policy. Agency policy can never be less than the state's policy, but the agency can add additional requirements or interpret the policy in a stricter manner. (I have that where I work...makes me crazy, lol). The funding is mostly federal, but some money is subsidized by the state as well. I don't get into funding, but I know those goofy 5min time sheets I fill out, along with their codes, etc. draw down federal, state and local funding money, depending on which code I use. (which is another time consuming thing...figuring out which code to apply to which case). Local funding applies to our benefit pay, meetings, training, etc. that are not direct client related.

 

[tlcya]

tlcox: I also wanted to add...Reunification is NOT a part of child protection. As I mentioned, I'm an investigator. I am not a case manager. Case Manager's are the second team that comes in when the investigator determines that abuse or neglect has occured or is likely to occur and they work with the family to develop a case plan to KEEP the family together. If a child(ren) is/are removed at the investigative phase, they are moved to Foster Care and the Foster Care workers are ordered by the court to develop a plan to reunify the family. I won't do case management or foster care for that reason. I don't have the patience for some of these people. I would rather be the one to remove the children and move on. I'm in the business of child protection...even though my co-workers and the court is not.

I thank you for your clarification and appreciate your insight and your challenges is trying to do the task before you. I do think that the Zahra project is coming from the right place, hearts moved by Zahra's particular case wanting to try and improve the DSS system. I hope, as I said, that they take alot of input from folks dealing with and in the current system. I think that can only improve proposals that come from it. I apologize if you took my concerns with the system in place as personal criticism. I understand beauracracy (sp?) and red tape practically tie workers hands and cover them in paper obligations. That is a part of the system I hate. The fact that it is so guidelined out that individuals are given a task and then roadblocks put in every direction to completing it. My concern is with the "system" and those who run it (ie government, legislature, fat cats who push paper and have no clue what it is to do the actual job) not those who try like he77 to wade through it all day.

I would like to see folks like you helping to describe what WOULD be helpful and how do we get those things accomplished to the folks at Zahra Project.

I know we can all agree budgets don't allow for as many people to follow kids once in the system adequately. Investigators have too great a case loads and too many BS calls that are malicious in nature and unfounded. How could Zahra's need for help been better addressed? How can we make that possible for those who are in your shoes?

 

[NC Analyzer]

I thank you for your clarification and appreciate your insight and your challenges is trying to do the task before you. I do think that the Zahra project is coming from the right place, hearts moved by Zahra's particular case wanting to try and improve the DSS system. I hope, as I said, that they take alot of input from folks dealing with and in the current system. I think that can only improve proposals that come from it. I apologize if you took my concerns with the system in place as personal criticism. I understand beauracracy (sp?) and red tape practically tie workers hands and cover them in paper obligations. That is a part of the system I hate. The fact that it is so guidelined out that individuals are given a task and then roadblocks put in every direction to completing it. My concern is with the "system" and those who run it (ie government, legislature, fat cats who push paper and have no clue what it is to do the actual job) not those who try like he77 to wade through it all day.

I would like to see folks like you helping to describe what WOULD be helpful and how do we get those things accomplished to the folks at Zahra Project.

I know we can all agree budgets don't allow for as many people to follow kids once in the system adequately. Investigators have too great a case loads and too many BS calls that are malicious in nature and unfounded. How could Zahra's need for help been better addressed? How can we make that possible for those who are in your shoes?

Oh no, I never took what you said as criticism :giggle: Believe me, I've been slammed, insulted, and told off in multiple ways...I can assure you I did not consider your comment to be criticism, LOL.
I'm sorry, I really cannot say anything more about the ZP except they are not what you wish/hope they are. I do not support the group and my hope in coming here is that someone else with good intentions and good research skills WILL be able to make the needed changes. I would be happy to give as much input as possible...but please realize that I am limited to knowing about NC laws and policy and not as well versed on other states. And I can only respond when I'm not working (or sleeping, :innocent. We definitely need change and we need change that does allow us to see these kids/families and insure to the best of our ability that everything that can be done for them IS done.

 

[NC Analyzer]

I don't want to get into trouble posting here. If someone (other than me) knows how to take some of this information and start a new discussion...please do. Just leave me a link and I'll find you! Maybe we could call it CPS questions and reform solutions? I don't know...I'm the newbie! I just don't want to be part of this ZP discussion area.

 

[Allusonz]

Just for anyone that is interested, we have a thread for discussing how CPS could be improved. I have not read there lately, but here is the link: Overhaul of Social Services? Stop these tragedies before they happen??? - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community


On another note: NC - I am hearing your frustration and I can relate. I often work with social workers and I know they are frustrated.

There are things that can be done to make the system work better. We just need to identify them and then get them implemented.

I think any proposals have to work with the constitutional rights of the parents, be compassionate, yet responsive, and protect the kids. There are a lot of kids out there that need protection.

Salem

ETA: I apologize for popping in and out all the time. It seems everytime I come to this thread, RL wants my attention. I will be back

thanks so much salem did not know this existed now i do

 

[WhyaDuck?]

Overhaul of Social Services? Stop these tragedies before they happen??? - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Is this what you had in mind?

 

[NC Analyzer]

Is this what you had in mind?

Well, I was actually hoping for a new discussion area that was less focused on bashing CPS in general and discussing specific cases.
Kinda hoping for something along the lines of questions and ideas for change...I know, I know, these new people sure are demanding :gavel:


:jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping:

 

[WhyaDuck?]

Well, I was actually hoping for a new discussion area that was less focused on bashing CPS in general and discussing specific cases.
Kinda hoping for something along the lines of questions and ideas for change...I know, I know, these new people sure are demanding :gavel:


:jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping::jumping:

That is the thread designated for how to change CPS. I could start one in the Jury Room for you, if you prefer, though I really don't find it helpful to split conversation, as discussion confined to tight threads is the best for research and discussion purposes. Also, at WS we do not split into "pro" and "con" sides, as that is also not useful. We prefer both sides work together, and be respectful.

However, let me know if you'd like a fresh thread in the JR - but also keep in mind that no one can direct the opinions in the thread, so if people are still disapproving of CPS, that is their right and I can't guarantee you will approve of their sentiments there any more than in the thread you dislike. Not to put you off, but I just wanted to be clear that I can't promise anything.

Please reconsider using the thread designed for this discussion, but let me know if you want a fresh one and we can make it happen (or you can make one yourself - just head to the "members' only section").

ETA: Also, there is no case discussion in the JR - that is for recreational threads or theoretical/opinion discussion only.

 

[WhyaDuck?]

Now, folks, please get this thread back on topic.

 

[KPMcLovin]

Just wanted to let you guys that are genuinely interested in improving the system and have the time to know that we (The Zahra Project) would love to hear anyone's opinions on things we are discussing. There is a wide variety of people there with different backgrounds. We don't claim to know how to fix the system, we are just trying to put together great minds and figure out ways to help. I've found this group (WS) to be a bunch of smart, ethical people and I enjoy the conversation here. We have quite a few good discussions going on in the discussions tab at TZP. I don't think you need to like the page to view them. This is where issues such as homeschooling and CPS problems get talked about. The page is minimally moderated because most of the people on the behave. I think I have deleted four posts. Pros and cons are welcome (but no bashing, harassing or bullying).
We really are a group with a great agenda, and we are trying hard to figure out how to get there. We have an advisory board that contains people with social work backgrounds, thank goodness, because I personally am a dog trainer from NC with absolutely no experience in the social work field.

 

[Flakes]

Just FYI, I started The Zahra Project and would lave to have some of your brilliant opinions there.
I'm flattered that we have a thread named after us

Hi KPMcLovin Great sentiment and purpose in this project. I wish you all the best with it.

I want to raise one concern however, and I feel this very, very strongly (I can't emphasise how strongly).

I have a real issue with the clause you are drafting that deals with spouses/etc that are witness to an event of child abuse and potentially face charges identical to those against the perpetrator of the abuse.

This proposal effectively threatens people who are already in an abusive relationship with their partner. If a person is abusing their partner and the children then we are dealing with generations of victims here. These adult victims can be powerless and under severe threat if they speak out, or act out, to protect their children. The cycle of abuse can make such victims of spousal abuse quite utterly paralysed, powerless and incapable of acting in the defense of their abused children no matter how upset they are by it. It is a pathetic situation.

I believe the solution to this problem is not to persecute these victims of abuse, it is to show compassion to them and assist them to become empowered so that they can remove their children from the abusive environment. This requires sanctity and support for the abuse victims (both parent and child).

I feel it's easy for people who have not experienced abuse to say "just walk away" and "if you can't then you're mutually responsible for the abuse to the children", but it's not necessarily that simple if a person is themselves a victim in this situation. Consider the mental damage of years of abuse by the person they "love" and how this would impact on their ability to act in defense of their children. This may be from more than just fear, it may also be tied in with religious beliefs regarding marriage.

We are talking about a complex range of issues here, and I really don't think punishing such victims for failing to intervene in the abuse of their children achieves much. I don't even like to contemplate the results of such a law being passed.

 

[NC Analyzer]

Hi KPMcLovin Great sentiment and purpose in this project. I wish you all the best with it.

I want to raise one concern however, and I feel this very, very strongly (I can't emphasise how strongly).

I have a real issue with the clause you are drafting that deals with spouses/etc that are witness to an event of child abuse and potentially face charges identical to those against the perpetrator of the abuse.

This proposal effectively threatens people who are already in an abusive relationship with their partner. If a person is abusing their partner and the children then we are dealing with generations of victims here. These adult victims can be powerless and under severe threat if they speak out, or act out, to protect their children. The cycle of abuse can make such victims of spousal abuse quite utterly paralysed, powerless and incapable of acting in the defense of their abused children no matter how upset they are by it. It is a pathetic situation.

I believe the solution to this problem is not to persecute these victims of abuse, it is to show compassion to them and assist them to become empowered so that they can remove their children from the abusive environment. This requires sanctity and support for the abuse victims (both parent and child).

I feel it's easy for people who have not experienced abuse to say "just walk away" and "if you can't then you're mutually responsible for the abuse to the children", but it's not necessarily that simple if a person is themselves a victim in this situation. Consider the mental damage of years of abuse by the person they "love" and how this would impact on their ability to act in defense of their children. This may be from more than just fear, it may also be tied in with religious beliefs regarding marriage.

We are talking about a complex range of issues here, and I really don't think punishing such victims for failing to intervene in the abuse of their children achieves much. I don't even like to contemplate the results of such a law being passed.

I absoutely agree with you, Flakes. I was a Domestic Violence Program Manager prior to my current position as an Investigator. The cycle of abuse and the dynamics of abused women (and men) are very difficult for many people to understand without the proper training. It would further victimize the victim to prosecute them for something they had no control over. Additionally, the current law already permits the State to prosecute witnesses/spouses/significant others who have seen a child being abused and did not act to protect the child. It would be completely futile to attempt to legislate a new law that is already a law. The decision to prosecute is made by the DA's office based on the facts of the case.

 

[dar107]

There is some great videos of the Zahra Angel Wings ride the other day on the Zahra Project page. Big turn out, and I heard the sun came out just as they were to get started. Go figure, angels controlling the weather?



http://www.facebook.com/board.php?uid=189660627730936&status=512#!/thezahraproject