Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!


CHILD WELFARE: WHAT WENT WRONG?


In my opinion, the consequence of failing to name the court to which the appeal is taken is unduly harsh in a case such as the one before us. But we are not at liberty to act as free-wheeling chancellors of old, riding roughshod over rules that in our opinion are inequitable. The rule of law requires that such a change come from either Congress or the Supreme Court, which I in fact would urge be done. In the meantime, I agree with the wisdom of President Ulysses S. Grant's statement that "the best way to get rid of a bad law is to enforce it." See State ex rel. Skilton v. Miller, 128 N.E.2d 47, 52 (Ohio 1955) (Stewart, J., dissenting).

Children's Rights Advocacy

Children are Special!
Childhood is a Special Time!
A Time for Wonder, For Learning & Growing!



WHAT IS WRONG WITH CHILD PROTECTION LAWS?
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?


I have promised myself over and over to complete this page and get it uploaded to this web site for several months now.

Since this web site was first uploaded there have been many visitors to this web site, entries in the guestbook, and requests for help, or more specific information or referrals. There has been a lot of time spent maintaining this web site and many hours reading e-mail. This web site has been a very important part of my learning process also.

Many people who have visited this web site would not have ever found it in the first place were they not concerned about child welfare issues and looking for answers. Like myself, when other people decide to set about to find answers it was usually because they needed to help themselves, or were determined to help someone else, or just get some straight answers.

I have done everything I could to make it possible to just get straight answers. The truth for me, and for so many of the other people that have started to look for answers is that they started this quest far too late to help themselves and what they were seeking they needed to know years before they realized they now need to get some accurate and reliable answers. Hopefully, this web site will make it possible that somehow, and someday, these things will change for the better.

The number one lesson I have learned why it is so difficult to change, or reform, certain injustices is that it is the people themselves who are the most guilty and responsible for why there are injustices and this is true for the simple reason that the people have forgotten how significant it is that the rights of others are so very closely connected to their own rights. The police, lawyers, judges, legislators, and many other public servants know this very well and they very diligently watch out for their own interests and protect these interests most effectively by zealously protecting each other each and every time the situation calls for it, they do not turn their back on their own kind. If the public would just see how simple this is and learn to speak out most loudly when it is their fellow citizen's who are treated unfairly there would be a lot less corruption and a lot less injustice. It is only the public and the citizen that can change this because your government is not very willing to bring this to your attention.

Instead the citizen has been lead to this slaughter by ignoring these injustices and when these injustices are visited upon themselves it is usually only then these people will want to speak of injustice and legal reform.

I can tell you this with absolute certainty ...  The number one fear your corrupt government has is that the people figure this out and take the steps necessary to correct it.

Far too many people have no idea how simple it is to bring about significant and lasting legal reform if only the public would come to demand that these lessons never be forgot and demand that these lessons be diligently included as a part of the public education, taught to children in school each and every year, and never be allowed to have these lessons removed from the agenda of public education being taught to children. For many people who are reading this I doubt it is necessary to explain what happens when these lessons are forgot by the people.

I used to manage a law office and have seen these issues from both sides of the fence. Most significant for me is that there was a time when I was guilty of participating in "taking the client for a ride." Some lawyers joke about the "Bad Tasting Medicine!" They actually laugh and joke at the confusion a client has when presented with an excessively large legal bill combined with a decision of the court that is equally, if not more, hard to swallow. These lawyers will jokingly comment about justifying the legal bill for the reason that "this medicine may taste bad, but it is good for you" and "if not for this bill things would be much worse for you than they are now."

The simple truth of excessive legal bills is that attorneys are encouraged to over bill and are rarely sanctioned, or punished for it. Why attorneys over bill is because it is a service to the court:

1) The client will get very discouraged with continuing litigation because of the legal costs.

2) The client will also have more difficulties affording the appeals of the decision of the court after being drained financially.

3) The fewer appeals a judge has filed on his/her decisions, the fewer these decisions will be reversed, or overturned, and the more competent the judge will look when it is time for reelection. And judges do not forget these favors. One of the first lessons I was taught working in a law office was never do anything that makes a judge look less than highly professional. [But this is another account for another time and place]

4)  Many lawyers become quite well aware of what the client can afford and usually intentionally bill beyond that so as to be able to excuse some of the bill, out of the kindness of their heart. It offers the public a "human side" to the legal profession.

What is even worse is that many attorneys have no idea that they work against justice and an efficient legal system for the simple reason that they truly do not know any better and what they are doing is the only way they have ever learned. For many of these lawyers they really do not think about it this anymore and have stopped questioning these things long ago and are quick to tell a client who questions what is going on that "You just don't understand how the law works and that is why you hire an attorney!"

The sad truth for many clients/litigants is that your attorney knew your case was not going to win before he/she asked you to sign the attorney/client agreement, but that did not stop the attorney from encouraging you to hold on to hope and continue paying your legal bill.

There are many things which are not going well with this society and these problems are spread throughout the many facets of this society, its laws, public policies and its public servants. There are good reasons for this and for the most part the fault lies with the people who have grown far too comfortable being indifferent to what knowledge and due diligence could have preserved and prevented.

People are more inclined to be willing to fight difficulties rather than first try to understand them. Sometimes the truth is so unpleasant, that the lie will be much more appreciated and valued. But understanding what is going on is the only way to begin effectively addressing the issues.

It must eventually become evident that public policy is more often influenced through methods of exploiting public indifference rather than through educating the public reason when it comes to administration of the public trust.

Personally, I have been focusing on these issues since 1992, and it is now eleven years later and 2003. I have seen so few meaningful changes and I have seen many other advocates come and go. There are many who are still on the Internet that were here before I came along and I often wonder how they do it.

Child welfare reform has its own set of circumstances and specific conditions to consider.

If children are the precious and essential elements of a society, then that society must conduct its affairs accordingly and by doing so not only secures its own welfare, but also the welfare of future generations, as a natural consequence of responsibly protecting and educating children in a manner that reflects children being recognized as one of the most precious gifts of God and being what life demands in order to preserve the continuation of life itself.

Children are the future, if there is to be one at all. What else could possibly be more important to consider when it comes to the rights of children? If what is decided to be right for Social Workers, Expert Witnesses, Courts, Prosecutors , Judges and the Parents, is wrong for the child then it was not right to begin with! There is no other standard to accept, or exception to consider, when it comes to the rights and welfare of children. [This will be repeated!]

Child welfare reform is long overdue and what is happening to children in the United States of America is a national disgrace and the people need to accept their portion of the guilt for this disgrace.

If the taxpayers fully understood the billions of dollars they provide to finance a system specifically designed to maintain the profits for those who service and administer the child welfare system there may be some additional motivation for effective changes being demanded if not for protecting children but protecting instead the abuses heaped upon the taxpayer because of these policies and administration of this public trust. But these changes are even more unlikely because of the indifference of the taxpayer and an apparent willingness of the taxpayer to submit their hard earned dollars without question and without demand for an accurate accounting.

People, in general, also do not want to know the truth and prefer to avoid it and do not like being confronted with issues and concepts that may suggest how wrong, or even misinformed they may possibly be.

Those people who question and protest are very few and far between.

In the meantime an entire industry has been created and survives and thrives because of the potential need for the review of public policy. Information has become a commodity, something to be controlled and dispensed with care and limitations. The truth of this matter is that these organizations who advocate and promote social change have no desire to see any real changes being made for the simple reason that if these changes are made they would all be out of work to do in addition to having an easy way of making a living. Many reform groups and similar organizations fully intend to establish their policies in ways that will only extend a "carrot on the end of a stick" towards possible reform rather than zealously pursue legitimate reform.

For those who are willing to put the energy and effort towards effective child welfare reform there is a need to understand what is going on, how it got this way, and why the demand for changes is not being heard now.

1) The most powerful and significant "stumbling block" towards effective child welfare reform right now is the indifference of the public for these issues. Most people would agree with the need for changes and reform if it personally affected them, but it does not. Those who become involved in the courts and the child welfare system are, in fact, a very small segment of the entire population. The public has to be educated about what is really going on and probably the best way to address this is the waste of taxes through fraud and misconduct. It is sad to say that there will probably be more people upset about the waste of their taxes than those who will be concerned about what these programs are doing to so many children.

2) Education of the public and an unwavering diligence to maintain that awareness are the two most necessary factors needed for any effective reform.

What many advocates fail to understand is that the two best ways to educate the public and maintain that awareness is to address these issues at the county level as much as possible. National reform and national issues are certainly important, but many children attend public schools and it is especially the county board of education that needs to be pressured constantly to maintain programs that teach children these values, the Constitution, and the civic functions of government. Some of these children will someday sit on a jury, or become police officers, or employed in other public sectors. Legal rights need to be diligently taught from the very start of any education.

The County Commissioners administer many facets of your daily life. The County Commissioners set the salary and operating budgets for the county courts, the county sheriff department, community mental health, the county library and public utilities. Federal funds and state funds that come to the county are administered through the county commissioners. Children's Protective Services, although a state agency is also managed at the county level. County Commissioners make many decisions affecting the operations and budget of the local social services, welfare, and CPS agencies.

Those who want to address changes and reform need to also include the County level government when they write legislators and other policy makers. County meetings should be attended and who is elected to these positions should most certainly be considered as important to you and the rights of your children as who you consider voting for President of the United States, or congress.

Effective changes can begin at the county level and should not be overlooked by those who want to address the issues of reform. It constantly frustrates me at how few advocates and protestors realize how important it is to make the county comissioners also think about these issues.

There is a strong resistance to child welfare reform because there are many who are not indifferent to what is going on and specifically worked very hard for many long years to bring about the current laws, programs, and policies so as to be able to work within this system under the present conditions as they are now. The current child welfare laws did not just happen to come along. These laws were very carefully thought out and presented to the legislators by those who intentionally planned for these conditions to come about. If there is anything you can be certain about it is this:

There are those who do not want to see changes and reform made to the child welfare system because the child welfare system is currently operating to the benefit of those who administer it, contract to it, and provide professional services to the child welfare system. There are many special interests involved in the child welfare system and these special interests have many means at their disposal to prevent, minimize or resist, any unwanted changes and exploit the public indifference to their advantage.

There is a combination of factors that cause children to be subjected to far too many "special interests" and political considerations when they become involved in the child welfare and child protection system:

1)   Federal Grants [primarily DHHS & Federal Education grants, but there are others] reach the states allowing for the funding of programs that are in turn contracted out to various licensed professionals at the county level through Children's Protective Services and Community Mental Health agencies. Many of your local psychologists, family therapists and counselors, are profiting from the availability of tax dollars instead of providing services to legitimate private paying clients.

2)  In order to justify receiving this money, and even more of it, many Behavior Healthcare businesses have began to spring up like mushrooms after a Spring rain. These agencies hire staff to provide court ordered evaluations and assessments in contested visitation and child custody cases. These businesses also provide evaluations and assessments referred by Children's Protective Services agencies for risk and needs determinations, or once again court ordered community services required when Children's Protective Services opens a case for intervention of child abuse, or neglect, cases and has petitioned the court for an order requiring parents of these children to attend and cooperate with services even if these parents have not been found guilty of child abuse, or neglect, in a court of law.

3)  These billions of available federal dollars are eagerly sought out and children are being "processed" in production line fashion. All that is required to keep these available funds flowing is children to "process" and knowing how to fill out the forms. There is little oversight and when the court is involved secrecy, immunity, and many privileges of confidentiality are often abused.

Children's medical records and history are often altered in order to justify providing these services and submit the billing for the services being provided. I hope you can imagine what this must do to a child who has little choice but to continue to receive unnecessary treatment by professionals who are providing these treatments, counseling, or therapy, based on inaccurate, incomplete, or sometimes totally fabricated and falsified referral information. This is being done by licensed professionals who do not have the morals to make any attempt to at least inquire into the accuracy of the information which they are relying upon and basing their services on, especially when they are not required to do so by any current regulations.

I have included a July 29, 1999, press release from the Department of Justice to support the point I am trying to make.

4)  I am not a person who would even claim to understand politics but the 4th point I hope to make is that I believe that many legislators who have supported the legislation that has become excessively abused have their own reasons to "put off" requests for these reviews. A case in point is Arkansas State Senator Nick Wilson.



http://www.nwamorningnews.com/2000/march/05/news/0305editorial.shtml

'Because I am guilty' Tuesday, March 07, 2000
The Morning News of Northwest Arkansas

Powerful senator now convicted felon!

"Because I am guilty."

That was Nick Wilson's simple, direct and concise explanation Thursday of why he changed his innocent plea to guilty in one of the most sensational public-corruption cases in Arkansas history.

That declaration by Wilson, arguably among the most powerful state senators ever to walk the
Capitol's marble floors, ended his prosecution on 129 federal counts of defrauding taxpayers. But
Wilson's plea does not end a public-corruption scandal that has become a disturbing era in Arkansas politics.

Before a federal judge in Little Rock, Wilson admitted his role in a scheme to divert state tax dollars to his own pockets and those of his cronies. In exchange for dropping all but one of the 129 counts against the former senator from Pocahontas and a guilty plea to the remaining charge, prosecutors will get Wilson's cooperation as their cases against others in the alleged scheme continue. Wilson, it seems, will be taking the stand against three former Senate colleagues who prosecutors say he helped enrich with ill-gotten gains.

Wilson's admissions described a classic political-fraud scheme. It was a scam that only a powerful office holder like Wilson could direct. Dollars were allocated to various programs through legislation. Wilson's influence secured the legislature's passage of the bills so the money would be there. The contracts to distribute the money ended up going to Wilson and a select group of his pals, again utilizing the former senator's clout.



This article was published on Thursday, March 23, 2000
http://www.arkansas-online.com/today/ark/0A1xcorrupt23.html

Lawyer tells of setting up scheme with Todd, Bell

LINDA SATTER ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE

Lawyer Elizabeth Turner told jurors Wednesday that former state Senators Mike Todd and Steve Bell schemed with her to illegally profit from a program to help children.

Todd of Paragould and Bell of Batesville are on trial in federal court in Little Rock on charges of racketeering, mail fraud and money laundering. The charges stem from their work with the program, which was created in 1997 to provide attorneys for children in custody disputes.

Also on trial is state Sen. Mike Bearden, D-Blytheville, who faces the same charges over his participation in another state program concerning children. That program produced high-dollar state contracts made from 1993 to 1997 with a few select lawyers to enforce child-support orders.

Federal prosecutors say former Sen. Nick Wilson of Pocahontas reigned over both schemes. Wilson has admitted that for using his government connections to secure the jobs for his friends, he received hundreds of thousands of dollars in kickbacks.



http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1999/July/334civ.htm

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CIV

THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1999  (202) 514-2007 TDD (202) 514-1888

COLUMBIA/HCA HEALTHCARE TO PAY $1.25 MILLION TO SETTLE FALSE CLAIMS SUIT INVOLVING NORTH CAROLINA HOSPITAL

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Department of Justice today announced that Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation has agreed to pay $1.25 million to the United States and the State of North Carolina to settle charges that the company submitted false claims to a Medicaid-funded managed care plan for adolescent psychiatric services.

The settlement, which resolves a lawsuit unsealed July 6 in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, addresses claims that Columbia/HCA's Brunswick Hospital, located in Supply, North Carolina, defrauded a Medicaid waiver program known as "Carolina Alternatives," a managed care plan for adolescent mental health and substance abuse treatment services. The settlement is unrelated to the government's ongoing nationwide investigation of other Columbia/HCA practices.

The government claimed that from at least 1994 to 1996, outpatient programs of Brunswick Hospital's Adolescent Psychiatric Unit billed Medicaid for services provided by unqualified or under-qualified employees as if they were provided by qualified mental health professionals. In addition, the government alleged the hospital billed Medicaid for services that were not rendered, and double-billed Medicaid for certain therapies by failing to subtract amounts included in other claims for those same therapies. The government claimed further that Brunswick Hospital staff altered and falsified medical records to conceal these deficiencies from a Medicaid review in 1996.



http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2003/September/03_civ_515.htm
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2003
WWW.USDOJ.GOV CIV
(202) 514-2007 TDD (202) 514-1888

NORTH CAROLINA TO PAY $23.8M TO RESOLVE OVERBILLING ALLEGATIONS FOR
STATE'S FOSTER CARE & CHILDCARE SERVICES

WASHINGTON, D.C. - North Carolina has agreed to pay the United States $23.8 million to resolve multiple allegations of False Claims Act violations, as well as administrative violations, concerning federal funding of the state's foster care and childcare services, the Justice Department announced today.

North Carolina has agreed to resolve allegations that the State Division of Mental Health, Developmental Disabilities and Substance Abuse knowingly billed the federal government for costs that were ineligible for federal foster care training funds. The settlement agreement also resolves allegations outlined in reports by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Inspector General that North Carolina committed administrative violations by failing to document its actual costs spent on day care services.

"The Department of Justice is committed to preventing the fraud, waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars and ensuring recovery of funds intended to benefit our nation's children," said Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division.

According to the terms of the settlement agreement, the state has agreed to make cash payments totaling $20 million, agreed to a disallowance of federal funding in the amount of $3.8 million and agreed to implement a new record-keeping system for identifying child care expenditures.

In 2002, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina criminally prosecuted Dr. Lenore Behar, the former Chief of the Child and Family Section of the Division of Mental Health. Behar was indicted for her role in mischarging foster care training funds and was subsequently convicted of obstruction of justice.

"Today's settlement resolves every foster care training claim submitted by the Division of Mental Health during the tenure of Lenore Behar," said Frank D. Whitney, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina in Raleigh. Whitney applauded the settlement for "recovering funds meant to help North Carolina's children, that were instead spent on things like international travel, the renovation of a college building in another country, and the construction of a statue of a foreign leader."

Attorneys of the Justice Department's Civil Division and U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina, with assistance from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of General Counsel, negotiated this civil matter.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Defense Criminal Investigative Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Inspector General and the Defense Contract Audit Agency also provided investigative support.


5)  When all of this is contained within a single county jurisdiction, or authority, and review is so highly unlikely it provides that anything goes. There are jobs, reputations, and job security to consider over the rights and welfare of a child. It is not going to look good when a judge, or a court appointed attorney finds any discrepancy with a contracted expert witness' opinions, or the reliability of a social worker's conclusions, for it only invites potential review for a judge to do so.

When there is confidence that there will be minimal or thorough reviews there is bound to be corruption, fraud and misconduct especially if there is going to be a general indifference to it by the public.

There are too many special interests and political issues involved to assure that the rights and welfare of children are being protected over the potential for profit instead of the rights and welfare of children.

6) When all else is said and done if reviews are eventually thoroughly performed another issue that is bound to rear its ugly head is that these cases also clearly reveal that those conditions imposed upon the citizen for noncompliance of public policy are excessively disproportionate to the conditions imposed upon the public servant for noncompliance with public policy.

This nation and this society has allowed democracy to become one of the most tyrannical systems available where the citizen is held accountable by specific standards and measures while the public servant is held to account by a totally different set of standards and measures. These child welfare laws are only one of the many prices to be paid for the citizen accepting this double standard from its own government and allowing these conditions to continue.




 ".............. for how we live is so far removed from how we ought to live, that he who abandons what is done will rather learn to bring about his own ruin rather than his own preservation. A man who wishes to make a profession of goodness in everything must necessarily come to grief among so many who are not so good. Therefore it is necessary for a prince, who wishes to maintain himself, to learn how to not be good and use the knowledge as well as not use it, according to the necessity of the case." THE PRINCE ..... Machiavelli



I have since learned that right here in the United States of America prosecutors, police, expert
witnesses and even child welfare social workers can bring a citizen into the court process by
presenting lies, manufacture and fabricate evidence and even do so with malice and it has become
established case law that these people will have immunities, even if they are caught doing these things.

The truth of this has been so well stated in court decisions issued right here in the United States:

Specifically, I am referring to two decisions, one that is published and one that has been designated
as unpublished: [Read entire case by clicking here]

The published case is an 11th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals case: Appeal from the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida (January 23, 2002) No. 00-16361 [D.C. Docket
No. 97-06832 CV-PAS

Robert R. Rowe, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus THE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE, a municipal
corporation, BLACKBURN, individually and as police officer of the City of Fort Lauderdale.

The specific judges who decided this case were: The Honorable J.L. Edmondson, the Honorable
Edward Carnes, and the Honorable R. Kenton Musgrave.

A copy of this case should be available through the Court Clerk's office of 11th Circuit Court of
Appeals

Thomas K. Kahn, Clerk
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit
56 Forsyth St. N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303

In this decision these judges made these observations about prosecutor [Lazarus] discretion and
immunities:

     We now turn to the issue of whether, given those facts, the district court was right to grant
     Lazarus summary judgment on Rowe's claims against him. We begin by discussing whether
     Lazarus was entitled to immunity from Rowe's claims. A prosecutor is entitled to absolute
     immunity for all actions he takes while performing his function as an advocate for the
     government. Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259, 273, 113 S. Ct.. 2606, 2615-16
     (1993). The prosecutorial function includes the initiation and pursuit of criminal prosecution,
     Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 424, 96 S. Ct.. 984, 992 (1976), and all appearances
     before the court, including examining witnesses and presenting evidence. See Burns v. Reed,
     500 U.S. 478, 492 111 S. Ct.. 1934, 1942 (1991). Under these principles, it is clear
     that, even if Lazarus knowingly proffered perjured testimony and fabricated exhibits
     at trial, he is entitled to absolute immunity from liability for doing so.

     "An investigator's planting or fabricating evidence in an effort to obtain a conviction does
     violate clearly established law, Jones, 174 F.3d at 1289-90; Riley v. City of Montgomery,
     104 F.3d 1247, 1253 (11th Cir. 1997), and therefore is not protected by qualified immunity.
     Thus, if Lazarus had engaged in any planting or fabricating of evidence while he was in an
     investigatory role, he would not be immune from liability for damages to Rowe."


The next case I would like to refer to is an unpublished case issued by the Michigan Court of
Appeals February 9, 2001 Court Of Appeals Docket Number: 215286

EDWARD BIELASKA and CLAUDIA BIELASKA Plaintiffs-Appellants, v Wayne Circuit Court
LINDA ORLEY, LAURA ORLEY, and WILLIAM ORLEY, Defendants, and KAREN
SCHULTE, FAMILY CONSULTATION & TREATMENT SERVICES, INC., KATHLEEN
COULBORN FALLER, JANE MILDRED, and ELLEN DEVOE, Defendants-Appellees. Lower
Court No. 96-614421-NM for Wayne County, Michigan.

The section of this case I would like to quote from follows: [Read entire case by clicking here]

"Our Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of the civil action, finding that summary disposition was warranted under MCR 2.116(C)(7) and (8). Id. at 118. In that opinion, the Court explained the scope of the witness immunity doctrine in Michigan. The Court stated:

[W]itnesses who testify during the course of judicial proceedings enjoy quasi-judicial immunity. This immunity is available to those serving in a quasi judicial adjudicative capacity as well as "those persons other than judges without whom the judicial process could not function." Witnesses who are an integral part of the judicial process "are wholly immune from liability for the consequences of their testimony or related evaluations." Statements made during the course of judicial proceedings are absolutely privileged, provided they are relevant, material, or pertinent to the issue being tried. Falsity or malice on the part of the witness does not abrogate the privilege. The privilege should be liberally construed so that participants in judicial proceedings are free to express themselves without fear of retaliation. As this Court [previously] noted: "Witness immunity is also grounded in the need of the judicial system for testimony from witnesses who, taking their oaths, are free of concern that they themselves will be targeted by the loser for further litigation. Absent perjury of a character requiring action by the prosecuting attorney, the testimony of a witness is to be weighed by the fact finder in the matter at bar, not by a subsequent jury summoned to determine whether the first lawsuit was tainted . . . ." [Id. at 133- 134 (citations omitted), (emphasis added).]


The judges who issued the Bielaska decision are:

The Honorable Hilda R. Gage
Michigan State Court of Appeals, 2nd District
American Center Building
27777 Franklin Rd. Suite 645
Southfield, Michigan 48034-2055

The Honorable Donald E. Holbrook Jr.
Michigan State Court of Appeals, 4th District
Washington Square Building
109 W. Michigan Ave.
P.O. Box 30022
Lansing, Michigan 48909-7522

The Honorable Michael R. Smolenski
Michigan State Court of Appeals, 3rd District
State of Michigan Office Building
350 Ottawa N.W.
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503-2316



It is more than shocking, and very discouraging to me, that my fellow citizens of the United States of
America do not realize the extent to which prosecutors, police, and especially court appointed
witnesses lie, manufacture, fabricate and commit perjury in order to "win a conviction." It is even
more appalling to me that the press continues to ignore this truth.

What is even more discouraging to me is that elected representatives continue to argue and debate
about constitutional and procedural safeguards that may as well be considered nonexistent now. The
next step has already been put in place for people are being detained without being charged, or
allowed a public hearing, and detained indefinitely while being subject to "secret tribunals."

Even the President of the United States of America is highly upset that the leader of Iraq may be lying, but could also care less about the truth of how legal it has become for public servants of the United States to lie, fabricate allegations against its own citizen's,  manufacture evidence, commit perjury, and do so with the court's blessings.

Now that you have become aware of the Bielaska and Rowe cases you need to know how guilty the press is for not doing its duty to inform the public that these things are going on within the Government. Try contacting any newspaper, television station, or news journalist and bring these cases to their attention. Try contacting any elected official and bring these cases to their attention. It is not a given condition that the press and the elected do not know these things are going on because the press and the elected do know what is going on and intentionally will not participate in allowing the public to become aware of "certain things." The press in the United States has also become corrupted. You cannot rely upon the press to value the truth.

Since I have made it this far in my attempt to identify the problems with the child welfare laws I have one last thing to explain about the child welfare programs, purposely left out for the last to explain one of the most essential parts of this "structure." What makes all of this work is children to process through this system, not everyone's children but carefully selected children, especially children from middle class and lower income families.

The child welfare system exists to protect children and some children are being competently protected which also happens to be an established fact because the child welfare system is not totally corrupt, or totally inept. There are dedicated child welfare workers, expert witnesses, prosecutors and judges and these people rarely get the recognition and credit they deserve.

Many people who have experienced this "child welfare" system must by now realize it is not very productive, nor does it do your child(ren) any good to assert your innocence. Most likely if you truly are innocent then the people that are doing this to your children also know you are innocent and could care less if you are innocent, or not. Many a child abuser is also being protected and that is not the point I want to make.

What is not being fully realized is that within this child welfare system is an element growing within. There are social workers who cannot competently handle the power they wield and cannot exercise it enough. There are therapists and counselors who cannot be bothered with verifying background information before they initiate their professional services. They have numbers to process, data to store, and forms to fill out and so what if they make errors, it is all done in the strictest of confidentiality with very little oversight or accountability for them to have to worry about getting it right.

Our child welfare laws invite these abuses and ignore them for two specific reason, public indifference, and it is intended to work this way and avoid these oversights. If your child falls into this pit and is ruined or harmed for life because of it there are very few who care and want to put an end to this outrage.

Many of these difficulties that people face are little more than easily avoidable conditions brought about and often encouraged by the actions and preferences of those who can appreciate and exploit the choices others do not realize they are making.


Adolf Hitler said this best:

Hitler on Propaganda - From chapter 6 of Mein Kampf:

"The function of propaganda does not lie in the scientific training of the individual, but in calling the masses' attention to certain facts, processes, necessities, etc., whose significance is thus for the first time placed within their field of vision. All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be. But if, as in propaganda for sticking out a war, the aim is to influence a whole people, we must avoid excessive intellectual demands on our public, and too much caution cannot be extended in this direction."


PLEASE! NO E-MAIL THAT I ENDORSE NAZI'S OR ADOLF HITLER!
I DO NOT!

When I was a child there were many heroes: Robin Hood, the Lone Ranger, William Tell, and Zorro, to name a few. These heroes resisted corrupt public officials and were champions of the people. Hollywood has been quite careful to eliminate these kinds of heroes and replace them with police who beat the suspect and intimidate, verbally abuse and threaten people for the public good. Even Hollywood is doing its part to "soften the public attitude" towards the abuses soon to come your way.

As long as you choose to be confused and angry your ability to work towards changes is limited. But when you are no longer confused and can remain persistent you have come to stand on equal ground with those who oppose your efforts and now those who oppose your efforts can no longer afford to stand idly by and do nothing in order to oppose, or resist, these changes you work towards. As long as you were confused you were not much of a threat to those who oppress and oppose you, and as long as you were angry you were more of a problem to yourself and not much of a concern to those who intent to oppress and oppose you.

It is a serious mistake for the citizen to measure freedom by the standards of wealth, convenience and prosperity. Freedom, and any zealous respect for preserving freedom, is far better measured by the court processes available to the accused, especially when it is the government who is your accuser, the government who is the only witness against you, and also when it is then the accuser/government who decides whether or not you are innocent, or guilty.

Now for those who would like to become actively involved in change and reform, especially with the child welfare (f)laws it must be said:

If what is decided to be right for Social Workers, Expert Witnesses, Courts, Prosecutors , Judges and the Parents, is wrong for the child then it was not right to begin with!

There is no other standard to accept, or exception to consider, when it comes to the rights and welfare of children.

It is this simple and if we can just start understanding what is really happening, how it got to be this way, and why it is going to be difficult to change then change just may be possible.

For now the sad and simple truth is that change is not deemed necessary by the majority of the people and the legislators and few, very few, are willing to even try to understand why.

People do not understand legal issues because they are encouraged not to and specifically taught to "trust" the professional ethics and standards as effective "checks and balances" for competent and just administration of the public trust by the courts and enforcement of law.

Several issues people need to be aware of is that the court function is to preside over the proceedings. A judge is not required to know the law or diligently apply the law, the litigant is.

One specific legal doctrine that has evolved could best be explained this way:

When the government errs it is you who must catch that error, take exception of it, and request to have that error corrected, or forever thereafter be subjected to having to comply with the conditions of that error.

You can find this practice/doctrine in many decisions issued by higher courts:



A party may not harbor error as an appellate parachute. People v Carter, 462 Mich 206, 214; 612 NW2d 144 (2000); People v Fetterley, 229 Mich App 511, 520; 583 NW2d 199 (1998).


Furthermore, this Court will not search for authority to support a party's position, and the failure to cite authority in support of an issue results in its being deemed abandoned on appeal. Davenport v Grosse Pointe Farms Bd of Zoning Appeals, 210 Mich App 400, 405; 534 NW2d 143 (1995).


Moreover, the Michigan Court of Appeals "functions as a court of review that is principally charged with the duty of correcting errors" that occurred below and thus should decline to address unpreserved issues. See Michigan Up & Out of Poverty Now Coalition v State of Michigan, 210 Mich App 162, 167-168; 533 NW2d 339 (1995).


Judge are also given almost total power to decide discretionary matters which your right to appeal is again restricted and limited:


Finding an abuse of discretion must be more than a disagreement in judicial opinions between the trial court and this Court. Id. at 897. In reviewing the findings of fact, this Court should defer to the trial court's determination of credibility. Mogle v Scriver, 241 Mich App 192, 201; 614 NW2d 696 (2000).


Courts also do not allow repetition and for good reasons, however there should be exceptions to the Doctrine of Res Judicata:


[4] Collateral estoppel precludes relitigation of an issue in a subsequent, different cause of action between the same parties when the prior proceeding culminated in a valid final judgment and the issue was actually and necessarily determined in the prior proceeding.  Schlumm v. Terrence J. O'Hagan, P.C., 173 Mich.App. 345, 354, 433 N.W.2d 839 (1988).  The ultimate issue in the second action must be the same as that in the first.  Detroit v. Qualls, 434 Mich. 340, 357, 454 N.W.2d 374 (1990).  The issue must have been necessarily determined--that is, essential to the resulting judgment--in the first action.  Id.  It also must have been actually litigated--that is, put into issue by the pleadings, submitted to the trier of fact, and determined by the trier of fact.  VanDeventer v. Michigan Nat'l Bank, 172 Mich.App. 456, 463, 432 N.W.2d 338 (1988).  The parties must have had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in the first action.  Kowatch v. Kowatch, 179 Mich.App. 163, 168, 445 N.W.2d 808 (1989).


But even this doctrine will have conflicting decisions. Still it is a matter of convenience and discretion by the court, and not a matter of right for the people.


The law of the case doctrine, moreover, "directs a court's discretion, it does not limit the tribunal's power." Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 618 (1983); see Messenger v. Anderson, 225 U.S. 436, 444 (1912). Rather, "[a] court has the power to revisit prior decisions of its own or of a
coordinate court in any circumstance." Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 486 U.S. 800, 817 (1988). Law of the case does not prevent courts from reexamining earlier decisions that are "clearly erroneous and would work a manifest injustice." Agostini, 521 U.S. at 236. This is such a situation. As we now explain, the court of appeals' invalidation of the extension of HI and OASDI taxes to judicial salaries rests entirely on a decision that interpreted the Compensation Clause in a manner that has been thoroughly discredited. That decision should now be definitively repudiated.


"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." U.S. Supreme Court in American Communications Association v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 442


There is a need for me to sometime, somehow, and somewhere put an end to this presentation and get it posted to the Internet. I could go on and on with these issues.

More than anything I wanted to do my very best to make this information available to the public, and especially those who want honest and accurate answers, no holds barred.

What is on this page is truly as best a summary I am capable of providing of the results of what I have learned since 1992.

It was very difficult for me to finally personally recognize how much I am responsible for ignoring the rights of others and the injustices they received as I was growing up. It is my shame that it took these injustices to be visited upon my own child before I seriously began to question what is going on.

I can only pray that I learned my lesson, a very valuable lesson that my parents did not insist I learn, know, cherish, and keep. Now that I have learned my lesson it is one that I will insist my children learn, know, cherish, and keep. This is not a lesson that I learned all by myself, not by any means. I attended public schools in the 1950's and the 1960's and I remember very well, now and a little too late, that these lessons were taught in public school and I can even remember the names of two specific public school teachers who taught these lessons very well. Joseph Kodba, Riley High School, South Bend Indiana and Lee Harper, Studebaker Junior High, South Bend, Indiana.





 "Where the people fear the government you have tyranny." "Where the government fears the people, you have liberty."


John Adams said "Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the People!"

I remember very clearly that these lessons were taught in government classes, civics classes and social studies classes. So do not give me any credit for writing this as if I have stumbled upon knowledge and recognized it for what it is. If I had listened and understood when these things were being taught to me it would not have taken me 30 years to try and understand why this government has become what it now is. But I do remember now and that may be the only credit I deserve.

To add insult to injury, the one thing I have been able to figure out for myself is that one of the most powerful tools corruption has to its advantage is that corruption has little to fear because I have come to realize certain things, or have "awakened to the circumstances and conditions."

To say the United States of America knowingly and willingly does these things to children for profit and experiments in social control is to automatically be placed in a category of individuals who have lost their mind and ability to reason. To try and speak out about the whole truth, no matter how much proof I have been able to document that this is true, is to invite ridicule upon myself, and more. For those of you who may be able to grasp what I have tried to present, even with the limitations of my tenth grade education, must also come to terms that to come forth with the truth is to invite scorn, punishment and penalties upon yourself. To attempt to continue taking a stand about these issues is only reinforcing the the disbelief many others choose to hold onto. Listen to me, I sound crazy, like a man gone completely mad and it is certainly well advised not to take a person with such "wild ideas" seriously.

It must be known for certain by those who choose to advocate for social change and especially the rights of children that to demand an exposure of the whole truth is to invite failure. To fail to realize what you are up against is also to invite failure. A balance must be found where the public will not "fear your messages." That is why I have said that advocating for children's rights must focus on truth and perhaps the truth that God has provided is the best issue to stand firm upon.

It is most fortunate to know that if one is truly aware of the rights of children and has the knowledge of the needs of children then this truth itself will guide the advocate towards effective reforms and keep them from the harms way for casting fearful and negative messages to the public.



Child welfare reform has its own set of circumstances and specific conditions to consider.

If children are the precious and essential elements of a society, then that society must conduct its affairs accordingly and by doing so not only secures its own welfare, but also the welfare of future generations, as a natural consequence of responsibly protecting and educating children in a manner that reflects children being recognized as one of the most precious gifts of God and being what life demands in order to preserve the continuation of life itself.

Children are the future, if there is to be one at all. What else could possibly be more important to consider when it comes to the rights of children? If what is decided to be right for Social Workers, Expert Witnesses, Courts, Prosecutors , Judges and the Parents, is wrong for the child then it was not right to begin with! There is no other standard to accept, or exception to consider, when it comes to the rights and welfare of children. [This will be repeated!]

Child welfare reform is long overdue and what is happening to children in the United States of America is a national disgrace and the people need to accept their portion of the guilt for this disgrace.



If the children's advocate were to strictly adhere to those rights, but stay faithful and fully informed, and limit their presentations and pleas for those rights of the children to these truths then these truths will also protect these advocates from the punishments and penalties of attempting to expose the whole picture. In addition to these protections for not exposing it all, these truths will eventually allow the public their own opportunity to see the whole picture in full when the public is allowed to see for itself and then begin to realize how important the rights of children are and what has not been done by this society to protect these rights.

There are mother's rights groups and there are father's rights groups who cast stones at each other and fight amongst themselves and by doing these things confuse the issues of children's rights and waste so much time and energy that could solve MANY problems if only these groups would abandon their theories that are not consistent with the truth of children's rights.


THE TRUTH OF CHILDREN'S RIGHTS!

If what is decided to be right for Social Workers, Expert Witnesses, Courts, Prosecutors , Judges and the Parents, is wrong for the child then it was not right to begin with! There is no other standard to accept, or exception to consider, when it comes to the rights and welfare of children.



"The most odious of all oppressions are those which mask as justice." --U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, Krulewitch v United States. 336 U.S. 440 (1949)

That legislator, or that lawyer, or that judge, or that prosecutor, or that police officer, or that social worker, knows what they are doing to you and also know what suffering your children will soon endure, or have endured. These people are not ignorant to what they are doing, they know full well what they do and they do not care what it causes you, or your children, to suffer. They are not incompetent, or ignorant, they are corrupt and have learned how to be indifferent because the public has been indifferent for far too long. YOUR NUMBER ONE STUMBLING BLOCK TO CHILD WELFARE REFORM IS THAT THE PUBLIC DOES NOT WANT TO KNOW THIS TRUTH!

How can the children lead our world further, if the world cannot lead them further?

My Best Regards to All!

Sincerely,

Terry L. Fesler
Three Rivers, Michigan
honochenokeh.geo@yahoo.com
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/oaxamaxao/index.html
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/oaxamaxao/michiganjail.html
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6260/casscounty.html

even the president of the United States knows
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6260/gwb.html





 "Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed ..." Isaiah 10:1,2.


Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. --Justice Louis Brandeis, Olmstead v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438 (1928)



QUOTES OF VERNON HOWARD

"If shocked or hurt by bad human behavior; they are then being gullible, preferring fantasies about human nature over facts."

"Human stupidity is only dangerous to stupid humans."

"Be grateful, not resistant, to anything that makes you aware that you were unaware."

"Seek truth, not happiness, and then see how your ideas about happiness change."

"No one is betrayed by other people without first betraying themselves."

"When wanting something from the sheep, the wolf always insists he only wants to give something to the sheep."

"Unconscious participation in social illness is what perpetuates it."

"What is right for you cannot be wrong for anyone else."

"Because evil is weak it is willing to meet us halfway, but strong goodness never compromises."

"Some people actually feel guilty saying no to someone who is trying to deceive them."

"You can tell when someone begins to understand human nature because human nature no longer confuses, or surprises them."



 Anyway

People are unreasonable, illogical, and self-centered.
Love them anyway.
If you do good, people may accuse you of selfish motives.
Do good anyway.
If you are successful, you may win false friends and true enemies.
Succeed anyway.
The good you do today may be forgotten tomorrow.
Do good anyway.
Honesty and transparency make you vulnerable.
Be honest and transparent anyway.
What you spend years building may be destroyed overnight.
Build anyway.
People who really want help may attack you if you help them.
Help them anyway.
Give the world the best you have and you may get hurt.
Give the world your best anyway.
 -- Meditations From A Simple Path -- by Mother Teresa



[Return to Children's Rights Advocacy]


There have been visitors to this web site since January 12, 2003