CPS requires a warrant, just like any other government agent.

I understand that this woman is entirely innocent, and just wants to get CPS off of her back. Still, surely the right answer to a government official demanding to talk to you children is: "no". Her 16-year-old son is right on the mark - she should limit any future communications to exactly what he said: "CPS, you have too many errors in your information; I do not care to talk to you any more. Goodbye."

CPS is not on your side. Like any other agency, they want to find problems - they need

This is ridiculous. Someone from the government asked her to incriminate herself without a miranda warning. Refuse to speak to the social worker. When she comes back with a cop, you'll know where you really stand. Nothing good could have come from saying anything to the social worker. At best, the LW gets to keep her own kids. This is a great opportunity to teach the children about a meddling government. Tell them to say nothing. Tell them the truth, that the lady from the government is looking for a reason to take them away from their mommy. Disgusting.

Nothing good could have come from saying anything to the social worker.

Yeah, it's really a lesser of two evils thing in that regard. The slightly less awful option is to politely comply and hope they come to the correct conclusion, versus giving them (seeming) grounds to remove the children. Good for you, though, LW, for being polite but continually reminding the caseworker how many holes there were in the story. And good for you for raising smart kids, considering they didn't get shouty with the caseworker when she insulted their intelligence numerous times and tried to lead them into incriminating statements about you. Asking your daughter whether you'd been drinking last week or last month (after she said several times it'd been so long she couldn't remember) was seriously bad form.

With the family stuff described, I can understand how LW could think someone was being malicious, but the first thing I thought when I read about the incorrect ages and names was that this accusation was meant for someone else altogether. Especially considering the caseworker kept insisting on the 10- and 12-year-olds and then said she had no record of anyone talking to your daughter. Maybe it's because I just watched the episode of M*A*S*H where the Army thinks Hawkeye is dead, but is it possible that, worse than a flimsy claim, this is bureaucratic ineptitude at its finest?

I, too, wondered if they were at the wrong house. However, the kids have the mother's maiden name as their last name in the CPS records, so they must be at the right house...but how can they get so many details wrong?

It sounds like someone who doesn't know the family well made a cockamamie complaint. I hope the LW finds out who it was!

Can the LW legally tape the conversations?

Wow. Just...wow. I've had to deal with CPS myself, but it was nothing like this! Just my ex trying to discredit me, but at least the case worker (who was a guy, btw) saw the truth of the matter pretty much right away, and closed the case almost immediately. I'm so sorry you went through that, LW, and I hope things work out for you!

Two minor, ancillary comments. First, it reminds me of Tony.

And...

... Busybody conservatives are just as much a part of this madness as busybody liberals.

Best wishes, whoever-you-is... I drink enough wine for both of us, but I don't abuse your kids either.

I agree w/ the advice that you should seek counsel, and perhaps a police presence when dealing with social services representatives. This is especially true when you're dealing with someone who persists in trying to indict you based on false and erroneous information. It's an indication that they're not pursuing an investigation, rather they're trying to develop and indictment against you. CPS and similar agencies have police powers in many jurisdictions. They can make arrests, forcibly take children into custody, force entry to your home, collect evidence, and their testimony is privileged in court. But unlike the police, they don't tend to acknowledge this, and portray themselves as counselors.

The thing is, though, whenever children are in danger and CPS fails to interview enough, or ask the right questions, they get skewered. Often kids won't tell what's really going on at the first, or even the fourth, question. Kids instinctively protect their parents. Asking it repeatedly and in a variety of ways is a tactic used to get to the truth when there is genuine abuse or neglect.

It's a no-win. CPS has to investigate and they are allowed to interview the children. LW did the right thing letting them speak to her kids, as to do otherwise would've only made things worse.

"And a question -- is there any recourse that you have? A false accusation is very serious. I don't have to tell you that. If people can make false accusations without any possibility of punishment, well, it leaves the field open for false accusations...and for children to be taken away from good parents."

I've never liked the anonymous system of reporting. I've seen it abused several times. Years ago, my babysitter had a dispute with a neighbor, who called CPS and reported her for child abuse, and it disrupted all our lives while she was investigated. The charge was unfounded, and she figured out it was the neighbor because she eventually admitted it, but, barring a confession, it's impossible to know. These neighbors filed restraining orders against each other, and wound up in court, but nothing but drama and chaos was gained by either side.

LW needs to think about anyone she has a offended or who might dislike her enough to do make such serious charges. It might even be family, since she's estranged.

But, no, she has no recourse against a false allegation. The state is concerned that people will not report valid concerns of child abuse if they don't keep it anonymous, and that is probably true. Most people are VERY reluctant to do it even when they witness abuse. Few want their neighbor, friend, co-worker to know they reported it.

So, the price we'd pay is a lot more abused kids, who aren't helped, and society will be outraged by this too.

I will say that this sounds like a "friend" (frenemy) or family member due to the report that she confided about her drinking to someone, and that this person knew her family background.

Unless your maiden name is rare, I'd think they had the wrong house too.

I know a lot of parents who have had to deal with CPS for various reasons (one reported by a newbie cop b/c her preschooler snuck out and headed to the park without her, one had a string of accidental injuries to her kids, etc). All were very unhappy but understood how it looked. None had any problems with CPS-they interviewed and that was that. I'm sure I'll have my turn before the kids are all 18.

CPS is damned if they do and damned if they don't and should have. Kids will lie to protect parents that are abusive-not merely from fear but also from love. Kids love their parents, even really crappy ones. My SIL was a caseworker for CPS and now is a case worker for a foster care agency. The stories she can tell-and they are NOT rare-will make you want to die. So sorry if I don't feel horribly bad for someone who had to answer a few questions one lazy day when kids are being boiled alive right here in central texas. (and to save you all with the debate rules some time, I'm not debating. I'm giving my opinion)

Plus, maybe you are an alcoholic. It's not like they don't lie. I don't even know who you are on here, much less in life, so I can't say yes or no. But none of us can, here. So who knows? Not Amy.

Please, momof4 it wasnt just questions, she still has a god chane of losing her kids.

My advice file a complaint with the CPS case workers boss and the DA's office on the same day, the day after you get a news crew to interview you for a story, the only thing government burcrats fear is losing the jobs thru regime change and publicity

Can the LW legally tape the conversations?

Posted by: crella at July 12, 2011 4:34 AM

Probably depends on the state for consent but I would tape all conversations (hah, that was an illegal interegation IMHO) anyway. Those CPS thugs have no expectation of privacy when conducting interviews and since they'll use anything you say against you, everyone should protect themselves.

I have no sympathy for how tough social workers have it in their jobs, the state is after bodies and revenue, not helping people. I firmly believe anymore that for every case where they do help, they ruin 10 families lives over petty petulant ego driven rules.

I have no children myself, but once had CPS show up on my door insisting they speak to my son. The city police officer was standing there beside her, laughing the entire time. He knew I didn't have any children, but apparently could not convince this woman.
I've also had someone call the Humane Society accusing me of abusing my birds. I have a pretty good idea who did such a thing, but am really upset that I have no recourse against the neighbor from hell. She also has the city ticket me for too tall of vegetation (tomato plants) on a regular basis as she is an alderman who uses the city council as vindication against all who dare not do as she says.

In California, as I believe in most states, CPS will not respond to a situation likes this unless there is direct evidence that the subject is under the influence at that time. The law states they are not allowed to respond unless there is clear and obvious signs of abuse and or endangerment-
the person who called it in is protected until the discovery and/or trial phase if it comes to that which it almost never does

| the slightly less awful option is to
| politely comply and hope they come to the
| correct conclusion, versus giving them
| (seeming) grounds to remove the children.

Amy you should rerun the one about answering questions from police, the lawyer in the video

"Please, momof4 it wasnt just questions, she still has a god chane of losing her kids."

No, she won't lose her kids. I inderstand it's frightening and stressful, and CPS kind of wants parents to fear that, so they cooperate more willingly. They don't always fully explain the process.

In stressful situations, I always try to calm myself by considering what is the worst that could reasonably happen, and, in this case - even assuming, for the sake of argument, she is found guilty of drinking in front her kids (an extremely unlikely scenario if the facts and interviews are as presented) - she'll be required to seek help. Maybe she'll have to attend AA meetings for awhile.

The state tries to keep families together in all but the most aggregious cases. This isn't aggregious. Her kids aren't starving, bruised, and battered. Plus, they're older, so it's highly unlikely they would be permanently removed.

So, LW, stay calm. My guess is that it will be declared unfounded, but, worst case scenario, you might have to seek help for your "addiction". I know that would be stupid if you aren't addicted, but perhaps knowing that's the worst outcome will help you relax a bit.

Also, the maiden name thing strongly suggests a family member. Since you're estranged, they may not remember your child's exact ages and last name.

Some alcoholics tend to believe that everyone else has the same problem with alcohol they do. This sounds to me like a family member who wants to say, "See, you're no better than me!" Just a guess though.

"Also, the maiden name thing strongly suggests a family member."

I didn't think so. She goes by her maiden name, but her children do not, and whoever made that complaint didn't know that, they just assumed the kids shared her last name. That made me think someone with an ax to grind in the neighborhood...

The 6th Amendment no longer applies, and lovelysoul is OK with it.

It's for the children, right?

My wife and I experienced a similar situation long ago. Neighborhood Nazis are impossible to fight. We moved.

It was that or toss him under the bus for stealing from his place of employment, and her for running an unlicensed day care operation.

Why did I refrain? One or possibly two innocent people would have been harmed. Fate, karma, or the deity have dumped on them anyway. Living well really is the best revenge.

When my kids were in grade school, I had the audacity of writing a letter to the pricipal complaining about one of my kids teachers. CPS showed up at my door 2 days later investigating me for child abuse because my daughter cried when the teacher told her she was "going to tell her parents" when she did something wrong. They actually removed my other two kids from class and interviewed them without my consent or knowledge. This country is so screwed, the end is near.

Nothing good could have come from saying anything to the social worker.

Especially on two different occasions. Now they can compare the two sets of notes, and find "inconsistencies" and label them lies or perjury.

I am the LW and I did want to clarify a few things. First, I never confessed to anyone that I have a disease or a problem as the CPS worker stated. When I told her that I've never said that to anyone, she then asked my son if he ever said it, even jokingly. He also stated to her that he does not drink and that because of what he saw while living with my family that he finds alcohol repulsive. She then asked if it could have been his sister. He laughed and said, "my sister is only 13. She's not drinking." The worker's response was to ask if my 13 year old daughter takes any form of illegal substance. My son laughed again at the ridiculousness of the suggestion and question and told her, "my sister is 13. She is not drinking or doing drugs." The worker then asked him if he knew what intoxication meant. He told her that yes, at 16, he is aware of the meaning of intoxication and has seen people who are intoxicated, just never his mother.

My feeling is that the worker was not on a witch hunt nor was she trying to build a case against me but I am puzzled that a case would be followed after finding so many glaring inaccuracies in the report. I do believe she had questions that needed to be asked. I did offer to leave the room while she spoke to my son because I didn't want there to be any appearance of him being coerced into saying the "right" things by me. She asked him if he was comfortable speaking in front of me and he said yes. I felt that was a mistake on her part, not because I'm guilty, but what kid would say no in front of their parent, especially a guilty parent.

I am not worried about the report coming back against me. My kids are old enough to speak truthfully and articulately and while kids do lie for their mother, I don't think that any kid growing up in a home with alcohol abuse would laugh at the absurdity of the thought of their mom being a drunk. Both of my kids stated independently that the idea was absurd. What I do worry about is that I don't know who did this or why. I've had no recent arguments with anyone. While I've been estranged from my family for years, there has been a slight thaw in the relations and I can't see why they would file a report now when things have cooled off as opposed to all of the years that things were hostile.

I don't know about the legalities of not letting the worker in or not answering questions. I was so surprised when she said she was CPS that automatically I let her in wondering what was wrong and for some reason I never even considered that it was about me. I just let her in and asked her what was wrong. When it hit me that I was the subject, I was stunned. There is no law against lying around in your pajamas on a Sunday but I did feel scrutinized. My house was cluttered from the weekend and I looked like I had just rolled out of bed although I had been up reading for hours. I know that's not proof of anything but it did bother me how it must have looked and it bothered me that I would even question whether or not I had the right to spend a lazy day doing nothing but hanging in pjs and reading. I also had a six pack of beer in my fridge that has been in there for months for a night I was having people over and we were going to try some wheat beer with oranges in it. The plans fell through and the beer sat untouched in my fridge for months. Again, its not illegal to have a six pack but its not something that is typically in my fridge and it bothered me that I even was giving it a second thought after showing her the contents of my fridge. She told me that she had to see in my fridge and cabinets and had to see the kids' bedrooms to make sure they have a place to sleep. I did ask her if I really had to show her and she said yes. Its silly now that I didn't challenge her but I felt I had nothing to hide so why would I challenge her.

I will be filing a complaint with the District Attorney. My initial plan was to file immediately but I will wait a few days until the formal CPS complaint comes in the mail. I have no way of knowing if the caller made the call anonymously or if they left a name and I'm not sure what the DA really can do if it was anonymous but I want to have a record in case another false report is made in the future. Its sick to me that anyone would waste the tax payer resources of an agency designed to protect children as a means of settling a grudge. I'm a person who tells you if I'm upset and tries to come to a resolution. I can't imagine filing false reports because I'm upset about something. There are kids who are being abused and neglected and a report like this is part of what overwhelms an already overloaded system. I do have sympathy for the CPS workers as a whole because as LS pointed out, they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. Because I know I don't do what I'm accused of doesn't mean they know that so I do understand they have to look into it. I'm upset at the rudeness of the first worker and the confusion of the second worker and her insistence on the fact that they spoke to the child they didn't speak to, but the reality is that this isn't the fault of CPS. Its the fault of a malicious person who thinks nothing of making false reports and wasting the time of workers who should be investigating real incidences of abuse.

Normally I would have no problem posting who I am but because I don't know who did this to me, I want to remain as anonymous as the person who made false allegations against me. I don't want to take the chance that they would see this and get a thrill out of causing trouble nor do I want to piss of any state agency currently conducting an investigation. Nobody here knows me personally so I could say anything that I want to say but I am a truthful person. I have no problem with people drinking. I would never lie and say I haven't had a drink or two or even at times three. For the most part I do not drink on a regular basis and certainly never to the point of intoxication. I have never been drunk in front of my kids and I have never once in my life even had one drink and then gotten in a car and driven. These allegations are malicious lies and the worst part is not being able to face my accuser and knowing that my accuser will most likely get away with this and possibly do it again.

The state tries to keep families together in all but the most aggregious cases -
ls

Right, that why when kids are removed from singel mom they are placed in foster care rather thn their fathers

They are placed with fathers, luj. If the dad is around, has been involved, and doesn't have a criminal record, etc. They always look to family members before foster care, though temporary foster care may be used for the first few days until safe family care is found and approved.

LW, thanks for clarifying more details. I know it must be upsetting to think that someone would do this, especially when it seems that you truly have no idea who it could be.

I thought that the CPS worker stated that you had made a comment about "having an excuse to drink" because of your family history. I understand you didn't say that, but if the caseworker said that, it must be part of the report the person gave.

I believe you have a right to find out the charges in the report, and doing so may give you a clue about who would've made it. I think you should do all you can to peice together who has it out for you, as that is really as much of a concern as CPS. It's a very vindictive act to falsely accuse someone of child abuse. This person likely won't stop at this. Somebody is either very hurt, angry, or jealous.

Have you recently been involved with any men who might have a jealous ex-wife or girlfriend? A neighborly dispute? Even problems with your kids at school or friends?

In my old babysitter's case, the scenario started when she forbid her son to play with the neighbor's boy (who had previously been his friend) because he began cussing and other behaviors she didn't want emulated. That enraged the other mom enough to file a false charge. That's how little it takes with unbalanced people.

Now let me get this straight. The first "social worker" did not know the actual ages of the children involved. The next "social worker" spoken to had no record of the first interview. Then, yet another "social worker" paid them a visit, again was not certain of the ages of the children, and fabricated a story about the LW telling someone in confidence about her supposed problem.

Don't even start with the "don't blame the poor CPS workers" crap. These people repeatedly demonstrated their incompetence, and possibly their dishonesty. The ultimate outcome of this "case" is that the three CPS idiots should be severely disciplined, and whoever the jerk is who is supposed to be supervising them should be severely disciplined also. When did incompetence become the gold standard for government workers?

I suppose that the idea that "with great power comes great responsibility" is, in this age, suitable only for comic book heroes.

Dunno L/S, when I still lived in Illinois, my ex and I had a run-in with their CPS, and OI... we were threatened with having my son removed and forcibly immunized because the CPS had a policy that it was child abuse to not immunize, regardless of the reason. In 1996. [Kid is allergic to the immunization carrier, went in to shock from the prick test]. This happening while the kid was in the ICU from what we thought might be meningitis. The case worker asked us questions 10 ways to Sunday, while my ex was of course bawling, becasue here the kid might die of meningitis, and there is an uneducated, unprofessional case worker digging into her and ignoring me entirely. I essentially had to drag the caseworker into the hall. I asked her name and she wouldn't give it to me, 'In that case I have to believe you are an imposter, and I will have security remove you.'

that did not go down well, they are used to being the bullies. Eventually, some days later I contacted the Ohmbudsmans office of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, as it was called then... and they were sort of like 'we're to busy to deal with this... so sue us.'

I talked to a lwayer, and he suggested watching and waiting, and nothing ever happened. He suggested that we wouldn't be able to afford to sue them, regardless, and that it was better to lie low.

There are a lot of people and things I miss about that state but the govt. of it isn't one of them.

"Asking it repeatedly and in a variety of ways is a tactic used to get to the truth when there is genuine abuse or neglect. "

They are also tactics that are very useful in confusing children about what the truth is, and getting them to admit to things that aren't true. As was demonstrated in the McMartin Preschool case.

als,

When has anything but incompetence been the standard for government workers?

LS, I haven't had any romantic involvements in the past few years and the last one was a man who had never married and had no kids. I don't know that I believe it was a family member only because we have lived in the same town for the past several years with no incident, just silent hostility, so what would be the reason for a report all these years later with no incidents?

The most reasonable possibility would be a girl I took in recently. We've known her and her brother for years and the family had some issues. She had been thrown out and asked if she could stay with me temporarily. I tried to help her get a license, a job, and financial aid for college. She was 19 and obviously had no guidance. She wanted to lie around all day and wait for my oldest son to get home from school and work and then go out. I explained to her that my own kids were not allowed to lie around and do nothing and that she'd have two weeks to show me she had some sort of plan for the future. She waited the two weeks and then left without a word. Some of my friends feel that either she or her mother made the call but I don't know. She knew my kids ages although I don't think her mom did, and she knows my last name although again, her mom knows my family so I could assume that's where my maiden name came into the picture. Either way, it sucks.

And alittlesense, it was two case workers that came. I don't believe they were social workers, but I'm not sure. One was the weekend worker who came because they have to respond within 24 hours of a report. She asked based on what was reported. I can't blame her if she was given incorrect facts. The second worker was confused because I am guessing their was a lag in getting the weekend paperwork. Again, the information they were given were about a 10 and 12 year old. I can't blame them for being given incorrect information, just for pursuing a case once they realize the majority of what they were given was incorrect.

I don't know what could be done to change the system because I can understand why anonymous calls are allowed. The fear is that a child may be not get help if a caller fears retribution. Still, I know that whoever called about me was not calling out of any genuine fear or concern for my kids. If I were a partier or drank a lot I'd probably feel like maybe there was some concern but the accusations are blatant lies and completely outrageous. While I'm pretty sure it will come back as nothing, I do think that someone caused a major nuisance in my life with minimal effort and little chance of repercussions. That shouldn't be allowed. I don't know if the call registry records calls or has a caller id for cases like this, but I plan on finding those answers out.

The longer I live the more I belive that the soulution to 95% of mandkinds problems is to randomly kill about 2/3rds of the species

Something similar happened to me, only there was no anonymous false accuser to prosecute. The back story- I had an abusive husband that I had divorced 9 years previously while my youngest was a baby.

Childrens' services went to my childrens school and interrogated many children, including mine. My children were removed from my home the next day for "Failure to protect" them from their father many years before. I had divorced him, moved cities, changed my name, and hadn't seen or talked to him since the divorce. During the divorce, he had pressed for visitation, but I bought him off by waiving his child support and threatening to press charges for the abuse. We never heard from him again.

No accusations of abuse or neglect were ever made against me. I was never charged with, arrested for, or committed any crime. Yet, my parental rights were terminated. My youngest was adopted. The older ones grew up in what they call "the system" of institutions and foster homes.

Although all of my children have a relationship with each other now, my daughters did not see my son for ten years.

I do not drink, smoke, swear, or take drugs. I enjoyed a successful career and owned a car and home at the time. I sold my home and dumped every penny into fighting them. Even though I was innocent of wrongdoing, I wish I hadn't fought them. Perhaps it would have ended differently if I had not argued with them.

So far, as each one turned 18, they returned to me. My youngest has now spent more time with her adoptive parents than she did with me. Unlike her older siblings, I doubt she will return.

All of the children were poisoned with lies and told that I did not wish to see them, while I was told that the children did not wish to see me. This went on for years while I fought the courts to get them back and for visitation. The very limited visitation was more strictly regulated than that prison visitation. Any discussion of "the case," such as my children asking me to bring them home would cause any contact to be prohibited for months.

I lost my family, home, career, and every possession I owned. Eventually, I had to put the past behind me and move on, my bitterness and hatred caused no harm to the creators of this situation, but only destroyed me.

I choose to be happy and thankful for what I have now. A minimum wage job, small apartment, and the occasional dinner with my grown children.

LW - No matter what you believe about the likely outcome of your case, GET A LAWYER, NOW!!!!

I guarantee it will be worse than you imagine. I HAD a lawyer, and still had to put up with a Caseworker coming to my house once a month for a year. If you don't have representation, they can and likely will decide anything they want to. You are presumed GUILTY unless you can prove yourself innocent.

I would have been tempted to start questioning the CPS worker about her drinking problem, since it would clearly affect her ability to conduct the investigation.

"No accusations of abuse or neglect were ever made against me. I was never charged with, arrested for, or committed any crime. Yet, my parental rights were terminated. My youngest was adopted. The older ones grew up in what they call "the system" of institutions and foster homes."

I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up. I'm a former guardian ad litem, and the state doesn't terminate parental rights like that. They certainly wouldn't have done it for failure to protect if you had already left the abuser. I think you're leaving something very significant out of the story.

I very much doubt it lovelysoul, you assume they sytem is there to protect kids, it isnt, its there to find a scapegoat.

If they can pin it on a man great, if not they will pin something on a woman just as easily.

In my case the scapegoat was the parent who was not a member in good standing in the LDS church.

My sister and I told the case workers about the abuse, we were sent back anyway

I have to disagree with LovelySoul. Sorry. I've also worked in the foster care system, and I've seen way too many cases where the caseworker gets a personal vendetta against a birth parent, even if said birth parent has done nothing really wrong. In those cases, the parent has very little recourse. I also recommend talking to a lawyer who can tell you what your rights are in this case, especially since the initial file had so many complaints in it.

...I meant so many errors, not so many complaints. I need more coffee.

Also lovelysoul

fathersandfamilies.org/?p=17372
fathersandfamilies.org/?p=4685
fathersandfamilies.org/?cat=40

Loj, certainly caseworkers make mistakes, but your assertion was that the state doesn't try to give children to their fathers before putting them in foster care. In my experience, that is not true when there is a stable dad who has been involved.

The case you sited from fathersandfamilies was about CPS not contacting an absentee father.
Caseworkers are people and they have their biases. I suspect when they're dealing with urban, single moms, they sometimes assume there is no father in the picture because, let's face it, that is often the case.

But had that father come forward, and could prove he was stable enough to assume custody, he would've likely been given custody.

CPS doesn't want to put kids in foster care. In most places, there aren't even enough foster parents to handle the most serious cases.

There are usually more adoptive families, but it takes so long to terminate parental rights in most cases, the children get too old to be desired by many. That's actually what I've seen more of - the state giving birth parents so much time, and too many chances, to get their acts together.

It depends on the state. Each state is different. Tell us which state this is in. It is no accident that many people are leaving certain states.

I firmly believe anymore that for every case where they do help, they ruin 10 families lives over petty petulant ego driven rules."

That's nice. I believe in God. But as Amy says, prove it. FInd the families who's kids were yanked for no reason. Find the 10 times as many as deserved it. I'll be waiting.

"Please, momof4 it wasnt just questions, she still has a god chane of losing her kids."

No she doesn't, unless she really is a drunk and there are lots of witnesses to it. And preferably some DWI's. With the kids in the car. Or, again, do you have some scads of proof that good parents lose their kids frequently?

If we didn't have genuinely abusive parents, we would have no need for the CPS creepos. However, we do have genuinely abusive parents in our society.

I think the LW should hire a PI to help her track down this malicious person before he/she/it causes any more damage.

This poor woman talked way too much. She should have only answered the questions, not volunteered anything, and if possible, taped the whole encounter. And then gotten a lawyer, even a pro bono one at Legal Aid. NEVER volunteer information.

Why so angry, momof4?

What's really sad and ironic about this is that there are still SO many abused and neglected kids out there and so many abusive parents who will never see repercussions or even this level of investigation. If child abuse was extremely rare and swiftly punished then I imagine situations like this would be more tolerable--you'd think "well this is a pain in the ass, but at least I can rest assured that a real abuser will never get away with it." Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case.

Whoops. To clarify my earlier comment, which I typed much too late at night, I don't necessarily think it's the right course of action to comply up to a point, just that I understand why people like LW do. I've seen people who would scream like a banshee to protect themselves go along with things when it comes to their kids. I'll kick, bite and scream at anyone trying to pull one over on me, but I don't know that I'd necessarily do the same if I had kids if I didn't know what would happen. My point was that it's an awful position to be in, having to choose whether to fight when an agency has the power to take away your children, especially in light of the caseworker's insistence and, you know, general incompetence. I don't think there's a best solution in a situation like this, only a less bad one, and it won't always be the same solution across the board. Not getting your kids sent to foster care is a powerful motivator in the real world.

I do think that, though she politely complied with the caseworker, LW was right to continually point out the mistakes and inconsistencies in the claim and to not wait for CPS to get around to calling her back. Arm yourself with information and a lawyer, LW, and keep on them every step of the way. Complying doesn't mean you have to fade into the background. Stay reasonable but stay in their faces.

Why so angry, momof4?

She's not angry. She just knows the authorities are the people to be trusted. Read her comments here. She has no sympathy for the accused, only those in power.

RE: it doesn't add up.

I sure did think that too. I thought my childrens' absence would be very temporary. The excuse given by social services was that since I failed to protect my children before, I had a "history" and couldn't be trusted not to do it again. Ironically, I couldn't have failed to protect my children from their abuser again if I'd wanted to- he was already in prison before my parental rights were terminated.

For years, I told anyone who would listen about what was going on, which greatly angered social services. Every time anyone said it didn't add up and therefore I must be guilty of something, I invited them to my next court hearing. No one believed the until they heard some of the ridiculousness for themselves.

A few examples out of hundreds: At one hearing, social services used a court ordered psych eval against me. The judge ordered that since I was neither crazy nor stupid (so determined by their psychiatrist,) that my insistence that my children should be returned to me convinced him they should not. Another time, at a hearing I demanded in an attempt to get visitation reinstated, social services told the judge that they should not be required to inform me of when and where my visitation would take place, and the judge ordered that they did not have to inform me. I called, pleaded, and begged social services to tell me when and where to go for visits until they had the judge order me not to call them anymore. My children were left sitting in the lobby waiting for me and told I didn't care to see them. I was not permitted to send my children Christmas or birthday gifts because "sending someone gifts they don't want is stalking."

The quantity unbelievable court orders that "don't add up" fill an entire filing cabinet.

Eventually, I moved on. They won. My children refused to see me for a time, but when they were old enough they saw right through the lies. This is why only the youngest one was adopted- the others refused to allow it even though they knew they'd never be permitted to return to me.

Even though I didn't know my ex would turn out to be a charming but abusive con-man, I have come to agree with the conclusion that ignorance is not an excuse for failing to protect your children. Unfortunately I realized this too late.

I'm very glad LW complied with the caseworkers and I recommend continuing this path. DON'T "stay in their face." Poking a bear only entices a fight.

Food for thought: it is not against the law for a government employee (including caseworkers) to lie in the line of duty, even under oath. The laws were written to keep law enforcement officers safe, but has ended up being very misconstrued.

"What's really sad and ironic about this is that there are still SO many abused and neglected kids out there and so many abusive parents who will never see repercussions or even this level of investigation."

The world is not perfect, and we cannot make it so. Life's a bitch. Lots of people refuse to accept this: they can force perfection through government intervention.

CPS is already far, far too intrusive. CPS should only intervene when a child is in serious danger. Why? Because the interventions themselves are harmful, often massively so. Children were taken from their parents on the judgement of case worker far too quickly.

Consider the cases where it is "just" temporary. The investigation vindicates the parents, and the child is returned. What sort of impact does it have on a child, to be ripped out of its family for months on end? "Oh, they're back together, so it's alright." No its not alright - that kid has been damaged by CPS.

Of course, kids are also taken away permanently. I know a woman who was taken from her family, because her father sexually abused her. She was placed in a foster family - where she was sexually abused by her foster father. Great improvement; she would have preferred to stay with the known evil.

If the kid isn't starving, has clothes to wear, and isn't bruised from head to toe, CPS should probably keep its nose out of the situation.

The quantity unbelievable court orders that "don't add up" fill an entire filing cabinet.

The world is not perfect, and we cannot make it so. Life's a bitch.

That's the core problem, isn't it? Like random says, agencies like CPS are very powerful in some respects. Attempting to thwart that power, right and righteous though it may be, can end badly for the individual. Especially with an agency that can take away children. Being a revolutionary probably looks less tempting as your kids are being marched out the door, but not fighting can have the same result as resisting. Getting a lawyer and insisting you've done nothing wrong can be construed as signs you're guilty, while silent compliance will be taken as a tacit admission of guilt. I don't think government is inherently eeevillll, but inherently double-edged, so you can get screwed seven ways to Sunday no matter which path you choose.

It's important to accept that WE made it this way. We as, as a society, chose to protect children from abuse. For a long time, this wasn't the case. Certainly, in pioneer days, what happened within the home - bad or good - was private. Yet the cost of that - dead and suffering children - ultimately weighed on the collective conscience of the public and laws were passed.

I learned a long time ago that it's almost always the "good" causes that lead to the loss of liberties. Protecting children...protecting the environment...protecting the country...these are, in very many ways, noble endeavors, but they can't occur without the loss of freedoms.

When you think about it, the power CPS has is beyond almost every other area of the state. They don't even need a warrant to look inside your refrigerator, which is pretty damned scary. Yet, we gave CPS these powers because every time we saw a child suffering abuse, we cried out for justice.

But if we are going to say that abusive parents must be investigated in this manner, we must accept that innocent ones will be too. There's just no way around that.

And if parents are able to grab a lawyer and sue, or prevent the state from entering their home or talking to their children, don't you know the abusive parents will employ those same tactics too?

So, we vote the state even more power, because we think it will never be us. It's always the "bad" people that will be impacted - the "big developer", the "corrupt corporation", the "abusive parent", the "terrorist"..THOSE are who are the laws will effect, not us.

But it doesn't work that way. Every time you're being hassled by a building inspector, or code enforcement, or a TSA agent, or a CPS worker, that is the result of these laws.

They do some good, and they do some bad. It's always a mixed bag. The question is whether the good stuff is worth the bad. Do the means justify the end?

I'm biased, of course, having volunteered in the system, and that's actually why I volunteered because I understood - as a former foster child and adoptee - that it's made up of human beings and therefore frought with human error, so the only way to make it better is to try to bring in as many good people as possible. You'll still get mistakes, but at least they won't be malicious ones.

Most of the caseworkers I've known are decent people. They aren't purposely trying to ruin anyone's life. In fact, they're trying to do good. But, like everyone, they get tired, pessimistic, distracted, and make mistakes on the job. It's just that when they make mistakes, the consequences can be huge and horrifying.

And the reality is that there often isn't a good solution for kids in abusive situations. What the state mandates may prove to be no better than leaving them with their parents. It's true. The public would like to believe that there are tons of willing and loving foster families out there just longing to nurture a poor abused child, who will not only be receptive to this (despite losing the only family he's ever known) but will thrive.

That doesn't happen that often, but when it does, it only happens because good people (not laws) are involved. So, I challenge anyone who doesn't like the system to role up their sleeves and get involved - become a guardian-ad-litem, a foster parent, volunteer at a shelter, or maybe even become a caseworker yourself. That's the only real "fix" for these problems.

Vix, I'd really like to know where and when this happened. It simply could not happen that way today in my state. I'm having a hard time accepting that your parental rights could be terminated without you being formally charged with something.

I'm having a hard time accepting that your parental rights could be terminated without you being formally charged with something.

Posted by: lovelysoul

I dont see why there is an entire international fathers rights movement that has sprung up becuase of that

I am not angry, and people in authority aren't always to be trusted by any means. I simply do not take one anonymous unknown person's word against another anonymous possibly make-believe CPS worker.

I also know-without doubt-a parent who has done nothing will not have their kids taken away by CPS. A parent can beat the crap out of their kids to the point of multiple broken bones over time, and CPS is going to try to keep that family together. Parenting classes, anger management classes, addiction services, all are things CPS uses before taking kids away. Wrongly, usually.

Still waiting on that long list of proven innocent parent loses kids cases!

I also know-without doubt-a parent who has done nothing will not have their kids taken away by CPS.

Except you're flat wrong. My hyperactive son had inflicted a few bruises on himself before he went to stay overnight with his grandmother (my mother-in-law). She called CPS, he was removed from the house until the hearing (fortunately, we were able to get them to let him go to MY parents, or else she would have taken off with him, I guarantee it).

When my parents first talked to the Caseworker, they explained how he was very active and got bruises because of it. We explained every single bruise and scratch on him. They pleaded with her to come out and observe him to see. She refused.

When we got to court, my lawyer explained that he had observed my son in the short time that we were in his office, and that he was so active there that he probably got a couple of new bruises just in that short time (no, he wasn't tearing up the place, he just couldn't sit still). The judge flat-out IGNORED him.

At the end, the judge stated, "Clearly there has been bad parenting here (paraphrased, I can't remember the exact quote)," and we had to sign a pledge that we would NEVER use physical discipline on him, even though nothing had been done at that time. Then we had to allow a caseworker to come to our house and have a meeting and inspection every month for a year. Fortunately, THIS one was more reasonable, and nothing further happened, but we were on the verge of having our son taken from us for no reason at all.

Momof4 is correct. I'm not going to lose my kids. As LS pointed out, if by some crazy chance I were found guilty, they'd suggest AA or a parenting class and be on their way. Its sad to think that if I really was drinking and driving on a constant basis that nothing would really happen. My experience with CPS has been that the kids I see facing real dangers don't have a lot of options. I live in NY and I've seen a few houses where the kids would be better off getting out but where do they go with a shortage of Foster Parents or responsible willing family members. Its not an easy question.

My problem here isn't that I'm worried about what CPS will do. That doesn't come from a great faith in the system but rather the fact that my kids are old enough and intelligent enough to know what goes on and be able to articulate it to anyone asking questions. Right now my problem is that someone would use a state agency designed to protect children as a means of settling a score, a score I wasn't even aware of. I understand anonymous calling but I would like to believe that the call registry has caller id or some way to identify people who call in with such obviously false reports. The system is already overloaded. Cases like this don't help. And obviously on a personal level its very upsetting to think someone could send case workers to my home on a lazy Sunday day and I have to worry if I picked up from the night before or if I went grocery shopping recently or even if I decided to go to a party with my kids and maybe had a drink and now a stranger is asking my kids if I ever drink. My understanding of the fact that they have a job to do does not take away from how invaded I feel and how outraged I am at the fact that so many errors in a report are still being taking seriously. I am waiting for someone to show up again and ask me to produce my non existent 10 and 12 year old.

LW, I don't believe anonymous reporting necessarily means that the state doesn't know who it is. I've made reports before, and I was asked to identify myself but told that my identity would remain anonymous to the person I was reporting. I can't recall if I had a choice in that - I willingly gave them my contact info, so they could follow up if they had any questions about what I had witnessed.

And WayneB, as distressful as that was, you did get your child back. I wasn't suggesting that children couldn't be temporarily removed, but in almost every case I've been involved with - even when abuse/neglect was proven beyond a doubt - there is usually a clear plan set forth by which the parent can retain custody. Momof4 is right - parenting classes, substance abuse treatment, counseling, etc.

I feel confident LW is innocent because logic dictates that she is writing this to us anonymously, so there is nothing to be gained here by lying.

But put yourself in the caseworker's position for a moment. She doesn't have the benefit of the info we have here. She is there because a charge has been made that this mom is a drunk and drives drunk with her kids in the car.

The kids all say "mom never drinks," which is a little unusual because most people do drink, socially at least, so their statements could be true or they, being teens or preteens, understand what's going on, and no teen wants to go to foster care, so their instinct is to defend mom.

Also, there's a 6 pack of beer in the fridge, which is inconsistent with what's being said, even if LW explains that it was for a gathering that never occurred.

Then, mom begins volunteering info about her background in an alcoholic family. Although I understand from her writing to us where this comes from, it would actually tend to set off warning bells to me if I were just there interviewing her. Children from substance abusive homes have a greater likelihood of becoming substance abusers themselves.

Mmmmm...what to believe? If the caseworker leaves and mom drinks that six pack, gets in the car with the kids and has a terrible accident, the headlines will be "CPS fails to protect kids from mom's out-of-control drinking!"

So, I think the caseworker did the reasonable thing to try to get more info from the kids, even maybe trying to trip them up a bit to see if they are really telling the truth about mom's drinking. I, like LW, am actually surprised she kept mom in the room, and I believe she did so because she actually wasn't that concerned and was just crossing the "ts" of her report - to cover her ass in case her gut instinct is wrong and mom really is a drunken danger. She asked questions and that's about all she can do, without discovering mom falling down drunk at the door.

This case will be declared unfounded, and, as uncomfortable as it is for the LW, that's the price we pay for the ability to help the children who genuinely need it.

"I learned a long time ago that it's almost always the "good" causes that lead to the loss of liberties. Protecting children...protecting the environment...protecting the country...these are, in very many ways, noble endeavors, but they can't occur without the loss of freedoms."

It's very true that an awful lot of bad can ride in on the back of a little bit of good. And when people get hysterical about an issue, as we did about child abuse in the '80s, that's when the door gets thrown wide open to the worst sort of government abuses. As a libertarian, it is not acceptable to me to say "in order to have X, we must give up freedom". My experience has been that people who say that usually have an ulterior motive.

"When you think about it, the power CPS has is beyond almost every other area of the state. They don't even need a warrant to look inside your refrigerator, which is pretty damned scary. Yet, we gave CPS these powers because every time we saw a child suffering abuse, we cried out for justice. "

Yep, even when the abuse turned out to be falsified, as in the McMartin and similar cases. (It almost makes we hope that there is a hell, because I want to see Janet Reno burn in it.) Any government agency that has a lot of power will naturally attract narcissists and sociopaths; one of the most important functions of that agency is to screen such people out in its hiring process. Military and police people have known this for a long time. (The U.S. military does a very good job of this screening. Police academies vary a lot; some are good, some unfortunately are not.) The various CPS'es and similar agencies have no such traditions, and they do little to no screening to weed out unsuitable cluster-B types. And it doesn't help that most people who apply for CPS-type jobs are the products of an educational system that selects for Cluster B types and encourages their deviant tendencies.

This is one reason that government power in general needs to be scaled way back. Things like arrest powers need to be limited to a few agencies that can put in robust screening processes and be more easily monitored.

LS, I am trying to look at it from an outsider's perspective as well. They receive a report. They have to investigate. They don't know until they visit that most of the info given is incorrect. I can completely understand how it doesn't look great when a subject opens the door at 1 pm in pj's with the house a little cluttered, claims to not drink often and then opens the fridge to find a six pack. Of course it looks bad. And while many people are social drinkers at the very least, my kids haven't seen me drink even a glass of wine in a long time because even that's been limited to a glass at dinner when out with friends but I do understand also how a kid saying "never" could seem sketchy as well.

My son did follow-up though with the fact that I do drink wine on occasion and just that its been awhile since he's seen that. My kids have never seen me drunk and I think that was what they were more insistent on. The worker kept asking the last time they saw Mom drunk. That answer is never but again, they do have to ask the questions. And again, its not that I'm against drinking, because I'm not. I never was a big drinker probably because of the history which was offered in response to her asking me if I was estranged from anyone with a drug or alcohol problem. I've been very open about that in my life and didn't feel it was something to lie about though again, I do understand that would raise some questions as well.

While I don't blame CPS for conducting an investigation I will say again, the upsetting part is that someone would do this for simple malicious reasons. CPS isn't at fault here. They are simply responding to a complaint. Regardless of what I think about how they are conducting it even after knowing most of the important info is false, I do think that even CPS should realize that this isn't just an unfounded report, but a malicious one. Maybe if they took it more seriously and pursued action against false callers, people would hesitate in using state agency as a means of satisfying a vendetta. As it is, I will pursue whatever I can pursue as far as charges go, but that will really depend on what the DA decides to do. And again, there are kids out there who need help. This fake caller is taking time and resources away from that.

Like LS said, this is mostly a nuisance for me, but the trickle effect of the money wasted, the time of the workers wasted, the kids who have less time with a worker who is spread thin, etc. That's the real shame of this. And of course the fear in my head that this person will do this again and maybe next time its not CPS, but the IRS or something else. That's scary.

Yes, Dave, but I've given up on the idea that the public can really stomache the bad things that will happen if we really cut back on government intervention.

They (we) scream at either end of the spectrum: when a child is abused or someone is falsely accused. Doesn't matter. Something must be done! The concept that nothing might be done - for the government just to stay out of it and let the bad and good of people's lives play out in the name of personal freedom - is unpalatable now.

Especially when we're talking child abuse. I personally lean towards believing that anonymous reporting should be stopped. This would likely result in more child abuse going undetected, although if the abuse was bad enough, somebody should have the guts to put their name out there and say so. I would, and I have to believe that many others would too.

So first its good parents never lose their kinds, now its good parnets have ways to regain custody.

Here is a brain teaser, if good parents cant lose cstody, why do they need ways to regain custody?

And momof4 here is an Az couple who lost their kids for over a month and were placed on a sex offender registry regarless of the fac that there had been no trial

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/arizona-couple-suing-bathtime-photos-prompt-wal-mart/story?id=8624533

and then there is this lovely story
fathersandfamilies.org/?p=16423

"Here is a brain teaser, if good parents cant lose cstody, why do they need ways to regain custody?"

Good parents CAN lose custody, while it's determined that they are, in fact, good parents, and the children are not in danger, but that is quite rare. This tired old case of the bathtub photos is all you can find? CPS investigates tens of thousands of allegations. Of course, they will err. It's a system of human beings making judgment calls, so of course, they will make mistakes.

But what's the alternative? Put in a policy that kids can't be removed until parents have adequate time to prove they're good parents? What if they're not? What if the children are in danger?

It's really a no win. Maybe it's better to do nothing, but then, people would cry that nothing was done.

And Dave is right. Caseworkers aren't paid very well, so we're not drawing from a pool of geniuses. We can bemoan their lack of logic in many cases, but getting back to what I said earlier, if you're smart and insightful, and you think the system sucks, then why not volunteer your time? At least you know YOUR decisions would always be right. :)

Hows about we acertain there is an acctual danger before we shoot first and ask questions later.

Form a simple cost benifit anaylisis damaged kids from bad home are less likey to suffer more harm from waiting a day or to for a rational response then undamaged kids are likey to suffer harm by dragging them kicking and screaming from parents who love them.

And no that wasnt the only case I could find, If I took the time I could dig up hunndereds, but no matter how many CPS fuckups I'd've shown to you the "its for the children, better safe then sorry, it all worked out in the end" mantra never stops

It doesnt all work out in the end, from what I understand that AZ couples kids are still in therapy. And their parnets are still frightened of the government

Btw, LW, you don't need to feel so defensive about your cluttered house, being in your pajamas on Sun, and having beer in your fridge. It's all perfectly normal, and I bet, despite the demeanor she might've projected, the caseworker thought so too. Actually, the fact you were a little embarrassed is a good sign. Bad parents tend to be more like, "So what?".

Frankly, I can't say that my children have never seen me tipsy. Once, after a night out with my girlfriends, where we drank way too much wine, my daughter, who was about 9 or 10, woke me to ask a question, and I was so disoriented, she asked me to repeat the alphabet backwards to "prove" I wasn't drunk. I failed miserably (though I'm not sure I can actually do that sober! lol).

My daughter and gfs still laugh about that sometimes. My kids were never in danger. Their dad was babysitting while I went out, but I'm glad a CPS worker didn't knock on my door back then, as I'm sure my daughter would've gleefully recounted the story.

Still, it's not enough to lose your kids over. Substance abuse has to be bad enough, and consistent enough, to pose a real threat to the children's welfare.

No, Luj, I wasn't saying there are no fuckups, but you are vastly exaggerating the times when children are removed like that. It happens, but, at least in my state, it doesn't happen unless there is some very compelling evidence that the kids are in immediate danger.

That's the truth. You can dig up cases from all over the country - and I agree it should never happen when they're wrong and kids are traumatized by it - but, in my experience, those cases are not common. It's MUCH more often the case that they leave kids in the home when they should be removed, and those kids end up hurt or murdered. I could probably find 10 or 20 cases like that to every one you find where they are wrongly removed.

LS, obviously I'm upset that I'm being investigated and for false allegations, but a few days since the first knock on the door has eased some of the tension I originally felt and I am finding some of the humor in the situation. My friends and kids have been telling me I've been a bore lately and they all find it hysterical that I'm being investigated for being such a party animal. My son wants credit for the fact that a six pack has remained in the fridge for so long. According to him, a lot of his friends would have lifted it after the first week. I've been the butt of quite a few jokes this week and get a lot of calls from my friends at Happy Hour asking if I'll be the designated driver, the joke being that they're out drinking and I'm home reading a book.

I'm not known for my exceptionally immaculate house but of course on the worst day is when someone shows up and there I was in pjs and bad bed hair looking sort of like the Nick Nolte mug shot. I can laugh now, yes even while being investigated, but the truth is, its hard to feel comfortable when that's happening. I'm sure the worker visited messier houses and messier people, but in an instant I could see every bit of dust, crumb, and empty water bottle lying around. And again, what really is upsetting is not the fear of being found guilty, but the fact that someone did this for malicious reasons and the fact that the person who did may never face any repercussions.

I don't think that the problem is that DFS has so much power. I think the problem is people abusing that power with all kinds of false allegations. I believe that we are still on the waning end of the child abuse hysteria that was started in the 70's and 80's. This crap is being perpetuated almost every day, especially by the media. By now we all know the little cookboook for aging stars who want to get back in the limelight: say you were abused. Oprah, Roseanne, and how many others perpetuate this nonsense. It really detracts from the bonified cases of abuse.

For the most part, I must say by personal experience that most DFS workers have treated me fairly and professionally. My ex wife, just two weeks ago, hotlined me to DFS. She said that she "remembered" my son saying that 6 years ago I had touched his privates, and that he talked in his sleep saying "don't touch me." Of course, none of this had to do with her wanting 50-50 custody (I have primary). Also, we had already been through three modifications since then, and this supposed abuse was never mentioned.

Of course, the DFS lady called me for an interview, where she gave me the results of their interview with my child. Of course there was nothing.

Of interest: the DFS lady told me that judges these days are on to all of the false allegations in custody cases, and advised me to keep the paperwork she gave me. She also said that these days judges are more likely to give custody to the parent who does NOT make allegations for abuse, presumably because of the whole false allegation problem...which of course is almost always by the ex-wives.

So, the judges are on to all of you who use this BS to try to gain an advantage...beware. And to all those fathers out there who have custody like I do: keep up the good work!

I'm really surprised no has added a comment to this quote from Vix:
Food for thought: it is not against the law for a government employee (including caseworkers) to lie in the line of duty, even under oath. The laws were written to keep law enforcement officers safe, but has ended up being very misconstrued.

It is against the law for anyone to lie under oath, that's the whole point of being under oath. I used to work for an attorney that represeted the department of social services in the county I lived in at the time, specifically in cases of abuse/neglect of children. Others have said it too, but before the courts will terminate parental rights they will try over and over again to the give the parent(s) a chance to straighten out and get their kids back. Someone else said they had a hard time believing what Vix said, I don't beleive it. There is no way that a judge will terminate a person's parental rights if there is absolutely no proof of wrong doing on the parent's part. It is a last straw and takes years to actually happen. I've been reading the blog and comments for a few years now and don't often post any comments, but I felt the need to put in my two cents on this. How can anyone think it's not against the law for federal employees to lie under oath and to do absolutely nothing wrong and have their parental rights taken away. I don't believe it for one second. Also, how did your kids refuse to be adopted? Older children are much less likely to be adopted and I don't think anyone is going to try to adopt a child that does not want to become a part of the family. None of what Vix has said makes sense to me.

'I also know-without doubt-a parent who has done nothing will not have their kids taken away by CPS. A parent can beat the crap out of their kids to the point of multiple broken bones over time, and CPS is going to try to keep that family together'

How do you know this, without a doubt?

"How do you know this, without a doubt?"

Probably by the many stories of children who have not been removed, after mutiple interventions by CPS, and end up dead.

That was really my point to Luj. There are two basic problems with CPS:

1) They remove children from homes when they shouldn't

2) They fail to remove children from homes when they should

Of these, I'd say #2 is the larger problem, at least from the perspective of the kids, and also because this happens far more often than #1, and when it happens, children often end up being killed.

However, if you're only looking at it from a purely libertarian perspective, #1 would seem to be the larger problem.

Both problems are caused by human error because it's a system made up of human beings, asked to make intuitive judgment calls, and there's very little way around that.

Also, one of the reasons that the state pushes to keep families together is because there are limited placements, essentially nowhere to put the number of children that need help. There aren't enough foster families, or long-term shelters. They can remove them temporarily, but that's just to an emergency shelter. Ultimately, that child will likely be returned to the home, as long as the parent has been cooperative and followed the reunification plan (substance abuse treatment, parenting classes, counseling, etc).

Where they err mostly is in giving parents too many chances to reform. Let's say the abuse is discovered when the child is 3. That's a cute, still adoptable age. The child is removed from the home, then returned when the parent seems better and the environment "safer", only to be removed again months or years later when more abuse/neglect is discovered. Another "plan" is put in place, and the parent embarks on more treatment...maybe missing a few conseling sessions and hearings, here and there, that need to be recheduled, dragging the process out.

Ultimately, the parent fails to totally reform, and parental rights are terminated, but, by then, the child is, say, 8 yrs old or older and now has developmental delays and emotional issues, rendering him less than appealing to adoptive parents, so he gets placed in foster care for the rest of his childhood, often bouncing from family to family.

And the whole process is even worse for children who are already older when the abuse is discovered. The chances they will be adopted are slim, so reunification is often the best option, even when the home enviroment isn't ideal. That is what the whole system works towards - hoping the parent can get their act together and keep the child.

LW, I would be very careful about signing up for the whole AA treatment thing, in hopes that they will then let you keep your kids.

The problem with that is that you will then be on record as having undergone treatment for alcoholism, in order to keep your kids; that you aren't an alcoholic won't matter; you took the treatment, therefore, you will be, officially, an alcoholic. This could be used against you in the future. The malicious informant may strike again,your spouse may decide to make trouble, and all the well-meaning folks who are convinced the government never makes mistakes will be murmuring "Hmmm, had to be treated for alcholism, did she? Had to do it because they might have taken her kids away? Hmmm, maybe she was abusing them all along, and they should go into foster care! After all, the government doesn't make mistakes about this sort of thing!"

This could come back to bite you!

Please---you need a lawyer! And good luck to you.

You need to get a lawyer, and you need one

Sorry for the typo! I should have said, "You need to get a lawyer, and you need one NOW!"

Typo or not, the advice still holds.

Thanks for the concern, Rhinestone, but I wasn't planning on joining AA. I said that if the report came back and found guilt that probably that would be one of the things CPS would want me to do. For now, I'm waiting for the initial complaint to come in the mail and then I'm heading to the DA to attempt to file charges against whoever made that call. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that something will come of that. Otherwise there are no plans for AA because I don't have any fears that custody of my kids is in jeopardy. That is something else that bothers me though too. The fact that I have nothing in writing with any type of charges, an investigation is underway or complete, and I still have to wait for some notification in the mail. Seems a little unfair. Maybe a better system would be for something to have been given to me when the first or second worker came to my house and interviewed my minor children.

So the argument is that since the cases are rare, that's OK?

I have to remember to use that in arguing for capital punishment.

I can drive a few miles down the road and see the projects - where, since the CPS people sign paperwork attesting to their having been there, all the children are brought up fully in compliance with State standards. Isn't that reassuring?

Consistency Warning

If you insist that a government agency is better at raising kids than some parents, then you surrender the right to be secure to the opinion of a government agent whose job depends on finding fault with your parenting. This subjects YOU to that agent's whim. Cross your fingers and hope.

Octomom can keep her kids. Huh?

"So the argument is that since the cases are rare, that's OK?"

It's not ok, just the inevitable result of a system made up of human beings who will make mistakes.

But the worst mistakes are the kids who are injured or killed. What are we to do about those children? Nothing?

"If you insist that a government agency is better at raising kids than some parents, then you surrender the right to be secure to the opinion of a government agent whose job depends on finding fault with your parenting. This subjects YOU to that agent's whim. Cross your fingers and hope."

Nobody believes a government agency is better at raising children than loving parents, but, sadly, many kids don't have loving parents.

If you ARE a loving parent, or even a semi-loving parent, and halfway sober, and not likely to strike your kid, the government isn't going to permanently take your child away.

There's nowhere for them to even put your child! In my county, we have a handful of reliable foster parents. One family takes in about 16 kids at a time. They are living, breathing SAINTS, taking in abused and neglected children nobody else wants to take in.

Believe me, CPS doesn't want to remove your child if they can help it. They only do so when there is sufficient evidence to fear for that child's safety, and even then, unless the abuse/neglect is so severe that it can't be addressed by counseling or treatment, they won't permanently take your child away.

"Octomom can keep her kids. Huh?"

Yes, they are her kids, and she seems to be doing a reasonably good job. It's amazing how many people wanted those kids taken from her and put in foster care. Isn't that totally against your position? She may have been foolish to get pregnant with 8 kids, but they are HER kids, not the state's.

If you ARE a loving parent, or even a semi-loving parent, and halfway sober, and not likely to strike your kid, the government isn't going to permanently take your child away.

I could give you the names of people who have, if your interested.

My mother lost custody of my sister and I because the judge didnt like the fact that she wasnt a mormon, there are about half a dozen adoption cases where days old babies are taken from their fathers and given to people thosuands of miles away even though they've commited no crimes.

There are a couple of lawsuits aginst california cps for taking kids from their mothers, putting them in foster homes and using their pull with the courts to cut their fathers out of the kids lives until the age out of the system.

Unpaid vollenteers in the child care system are one thing - paid case workers are like the morons working in the DMV - rational thought and careful consideration are not encouraged, following the 'system' is

LW, even if they ask you to join AA, I would hesitate to do that; it would be seen as an admission that, yes, you are an alcoholic (and, hence, must have been lying to the social worker when you said you don't drink.)

And do not wait for anything in the mail; do not wait to find out who your accuser is; talk to an attorney NOW! As in---immediately! You need to prepare for anything they might spring on you. Also, from this point on, you shouldn't talk to anybody from CPS unless one is present.

A fair system wouldn't rely on anonymous complaints in the first place; this is not a fair system. Don't expect them to do the right thing here, because they won't.

Once again--good luck!

Get a lawyer. Now!!! These people will not rest until they have total control over your life. They MUST find you guilty of something horrendous in order to justify their continued employment. There is no incentive to find in your favor, and every incentive to find against you. Government employees advance by expanding their departments and increasing the number of people working under them. If they were to find your town full of decent parenting, their division would have no reason to expand, or even to exist. By finding evildoers like you, they increase their caseload and can therefore demand more funding in the next budget.

Luj, I can't speak to those cases, not knowing all the facts, but I assume what happened to your mother was a long time ago.

It's also true that only the caseworkers, volunteer advocates, and the court know all the facts. Often, when you hear someone complaining about how their children were wrongfully taken, they are not telling the full story - like I suspect Vix wasn't.

Many abusive/neglctful parents, particularly narcissists, have an amazing ability to gloss over the picture. The account they can give vastly differs from what their children actually experienced.

As for adoption, I assume you mean with single mothers. I was one of those day old babies whisked away to foster care, and I'm totally grateful. My birth father was not there for my mother throughout the pregnancy, and he was an alcoholic/drug addict. Thank goodness the state didn't try to track him down to take me. I have a half sister who did grow up with him as a father, and it was terrible.

There are usually very good reasons an unwed mother chooses adoption.

Considering the fact that I am the subject of a false allegation I hate to sound like I'm justifying the system but I don't think the workers showing up at my house had any personal vendetta. They received a complaint. They have to investigate. I'm mixed on anonymous reporting. I feel violated and invaded, but there are real cases of abuse where a caller may seriously fear some retribution. The first worker was extremely rude but overall the fact that she was out of here so fast makes me think she doesn't believe there was any validity to the case just as the fact that the second worker seemed so comfortable with my son. This isn't the fault of CPS. It is the fault of some malicious person who decided they have a grudge against me and this is their way of sticking it to me. I would probably feel better if I knew for sure that whoever called falsely will suffer a consequence. I'm being denied the right to face my accuser and it stings especially because while the rest of you have no way of being sure, I am sure that these allegations are false and that they were not made out of genuine concern but a desire to cause trouble.

LW I'm sure that couple in AZ felt the same way you did when child services showed up over bathtub photos.

I doubt they felt the same way once they cops hauled away their kids, they wound up on a sex offender registry and she lost her job with the school district for being a danger to kids.

Sure about 6 weeks later they got the kids back, but now they have nightmares and suffer from seperation axiety and require counciling

But its all perfectly fine, right?

LW, the problem is not with one, malicious informer, and, at this point, finding out who this informer is will not help you very much.

The problem is with the CPS system, which allows anonymous accusations---they're the ones denying you your right to confront your accuser; this is very much their fault. If they didn't allow this kind of anonymous informing, your accuser couldn't have done this to you, in the first place; they wouldn't have dared. This is very much CPS's fault; they've set up a system that is all too easy to abuse. An ex-spouse, an angry "friend", a meddling relative, the lunatic next door, can all report you, and give the CPS power to barge into your life.

Please consider: CPS continued following up on this report, despite the many inaccuries contained in it---inaccuracies which were pointed out to them. They tried very hard to get you to incriminate yourself, the second social worker they sent doesn't sound as if she was particularly fluent in English. (Also, you have to consider they may be playing a good cop-bad-cop game, here.)

This does not sound like they're planning on letting this go. And you don't know for sure that the first, rude and hostile woman, is off the case; have you seen anything in writing, to that effect?

You need to:

1. Get a lawyer---NOW!

2. Stop volunteering information. For instance; do NOT explain to anybody---no, not even the "nice" social worker---about your family's history of alcoholism, problems with your ex, problems with the girl you took in; it can be used against you, and won't work to your advantage. It would be best if you simply state something like, "I will not say anything more without my attorney here." And keeping saying, it over and over. Until the attorney's there.

3. Get a Lawyer.

4. Google the McMartin Case. This will show you, better than anything else, how you can't just trust that the authorities will always do the right thing.

5. Get a lawyer---NOW!

Confronting your accuser is something you can try to do once you are free of the current mess. For now, though, your problem is with the CPS, not them.

Good luck, and best wishes!

Understandably, LW, you want to make light of this, and hope things turn out for the best, but the situation is serious. There is no guarantee that the District Attorney will favor your suit; he, or she, might not want to go against the CPS---they are there to protect children, arent' they?

You need to get busy and get legal counsel NOW!

Rhinestone, I'm not making light of it. I take the allegations very seriously. Because I know how false they are and how out of character for me the charges are, I have no doubt that in the end I will be vindicated as far as CPS is concerned. I didn't offer the worker information about the girl who stayed with me. I just spoke of it here. Also, the worker asked me about any estrangements with people with a history of drug or alcohol abuse. I felt that she had knowledge of something which would make me seem like a liar had I not said yes.

I have some knowledge of the workings of CPS that I don't want to explain, not because I'm guilty of anything, but because I'm hesitant to give any information that will identify me, but the two workers were not a trick. Once a report is filed, CPS has 24 hours to visit the home to investigate. The worker who came first was what is considered a weekend worker. She comes basically to cover their ass regarding the 24 hour policy. Then it is assigned to a caseworker. That was the second worker. It wasn't good cop/bad cop as much as just one worker who had zero personality and one who probably had more patience and experience. Again, I don't want to seem like I'm defending CPS but, it is not either worker's fault they were handed a paper with allegations against me. They were only doing their job by coming here. I have concerns with how they did their job but that is a different issue. My issue is with the fact that after so many inconsistencies a report would be taken seriously, but again, that is part of their investigation and most likely the report will come back as unfounded based on too many inaccuracies and the interviews with my kids.

I've said earlier that I'm mixed on the anonymous calling and regardless that this is happening to me, I still do understand why such a thing is permitted. I'm sure there are cases where innocent people have gotten a raw deal but I don't believe that is the majority of cases. My experience with what I've seen firsthand with CPS is that too many parents both male and female, get away with way too much abuse and neglect. I've often wondered what you have to do in NY to lose your kids because I've seen some cases where it boggles my mind that kids weren't removed immediately.

Unfortunately as LS pointed out, there's not a lot of places to send those kids. The group homes are not cute little places filled with singing kids as portrayed in "Annie" nor are there many wonderful grandmotherly types looking to take a kid in and love him or her. The foster care system is horrendous and filled with kids living in homes where the parents get paid to have them. The girl who stayed with me was a foster kid for her first 8 years. Coincidentally the first time she was thrown out was when she aged out of the foster care system.

So please Rhinestone, I do appreciate your concern and don't want you to think I'm making light of this. I appreciate everyone's kind words and thoughts. I could be completely wrong and crying to Amy in a month but I'm reasonably sure that the system is so overwhelmed with kids facing severe abuse and neglect that both workers left my house shaking their head. Either way, again, thank you so much for your concern. I really do appreciate it.

LW, you have the right perspective on this. Don't let Luj and Rhinestone get you paranoid. There's no way they are removing your children. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing on your part, and even if there was - even if you had a substance abuse problem - they are not likely to remove your children. If they were going to do that, they would have already. You've had 2 home visits and neither of them have shown you to be a danger to your kids, ie: you didn't answer the door drunk. There was food in the fridge and the kids seemed well cared for. They have absolutely no grounds for removal because you pose no immediate risk to your children.

This is not a case where you might be molesting your children, as the bathtub case was. That was an unfortunate misinterpretation made by CPS, which led to an overreaction, and as upsetting as that is, a case like that is still rare.

CPS investigates plenty of unfounded allegations, made by vicious neighbors, exs, etc, and, from your description, neither of the caseworkers believe these allegations. They were just making the visits they had to make.

For months, my girlfriend had to deal with CPS because her ex kept calling to report that she was abusing their kids and leaving them home alone, and sometimes, there was even a bruise or two on them (from soccer practice or any number of reasons) and once, her 14 yr old daughter was babysitting the younger ones, which is completely legal. She kept her cool, cooperated each visit, and they never removed her kids. In fact, they started apologizing for having to come over because it became obvious she was merely being harrassed.

Eventually, they must've told her ex they didn't believe his accusations. I'm not sure, but he was a doctor, so he had quite a lot of credibility in that sense at first, but even so, CPS isn't going to remove children unless they witness a dangerous situation, or have proof a dangerous situation has occurred.

If you'd gotten a DUI, for example, this would be different, but, even then, they'd most likely keep your kids in the home, as long as you agreed to get treatment immediately. They would probably only remove them if they, in fact, witnessed you drunk in front of the kids.

Almost every case I had as a guardian dealt with substance abuse, in one way or another, so I know a lot about how they would (or should) handle this, and, from the sound of it, neither of these caseworkers believe you are a danger, so you shouldn't worry, and I see no need to lawyer up.

Thanks, LS. I'm not going to lawyer up. I know that Luj and Rhinestone are just concerned I'll get a raw deal, but as I said before, I'm not worried that anything will come of this as far as them finding me guilty. Obviously its upsetting and frustrating and I would like it over already, but I can't blame CPS workers for being given a lot of inaccurate information and following up on it. Its ridiculous that they asked me as many times as they did to produce kids of the wrong ages despite my correcting them, but the bottom line is that this was a malicious act on someone's part and not on the part of CPS. All I can hope is that whoever did make that call did not do so anonymously so that I can press charges. I also would like to find out if there could be some note made of this in the call database so that in the case that this person calls with a complaint again, they will have a log and maybe get more information from the caller. I'm sure though that's wishful thinking on my part.

I don't think you'll ever be able to press charges, LW. Even if CPS knows who the caller is (and they probably do), his/her identity will be protected. That's the basis of the whole system.

I don't like it either. As a libertarian, it offends me. I've had neighbors anonymously make reports regarding code or enviromental infractions, usually very petty stuff, and it's typically the busybody types with nothing better to do. If they had to put their name out there, those kinds of reports would stop.

Yet, as a child advocate, I'm genuinely torn. I believe removing the anonymity would decrease reports and leave more children in danger. I've seen how hesitant many people are to report abuse, particularly when they're not entirely sure but have witnessed kids who seem hungry or show signs of physical abuse. I think that would end...certainly if they could be sued for reporting a concern that may end up being false.

Which brings me to the other reason you can't sue the caller, even if you knew who it was. With child abuse cases, "unfounded" doesn't mean innocent. It just means they found insufficient evidence. The caller would always claim they honestly thought they saw you endangering your kids - and it would still be your word against theirs - so, barring a confession that they did it purely for harrassment, it would be difficult to prosecute them for anything.

If you could narrow down who the caller might be, confront them, and get a taped or written acknowledgment, you'd have a better chance, but still, it would depend on whether that evidence, especially recordings, would be allowed.

There's also the possiblility that this isn't some vindictive person, out to get you, but a witness who honestly thought they saw you drunk. Maybe you stumbled on your way to the car one day, or they thought they saw you drinking a beer while driving.

A neighbor swore to me that my then 15 yr old daughter was drinking beer one day, and I went home livid, until she showed me that it was root beer, in a very real-looking beer-shaped bottle.

So, people misinterpret things at times. That, of course, is another justification for ending anonymous reporting.

LS, my choice of drink lately has been a cup of coffee, at home, or a sports bottle of water so I'm reasonably sure this was not a case of mistaking what I was drinking. I don't listen to gossip but some of the things I'm being told about the mom of the girl I took in are pretty consistent and from a few different people. Apparently she had a history of harassing the people who took her daughter in despite the fact that she threw her out. I still am not 100% sure but as I hear more its starting to make a little more sense to me. Little pieces are starting to fit. Again, I'm not 100% sure, but she would be someone I could see doing it. I have no fresh grudges with anyone else and as my friends and kids keep pointing out, I've been a very boring homebody lately.

As far as unfounded not meaning not guilty, I know that's true although if the caller did give a name, CPS in NY claims to take very seriously a false allegation. I guess it would really depend on what the DA thinks as far as pursuing charges. If asked, I don't think this woman could even say what I looked like. I haven't seen her in years. Realistically though, I don't have great hopes for being able to pursue charges. At the very least I want a record though in case it happens again as protection or proof that I am being harassed.

As you pointed out, there are pros and cons to anonymous reporting. Although this is a nuisance for me right now, I'm sure nothing will come of it. I don't like that someone could do this out of spite or malice but I do think that there are kids out there who would never get a look if it weren't for anonymous reporting. Its a tough one, definitely.

What a fucking shame that DCS/CPS/B.S. is so intent on allegations like this that are rife with discrepancies and yet are totally fucking useless in countless cases of severe, pervasive, and long-term abuse such as with Christian Choates (whose life could have been saved if DCS didn't simply satisfy themselves with "following protocol").

Just an update for any still paying attention.....

I called the CPS case worker yesterday to tell her its been a week and I have not received the formal complaint in the mail as the first worker told me to expect. I was told that the first worker was incorrect and that nothing was mailed because they did not have my correct mailing address. I expressed surprise considering two workers had visited my house so they should know where I live but was told that the mail would have went out based on the info given in the call and that the caller did not have a complete address. That was upsetting and I questioned how they could investigate a complaint where confessions were supposedly made yet the caller didn't know where I lived. Apparently she was only able to give my name and CPS cross referenced my name with records to find me. I was given the "you shouldn't worry if you know what's in your heart" lecture again and told that she would ask for the complaint to be mailed to me.

I finished off my day at the DA's office where I filed a formal complaint. The clerk told me that they will subpoena the CPS records and if the caller left a name, charges will be filed. If not, the caller had two years to make another false call and CPS can file charges. What didn't make sense was how charges could be filed if both calls were anonymous but I was just so happy that someone took my complaint seriously that I didn't ask. I will wait until the DA's investigation is complete.

As much as I understand that CPS has a job to do and that its not their fault someone did this and gave false information, it seems to me that when someone calls the abuse hotline claiming a close relationship with the abuser and speaks of confessions that the abuser supposedly made, that the called would know at least where the abuser lived, but that may be a silly thing to thing.

Would I be in trouble if it was me this happened to? I don't let strangers in my house, I don't care who they say they are. I was under the impression even DCFS or whatever needs a warrant or court order of some kind unless you let them in voluntarily.