WATCH VIDEO CENSORED BY YouTube: MORE THAN 100,000 CHILDREN IN FOSTER CARE ARE ABUSED EACH YEAR:
BELOW IS A LINK TO THIS SAME VIDEO POSTED ON BitChute THAT WAS CENSORED BY YouTube. Exposing the fact that more than 60% of kids in foster care are abused goes against YouTube’s community (communist) standards:
While appearing to be benevolent, helping unwanted orphans find good permanent homes the devil in the details and results. The fact is, the entire CPS system feeds pedophiles and is as corrupt and despotic as the day is long.
In 1974 Walter Mondale promoted the Child Abuse and Prevention Act which began feeding massive amounts of federal funding to states to set up programs to combat child abuse and neglect. From that came Child “Protective” Services, as we know it today. After the bill passed, Mondale himself expressed concerns that it could be misused. He worried that it could lead states to create a “business” in dealing with children.
Then in 1997 President Clinton signed the “Adoption and Safe Families Act.” The public relations campaign promoted it as away to help abused and neglected children who languished in foster care for years, often being shuffled among dozens of foster homes, never having a real home and family. In a press release from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services dated November 24, 1999, it refers to “President Clinton’s initiative to double by 2002 the number of children in foster care who are adopted or otherwise permanently placed.”
It all sounded so heartwarming. We, the American public, are so easily led. We love to buy stereotypes; we just eat them up, no questions asked. Clinton’s “compassionate” law created powerful financial incentives to remove children from their homes and place them in foster care, thus sparking a lucrative government-run business of child removal from families, which was and is the hidden agenda of the entire operation.
On Oct. 1, President Donald Trump’s Family First Prevention Services Act went into effect. Trump’s law seeks to reverse some of the damage caused by the Adoption and Safe Families Act signed by President Clinton. The Act created a program in which the federal government cuts checks to states, courtesy of Social Security, for every child adopted out of foster care. The Act also requires the termination of most parents’ custodial rights after a child has spent 15 months in foster care. Then-First Lady Hillary Clinton spearheaded the push to pass the Act through Congress. As usual, the media, lead by the New World Order New York Times promoted the Act as a way of helping unwanted or orphaned children find “safe families” and “good homes.” As usual. As always. And in typical Law of Reversal fashion, the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 resulted in the opposite of what it supposedly intended.
Instead of placing foster children into safe, loving families, the Act placed innocents into the hands of predator pedophiles due to financial incentives to the states. The Act exploited the most vulnerable children among us and bred systematic corruption. Then we have the current Pizzagate connections that have been swept under the media rug since they emerged in 2015. The Hillary Clinton/Clinton Foundation/James Alafantis/Anthony Weiner/John Podesta/Jeffrey Epstein/Obama White House Pizzagate connections have been squashed by the media and tight lipped complicit politicos, industrialists and celebrities as have the evil ongoing systematic abuse of children in the foster care and CPS systems. Maybe this will soon change.
Not surprisingly and by design, Bill Clinton’s Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 quickly became a “cash for kids” boon for State Child Services bureaucracies, Big Pharma, sex traffickers and pedophile abusers nationwide. The Act created a streamlined legal, bureaucratic and economic monster to deliver the most vulnerable children, orphans and confiscated children of the poor into the predatory hands of abusers and child molesters for money. This was celebrated as great progress for children. The media propped up the window dressing with what appeared to be impressive numbers. After the passage of that legislation, foster adoptions increased 64% nationwide from 31,030 the year the law passed to 51,000 last year,” Hillary Clinton wrote in the introduction to the 2006 edition of her book, “It Takes a Village.”
Abuse in the foster care system is a reality that no one likes to talk about. In fact, reliable data on foster care abuse is notoriously hard to come by. While anecdotes of horrible maltreatment of children by foster parents abound, these don’t paint a clear picture of how prevalent abuse is in the foster care system. The precious few studies that do exist typically examine the problem on a state-by-state basis. One of the more comprehensive reviews of foster care abuse, conducted by a watchdog group in 2004, cited findings that 28% of children in the Maryland foster care system had suffered abuse. Similar rates were cited for other states, with a 21% abuse rate in foster care homes in Louisiana, and a 25% rate in Missouri. Multiple organizations that have studied systemwide foster care abuses have concluded that children in state care are 10 times more likely to be abused than children in the care of their biological parents.
Due to lack of data and the fact that many cases go unreported, it’s impossible to know exactly how many children are suffering abuse in the California foster care system. In 2014, there were 496,972 reports of neglect and child abuse in the State of California. Of these, 16% (or 79,179) were substantiated by the child welfare system. Many of these children end up in the foster care system, where they may become victims of further abuse or neglect.
In California there are currently about 55,000 children in foster care;
Nearly 100 children are placed in California foster care every day;
At least 38% of California foster care children experience 5 or more placements; 73% of California foster care children are in the foster care system for 2 or more years. After 15 months, parental rights are lost.
While the limited data available about foster care abuse is shocking, inside stories suggest that the problem may be much worse than what is actually reported. Even though child welfare services has systems and requirements in place for monitoring foster care and visiting foster homes, these safeguards don’t always happen or fail to detect abuse when it is occurring. Every day, foster care children continue to be subjected to unacceptable emotional, physical, and sexual abuse.
Like the Affordable Care Act was not affordable, the Adoption and Safe Families Act did nothing to keep families safe. It was drafted in response to what was perceived as a failure in the previous legal framework for caring for foster children.
“The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) was enacted in 1997 in response to concerns that many children were remaining in foster care for long periods or experiencing multiple placements. This landmark legislation requires timely permanency planning for children and emphasizes that the child’s safety is the paramount concern,” states a Health and Human Services government training website.But this was a cover, since in reality the opposite aims of the act occurred. This of course was not by accident or poor administration. Or even by the corruption it created. It was intentional. To be used as a wider cover for the shadow government protected elite Pedogate sex trafficking operations.
“The Adoption and Safe Families Act established incentive payments equal to $4,000 for each foster child whose adoption was finalized over a certain base level and $6,000 for each special needs adoption above the base level,” according to a 2004 Congressional Research Service report.In fiscal year 2016, the federal government paid 47 states a total of $55.2 million in adoption incentive payments under the ASFA, according to congressional budget records. As of April 2018, the federal government had paid states a total of $613.9 million in ASFA incentive money. Foster parents who adopt their foster children are also entitled to checks. Natural parents and advocates see these financial incentives as distorting the entire system.
“They have social workers in place whose main objective is to commit perjury in the courtroom, to create a rationale for why to take the children and get paid. It’s almost like perjury is part of their job description,” says Andrea Packwood, president of California Family Advocacy, noting social workers’ proclivity to coach children about what to say in cases.
“If, for example, you have a neighbor who doesn’t like you or your politics, their allegations against you don’t even have to be substantiated. You could be the perfect parent, but if your garbageman doesn’t like you, that gets submitted as evidence,” Packwood said. “There’s a movement of people like Antifa who are using this for political motivations as well.”
DeLeith Gossett, a law professor at Texas Tech University, said in a 2018 Memphis Law Review article: “The 1997 act’s financial incentives have disrupted families permanently by the speedy termination of parental rights, without the accompanying move from foster care to adoptive homes. The programs that the Adoption and Safe Families Act govern thwart its very purpose as children continue to languish in foster care waiting for permanent adoptive homes, often until they age out of the system into negative life outcomes.”
In a 1977 interview anti-family Communist ideologue Mary Jo Bane, who served as the Clinton administration Department of Health and Human Services’ assistant secretary of children and families, said:
“What happens to children depends not only on what happens in the homes, but what happens in the outside world,” “We really don’t know how to raise children. If we want to talk about equality of opportunity for children, then the fact that children are raised in families means there’s no equality. It’s a dilemma. In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them.”
This long, insidious trail of breadcrumbs leads directly back to the Clinton Administration’s Adoption and Safe Families Act signed into law in 1997. The act stipulated that for every additional child adopted over current level at the time, states receive $4,000. An additional $2,000 bonus was paid for each adoption of a child with special medical needs.”
The Epoch Times recently uncovered multiple cases of alleged child sex abuse in the Contra Costa County foster care system in California. The State Department’s 2019 human trafficking report confirms that the foster care system is a breeding ground of human trafficking. President Trump’s Family First Prevention Services Act fights back against the financial incentives that move children quickly to foster care, but parents are unsure whether Trump’s law will be enough to reverse the systemic damage. With the Family First Prevention Services Act provides the option to use federal foster funds for prevention services that would allow ‘candidates for foster care’ to stay with parents or relatives.
The Family First Prevention Services Act also seeks to curtail the use of congregate or group care for children and instead places a new emphasis on family foster homes. With limited exceptions, the federal government will not reimburse states for children placed in qualified group care settings for more than two weeks.
In typical Law of Reversal fashion, the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 did the opposite of what it supposedly intended. Pardon the pun, but as usual, the devil is in details.
Instead of placing foster children into safe, loving families, the Act placed innocents into the hands of predator pedophiles due to financial incentives to the states. The Act exploited the most vulnerable children among us and bred systematic corruption.
As usual, in typical New World Order fashion, the media, lead by the New World Order New York Times and Hillary Clinton promoted President the 1997 law as a way of helping unwanted or orphaned children find “safe families” and “good homes.”
Like Al Gore’s infamous statement “NAFTA is a great deal for America, Larry,” the opposite occurred. As usual. As always.
The Clinton/Epstein Pizzagate connections squashed by the media and tight lipped complicit politicos, industrialists and celebrities who jaunted to Pedo Island on Epstein’s private jet, the evil abuse of children in the foster care and CPS system have also been suppressed.
Not surprisingly, Bill Clinton’s Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 quickly became a “cash for kids” boon for State Child Services bureaucracies, sex traffickers and pedophile abusers nationwide.
The Act created a streamlined legal, bureaucratic and economic monster to deliver the most vulnerable children, orphans and confiscated children of the poor into the predatory hands of abusers and child molesters for money. This was celebrated as great progress for children.
10 years later, Georgia State Senator Nancy Schaefer published a report detailing the operations of this machine. Below are key excerpts:
From the legislative desk of Senator Nancy Schaefer 50th District of
Georgia on November 16, 2007:
THE CORRUPT BUSINESS OF CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES
By Nancy Schaefer Senator, 50th District
My introduction into child protective service cases was due to a grandmother in an adjoining state who called me with her tragic story. Her two granddaughters had been taken from her daughter who lived in my district. Her daughter was told wrongly that if she wanted to see her children again she should sign a paper and give up her children. Frightened and young, the daughter did. I have since discovered that parents are often threatened into cooperation of permanent separation of their children.
The children were taken to another county and placed in foster care. The foster parents were told wrongly that they could adopt the children. The grandmother then jumped through every hoop known to man in order to get her granddaughters. When the case finally came to court it was made evident by one of the foster parent’s children that the foster parents had, at any given time, 18 foster children and that the foster mother had an inappropriate relationship with the caseworker.
In the courtroom, the juvenile judge, acted as though she was shocked and said the two girls would be removed quickly. They were not removed. Finally, after much pressure being applied to the Department of Family and Children Services of Georgia (DFCS), the children were driven to South Georgia to meet their grandmother who gladly drove to meet them. After being with their grandmother two or three days, the judge, quite out of the blue, wrote up a new order to send the girls to their father, who previously had no interest in the case and who lived on the West Coast. The father was in “adult entertainment”. His girlfriend worked as an “escort” and his brother, who also worked in the business, had a sexual charge brought against him.
Within a couple of days the father was knocking on the grandmother’s door and took the girls kicking and screaming to California.
The father developed an unusual relationship with the former foster parents and soon moved back to the southeast, and the foster parents began driving to the father’s residence and picking up the little girls for visits. The oldest child had told her mother and grandmother on two different occasions that the foster father molested her.
To this day after five years, this loving, caring blood relative grandmother does not even have visitation privileges with the children. The little girls are in my opinion permanently traumatized and the young mother of the girls was so traumatized with shock when the girls were first removed from her that she has not recovered.
Throughout this case and through the process of dealing with multiple other mismanaged cases of the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS), I have worked with other desperate parents and children across the state because they have no rights and no one with whom to turn. I have witnessed ruthless behavior from many caseworkers, social workers, investigators, lawyers, judges, therapists, and others such as those who “pick up” the children. I have been stunned by what I have seen and heard from victims all over the state of Georgia.
In this report, I am focusing on the Georgia Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS). However, I believe Child Protective Services nationwide has become corrupt and that the entire system is broken almost beyond repair. I am convinced parents and families should be warned of the dangers.
The Department of Child Protective Services, known as the Department of Family and Children Service (DFCS) in Georgia and other titles in other states, has become a “protected empire” built on taking children and separating families. This is not to say that there are not those children who do need to be removed from wretched situations and need protection. This report is concerned with the children and parents caught up in “legal kidnapping,” ineffective policies, and DFCS who do does not remove a child or children when a child is enduring torment and abuse.
In one county in my District, I arranged a meeting for thirty-seven families to speak freely and without fear. These poor parents and grandparents spoke of their painful, heart wrenching encounters with DFCS. Their suffering was overwhelming. They wept and cried. Some did not know where their children were and had not seen them in years. I had witnessed the “Gestapo” at work and I witnessed the deceitful conditions under which children were taken in the middle of the night, out of hospitals, off of school buses, and out of homes. In one county a private drug testing business was operating within the DFCS department that required many, many drug tests from parents and individuals for profit. In another county children were not removed when they were enduring the worst possible abuse.
Due to being exposed, several employees in a particular DFCS office were fired. However, they have now been rehired either in neighboring counties or in the same county again. According to the calls I am now receiving, the conditions in that county are returning to the same practices that they had before the light was shown on their deeds. Having worked with probably 300 cases statewide, I am convinced there is no responsibility and no accountability in the system. I have come to the conclusion:
• that poor parents often times are targeted to lose their children because they do not have the where-with-all to hire lawyers and fight the system. Being poor does not mean you are not a good parent or that you do not love your child, or that your child should be removed and placed with strangers;
• that all parents are capable of making mistakes and that making a mistake does not mean your children are always to be removed from the home. Even if the home is not perfect, it is home; and that’s where a child is the safest and where he or she wants to be, with family;
• that parenting classes, anger management classes, counseling referrals, therapy classes and on and on are demanded of parents with no compassion by the system even while they are at work and while their children are separated from them. This can take months or even years and it emotionally devastates both children and parents. Parents are victimized by “the system” that makes a profit for holding children longer and “bonuses” for not returning children;
• that caseworkers and social workers are oftentimes guilty of fraud. They withhold evidence. They fabricate evidence and they seek to terminate parental rights. However, when charges are made against them, the charges are ignored;
• that the separation of families is growing as a business because local governments have grown accustomed to having taxpayer dollars to balance their ever-expanding budgets;
• that Child Protective Service and Juvenile Court can always hide behind a confidentiality clause in order to protect their decisions and keep the funds flowing. There should be open records and “court watches”! Look who is being paid! There are state employees, lawyers, court investigators, court personnel, and judges. There are psychologists, and psychiatrists, counselors, caseworkers, therapists, foster parents, adoptive parents, and on and on. All are looking to the children in state custody to provide job security. Parents do not realize that social workers are the glue that holds “the system” together that funds the court, the child’s attorney, and the multiple other jobs including DFCS’s attorney.
• that The Adoption and the Safe Families Act, set in motion by President Bill Clinton, offered cash “bonuses” to the states for every child they adopted out of foster care. In order to receive the “adoption incentive bonuses” local child protective services need more children. They must have merchandise (children) that sell and you must have plenty of them so the buyer can choose. Some counties are known to give a $4,000 bonus for each child adopted and an additional $2,000 for a “special needs” child. Employees work to keep the federal dollars flowing;
• that there is double dipping. The funding continues as long as the child is out of the home. When a child in foster care is placed with a new family then “adoption bonus funds” are available. When a child is placed in a mental health facility and is on 16 drugs per day, like two children of a constituent of mine, more funds are involved;
• that there are no financial resources and no real drive to unite a family and help keep them together;
• that the incentive for social workers to return children to their parents quickly after taking them has disappeared and who in protective services will step up to the plate and say, “This must end! No one, because they are all in the system together and a system with no leader and no clear policies will always fail the children. Look at the waste in government that is forced upon the tax payer;
• that the “Policy Manuel” is considered “the last word” for DFCS. However, it is too long, too confusing, poorly written and does not take the law into consideration;
• that if the lives of children were improved by removing them from their homes, there might be a greater need for protective services, but today all children are not always safer. Children, of whom I am aware, have been raped and impregnated in foster care and the head of a Foster Parents Association in my District was recently arrested because of child molestation;
• that some parents are even told if they want to see their children or grandchildren, they must divorce their spouse. Many, who are under privileged, feeling they have no option, will divorce and then just continue to live together. This is an anti-family policy, but parents will do anything to get their children home with them.
• fathers, (non-custodial parents) I must add, are oftentimes treated as criminals without access to their own children and have child support payments strangling the very life out of them;
• that the Foster Parents Bill of Rights does not bring out that a foster parent is there only to care for a child until the child can be returned home. Many Foster Parents today use the Foster Parent Bill of Rights to hire a lawyer and seek to adopt the child from the real parents, who are desperately trying to get their child home and out of the system;
• that tax dollars are being used to keep this gigantic system afloat, yet the victims, parents, grandparents, guardians and especially the children, are charged for the system’s services.
• that grandparents have called from all over the State of Georgia trying to get custody of their grandchildren. DFCS claims relatives are contacted, but there are cases that prove differently. Grandparents who lose their grandchildren to strangers have lost their own flesh and blood. The children lose their family heritage and grandparents, and parents too, lose all connections to their heirs.
• that The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect in 1998 reported that six times as many children died in foster care than in the general public and that once removed to official “safety”, these children are far more likely to suffer abuse, including sexual molestation than in the general population.
• That according to the California Little Hoover Commission Report in 2003, 30% to 70% of the children in California group homes do not belong there and should not have been removed from their homes.
On my desk are scores of cases of exhausted families and troubled children. It has been beyond me to turn my back on these suffering, crying, and sometimes beaten down individuals. We are mistreating the most innocent. Child Protective Services have become adult centered to the detriment of children. No longer is judgment based on what the child needs or who the child wants to be with or what is really best for the whole family; it is some adult or bureaucrat who makes the decisions, based often on just hearsay, without ever consulting a family member, or just what is convenient, profitable, or less troublesome for a director of DFCS.
I have witnessed such injustice and harm brought to these families that I am not sure if I even believe reform of the system is possible! The system cannot be trusted. It does not serve the people. It obliterates families and children simply because it has the power to do so. Children deserve better. Families deserve better. It’s time to pull back the curtain and set our children and families free.
“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and the needy” Proverbs 31:8-9
On March 26, 2010 Senator Nancy Schaefer was shot in the back and murdered in her home in Georgia. Her husband of 52 years Bruce Schaefer was also found dead with a single gunshot wound to the chest. Police and government officials ruled the deaths as a murder–suicide perpetrated by Bruce Schaefer. The motive for the murder was suspiciously unclear and never fully established.
Even before a Georgia Bureau of investigation could be initiated, media outlets began pronouncing that their death was a “murder-suicide” and shut off most public comment posting on their web sites. Indeed, many of former Senator Shaefer’s video and interviews have been scrubbed from the internet.
Many who knew them believe that the “murder suicide” theory is highly unlikely. At the time of the murder the Schaefer’s were receiving death threats that had accelerated. Nancy Schaefer was completing a video exposing the lack of oversight in Georgia’s Department of Family and Child Services (DFCS) as well as Child Protective Services (CPS) nationally.
Less than a year before her murder, Nancy Schaefer was interviewed by Alex Jones to discuss the American foster care and adoption business, and the terrible corruption involved with it, including “bounties” on children and child sex trafficking.
This long, insidious trail of breadcrumbs leads directly back to the Clinton Administration’s Adoption and Safe Families Act signed into law in 1997.
The act stipulated that for every additional child adopted over current level at the time, states receive $4,000. An additional $2,000 bonus was paid for each adoption of a child with special medical needs.”
The following information on the abuse of foster children was compiled by my brother Rob Stone :
“Foster children or “wards” aka institutionalized children have ALWAYS played a key role in BIG PHARMA research…” Black, Hispanic & poor children are being medically kidnapped, taken from their families & being experimented on in NYC in ‘Incarnation Children’s Center Experiments’ run by Columbia Univ Presbyterian Hosp in affiliation with Catholic Home Charities thru Archdiocese of NY.”
Adoption Bonuses: The Money Behind the Madness
DSS and affiliates rewarded for breaking up families
By Nev Moore
May 27, 2000
Child “protection” is one of the biggest businesses in the country. We spend $12 billion a year on it.
The money goes to tens of thousands of a) state employees,b) collateral professionals, such as lawyers, court personnel, court investigators,evaluators and guardians, judges, and c) DSS contracted vendors such ascounselors, therapists, more “evaluators”, junk psychologists, residential facilities, foster parents, adoptive parents, MSPCC, Big Brothers/Big Sisters,YMCA, etc. This newspaper is not big enough to list all of the people inthis state who have a job, draw a paycheck, or make their profits off the kids in DSS custody.
In this article Nev Moore explains the financial infrastructure that provides the motivation for DSS to take people’s children – and not give them back.
In 1974 Walter Mondale promoted the Child Abuse and Prevention Act which began feeding massive amounts of federal funding to states to set up programs to combat child abuse and neglect. From that came Child “Protective” Services, as we know it today. After the bill passed, Mondale himself expressed concerns that it could be misused. He worried that it could lead states to create a “business” in dealing with children.
Then in 1997 President Clinton passed the “Adoptionand Safe Families Act.” The public relations campaign promoted it as away to help abused and neglected children who languished in foster care for years, often being shuffled among dozens of foster homes, never havinga real home and family. In a press release from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services dated November 24, 1999, it refers to “President Clinton’s initiative to double by 2002 the number of children in fostercare who are adopted or otherwise permanently placed.”
It all sounded so heartwarming. We, the American public, are so easily led. We love to buy stereotypes; we just eat them up, no questions asked. But, my mother, bless her heart, taught me from the time I was young to “consider the source.” In the stereotype that we’ve been sold about kids in foster care, we picture a forlorn, hollow-eyed child, thin and pale, looking up at us beseechingly through a dirt streaked face. Unconsciously, we pull up old pictures from Life magazine of children in Appalachia in the 1930s. We think of orphans and children abandoned by parents who look like Manson family members. We play a nostalgic movie in our heads of the little fellow shyly walking across an emerald green, manicured lawn to meet Ward and June Cleaver, his new adoptive parents, who lead him into their lovely suburban home. We imagine the little tyke’s eyes growing as big as saucers as the Cleavers show him his very own room, full of toys and sports gear. And we just feel so gosh darn good about ourselves.
Now it’s time to wake up to the reality of the adoption business.
Very few children who are being used to supply the adoption market are hollow-eyed tykes from Appalachia. Very few are crackbabies from the projects.
[Oh… you thought those were the children they were saving? Think again].
When you are marketing a product you have to provide a desirable product that sells. In the adoption business that would be nice kids with reasonably good genetics who clean up good. An interesting point is that the Cape Cod & Islands office leads the state in terms of processing kids into the system and having them adopted out. More than the inner city areas, the projects, Mission Hill, Brockton, Lynn, etc. Interesting…
With the implementation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act, President Clinton tried to make himself look like a humanitarian who is responsible for saving the abused and neglected children. The driveof this initiative is to offer cash “bonuses” to states for every childthey have adopted out of foster care, with the goal of doubling their adoptions by 2002, and sustaining that for each subsequent year. They actually call them “adoption incentive bonuses,” to promote the adoption of children.
Where to Find the Children
A whole new industry was put into motion. A sweet marketing scheme that even Bill Gates could envy. Now, if you have a basket of apples, and people start giving you $100 per apple, what are you going to do? Make sure that you have an unlimited supply of apples, right?
The United States Department of Health & Human Services administers Child Protective Services. To accompany the ASF Act, the President requested, by executive memorandum, an initiative entitled Adoption 2002, to be implemented and managed by Health & Human Services. The initiative not only gives the cash adoption bonuses to the states, it also provides cash adoption subsidies to adoptive parents until the children turn eighteen.
Everybody makes money. If anyone really believes that these people are doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, then I’ve got some bad news for you. The fact that this program is run by HHS, ordered from the very top, explains why the citizens who are victims of DSS get no response from their legislators. It explains why no one in the Administration cares about the abuse and fatalities of children in the”care” of DSS, and no one wants to hear about the broken arms, verbal abuse,or rapes. They are just business casualties. It explains why the legislators I’ve talked to for the past three years look at me with pity. Because I’m preaching to the already damned.
The legislators have forgotten who funds their paychecks and who they need to account to, as has the Governor. Because it isn’t the President. It’s us.
How DSS Is Helped
The way that the adoption bonuses work is that each state is given a baseline number of expected adoptions based on population.
For every child that DSS can get adopted, there is a bonus of $4,000 to $6,000.
But that is just the starting figure in a complex mathematical formula in which each bonus is multiplied by the percentage that the state has managed to exceed its baseline adoption number. The states must maintain this increase in each successive year. [Like compound interest.] The bill reads: “$4,000 to $6,000 will be multiplied by theamount (if any) by which the number of foster child adoptions in the State exceeds the base number of foster child adoptions for the State for the fiscal year.” In the “technical assistance” section of the bill it states that, “the Secretary [of HHS] may, directly or through grants or contracts, provide technical assistance to assist states and local communities to reach their targets for increased numbers of adoptions for children in foster care.” The technical assistance is to support “the goal of encouraging more adoptions out of the foster care system; the development of best practice guidelines for expediting the termination of parental rights; the development of special units and expertise in moving children toward adoption as a permanent goal; models to encourage the fast tracking of children who have not attained 1 year of age into pre-adoptive placements; and the development of programs that place children into pre-adoptive placements without waiting for termination of parental rights.”
In the November press release from HHS it continues,” HHS awarded the first ever adoption bonuses to States for increases in the adoption of children from the public foster care system.” Some of the other incentives offered are “innovative grants” to reduce barriers toadoption [i.e., parents], more State support for adoptive families, making adoption affordable for families by providing cash subsides and tax credits.
A report from a private think tank, the National Center for Policy Analysis, reads: “The way the federal government reimburses States rewards a growth in the size of the program instead of the effective care of children.” Another incentive being promoted is the use of the Internetto make adoption easier. Clinton directed HHS to develop an Internet site to “link children in foster care with adoptive families.” So we will be able to window shop for children on a government web site. If you don’t find anything you like there, you can surf on over to the “Adopt Shoppe.”
If you prefer to actually be able to kick tires instead of just looking at pictures you could attend one of DSS’s quaint “AdoptionFairs,” where live children are put on display and you can walk aroundand browse. Like a flea market to sell kids. If one of them begs you to take him home you can always say, “Sorry. Just looking.” The incentives for government child snatching are so good that I’m surprised we don’t have government agents breaking down people’s doors and just shooting theparents in the heads and grabbing the kids. But then, if you need more apples you don’t chop down your apple trees.
Benefits for Foster Parents
That covers the goodies the State gets. Now let’s have a look at how the Cleavers make out financially after the adoption is finalized.
After the adoption is finalized, the State and federal subsidies continue. The adoptive parents may collect cash subsidies until the child is 18. If the child stays in school, subsidies continue to the age of 22. There are State funded subsidies as well as federal funds through the Title IV-E section of the Social Security Act. The daily rate for State funds is the same as the foster care payments, which range from $410-$486 per month per child. Unless the child can be designated “special needs,” which of course, they all can.
According to the NAATRIN State Subsidy profile from DSS, “special needs” may be defined as: “Physical disability, mental disability,emotional disturbance; a significant emotional tie with the foster parents where the child has resided with the foster parents for one or more years and separation would adversely affect the child’s development if not adopted by them.” [But their significant emotional ties with their parents, sincebirth, never enter the equation.]
Additional “special needs” designations are: a child twelve years of age or older; racial or ethnic factors; child having siblings or half-siblings. In their report on the State of the Children, Boston’s Institute for Children says: “In part because the States can garner extra federal funds for special needs children the designation has been broadened so far as to become meaningless.” “Special needs” children may also get an additional Social Security check.
The adoptive parents also receive Medicaid for the child, a clothing allowance and reimbursement for adoption costs such as adoption fees, court and attorney fees, cost of adoption home study, and “reasonable costs of food and lodging for the child and adoptive parents when necessary to complete the adoption process.” Under Title XX of the Social Security Act adoptive parents are also entitled to post adoption services “that may be helpful in keeping the family intact,” including “daycare, specialized daycare, respite care, in-house support services such as housekeeping, and personal care, counseling, and other child welfare services”. [Wow! Everything short of being knighted by the Queen!]
The subsidy profile actually states that it does not include money to remodel the home to accommodate the child. But, as subsidies can be negotiated, remodeling could possibly be accomplished under the “innovative incentives to remove barriers to adoption” section. The subsidy regulations read that “adoption assistance is based solely on the needs of the child without regard to the income of the family. “What an interesting government policy when compared to the welfare program that the same child’s mother may have been on before losing her children, and in which she may not own anything, must prove that she has no money in the bank; no boats, real estate, stocks or bonds; and cannot even own a car that is safe to drive worth over $1000. This is all so she can collect $539 per month for herself and two children. The foster parent who gets her children gets $820 plus. We spit on the mother on welfare as a parasite who is bleeding the taxpayers, yet we hold the foster and adoptive parents [who are bleeding ten times as much from the taxpayers] up as saints. The adoptive and foster parents aren’t subjected to psychological evaluations, ink blot tests, MMPI’s, drug & alcohol evaluations, or urine screens as the parents are.
Adoption subsidies may be negotiated on a case by case basis. [Anyone ever tried to “negotiate” with the Welfare Department?] There are many e-mail lists and books published to teach adoptive parentshow to negotiate to maximize their subsidies. As one pro writes on an e-maillist: “We receive a subsidy for our kids of $1,900 per month plus another $500 from the State of Florida. We are trying to adopt three more teens and we will get subsidies for them, too. It sure helps out with the bills.”
I can’t help but wonder why we don’t give this same level of support to the children’s parents in the first place? According to Cornell University, about 68% of all child protective cases “do not involve child maltreatment.” The largest percentage of CPS/DSS cases are for “deprivation of necessities” due to poverty. So, if the natural parents were given the incredible incentives and services listed above that are provided to the adoptive parents, wouldn’t it stand to reason that the causes for removing children in the first place would be eliminated?
How many less children would enter foster care in the first place? The child protective budget would be reduced from $12 billion to around $4 billion. Granted, tens of thousands of social workers, administrators, lawyers, juvenile court personnel, therapists, and foster parents would be out of business, but we would have safe, healthy, intact families, which are the foundation of any society.
That’s just a fantasy, of course. The reality is that maybe we will see Kathleen Crowley’s children on the government home-shopping-for-children web site and some one out there can buy them.
A John Hopkins University study in Maryland found that children in foster care are four times more likely to be sexually abused than their peers not in this setting, and children in group homes are 28 times more likely to be abused.
An Oregon and Washington State study determined that almost one-third of foster children reported abuse by a foster parent or another adult in the home.
Researchers in New Jersey foster homes, concluded that “no assurances can be given” that any foster child in the state is safe.
More than half of child sex trafficking victims recovered through FBI raids across the U.S. in 2013 were from foster care or group homes.
This statistic brings to light the failure of the system to address the recurring sexual exploitation of minors while in their protection. Predators immediately recognize that children in foster care are especially accessible to them, because the adults charged with protecting them are not doing so.
The foster care system plays a significant role in the growing epidemic of reported institutional sexual abuse of minors. A report completed by the New Jersey Office of Child Advocacy includes the relationship of the perpetrator to the victim.
Of the child cases studied, 37.4% of perpetrators were institution staff, 36.5% were foster parents, and 20% where relatives of the victim. The results beg the question: is there a higher risk of sexual abuse in an institutional setting then in an abusive home environment provided by a relative?
The Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) reported that in 2017, more than 669,000 minors were in the US foster care system. Many states have been found guilty of failing to protect foster children in their care, specifically by failing to respond to allegations of sexual abuse and have paid out huge cash settlements to victims.
Racial Disparity in the Foster Care System
Racial Disparities exist at every level of the child welfare system. A report on African American Children in the foster care system provided by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), states that in 2004,
African American children represented more than one-third of children in foster care in America, despite accounting for only 15% of the entire child population. Women of color are more likely to be reported to the child abuse hotline and investigated for child abuse and neglect. They are the group with the highest number of substantiated cases, and as a result, are at the greatest likelihood to have their children removed from their care.
In many states neglect is defined almost exclusively by the ability to provide for the child financially; homelessness as the result of non-payment of rent, and lack of adequate access to food are grounds for removal for neglect. Instead of the child protection agencies providing needed supports to keep the family safely intact, removal of children from their homes usually takes precedent, Even if the children end up in placements free from abuse, outcomes are still not good. Children in foster care have proportionately high rates of physical, developmental, behavioral and mental health issues from the trauma of foster care.
In a shadowy online network, a pedophile takes home a ‘fun boy’
By Megan Twohey, September 9, 2013
(Above) GAMBLE: Randy Winslow plays cards with the 10-year-old boy he and Nicole Eason obtained through the Internet from adoptive mother Glenna Mueller, who provided this photo. Winslow was later convicted of trading child pornography.
A self-proclaimed ‘lil boy lover’ and a woman accused of neglect find a child on the Internet – and pick him up hours later in a hotel parking lot.
APPLETON, Wisconsin – Online, she called herself Big Momma; he went by the name lovethemcute. And in the summer of 2006, housemates Nicole Eason and Randy Winslow were surfing the Internet with a common objective.
Each was looking for children.
Winslow – lovethemcute – was 41, balding and paunchy. He swapped pictures of naked children and would later spend time in a chat room called baby & toddler love, where he described himself as a “lil boy lover,” court documents show. There, he would graphically boast of molesting boys and explain how to keep the abuse quiet: “Just have to raise them to think its fine and not to tell anyone,” he wrote in a chat with an undercover federal agent. “What is done in the family stays in the family.”
Eason – Big Momma – was about to turn 28. She had moved to Illinois from two states where authorities had taken away her biological children years earlier. In one report, authorities noted that a child she and friends were watching had died in her care.
Living away from her husband, Calvin, and with Winslow in the Illinois town of Tilton, Eason wanted to be a mother again. A few hours on an Internet bulletin board were all she would need to find a new child.
On July 14, 2006, Eason connected online with Glenna Mueller, a Wisconsin mother ready to give up a 10-year-old boy she had adopted. Mueller, 46, was once a licensed daycare provider. Struggling in a second marriage, she largely supported herself by collecting government subsidies for the seven children she adopted. She had taken the 10-year-old about three years earlier. Now, his tantrums were too much, Mueller told Eason.
“I couldn’t stand to look at him anymore,” Mueller says today. “I wanted this child gone.”
That’s when Mueller turned to Considering Disrupting an Adoption, a Yahoo group for parents struggling to raise the children they adopted. (After Reuters asked Yahoo about the group, which has been active for nine years, the company shut it down for violating Yahoo’s terms of service.) Most of the children mentioned on such bulletin boards come from overseas. Mueller’s son – an African-American boy – had been adopted out of the U.S. foster care system. On the site, she posted a description of the boy and her contact information. Almost immediately, Eason reached out.
Early that July morning, the two began exchanging emails, and Mueller sent Eason a picture of the boy. “He is ADORABLE!!!!!!!!!!!” Eason replied minutes later. She quickly added: “Randy wants to know if u would like a visit today?”
By that afternoon, Eason and Winslow were heading north, driving five hours from Illinois to Appleton, Wisconsin, where Mueller lived. They met in a hotel parking lot just off the highway, and Mueller brought the boy.
In an email, Eason had told Mueller that they need not involve a lawyer. No child welfare officials were notified, either. Along with the boy’s birth certificate, Mueller handed Nicole a note: Eason and Winslow had her permission to care for her son.
Mueller knew little about the couple. She wasn’t certain where or if Eason or Winslow worked, or if they were married; she knew nothing about Eason’s two biological children having been taken away, or of Winslow’s affinity for young boys; she wasn’t even sure of their address. She did know they were willing to take a child she could no longer stomach, and that was enough.
After less than an hour outside the Fairfield Inn, Eason and Winslow drove off with a young boy, a commodity in America’s underground market for discarded adopted children.
As nations around the world make adopting overseas more difficult for Americans, the U.S. government has taken no measures to restrict informal “private re-homings,” custody transfers of unwanted children that often start in online bulletin boards, a Reuters investigation has found.
The unregulated nature of this market makes it especially dangerous. Because the government doesn’t oversee the bulletin boards, people like Randy Winslow can easily gain custody of a child, without authorities ever knowing. Scrutinizing those who want children is often left to parents who are eager to get rid of the kids.
“I would have given her away to a serial killer, I was so desperate,” one mother wrote in a March 2012 post about re-homing her 12-year-old daughter.
“There’s hundreds of people looking for new homes for kids,” Mueller says of those who use the online bulletin boards. One participant referred to the re-homing forums as “‘farms’ in which to select children.”
Many of the online posts say the unwanted children have physical or mental disabilities. In the group Reuters analyzed, more than half were described as having some sort of special need. About 18 percent were said to have a history that included sexual or physical abuse.
Such descriptions could serve as a beacon for predators. “If you advertise details of things like their substance abuse or sexually acting out, that’s waving a red flag,” says Michael Seto, an expert on the sexual abuse of children at the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group in Canada.
Especially at risk are children described as troubled and lacking a consistent parental figure, says Eric Ostrov, a Chicago-based forensic psychologist who evaluates sex offenders. Those depictions, Ostrov says, would be a “tremendous lure.”
The great majority of children on the bulletin boards fit that profile. Most were adopted from overseas and brought to America. But children born in the United States can end up in the underground child exchange, too. The case of the 10-year-old taken by Eason and Winslow illustrates how easily parents will turn children over to strangers met online.
In early 2000, six years before picking up Glenna Mueller’s son in the hotel parking lot, Nicole Eason came to the attention of child welfare authorities in Massachusetts.
Eason, then 21, had taken her biological baby daughter to a hospital in the city of Pittsfield. Doctors at Berkshire Medical Center determined that the girl, 9 months old, had a broken femur “for which the parents had no explanation,” court records show. “A full skeletal X-ray” was done, and “two old fractures were discovered that were in different stages of healing,” according to court records. “The parents had never sought medical attention for those fractures.”
Rebecca Kickery, a former friend of Nicole’s, says she remembers the incident that put the girl in the hospital. She says she told a child welfare worker what she witnessed. The baby was “chasing her mom in the walker,” Kickery says, and Nicole Eason “was cussing at her. She grabbed the tray of the walker and yanked her… When she yanked her, her daughter’s leg went one way and her body went the other, and I heard it cracking like you crack a stick. And I just thought, this poor little girl.”
EX-FRIEND: Rebecca Kickery says she witnessed Nicole Eason abusing Nicole’s biological daughter.
By 2002, Calvin Eason and a pregnant Nicole had moved to South Carolina. That March, Nicole gave birth to a boy.
Massachusetts child protection officials learned of the move and told South Carolina authorities about the Easons’ history. They explained that Nicole’s daughter was already in the foster care system. “The allegations,” a report by South Carolina authorities recounted, “are abuse and neglect.” (The couple’s parental rights to the girl were subsequently terminated.)
About a week after Nicole’s son was born, the state executed an emergency removal of the newborn from the Eason home in Summerville, South Carolina, sheriff’s records show. Authorities cited the neglect investigation of the Easons in Massachusetts and the conditions in the couple’s South Carolina home.
“The home environment was deplorable for an infant, trash, clothes, stale food and stagnant water,” according to a March 27, 2002, report by the sheriff’s office. “The parents have an open investigation in (Massachusetts) where their parental rights are being terminated due to physical abuse on another child. Parents have severe psychiatric problems as well with violent tendencies.”
In interviews earlier this year at a house they were renting in Tucson, Arizona, the Easons said that both children were still living with them. No pictures of any child hung on the walls, but there were a half-dozen plaques with adages about parenting. One read, “Daughters hold our hands for a little while but hold our hearts forever.”
Nicole said South Carolina officials briefly removed their biological son years ago after someone reported that she had killed the boy and stuffed him into a tote bag. But he was returned to them within a few days, she said, after officials determined she had done nothing wrong.
The Easons never got the children back. The boy was adopted out of foster care, a South Carolina child welfare official said. The girl has either been adopted or remains in foster care; a Massachusetts official would not say which.
With her biological children gone, Nicole Eason babysat for other parents.
A neighbor in North Charleston reported to police in 2003 that she suspected Nicole had molested the neighbor’s young daughter. The girl, who was 4 or 5, told her mother that Nicole had been showering and sleeping naked with the child, the mother told police. When authorities interviewed the girl, she “had not disclosed any pertinent information for criminal charges,” according to a report by the North Charleston police, dated Feb. 27, 2003.
As police investigated the allegations, Nicole was being treated in the psychiatric ward of The Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston for “an unrelated incident,” according to the police report.
No charges were filed, but the mother secured a protective order against Eason when Eason left the hospital weeks later. Nicole says she never abused the girl.
In 2005, another allegation surfaced, this time against Calvin Eason.
A young boy who suffered from mental illness told his counselor that Calvin had touched him improperly while bathing the boy. The boy’s mother didn’t believe the allegation, according to a report by North Charleston police, and no charges were brought.
Before Calvin arrived, Nicole had gone online and taken a child through the re-homing network. In July 2006, Nicole’s pursuit of Glenna Mueller’s unwanted adopted son was accomplished in a single day.
Ten years old, the boy had come out of the Wisconsin foster system small and underweight. He loved babies and animals but suffered emotional and behavioral problems, Mueller says. He would act out, attack other children and show no remorse, she recalls.
A stay-at-home mother in the paper-mill city of Appleton, Mueller was, in essence, a professional parent. Her income came from government assistance for her adopted sons and daughters. She says a Wisconsin child welfare officer told her that if she relinquished the 10-year-old to the state, the move might prompt an investigation that could result in her losing her other children.
Increasingly stressed, she turned to another Yahoo group, called Considering Disrupting an Adoption, to find the boy a new home. If she handled the matter privately, she reasoned, the state wouldn’t have to know and therefore wouldn’t investigate her for neglect or abuse. Mueller posted a description of the boy and asked if anyone was interested.
Nicole Eason responded by email: “OMG Glenna I CAN HANDLE HIM … I HAVE the love, patience and time…” Mueller was eager to move forward but told Eason she couldn’t afford an attorney. They wouldn’t need one, Eason assured her and suggested they meet in person. She and Randy, she told Mueller, were willing to drive to Wisconsin that very day. Mueller agreed.
That afternoon, in the hotel parking lot off U.S. Highway 41, Mueller met Eason and Winslow for the first and only time.
Before the couple drove off with the boy, Mueller took a picture of the new family. The snapshot shows a small, lean child between the smiling pair. Winslow, wearing sunglasses, has his arm around the boy.
REGRETS: Glenna Mueller handed over her troubled son on the same day she connected online with Nicole. “I was desperate In hindsight, it was all wrong. I shouldn’t have done it that way,” she says. “But I did, you know.”
Several months passed before the boy’s caseworker in Wisconsin learned that Mueller had given the child to a couple in Illinois. Mueller says the caseworker insisted she take the the boy back. He told her that the transfer violated a legal requirement that authorities be notified when custody is transferred across state lines.
The caseworker “said I could be arrested,” Mueller says. “It scared the bejesus out of me.”
Mueller called Nicole Eason, who promised to meet her at the state line to give her the boy back. Mueller says neither Wisconsin nor Illinois authorities took action against her, Eason or Winslow for transferring custody illegally.
As Mueller began searching online for another family to take him, Eason and Winslow also were back online, again looking for children.
While Eason worked the re-homing bulletin boards, Winslow spent time in a chat room called baby & toddler love. That’s where an undercover federal agent Kevin Laws, who works in the child exploitation investigative unit at the department of Homeland Security found him in April 2007.
Laws posed as a single grandfather living in Alaska. He told Winslow he was caring for his two grandchildren, kids he said he would let Winslow molest.
In his messages to Laws, court records show, Winslow shared child pornography and claimed to have experience “sucking boys” who were 7, 9 and 11 years old.
When authorities searched Winslow’s home and took his computer, the warrant allowed them to look only for items related to the sending and receiving of child-exploitation images and the chats and emails between Winslow and the undercover agent. Nicole Eason was no longer living with Winslow.
In February 2008, Winslow pleaded guilty in his criminal case and was convicted of sending and receiving child pornography from June 2006 through May 2007. The span includes the months that the 10-year-old spent with Winslow and Eason. Serving a 20-year sentence at a federal prison in Elkton, Ohio, Winslow declined requests for an interview.
After returning to Wisconsin, Mueller sent the child to another home after getting approval from child welfare officials.
(Additional reporting by Ryan McNeill and Robin Respaut in New York)
On September 25, 2019 Patrick Howley published an article in the Epoch Times:
Clinton-Era Law Has Distorted Child Protective Services, Parents Say
Parents blame legislation signed by Bill Clinton for the rash of Child Protective Services (CPS) corruption and abuse claims cropping up all over the country.
On Oct. 1, President Donald Trump’s Family First Prevention Services Act—which he passed by attaching it to a February 2018 spending bill—goes into effect. Trump’s law seeks to reverse some of the damage caused by the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), which President Clinton signed in 1997.
Critics say Clinton’s law created financial incentives to remove children from their homes and place them in foster care, thus sparking a lucrative government-run business of child removal. YOU DON’T SAY?
The ASFA created a program in which the federal government cuts checks to states, courtesy of Social Security, for every child adopted out of foster care. The ASFA also requires the termination of most parents’ custodial rights after a child has spent 15 out of the past 22 months in foster care. Then-First Lady Hillary Clinton spearheaded the push to pass the ASFA through Congress.
“After the passage of that legislation, foster adoptions increased 64% nationwide from 31,030 the year the law passed to 51,000 last year,” Hillary Clinton wrote in the introduction to the 2006 edition of her book, “It Takes a Village.”
ASFA was drafted in response to what was perceived as a failure in the previous legal framework for caring for foster children.
“The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) was enacted in 1997 in response to concerns that many children were remaining in foster care for long periods or experiencing multiple placements. This landmark legislation requires timely permanency planning for children and emphasizes that the child’s safety is the paramount concern,” states a Health and Human Services government training website.
‘Ready for Adoption’
Parents affected by the ASFA say it gives the government a blank check to traffic children.
“As soon as you hit the 15-month period, you automatically get your rights terminated,” Jeremy Powell of Oklahoma told The Epoch Times on Sept. 24, immediately after losing any chance of getting back his four children, all under the age of 10. “They [CPS] were ready for adoption day one. They didn’t help us in any way.”
“I have 30 days to appeal,” said Powell, a former Chili’s cook who entered the CPS system when the cleanliness of his house declined, due to a health episode at work that led to his firing. Powell said his manager, who is an illegal immigrant, chose to fire him rather than file an official report that might have led to the manager’s deportation.
“I looked at Trump’s law about returning kids to their families, compared to Bill Clinton’s law. Trump’s law is on our side,” Powell said.
“The law should be stretched out for people in poverty because they only give you three months. … Even if you make it by the 90-day mark, they still ignore because you’re too poor to carry on. The jurors, the lawyers, everything. There has to be an extension of time for poor people to catch up,” Powell said.
“One of our kids has already been through six different fosters. They say they care about the children. They’re torturing them! As long as CPS can get a child’s parents to the 15-month line, they get a kickback for the kid,” Powell said. “It’s like the kids are cattle.”
“One of my reports said because I have a problem with the church, my kids shouldn’t be returned. So I have no First Amendment rights. I don’t know why I’m still in America, because I have to pay these taxes and I don’t have any family or any rights,” Powell said.
A National Issue
Powell’s story is similar to traumas suffered by parents all over the United States.
“I have at least 200 cases on file with evidence from people all over the nation,” Audra Terry of Texas told The Epoch Times, referring to whistleblowers who sent their stories to Terry through her RicoCPS.com database, which put out an open call for CPS abuse cases. “There are 10 people alleging sexual abuse.”
The RicoCPS website demands “solid evidence” be presented. Its goal is to “demand a federal RICO investigation to investigate every CPS agency nationwide for the purpose of transparency and justice.”
Terry is planning to give her information to Texas state senator Bob Hall, who is leading a push to reform CPS, and to Ted Cruz’s father, Rafael, at an upcoming event.
“The incentive money is the bonus check that goes to the state. They have different classifications for it. It is strictly a bonus check. It is really hard to track,” parental rights advocate Connie Reguli told The Epoch Times, referring to the checks that the federal government sends to states for each foster care adoption. Reguli practices family law in Tennessee and is the founder of the Family Forward Project.
“The Adoption and Safe Families Act originally established incentive payments equal to $4,000 for each foster child whose adoption was finalized over a certain base level and $6,000 for each special needs adoption above the base level,” according to a 2004 Congressional Research Service report.
In fiscal year 2016, the federal government paid 47 states a total of $55.2 million in adoption incentive payments under the ASFA, according to congressional budget records. As of April 2018, the federal government had paid states a total of $613.9 million in ASFA incentive money.
Foster parents who adopt their foster children are also entitled to checks, courtesy of the ASFA.
The parents and their advocates see these financial incentives as distorting the entire system.
“They have social workers in place whose main objective is to commit perjury in the courtroom, to create a rationale for why to take the children and get paid. It’s almost like perjury is part of their job description,” Andrea Packwood, president of California Family Advocacy, told The Epoch Times, noting social workers’ proclivity to coach children about what to say in cases.
“If, for example, you have a neighbor who doesn’t like you or your politics, their allegations against you don’t even have to be substantiated. You could be the perfect parent, but if your garbageman doesn’t like you, that gets submitted as evidence,” Packwood said. “There’s a movement of people like Antifa who are using this for political motivations.”
In October 2016, lawyers for officials in California’s Orange County argued in a civil case that social workers whose lies resulted in the removal of children from their parents had the right to commit perjury in the case and were entitled to immunity. The U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected the argument.
Expert opinion has begun to validate the parents’ complaints that there’s something wrong with ASFA’s incentives.
DeLeith Gossett, a law professor at Texas Tech University, said in a 2018 Memphis Law Review article: “The act’s financial incentives have disrupted families permanently by the speedy termination of parental rights, without the accompanying move from foster care to adoptive homes. The programs that the Adoption and Safe Families Act govern thwart its very purpose as children continue to languish in foster care waiting for permanent adoptive homes, often until they age out of the system into negative life outcomes.”
Cassie Statuto Bevan helped draft the ASFA. She told the Chronicle of Social Change: “ASFA was blamed for leaving a lot of children as orphans, and that certainly wasn’t the intention of ASFA. There has been concern we moved to permanency, but didn’t pay attention to the parents’ needs.”
The ideology of the Clinton bureaucrats who worked on the law might explain its focus.
“What happens to children depends not only on what happens in the homes, but what happens in the outside world,” Mary Jo Bane, who served as the Clinton administration Department of Health and Human Services’ assistant secretary of children and families, said in a 1977 interview.
“We really don’t know how to raise children. If we want to talk about equality of opportunity for children, then the fact that children are raised in families means there’s no equality. It’s a dilemma. In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them.”
Calls for Reform
Thousands of parents are expected to attend a rally at the California state capitol in Sacramento on Oct. 4 calling for CPS reform, the same day the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families holds a meeting in Alexandria, Virginia, to discuss its response to the child sex trafficking crisis.
The Epoch Times recently uncovered multiple cases of alleged child sex abuse in the Contra Costa County foster care system in California. The State Department’s 2019 human trafficking report confirms that the foster care system is a breeding ground of human trafficking.
President Trump’s Family First Prevention Services Act fights back against the financial incentives that move children quickly to foster care, but parents are unsure whether Trump’s law will be enough to reverse the systemic damage.
With the Family First Prevention Services Act, states, territories, and tribes with an approved Title IV-E plan have the option to use these funds for prevention services that would allow ‘candidates for foster care’ to stay with parents or relatives. “States will be reimbursed for prevention services for up to 12 months,” according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
“The Family First Prevention Services Act also seeks to curtail the use of congregate or group care for children and instead places a new emphasis on family foster homes. With limited exceptions, the federal government will not reimburse states for children placed in group care settings for more than two weeks,” the National Council of State Legislatures states.
“Approved settings, known as qualified residential treatment programs, must use a trauma-informed treatment model and employ registered or licensed nursing staff and other licensed clinical staff. The child must be formally assessed within 30 days of placement to determine if his or her needs can be met by family members, in a family foster home or another approved setting.”
Follow Patrick Howley on twitter: @HowleyReporter
Welcome to TRUTH TALK NEWS ” Where truth the mainstream media ignores is the top story!”
Let us take a journey together down the rabbit hole.
Take advantage of all the books, articles, links and information available on this site.
Watch TRUTH TALK NEWS, a talk show discussing suppressed history, current events, politics, pop culture, the esoteric and exoteric, and all things New World Order
THURSDAYS 9pm in Western Connecticut on Spectrum Cable Channel 192 serving the towns of Barkhamsted, Bethlehem, Bridgewater, Brookfield, Colebrook, Danbury, Harwinton, Kent, Monroe, New Hartford, New Fairfield, New Milford, Newtown, Roxbury, Sherman, Southbury, Trumbull, Washington, West Hartland, Winchester and Woodbury.
YouTube has aggressively targeted TRUTH TALK NEWS CHANNEL 2 for termination.
FIGHT Google/YouTube/Facebook CENSORSHIP!
Subscribe to TruthTalkNews on bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/QJKrgONwtmn0/
BOOKS YOU MUST READ TO UNDERSTAND THE NEW WORLD ORDER: The link below is a path of breadcrumbs that leads to greater understanding of the world we live in and those who chart and guide humanity’s progress from the shadows though out the ages. Here is an ever growing catalogue of hundreds of books, PDF’s, articles, white papers, links, documents and research material on all things New World Order.
Subscribe to William Cooper’s MYSTERY BABYLON CHANNEL:
BACK UP CHANNELS (contains all videos censored by YouTube and Vimeo): https://www.bitchute.com/channel/QJKrgONwtmn0/
Original TRUTH TALK NEWS CHANNEL: http://www.youtube.com/TruthTalkNews
http://www.HowardNema.com is censored and blocked by Facebook. Nothing can be posted or shared on Facebook from HowardNema.com due to “community standards” violations concerning bogus accusations of bullying, harassment and hate speech.
When truth is called hate, when hate is called love, when ideological beliefs breed rage and violence, our society treads on dangerous ground. Ground that has been traveled many times before by fellow travelers and followers of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol-Pot and many other Utopian charlatan totalitarians throughout the centuries.
Censorship should be a warning sign from history. For all of us. Silencing one silences us all.
STAND UP FOR FREE SPEECH! WATCH AND SHARE TRUTH TALK NEWS!
All information reported on TRUTH TALK NEWS and HowardNema.com is sourced and verifiable and for the purposes of education and FAIR USE. Take advantage of the many books, articles, videos and FULL PDF’s available for FREE, safe downloads at http://www.HowardNema.com TRUTH TALK NEWS and HowardNema.com ARE FREE SITES. All books and information on the sites are FREE and NOT monetized in any way.
You are not cattle. You are not a useless eater. You do not have to be a brainwashed slave owned by the New World Order. Do the research. Think critically. Find your own truth. There is only one truth. . . . Seek and you will find it. Awaken. Be a messenger.
Thank you for your continued support. God bless you all.