The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform Needs to Wither and Die

RE:The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform Needs to Wither and Die

Read your comments on "The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform Needs to Wither and Die" and personally, I am not really sure whose side you are on????

Re: RE:The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform Needs to Wither and Die

How so?

I'm in favor of treating victims and incarcerating abusers for significant sentences. I oppose reuniting abusers with their victims. I thought that was fairly clear in the text.

toughen up

Don't you realize that most parents accused of the crime of child abuse and neglect are never given due process in criminal court based on forensic evidence? They are almost always sent to family court and subjected to meaningless therapeutic services which are then billed to medicaid. You must understand that it is mostly poor and working people who are accused, and usually for the most trivial reasons having nothing to do with child abuse and neglect. These families cannot afford an aggressive defense and are forced to endure pain and suffering beyond comprehension. Especially the children. Don't you also realize that children are being abused and murdered in foster care and adoptive homes? That's not protection, that's human rights abuse. Who is abusing who?

Re: toughen up

"Don't you realize that most parents accused of the crime of child abuse and neglect are never given due process in criminal court based on forensic evidence?"

Yes, because most cases are never even investigated due to child protective services' lack of resources, which is what The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform banks on and is trying to expand. They want to ensure even fewer cases get criminally prosecuted.

"They are almost always sent to family court and subjected to meaningless therapeutic services which are then billed to medicaid."

That varies greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but pretty much my whole point is that things like this need to stop and that investigations and prosecutions should be moved almost exclusively to criminal courts.

"You must understand that it is mostly poor and working people who are accused, and usually for the most trivial reasons having nothing to do with child abuse and neglect."

Those are two separate issues and nothing more than rhetorical diversion. The majority of the population falls into the poor and working people demographic; so naturally they're accused of more crimes in every non-white collar category. It's a function of population statistics.

Your allegation about, "Trivial reasons having nothing to with child abuse and neglect," is erroneous. In the vast majority of reported cases the abuse and neglect is real and warrants investigation and prosecution, although I will stipulate that the severity of the abuse and neglect will, of course, vary. Not everyone locks their kid in a bathroom and starves them for failing to say amen after grace, but by the time abuse and neglect is severe enough for a kid to come forward or an obligated reporter like a teacher or doctor is compelled to take action, the likelihood that it's genuine increases exponentially.

"These families cannot afford an aggressive defense and are forced to endure pain and suffering beyond comprehension. Especially the children."

Like a high percentage of people accused of crime, they're compelled to make use of an overburdened public defender system, true. That's not going to enable them to mount an O.J. Simpson level of defense, but you're suggesting that they be given a pass because their crime is abusing children rather than knocking over a liquor store.

To suggest that letting these monsters go to therapy and reunite with their victims because they can't afford to hire the equivalent of Johnny Cochran and that that is somehow further victimizing the children is some of the most nauseatingly twisted logic I've come across in a long time.

"Don't you also realize that children are being abused and murdered in foster care and adoptive homes? That's not protection, that's human rights abuse. Who is abusing who?"

First of all, it's, "Who's abusing whom?" I most certainly do realize that a minority of children placed in foster care and adopted homes will undergo additional abuse. Those abusers, like abusive parents, must be investigated and incarcerated for significant terms, which cannot happen under The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform's agenda of gutting investigation budgets and preferring parental abuse over abuse by a predator outside the family unit.

And lastly, I find it highly ironic that you title your response to my essay, "Toughen Up," while posting under an anonymous login.

Re: toughen up

"To suggest that letting these monsters go to therapy and reunite with their victims because they can't afford to hire the equivalent of Johnny Cochran and that that is somehow further victimizing the children is some of the most nauseatingly twisted logic I've come across in a long time."

This is not my idea, this is the reality of child protection. Parents are charged with a crime but never given due process in criminal court because there is no evidence. Look, we all want to see an end to child abuse. But we have created a system that preys on the poor, displaces their children w/ middle class families, engages in medicaid fraud, extortion, racketeering, and murders children in foster care. If you can overlook all that and still support it, then you have become just another inhuman mindless zealot and no one is going to take you seriously. Our system of child protection is rife w/ corruption. You choose to look the other way and paint a rosy picture for yourself. I choose to fight against it and create a better way of helping the poor, especially the children of the poor. They deserve to be treated better than that, don't you think?

Re: toughen up

Except that what you (whoever you may be) propose is to exacerbate the problem at the expense of victims.

Child protection investigative services need more funding and resources to adequately investigate abuse claims and background check foster applicants. Police child abuse investigation units and prosecutors' offices need more resources to follow cases through the courts, and sentencing guidelines for abusers need to be strengthened.

Do child protective service organizations need to do a better job around the country overseeing their investigations and monitoring the facilities that tend to victims' needs? Absolutely. So let's improve their resources and enforce stringent guidelines rather than gutting them and putting abused children back with their torturers just because they're genetically linked.

Fortunately, PROTECT.org exists to counter the kind of child brutality NCCPR supports, and we've made great progress in the last several years in getting legislation passed in a number of jurisdictions and educating the public on why NCCPR and similar organizations' agendas merely exist to protect abusers.

What NCCPR proposes is to get rid of all that and keep the children with the people raping or abusing them.

There is an almost statistically imperceptible chance that a foster facility will abuse a child or engage in any activity like you described. There's a near 100 percent chance that the parent already has. How, I ask you, is that in any way a benefit to the child?

Every year a handful facilities like you describe are found. What's left unsaid are the thousands of families and facilities that take these kids in and do right by them.

And for the record, to call me a zealot when it comes to protecting children and punishing abusers is about as high a compliment as you could give.

Interested in identifying yourself yet or do you still prefer to hide behind an anonymous login?

Choosing to fight

<

Re: Choosing to fight

As per usual, Pansy, well-said.

Here's what I propose

End it. What we have on our hands is a system where children who do not need protection are being taken and children who do need protection are not being helped. End it. Treat genuine cases like the crimes they are and prosecute in criminal court. The only children who should be in care are those who are orphaned or those who are genuinely abused and statistically those cases are low per capita. We have more than enough resources to help those childre. But that's not how it works. So, get busy, do a little research and discover for yourselves the truth. It's not working, never has, never will. Follow the money. The vast majority of kids in care are not abused kids, they are just poor kids. I know it flies in the face of your beliefs. But the info is out there if you do the research. Wexler does not support abusers, he supports the innocent. Think about it.

Re: Here's what I propose

My "beliefs" as you call them are a direct result of more than 10 years of research on child abuse, particularly child sexual abuse.

I'm all in favor of prosecuting abusers in the criminal courts, which is one reason why I'm a member of PROTECT.org. Increased prosecutions and penalties are a cornerstone of their agenda.

Where we differ is on your delusional opinions that a) child abuse is a low per capita occurrence and b) that the system somehow unfairly targets poor people.

Wexler's agenda does nothing to help victims and everything to perpetuate the cycle of abuse. If you support him and NCCPR out of the misguided belief that you're somehow opposing the oppression of the disadvantaged, you're actually helping to perpetuate poverty, since many abuse victims end up unable to socially advance as a result of the developmental impacts of their trauma, and implementation of NCCPR's policies lead to perpetuation of abuse.

I review dozens of studies on child abuse every year and none of the ones that have scientifically objective methodologies support any of Wexler's or your claims.

We're working hard to, "End it," as you say. It ends when all child abusers are incarcerated and all victims get the care and treatment they need. It's an impossible goal, but we're making progress every year.

Re: Here's what I propose

The stats back up what I'm saying regarding the numbers per capita and the poverty. Wexler is not in favor of reuniting sexual abuse victims w/ their perpetrators. I'm not sure where you are getting your info. I'm all for protecting children from abuse but I am also in favor of protecting children from systemites who can't see the forest for the trees and will take any child even those who are not abused because of their own personal hysteria. Innocent families are being brutalized by child protective services. What do you say to those families? Do we leave them alone? Do we take their children just in case? How would you address a situation like that?

Re: Here&#39;s what I propose

Please, oh please, send me links to some of these studies.

In practical terms, "Family preservation," is nothing but keeping abusers with their victims. The Alabama Model is a national disgrace.

You seem to be operating under the delusion that child protective service agencies have some kind of agenda against the poor and that they delight in snatching children away at the slightest allegation of abuse. I assure you, abuse investigators do not go back to the office cackling like the Wicked Witch of the West because they snagged another kid away from another poor family.

In reality, very few children involved in investigations are ever taken away for more than a brief period, and then only when there's suspicion of imminent harm. Keep in mind, these agencies have so few resources in terms of staff and funding that only half of the abuse and neglect reports in this country are even investigated.

You've been giving vague generalities like, "End it." Would you mind giving me a detailed, specific proposal as to how you would improve child abuse investigation and prosecution? Please include numbers if you have them.

I'd appreciate your thoughts on this case.

http://childprotectionreform.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/one-familys-struggle/

I am going to present you with some stats and info - so please sit tight. In the meantime, what do you think of a case like this one. Let me know if you have any problems accessing this family's story.