My critique of Greg's Motion, 4-18-2002. Greg shows what it's REALLY all about. HIM!!!!!
Dan Sullivan
Dan Sullivan Apr 18 2002, 7:15 am
Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services
From: dsull...@optonline.net (Dan Sullivan)
Date: 18 Apr 2002 07:15:44 -0700
Local: Thurs, Apr 18 2002 7:15 am
Subject: Greg's Motion
Hey Greg,
Before I actually read your motion I recommended that you have an attny
read it and cut it down to the meat (it was obviously far too long).
Well now I've read the whole thing and you asked for criticism and
suggestions, so...
I've already lopped off what I believe are the non-significant parts.
You decide on the rest.
_____________________________________________________
> COMES NOW, Suzy Q. Mother, Pro Se, seeking relief from inappropriate
> and inquisitive services.
Of course it's inquisitive. It's an investigation.
Lose "inquisitive."
> The Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) has (attempted to) IMPOSE a
> Service Plan onto us rather than allowing us ACTIVE participation in the
> FORMATION of the Service Plan.
> Domestic Violence Victim Counseling
There has never been a domestic violence problem in our home.
There is no credible evidence of DV. DV counseling is not approp or
necessary.
--------------------------------------------------------
> Employment
> The Service Plan directs Greg to find employment.
Get a job Greg.
That's what CPS wants you to do before they give the child back?
Do it!
> Vocational Rehab
If you can't find employment in your present field, find something new.
Get a job Greg, any job. Get the little girl back to her mother.
Lose this part.
---------------------------------------------------------
> Parenting Classes
> The Service Plan directs Greg to attend Parenting Classes.
Greg will attend parenting classes if the child will be returned to the
family at the completion of the course.
Get this in writing, signed by CPS, and the contract reviewed by an
attny.
Reunification date specified!
> DHS has ordered that the mother (Suzy Q. Mother) and future
> stepfather(Greg) participate in a parenting program, as directed by
> the Department of Human Services (DHS).
> The Department of Human Services (DHS) has not removed their Parent
> Education requirement for Suzy Q. Mother, despite their own paid
> contractor writing that Suzy Q. Mother DOES NOT need such classes.
She should do it anyway, WITH you, to get her daughter back.
Again, get a signed agreement with what you have to do and with the
reunification date in writing.
--------------------------------------------------
> PLEASE CLARIFY
> 1A. Do you order imposed parent education?
Sure they do.
And drop all the pro-spanking sh-t. You sound like a lunatic.
> 2A. Do you order imposed Psychological Evaluations?
This is a stupid question. You know they do.
> 2E. Do you think that a one inch thick stack of input INTO a
> psychological evaluation would not bias the results?
Good question. Water under the bridge at this point.
Drop it.
> 2K. What legitimate reason exists to support DHS's claim that that
> amount of INPUT is necessary to the successful completion of this
> provision of the service plan?
DHS wants it to come out their way. That's why.
And of course it's biased.
Get an independant evaluation done.
Lose this part.
----------------------------------------------------
> 3A. Is it Constitutionally acceptable to deny a defendant family
> access to any materials used against them in court?
Subpoena ALL the records!
List everything you want.
Inform the judge that ALL the records you need and have a right to have
NOT been given to you. Cite the approp Iowa law.
> There is no history of domestic violence between Greg and I over three
> years, but DHS chooses to believe a (single) mislead (mistaken,
> misinterpretted ) comment from a 7 year old.
> No injuries to the child were (ever) alleged (by anyone).
-----------------------------------------------
> The same cannot be said for this last
> year in DHS kinship care. The child had a medical office visit as a
> result of DHS and kinship caretaker neglect. In fact, it was a kind
> of neglect we had protested about in one or more of our unanswered
> letters or e-mails to Judas of DHS, many months prior to the problem.
ONE medical visit?
If it's an insignificant ailment don't even mention it.
Did you send registered letters? Forget e-mls.
Lose this part.
-------------------------------------------------------
> The child has expressed a sincere desire to return to her parents.
When and where? and where is this documented?
Keep in mind even horribly abused children want to go home.
> The parents are not a danger to this child, and the child desires to
> return home. DHS cannot demonstrate that the parents are a danger to
> this child, nor can they demonstrate that we ever were enough of a
> danger to this child that would require her removal from the home.
---------------------------------------------------------
> Funds that WERE AVAILABLE through the Family
> Preservation program for help with a storage locker were not
> disbursed.
Are you nuts?
How would the taxpayers paying for the storage of crap that you
obviously aren't using otherwise you wouldn't be putting it into
storage be any part of family preservation?
Have a freakin yard sale like everybody else.
Or ask CPS if they have any space in their building they're not using,
maybe they'll let you store your stuff there for free.
Lose this part.
----------------------------------------------------------
> The parents request the court to begin immediate reunification
> efforts. The parents have prepared a reunification plan for the
> court's consideration. Because we did not get required ACTIVE
> PARTICIPATION IN THE FORMATION OF THE SERVICES PLAN, and because of
> the odious contamination of services, please RELIEVE us from the old
> contaminated services plan, and please ORDER acceptance of this
> REUNIFICATION SERVICES PLAN, without any contamination, obstructionism
> or delay.
> REUNIFICATION SERVICES PLAN
> 3. Suzy Q. Mother and Greg will find a third party NOT connected in
> any way to DHS to inspect our home to those standards only.
> 4. DHS will accept that inspection at face value.
You probably won't get away with this.
Take pictures of everything, before and WHILE the house is being
inspected.
-------------------------------------------------------
> 6. DHS will help this family retrieve the $9,000.00+ owed Suzy Q.
> Mother in back child Support, which would pay for a storage locker and
> more.
Are you out of your mind?
The little girl's child support will be used to pay for storing your
sh-t?
Do you really want to tell the court her money's gonna be spent on
YOU?
Get a job and spend your own money on a storage locker.
Or sell it at a yard sale, but get a job anyway.
Lose this part.
---------------------------------------------------------
> 10. Supervised visitation with Greg to begin immediately, with an eye
> toward unsupervised visits and reunification.
Has any professional stated that you (Greg) should not have
visitation?
----------------------------------------------------------
Greg, someone makes a report (it doesn't matter who) about the mother
and her little girl, and what does CPS find?
A guy who moved in with them who doesn't work. Who filled the house
with what? Tons of old computer sh-t? Other crap? So much you have
the stones to ask that DSS PAY to store it for you? You gotta be
sh-ttin me.
Even if there's nothing abusive or neglectful in that, CPS is gonna
invent
something because they look at you as an anchor around the mother's
neck.
They believe YOU are keeping HER and her little girl from making a
better life for themselves.
YOU and the mother have to demonstrate to the court that you're both
working on making a better life for the child.
Clean the house so it's as BEYOND CLEAN AND ORDERLY!
(read the book, "It's Here... Somewhere," by Alice Fulton and Pauline
Hatch)
Get a job.
Take whatever classes/courses are appropriate.
Stop talking about spanking!!! THIS makes you sound like a raving
maniac.
What would you EVER want to spank a 7 year old little girl for
ANYWAY?????
You want the child back? and you have to take a psych exam? tell em
what they want to hear.
You're sorry for what happened, you're getting your life together,
you're gonna do what's best for the mother and little girl.
You're gonna be a major POSITIVE influence on the family, NOT a
negative influence (like the ex-husband).
You know Greg, that's what you should be thinking anyway. Forget
telling them what they want to hear. Change your mindset.
Turn over a new leaf. Get on with your life, stop stagnating in it.
Look at what happened, look at what's going on. It's time to shake off
whatever's got you stuck where you are and get on with getting that
little girl back to her mother (where she belongs). If you can't or
won't
pull yer head out of your ass, freakin LEAVE!!! Whatever it is that you
do
for the mother can't even come close to what the mother needs to do for
that
little girl, and what the little girl needs from her mother.
You want to be a Constitutionalist?
Fine.
A defender of the Bill of Rights?
Good.
Do it after the mother gets her little girl home.
If this mother gets TPR'd, one day when she comes to her senses she's
gonna look around at all the sh-t that you brought into her house,
look at her little girl's empty bedroom (that you probably started to
fill up with more of your crap), and decide to do a Loreena Bobbit on
you as you sleep.
And don't think the mother hasn't got it in her. Right now she may
not, and she probably doesn't because if she did she would've thrown
you out already. But have that mother lose her child over you and the
pain inside her is gonna grow until it takes over completely. And then
Greg, either she's gonna have a nervous breakdown, OR it's maxipad
time for you.
Posting that Motion was the first time I got an eyeful of what the
situation was all about.
It's all about you.
The little girl's been gone a year and CPS has what? 15 or 18 months
to return the child to the mother or TPR?
The clock is startin to tick REAL LOUD Greg, or can't you hear it?
You've got some set of stones.
Call CPS now, tell them you'll do whatever it takes to get the girl
back, OR get the f-ck OUT!
It's not your child, it's not your wife, and it's not even your family.
I like the part where you wrote that you brought more "earned savings"
into the house when you moved in than the father paid in child support
in all of 2000.
You figured no one would realize that if the father didn't pay any
child support that year and you moved in with anything you could make
that statement.
And even if he paid $2000 in child support and you came with $5000 it
still doesn't give you the right to sit around at their house forever
unemployed.
Forget about losing the little girl, how much ass-sittin do you think
the money you came with buys you?
I'll make it easy on you. Time's up!
Now ask yourself what you give to the mother that could ever make up
for losing her little girl (besides the big indentation where you sit
on the couch).
Here's that answer. NOTHING.
And don't come back with all the "I've got this Constitutional right
and that Constitutional right.."
It's not about YOU!
It's about what's best for the little girl, and it's pretty obvious
from what you wrote in the Motion, YOU don't make the list.
Do the right thing Greg, and do it BEFORE it's too late.
There's no way this little girl's going back to the mother because you
did a half-assed smoke and mirror show on the Judge.
He's seen it all before.
BTW YOUR name came up 28 times in your motion and you referred to the
little girl about half that.
Sorta puts it in perspective.
Don't ya think?
All the best for the little girl and her mother,
Dan Sullivan
8man12
Dan SullivanZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
