Your tax dollars at work! -- Washington State enters lesbian, gay film festival, Co-produced by Washington state's Department of Social and Health Services
fx
State enters lesbian, gay film festival
http://www.theolympian.com/stateworkers/story/219316.html
"We are … GLBTQ," a documentary produced by two state agencies about
gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth involved in
child welfare, will be screened during the 2007 Seattle Lesbian and Gay
Film Festival.
The video has been entered in the juried, locally produced, short film
category and will be screened Oct. 14.
Co-produced by Washington state's Department of Social and Health
Services Children's Administration and Department of Information
Services, the 28-minute film focuses on the lives of gay, lesbian and
transgender youths in the state child welfare system.
It is being used by DSHS to train foster parents and kinship caregivers.
According to a national report by Lambda Legal Defense and Education
Fund, these youths come into contact with Child Protective Services more
frequently than their peers because often they are targeted for family
violence because of their sexual orientation or gender identities.
Foster caregivers gather for seminar
This year marks the 25th Foster Parent and Relative Caregiver's
Conference, which will be at Ocean Shores Convention Center in Grays
Harbor from Sunday through Sept. 25.
One of the largest gatherings of its kind in the world, according to the
state, the Foster Parent and Relative Caregiver's Conference features
600 foster and adoptive parent attendees, keynote speakers, 48
educational and inspiring workshops, a town hall meeting with Children's
Administration Assistant Secretary Cheryl Stephani, and other fun and
informational activities.
The Children's Administration partners with 20 nonprofit, tribal,
faith-based, educational, private and state organizations and agencies
to present the much anticipated three-day event.
CURRENTLY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES VIOLATES MORE CIVIL RIGHTS ON A
DAILY BASIS THEN ALL OTHER AGENCIES COMBINED INCLUDING THE NSA / CIA
WIRETAPPING PROGRAM....
CPS Does not protect children...
It is sickening how many children are subject to abuse, neglect and even
killed at the hands of Child Protective Services.
every parent should read this .pdf from
connecticut dcf watch...
http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com/8x11.pdf
http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com
Number of Cases per 100,000 children in the US
These numbers come from The National Center on
Child Abuse and Neglect in Washington. (NCCAN)
Recent numbers have increased significantly for CPS
*Perpetrators of Maltreatment*
Physical Abuse CPS 160, Parents 59
Sexual Abuse CPS 112, Parents 13
Neglect CPS 410, Parents 241
Medical Neglect CPS 14 Parents 12
Fatalities CPS 6.4, Parents 1.5
Imagine that, 6.4 children die at the hands of the very agencies that
are supposed to protect them and only 1.5 at the hands of parents per
100,000 children. CPS perpetrates more abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse
and kills more children then parents in the United States. If the
citizens of this country hold CPS to the same standards that they hold
parents too. No judge should ever put another child in the hands of ANY
government agency because CPS nationwide is guilty of more harm and
death than any human being combined. CPS nationwide is guilty of more
human rights violations and deaths of children then the homes from which
they were removed. When are the judges going to wake up and see that
they are sending children to their death and a life of abuse when
children are removed from safe homes based on the mere opinion of a
bunch of social workers.
CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, HAPPILY DESTROYING THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT
FAMILIES YEARLY NATIONWIDE AND COMING TO YOU'RE HOME SOON...
BE SURE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOUR CANDIDATES STANDS ON THE ISSUE OF
REFORMING OR ABOLISHING CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES ("MAKE YOUR CANDIDATES
TAKE A STAND ON THIS ISSUE.") THEN REMEMBER TO VOTE ACCORDINGLY IF THEY
ARE "FAMILY UNFRIENDLY" IN THE NEXT ELECTION...
Mike Dobony
"fx" <f...@starband.net> wrote in message
news:c4b6d$46f4158b$944e2002$27...@STARBAND.NET...
> The Olympian
>
> State enters lesbian, gay film festival
>
> http://www.theolympian.com/stateworkers/story/219316.html
>
> welfare, will be screened during the 2007 Seattle Lesbian and Gay Film
> Festival.
>
> The video has been entered in the juried, locally produced, short film
> category and will be screened Oct. 14.
>
> Co-produced by Washington state's Department of Social and Health Services
> Children's Administration and Department of Information Services, the
> 28-minute film focuses on the lives of gay, lesbian and transgender youths
> in the state child welfare system.
>
> It is being used by DSHS to train foster parents and kinship caregivers.
>
> According to a national report by Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund,
> these youths come into contact with Child Protective Services more
> frequently than their peers because often they are targeted for family
> violence because of their sexual orientation or gender identities.
>
According to the organization that promotes child molesting? Can you really
trust this organization?
rkb...@pacific.net.sg
We're good for flame-wars, but not for multiply cross-posted
flamewars.
Please leave alt.a out of it
Marley Greiner
"Mike Dobony" <sw...@notasarian-host.net> wrote in message
news:BRBKi.29668$eY....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
Lambda Defense promotes child molesting Prove it. Or do ou mean CPS. That
I might believe.
Marley
Greegor
wrote:
http://www.theolympian.com/stateworkers/story/219316.html
It sounds like NAMBLA, easily confused.
Foster Care has had a lot of PEDERASTY cases
in the media in the last 6 months, man-boy molestation.
The old social worker idea that gays are safer
has kind of fallen apart.
The idea that they can PREDICT that somebody
either will or will not do terrible things is bologna.
Judging parents without evidence is BS.
Approving a Foster as ""safe"" is BS also.
The process is WAY too political.
The opposite of homophobia is homophilia.
Obsessing EITHER way is wrong.
They tried to "social engineer" kids to be
gay friendly by placing many with gays and
to some extent it backfired on both CPS and gays.
rkb...@pacific.net.sg
>
> The idea that they can PREDICT that somebody
> either will or will not do terrible things is bologna.
> Judging parents without evidence is BS.
> Approving a Foster as ""safe"" is BS also.
> The process is WAY too political.
Okay, I'll bite.
It is difficult to evaluate foster parents with any degree of
reliability. Ditto for adoptive parents.
But what are the alternatives? Group homes?
There are kids who need care. What should society offer them?
Greegor
wrote:
Send them HOME unless "Imminent Danger"
can be proven using "Clear and Convincing"
as the burden of proof.
Those are SUPPOSED to be required now,
but not implemented.
The system and process that removes kids
is badly broken. CWLA itself said that 1/3
of the kids in Foster Care could go home if
the parents just had adequate housing.
In other words, they ARE NOT out of their
homes for an acceptable reason.
The basic problem is that they gave POWER
to people to be professional BUSYBODIES.
The self important ""Child Savers"" of course feel
the urgent need to show how tremendously
important they are so they decide they are
needed WAY more than they really are.
They knit pick and use INNUENDO to make
cases, not hard fact or solid proof.
One of the biggest dirty secrets is that
they do child removals for "preventive" reasons.
Legally they are supposed to show "Imminent Danger"
but in practice they show no such thing.
They use reasoning about like what Chicken Little
did in the children's book.
It's SOCIALISM gone mad.
Experts within the Child Protection INDUSTRY itself
have said that the culture within the CPS agencies
is so infectious and politically inbred that the only
way to reform CPS is to dismantle it completely
and start over with NONE of the old personnel to
infect the new system.
But if the Child Protection INDUSTRY was corrected
to respect Constitutional Rights of children and family,
they would be removing only a small fraction of
the number of kids they remove from their parents now.
The problem of what to DO with the kids starts
with the corruption and removal of TOO MANY kids.
Eliminate the ones removed based on garbage
excuses, INNUENDO, hearsay etc. and the
issue of what to DO with the kids becomes
MUCH smaller.
The population in Foster Contractor care should
be reduced drastically because BC stats recently
reported kids in state care die at 4x the national rate.
There are other stats for the US which are worse,
and a recent bunch of stats about how survivors of
Foster Incarceration fare later is a real nightmare.
""Child Protectors"" do not follow the old "First do no harm"
rule, and often ""protect kids to death"".
Foster Care can be correctly referred to as Foster/Adoption
because of something called "concurrent planning".
People desperate to adopt are generally directed to
the Foster Care system as a channel for adoption.
The contract that Fosters sign USED to contain
an understanding that they were NOT to see their
caretaker situation as an opportunity to ADOPT and
they had to LET GO when it was possible for the
kids to go back to their parents.
For a decade or so this part of their contract has
been dropped, and the Foster system is now
considered an avenue for ADOPTION.
This puts the Fosters and Adopters in a situation
where for their own needs they WANT to believe that
CPS does no wrong, the parents are crap, etc.
When Fosters DO dig into the true facts of where
and find out the system did a dirty deed, the
agencies become extremely vindictive and usually
yank their license to be Fosters.
One Foster just a few years ago was taking care
of AIDS babies and discovered that the kids were
being used as guinea pigs to test experimental
AIDS drugs. This might have been OK considering
the normal outlook for an AIDS kid, but the system
was mindlessly authoritative and refused to listen
to her concerns that the drugs were actually
making the kids WORSE. A Judge countermanded
the usual CPS/Foster agency vindictive removal of
her Foster license. It was discovered that this
problem spanned several states and that required
medical advocates to safeguard kids in the drug
trials basically did not exist.
The states were (once again) horribly out of compliance
with the law.
Adoption was not an issue for those kids though.
She was an RN and wrote a book about this experience.
I would say they failed to correctly
EVALUATE her capacity to rip them a new one.
rkb...@pacific.net.sg
> On Sep 29, 12:46 am, "rkb...@pacific.net.sg" <rkb...@pacific.net.sg>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 28, 4:49 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > The idea that they can PREDICT that somebody
> > > either will or will not do terrible things is bologna.
> > > Judging parents without evidence is BS.
> > > Approving a Foster as ""safe"" is BS also.
> > > The process is WAY too political.
>
> > Okay, I'll bite.
> > It is difficult to evaluate foster parents with any degree of
> > reliability. Ditto for adoptive parents.
>
> > But what are the alternatives? Group homes?
> > There are kids who need care.
> > What should society offer them?
>
> Send them HOME unless "Imminent Danger"
> can be proven using "Clear and Convincing"
> as the burden of proof.
>
> Those are SUPPOSED to be required now,
> but not implemented.
>
> The system and process that removes kids
> is badly broken. CWLA itself said that 1/3
> of the kids in Foster Care could go home if
> the parents just had adequate housing.
Well, it looks like the government is reducing support for adequate
housing for the poor, so that's not getting better any time soon. But
theoretically, even if it were - even if we went further and said that
half the kids in foster care should have been left with their families
- half the kids would still be in need of care.
Greegor
But the 1/3 reveals that the INDUSTRY admits they
lied to Judges and courts to make cases that
should never have been made.
If an INDUSTRY admits to 1/3 of their business being
a RACKET, would you stop there and presume the
other two thirds was legit?
Keep in mind that the 1/3 represents many THOUSANDS
of families torn apart with court approval.
The cases of what the general public would consider
to be child abuse are less than 1% of child removals.
Did you really think that inadequate housing justifies
removing a child from their family?
Even if a family lived in an Appalachian shack, do you
think they need to be removed to Foster Contractors?
Do you think the Constitution and LAWS really support that?
It's nut job ""do gooders"" who think the ideal is
THEIR perception of what a home should look like.
After some of my experiences I honestly think that
the caseworkers we ran into thought that our home
should look like a movie set or a furniture showroom.
firemonkey
Come on greg, the clutter issue was not the main issue. You
girlfriends daughter told the case worker you were washing her private
parts, she was 7 at that time, very inappropriate in the very least,
molestation at the worst. Most intelligent 7 year olds are more than
capable of washing their own bodies and getting themselves out of the
tub/shower and getting a towel for themselves. You have admitted going
into the bathroom while your girlfriends daughter was bathing to "hand
her a towel" this would be a huge cause for concern.
Why did you think you had the right to violate this little girls
privacy this way?
Why did you, an unrelated male, think you had the right to spank her?
Throw her outside on a January day in Iowa with no shoes, socks or
coat? Why did you think you had the right to give the little girl cold
showers??
Was it the same reason you felt that beating your wife was hunky dory
because she had mental illness?? Do you think you have "special
rights" above what other people have??
rkb...@pacific.net.sg
> Did you really think that inadequate housing justifies
> removing a child from their family?
>
> Even if a family lived in an Appalachian shack, do you
> think they need to be removed to Foster Contractors?
No. I'm good with Appalachian shacks, I'm good with shanties.
But if the inadequate housing is a patch of sidewalk, then I think -
in this country - it would justify removal.
Greegor
wrote:
Well, you're not alone in that. The high court
actually had to rule that household CLUTTER
is NOT justification for child removal.
( CPS was using that alone.)
The bureaucrats from CPS typically use
household CLUTTER as a catch all when
they're suspicious but can't prove anything.
The lower courts let them get away with it.
dragonsgirl
<rkb...@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
news:1191170201....@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
I grew up in an 'Appalachian shack'.
Four rooms, no running water, #10 wash tub to bathe in, outhouse, and coal
burning stoves.
So did my mother, and her father and mother.
We had heat, hot baths (supplied by the electric stove and canning pots),
good food, clean clothes and clean beds, etc.
Didn't hurt any of us a bit.
I highly doubt it would hurt a child today.
rkb...@pacific.net.sg
> I grew up in an 'Appalachian shack'.
> Four rooms, no running water, #10 wash tub to bathe in, outhouse, and coal
> burning stoves.
> So did my mother, and her father and mother.
> We had heat, hot baths (supplied by the electric stove and canning pots),
> good food, clean clothes and clean beds, etc.
> Didn't hurt any of us a bit.
> I highly doubt it would hurt a child today.
Sure.
I really can't see that as an issue.
Greegor
wrote:
Well, The Child Protection INDUSTRY does.
Remember, CWLA said that 1/3 of kids in Foster care
could go home if their family just had adequate housing.
That's the biggest lobbying group for Child Protection caseworkers.
Did you know that CPS in Iowa has absolutely
NO STANDARDS for a home inspection?
Asked to SPECIFY some, in the courthouse hallway,
they stated they DO NOT want to set a legal
precident that would restrict them in the future!
Have you ever heard of "Structured Decision Making"
and risk assessment "instruments" rkbose?
I actually looked at the SDM website a few
years ago and right on the front it said that
their "Structured Decision Making" forms
are NOT to be used for DECISION MAKING!
The fact is that these "idiot sheets" ARE being used
in a way that is horribly unprofessional, actually to
assess guilt of parents!
Several versions have been posted in the newsgroups and
JPEG photo scans of at least one was made available.
It was discussed and determined that if a caseworker
was sent to investigate a single mother with three kids
who lived on a farm, she was guilty based on the
risk assessment before the caseworker even knocked
on the door!
The scoring decides ""risk"" based on a point system.
Firearms owner (no regard for gun safe or trigger lock) -1
Distant from town (out in country) -1
Single
Mom -1
2 or more
kids -1
Hunts or kills livestock (chickens on farm) -1
Under 25 years old
-1
etc...
This isn't SUPPOSED to be used to decide to remove
children, but it's also supposed to be used ONLY by
people who have undergone extensive training by the
company that created it.
In several states they basically use plagiarized
versions of the commercial/cooperative made forms.
Structured Decision Making was a cooperative
consortium of several states to create these forms.
In at least one case, the SDM form score was actually
used to obtain a child removal order from a Judge.
The IDEA behind these was DECISION MAKING
from the start. The idea was to make it so that
judgements were OBJECTIVE and not SUBJECTIVE.
(Science vs. attitude)
But! The big flaw with THAT is all of the OVERRIDE
sections, so that if a caseworker wants to push the
score up to help a friend or down to "make a case"
where not warranted, they simply tweek the score
at the OVERRIDE sections.
If a family has a gun safe and trigger locks, the
caseworker COULD write it in if it's a FRIEND
or politically allied to CPS like a FOSTER/ADOPTER.
If the caseworker really doesn't like somebody
they can "make a case" by putting negatives
into the overrides even if they have to do the old
"white glove test" to find a complaint.
Every time an effort is made to PREVENT
personalities and subjective judgements from
being used, the agencies have circumvented it.
That's WHY there are NO STANDARDS for
HOME INSPECTIONS in Child Protection investigations!
This brings up HUGE 4th Amendment issues because
it is both an "unreasonable search" and ALSO can be
said to be a search "illegal for lacking specifics".
The high court Judges take a dim view of "fishing expedition"
searches.
dragonsgirl
"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191273060....@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
Greg, I see a lot of validity to some of your rants.
I think that I, for one, would like to see you start a blog, and within that
blog write about these things as well as include links to case law and
statutes.
I think it would be best for you as well...then instead of writing so much
in a newsgroup you could simply point to your blog link to make a statement.
Greegor
> "Greegor" <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Thanks but no.
Care to discuss the specific issues?
dragonsgirl
Sure.
Exactly what would consitute adequate housing, not only by the state's
standards, but also by societal norms?
For instance, when I lived in the home I was referring to it was a clean and
comfortable home.
It was an extra burdon on the adults to carry water from the well, wash
clothes in a wringer washer, heat water for baths, collect coal for the
stoves and keep them burning all night, and even empty the chamber pots
every day, but the home was still clean and comfortable.
Years after we moved out of the home some relatives took up residence there.
The wood was rotting in the floors, the wallpaper was falling off in thick
sheets, the roof leaked, the fireplaces were no longer useable, the windows
simply gushed cold air, the door frames had huge gaps from settling that
allowed in vermin, including rattlesnakes, and much worse.
That kind of life was no longer common in the early 80's. In the mid 80's,
before his death, my grandfather realized that this house was now an eyesore
and tore it down himself with a wrecker bar and a sledge hammer. If a 60
year old man can take down a house with those tools that should indicate
what kind of condition the home was in.
Now, I wonder, would it be adequate housing, and by who's standards?
Certainly society would not have seen it as adequate...I don't think. Maybe
some would. I would bet that the state would not have seen it as
appropriate.
What are your viewpoints on that?
>
Greegor
The workers we had really did seem to think that the
standard for homes was a "Fashion Plate" photo straight
out of a furniture store ad.
They IMAGINED the neatly stacked household clutter
was dangerous, because the child had never had so
much as a scratch from the ""dangerous clutter".
They actually acted like they had some sort of standard
to judge us by, but when we asked them for what
the standards were, so that we could MEET the standards,
they gave us the ""silent treatment"" to the point of
acting like they were psychotic or catatonic.
One of the basic legal issues is that people can't
MEET standards that do not exist!
It's a bit like the Service Plan stuff where they
insist that people must do everything on there
or lose their kids, except that if they put things
on there that CANNOT possibly be accomplished,
then their arguments fall apart.
Parents can't MEET standards that don't exist!
Some families have been GUILTED into thinking that
they had to clean up their clutter, where the people
actually BUY INTO the complaint from caseworkers.
My assertion is that the parent who falls for this
"guilt trip" standard is allowing the caseworkers
to put the shoe on the wrong foot.
This is very dangerous because it allows the
caseworkers to use very VAGUE undefined goalposts,
and those goal posts are crucial to getting the kids home.
Failing to meet the "goalposts" and the service plan
puts a family at risk of losing their kids forever through
a Termination of Parental Rights.
So the fact that the Standards for Home Inspection
do not exist is a HUGE issue.
Having a caseworker, contractor or other say
"it was awful" is the kind of vaguery they use now
all the way to TPR.
Lots of attitude and hyperbole was used on us
rather than any actual PHOTOGRAPHS.
Presented with photos we took they responded by
saying that we had "made some progress" when the
pictures were taken. There was a small problem
with this though and that was that they had said
that we had NOT made any progress.
But progress toward WHAT?
They have NO STANDARDS!
In regard to the Structured Decision Making garbage,
could you imagine the political liability if people
found out the various ""risk factors"" people can
be marked down for by Child Protection?
Single Moms with 2+ kids would RAISE HELL if they knew!
The BUREAUCRATS delude themselves that they are
using some kind of reasoning to ""evaluate"" people.
And there ARE some standards for Foster Contractors,
mostly formed as a knee jerk reaction to big scandals
or law suits, like fence around pool, etc..
But WHY were the Gravelles allowed to WAREHOUSE
eleven "special needs" kids and keep them in cage beds?
They even passed several inspections WITH THE CAGES!
Where were their ""STANDARDS"" when they did those inspections?
If natural parents did that they would have been
incarcerated immediately when it was noticed.
It goes way beyond double standards!
The agencies don't want to catch THEMSELVES
with any kind of a hand in real child abuse!
firemonkey
The little girl told them you were washing her private parts with her
bare hands greg.
> They IMAGINED the neatly stacked household clutter
> was dangerous, because the child had never had so
> much as a scratch from the ""dangerous clutter".
You put the little 7 yr old out of your trailer in January, in IOWA
not even allowing her to put on shoes ,socks or a coat.
> They actually acted like they had some sort of standard
> to judge us by, but when we asked them for what
> the standards were, so that we could MEET the standards,
> they gave us the ""silent treatment"" to the point of
> acting like they were psychotic or catatonic.
>
> One of the basic legal issues is that people can't
> MEET standards that do not exist!
>
> It's a bit like the Service Plan stuff where they
> insist that people must do everything on there
> or lose their kids, except that if they put things
> on there that CANNOT possibly be accomplished,
> then their arguments fall apart.
>
> Parents can't MEET standards that don't exist!
You are not a parent, not even of a cat.
> Some families have been GUILTED into thinking that
> they had to clean up their clutter, where the people
> actually BUY INTO the complaint from caseworkers.
>
> My assertion is that the parent who falls for this
> "guilt trip" standard is allowing the caseworkers
> to put the shoe on the wrong foot.
My assertion is that CPS knew the little girl was being molested by
you daily and used any excuse they could to ensure her safety.
Its a bitch isn't it greg? You were set up, Lisa leaving you alone all
day to perp on her daughter, have the little girl climbing into
dumpsters to retrieve cans for you, acting out your rage on her by way
of spankings and cold showers, and those nasty case workers come along
and ruin it all. That crazy grandma, trouble making neighbor ruined
everything for you, your still so pissed after 6-7 years your still at
Dan's heals like a rabid dog.
Greegor
FM > her private parts with her bare hands greg.
Actually, the child never said that but the caseworker
tried telling the big lie hoping to get REALLY LUCKY
and get a confession by saying that.
I told the caseworker she had watched one too
many TeeVee cop shows.
G > They IMAGINED the neatly stacked household clutter
G > was dangerous, because the child had never had so
G > much as a scratch from the ""dangerous clutter".
FM > You put the little 7 yr old out of your trailer in January, in
IOWA
FM > not even allowing her to put on shoes ,socks or a coat.
Child and I stepped out onto top landing of tiny front stairs with
the door against my rear end (swung out) for only a few minutes.
Child had on pants, t-shirt and peach colored socks.
We poked our heads out like the groundhog checking
for spring because the sun and a rapid MELT had moved in.
It was not January.
Firemonkey's insulting posturing is an example of the
exaggeration I have written about.
G > Parents can't MEET standards that don't exist!
FM > You are not a parent, not even of a cat.
The state claims the right to define who IS
and who is NOT family. This is of course
not really their right. I was called a "paramour"
which is a derogatory or purjorative term, and
not really appropriate for a fiance'.
FM > My assertion is that CPS knew the little
FM > girl was being molested by you daily and
FM > used any excuse they could to ensure her safety.
Thank you for highlighting just part of the
way that caseworkers violate the Constitutional
rights of families.
They just "know" something and so make up
whatever kind of crap will make a case.
FM > Its a [b-word] isn't it greg? You were set up, Lisa
FM > leaving you alone all day to perp on her
FM > daughter,
Fertive imagination is another caseworker trait.
FM > have the little girl climbing into
FM > dumpsters to retrieve cans for you,
Never. But we did collect cans for pin money.
Particularly at a company that runs 4 softball fields
I had long plywood tongs to reach into dumpsters.
FM > acting out your rage on her by way of spankings
Spanking is an obsession of caseworkers.
FM > and cold showers, and those nasty case
FM > workers come along and ruin it all. That
FM > crazy grandma,
8 years of Prozac, taken unreliably
FM > trouble making neighbor ruined everything for you,
If a delivery kid screwed up and delivered him the
local free shopping newspaper, he cussed them out.
FM > your still so pissed after 6-7 years your
FM > still at Dan's heals like a rabid dog.
I am responding to an attack from a flea.
Greegor
23. Newsgroups: alt.support.child-protective-services
From: "SheRman" Wed, Oct 3 2007 7:47 am
Subject: Re: evaluating foster parents
He is no longer involved with Lisa and the poor little girl in any
way, not
even to do any further mooching. They are out of his life. He
doesn't have
them to kick around anymore...
Sherman.
firemonkey
Really ? he is currently posting over at fightcps, still making
references to his "family".
Greegor
Can I quote you on that?