Underfunded programs overload CPS...Re: Jury In Caged Kids Case Resumes Deliberations Early
0:->
The most horrendous cases of foster and adoption child abuse come out
of these "warehouses," the state sets up and forces CPS to serve.
The cost to institutionalize children who are dangerous, to themselves
and each other, is extreme. The alternative CHOSEN BY LEGISLATORS,
Michael, not by CPS, is to support the lower cost placement with
ordinary citizens.
This is the kind of results we see.
Another case, just a few years ago in Oregon, comes to mind. There a
similar family of adopted and foster children were NOT adequately
confined and there was an horrendeous amount of abuse, both physical
and sexual, between the children.
The parents were "maintained" by CPS doing what CPS is mandated to do
by the legislature.
When you folks learn about the system, instead of your strange
delusional views that all evil resides in CPS, you might get as far
back as the law makers, and who elects them, and what they lobby for.
Low cost, Michael. Hide the problem, Michael. CPS workers do yoeman
work, considering.
Go to the source of the problem. Start with CA/N parents, then to the
legislature that is supposed to make law and public policy to deal with
them.
Note that they also demand CPS be a child protection agency for
children that are disabled as these children seem to be.
It's a population that I did not work with professionally, but knew
well from observations and practicum when I was a raw lad in school.
And continued to hear about from collegues who did work with them.
Institutionalized children.
And universally, whether CPS workers, mental health professionals, or
professionals working with disabled children, the talk was the
same....how can we get services for these children RATHER THAN SEND
THEM INTO fake cheapo situations where they are warehoused with people
not equiped or trained to deal with them safely and effectively.
We all knew where the blame lie. The people, not unlike you, Michael,
in denial, and looking to blame others for what YOU are unwilling to
fix.
There's a reason I ask for more money for children. BECAUSE THERE NEVER
HAS BEEN ENOUGH. All children's programs, and nearly all social support
programs (eldrely, mentally ill, developmentally disabled) come badly
underfunded in this country. With the "make do" that results in cases
like the one you have posted.
Thanks for keeping us up to date.
Kane
Michael wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> POSTED: 7:00 am EST December 21, 2006
> UPDATED: 9:05 am EST December 21, 2006
> NORWALK, Ohio -- The jury in the northern Ohio "caged kids" trial will get
> an early start this morning as deliberations continue into a third day.
>
> Jurors in Norwalk are considering the child endangering and abuse charges
> against Sharen and Michael Gravelle. They're accused of making some of
> their 11 adopted children sleep in wood and wire cages.
>
> The jurors deliberated about two hours Tuesday and all day Wednesday. They
> got permission from the judge to resume at 7:30 a.m. Thursday --
> one-and-a-half hours early.
>
> The defense says the Gravelles made enclosed bunks to protect the special
> needs youngsters from their sometimes-violent siblings.
> - --
> Michael (GN)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFFiplSZdBwRoyVY6URAnVGAJ9OeUhbkeasPI+vyb2ZvAPlwlYQvQCfdbxl
> qe5eF+n40Uto8QKKUOarL8M=
> =XkOp
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Greegor
Do you think it's OK for these Foster/Adopters to have CAGED these
kids?
Just a simple answer, not a three page rant or a filibuster.
If an actual parent had a kid or kids like this, and THEY
did this, would you back them up?
IS there a double standard when it comes to this?
Please be concise!
0:->
Greegor wrote:
> Kane, Can you please clarify what you hinted at?
> Do you think it's OK for these Foster/Adopters to have CAGED these
> kids?
Read my comments, point out what you think means one thing or the other
and ask your question in that context. Open ended babbling like that
above is just useless nonsense.
>
> Just a simple answer, not a three page rant or a filibuster.
>
On complex issues failing to cover enough detail leave YOU will lots of
wiggle room to make accusations, innuendo, and insinutation, Greg.
> If an actual parent had a kid or kids like this, and THEY
> did this, would you back them up?
That woudl be a case by case situation.
Where the couple failed was to seek the help they needed to deal with
such disabled children. I've worked with children that were not
"disabled" but were so psychologically damaged that the patient to
staff ratio had to be one to one, and more.
Certain boys could not be alone with another boy, not even walk up the
stairs with him unaccompanied by an adult. Sexual attacks you see.
You are too ignorant to discuss this with, but I'm patient. Possibly
one day I will have imparted enough knowledge to you that you will
begin to have an awakening.
>
> IS there a double standard when it comes to this?
No. It is a case by case matter. I'd expect a bio parent, a foster
parent, or an adoptive parent to use other means than caging.
My argument, that you have carefully done away with because you can't
handle it, is the political issues that come right back to the
public...folks like you that refuse to deal with reality and the
terrible burden that abusive and neglectful parents lay on society.
Of course we could let them just torture and kill to their hearts
content, now couldn't we?
>
> Please be concise!
>
No. I will take as much space and words to tell it like it is when and
were I feel like it.
If you don't care for it, don't read it.
You don't remember much anyway, especially if it is in conflict with
your dearest biases or damages the false self image you have that you
are 'okay.'
You aren't Greg. People such as you are dangerous to individuals
(Reference advice on FightCPS) and society in general because of a
value system that denigrates children to nothing but possessions
without rights of their own.
Get well, or stay sick, but I'll continue to post the truth about this
problem and about your kind as I see fit. Long or short, concise or
verbose.
You can shove that bullshit self importance of your's straight up your
ass and have it for dinner.
0:->
0:->
> Kane, Can you please clarify what you hinted at?
> Do you think it's OK for these Foster/Adopters to have CAGED these
> kids?
Can you think of or remember a single instance where I have defended
anyone, foster, adoptive, or bio parent, for mistreating children?
> Just a simple answer, not a three page rant or a filibuster.
Simple enough for you? Answer the question above.
> If an actual parent had a kid or kids like this, and THEY
> did this, would you back them up?
See above. And answer the question. You are insinuating again, without
proof.
Put up the proof then accuse. Just as we do with you. Evidence.
>
> IS there a double standard when it comes to this?
From you, yes. Because you do not put these same kinds of insinuating
questions to your buddies.
>
> Please be concise!
>
Concise enough for you, Ahole?
It's a Hawaiian word. Honest. Look it up.
R R R R RRRRR R R...what a pitiful piece of dreck you are.
0:->
Dan Sullivan
Greegor wrote:
> Kane, Can you please clarify what you hinted at?
Which was?
> Do you think it's OK for these Foster/Adopters to have CAGED these
> kids?
What do you think, Greg?
> Just a simple answer, not a three page rant or a filibuster.
How many words?
> If an actual parent had a kid or kids like this, and THEY
> did this, would you back them up?
Depends on the situation.
> IS there a double standard when it comes to this?
What is "this?"
> Please be concise!
Why?
You want less than a complete answer?