Powered by
Movable Type 3.2
Design by
Danny Carlton





Made with NoteTab

June 14, 2004

You might be a Liberal if . . .

(Note: this piece was originally published on my site http://ElevenOClock.com/news long before I knew what a blog was.)

You think the possibility of an innocent person being wrongly convicted is enough to make laws allowing most criminals to go free, but the reality that children are permanently harmed by overzealous or just plain malicious social workers is not enough to warrant reform to curb these abuses.

I know, some of you are jerking up in that conditioned set of responses, "But these are isolated . .. but we must protect the children . . . but the conditions demand a different set of rules." Complete and utter hogwash. It doesn't take long to locate these "isolated" incidents, and when you look deeper you find that they are regular and consistent. Yes, there are some good social workers. I'll even go so far as to say most are good at what they do and do their job correctly. But tell me, if someone offered you a cup of water that was only 5% cyanide, would that make it OK to drink? The fact is abusive social workers abuse children. There is very little accountability. Trust me I've dealt with them personally and seen what kind of sick people are hired to "protect" children. 

A child in foster care is 525% more likely to die than on average. A child receiving help from social services is 1600% more likely to die than those social services do not "help". A child is 300% more likely to be abused or neglected by a foster parent than by their own parents. Given this the various social services agencies, whether they call themselves CPS, DHS or whatever, seem to be the abusers more than the ones they are supposed to be protecting children from.

Previously social workers enjoyed immunity and used that to bring a reign of terror on families. Recent court decisions have established that they cannot just shrug off the US Constitution. Not all social workers and social service agencies are aware of this (or at least they pretend they aren't aware of it). We need to encourage our state legislators to make changes, and not just leave it to the courts. A victory through the courts almost always means a family had to suffer a great deal in order for that precedent to be set. A victory through a state law doesn't necessarily require someone to suffer. 

Comments

Posted by Jack Lewis at June 14, 2004 05:35 AM