Last Updated on September 2, 2020
The state of Minnesota Department of Human Services, in coordination with the Minnesota governor’s “Children’s Cabinet,” quietly sent a form to child care providers informing them that parents who contract Coronavirus might have their children placed in “foster care.” Considering the widespread epidemic of false positive Coronavirus tests, this document obtained by NATIONAL FILE presents the potential for a disturbing new precedent. And once children are in the foster care system, how soon if ever will they actually get released back to their parents? The form even states that the kids could be moved to another foster care placement if necessary.
“If parents are hospitalized and have not made arrangements, children might have a short stay in foster care while social workers try to find family or friends who can help, or until parents recover enough to resume care…It is likely in these situations that children will have been exposed to the coronavirus, though they might not be ill,” the form states.
“If it is a foster care placement, they would contact their foster care licensor to arrange for a new placement,” the form states, referring to the possibility that a foster care provider becomes ill while in possession of the children.
Minnesota state Rep. Mary Franson told NATIONAL FILE: “We went from 15 days to slow the spread to a mask mandate to now this. When does it end? What illness has prompted government to have parents provide a backup plan and who determines level of sickness? Democrats claim Republicans rip children away from parents but under such a proposal being floated by Minnesota, children could be ripped away.”
NATIONAL FILE PREVIOUSLY REPORTED:
Los Angeles family dependency lawyer Christopher Arash Borzi stated the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) is trying to remove the child of a parent who tested positive for Coronavirus.
Reached for comment by NATIONAL FILE, Borzi withheld comment at this time awaiting his employer’s permission. This case is not unusual as government agencies nationwide seek to strip rights from law-abiding citizens during the Coronavirus pandemic.
Child Protective Services (CPS) agencies are facing national scrutiny as Salem, Oregon salon owner Lindsey Graham accuses CPS of questioning her children in a politically motivated targeting operation. Graham is fighting Democrat governor Kate Brown’s state government in an effort to re-open her business during the government-imposed Coronavirus lockdown. Graham’s crusade, predictably, is making her a target of the political establishment.
I led the way in exposing Child Protective Services with my 2019 investigative journalism series. I spotlighted the massive problems in Oregon, interviewing pro-life activist Heather Hobbs regarding her claim that a nurse targeted her with a vindictive CPS report in the hospital due to her pro-life conservative beliefs, and I showed how the Oregon Treasury invested in a foster care provider accused of lording over patient abuse.
Meanwhile…
Washington state’s Department of Children, Youth and Families (DCFY, also known as “CPS” for “Child Protective Services”) posted a job listing for existing CPS workers to volunteer to supervise children in quarantine centers during the Coronavirus outbreak.
One of the listed locations, Cedar Springs Camp, clarified that they were falsely listed by the state of Washington as a quarantine center, and they asked the state to remove them. The job posting closed on May 11.
Responding to social media uproar, the Washington state’s DCYF put out a clarifying statement that the ad was only referring to children currently in the system. But their clarifying statement contradicts itself, at first stating that the quarantined children will be kids who have tested positive, and then stating that quarantined children will also be kids who may have been exposed to Coronavirus.
DCYF’s clarifying statement reads: “In light of some concerns from the public regarding two recent job postings by the Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF), the agency would like to clarify the intent of these job listings and address misinformation spreading as a result of the job description.
The job postings targeted current staff interested in Social Service Specialist 3 and Social Service Specialist 5 positions. The post prematurely included sites of potential locations in the community where we could house children in our legal care and authority who’ve tested positive for COVID-19 in the event that a placement home was not available. The facilities listed are not affiliated with DCYF and had not signed off on this job listing.
The listings have since been taken down to avoid further confusion.
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, DCYF began internal recruitment of social service specialists to care for foster children who are either COVID-19 positive or may have been exposed to COVID-19 in the event a placement home was not available.
To clarify, those facilities that ultimately open their doors to this effort would only house State-dependent children and youth in out-of-home care who due to being COVID positive or COVID exposed do not currently have a foster home available. These facilities are for this limited scope and not considered quarantine centers or intended for the general public.”
Meanwhile…
Multiple mothers have had their children taken away from them as a direct result of working in the medical profession during the Coronavirus outbreak. Will these disturbing cases register with our political leaders, who are voicing public calls to stand with our medical workers during the pandemic?
Additionally, NATIONAL FILE caught a Child Protective Services worker attempting to use the Coronavirus outbreak to suspend all visits for parents of a child in the government system, citing a statewide policy that the state government says does not exist. What is going on?
(UPDATE: Dr. Theresa Greene, profiled below, got her children back after an appeals court ruling)
The Washington Examiner previously reported:
“A divorced emergency room physician temporarily lost custody of her daughter because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Dr. Theresa Greene, a doctor in South Florida, previously shared custody of her 4-year-old daughter with her ex-husband, Eric Greene, but a judge granted an emergency order granting him sole custody until the ordeal is over, according to NBC Miami.
In the court’s decision, Circuit Judge Bernard Shapiro wrote, “In order to protect the best interests of the minor child, including but not limited to the minor child’s safety and welfare, this Court temporarily suspends the Former Wife’s timesharing until further Order of Court. The suspension is solely related to the outbreak of COVID-19.”…
…Theresa Greene responded to the judge’s ruling by saying that “the family court system now is stressing me almost more than the virus.”
“I was just shocked that the judge would take this stance without talking to medical experts and knowing the facts and take it so lightly, take my child from me, and not think of the effect on her, her mental and psychological well-being,” she added.
The doctor noted that the custody battle will not stop her from following the “oath” she took to help people.”
Washington Examiner passage ends
Greene appealed the decision, and an appeals court ruled in her favor.
Meanwhile, I recently reported:
An Oklahoma medical worker has been stripped of her parental custody at this time because she works in a medical clinic and could possibly be exposed to Coronavirus during the outbreak, according to court documents.
A district judge for the Sac and Fox District Court took medical worker Katherine Spencer’s children after the father petitioned the court. “The Petitioner alleged, and submitted documents in support, that the Respondent alleged proximity to Coronavirus,” the court order states. Court dockets show no record of a hearing on March 20, the day the court laid down its order to confiscate Spencer’s children.
Katherine Spencer told her story on Facebook and denied that she has any history of “neglect” prior to getting hit with a gag order by the judge.
NATIONAL FILE recently reported…
UPDATE: Since NATIONAL FILE broke this story, the parents in question have had multiple short video visits with their daughter)
A Child Protective Services (CPS) worker in Oklahoma used the Coronavirus outbreak to cut off a mother and father’s visits with their 20-month old daughter, even though the Department of Human Services, the state agency that oversees CPS, claims to be keeping parental visits open.
“DHS statewide has suspended all visitations due to the virus so after today’s visit, we cannot approve any more visitations until it is reinstated,” said CPS permanency worker Danelle Dillman in a Friday morning text message to Andrew Ritter regarding his 20-month old daughter, who was seized by the government for “Failure To Thrive” due to low infant birth weight after the girl’s mother chose to breastfeed her. Ritter and his wife said they preferred not to place their daughter on a particular appetite enhancer due to perceived conflict with the girl’s Zyrtec Antihistemine.
An Oklahoma DHS official told National File in a confusing, defensive interview that the state agency does not have a policy in place to suspend all visitations at this time, but rather to continue visitations using technology like Skype and FaceTime. But the official does not know if visitations are actually still occurring. Ritter and his wife never received an offer to hold a cyber-visit. Here is the text that permanency worker Dillman sent to Ritter:
When National File called up the headquarters for Oklahoma DHS, a woman who answered the phone told us that parental visits were indeed “suspended” for the time being, “until they get this virus under control.” The woman refused to give us her name.
But Keeley McEwan, head of the Oklahoma DHS communications office, told National File that “We have not suspended visitation across the board in any way.” She pointed to the agency’s daily guidance for case workers, which she noted is “fluid” and “changes day to day.”
“As of today we are highly encouraging continuing visitation” utilizing iphones and programs including Skype and FaceTime. “Whether a visitation is cancelled is on a case by case basis.”
She did not know whether any visitations have been recently held since the Coronavirus outbreak using Skype or FaceTime. Permanency worker Danelle Dillman did not respond to repeated requests for comment. McEwan did not confirm whether or not she spoke to Dillman or Dillman’s superviser following our conversation.
I have been reporting on the nationwide scourge of CPS removing children from parents’ homes for highly disputable reasons or no reason at all, which many parents feel is due to the for-profit nature of the government’s child removal industry.
I reported for The Epoch Times:
“Parents blame legislation signed by Bill Clinton for the rash of Child Protective Services (CPS) corruption and abuse claims cropping up all over the country.
On Oct. 1, President Donald Trump’s Family First Prevention Services Act—which he passed by attaching it to a February 2018 spending bill—goes into effect. Trump’s law seeks to reverse some of the damage caused by the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), which President Clinton signed in 1997.
Critics say Clinton’s law created financial incentives to remove children from their homes and place them in foster care, thus sparking a lucrative government-run business of child removal.
The ASFA created a program in which the federal government cuts checks to states, courtesy of Social Security, for every child adopted out of foster care. The ASFA also requires the termination of most parents’ custodial rights after a child has spent 15 out of the past 22 months in foster care. Then-First Lady Hillary Clinton spearheaded the push to pass the ASFA through Congress.
“After the passage of that legislation, foster adoptions increased 64% nationwide from 31,030 the year the law passed to 51,000 last year,” Hillary Clinton wrote in the introduction to the 2006 edition of her book, “It Takes a Village.”
ASFA was drafted in response to what was perceived as a failure in the previous legal framework for caring for foster children.
“The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) was enacted in 1997 in response to concerns that many children were remaining in foster care for long periods or experiencing multiple placements. This landmark legislation requires timely permanency planning for children and emphasizes that the child’s safety is the paramount concern,” states a Health and Human Services government training website.
‘Ready for Adoption’
Parents affected by the ASFA say it gives the government a blank check to traffic children.
“As soon as you hit the 15-month period, you automatically get your rights terminated,” Jeremy Powell of Oklahoma told The Epoch Times on Sept. 24, immediately after losing any chance of getting back his four children, all under the age of 10. “They [CPS] were ready for adoption day one. They didn’t help us in any way.”
“I have 30 days to appeal,” said Powell, a former Chili’s cook who entered the CPS system when the cleanliness of his house declined, due to a health episode at work that led to his firing. Powell said his manager, who is an illegal immigrant, chose to fire him rather than file an official report that might have led to the manager’s deportation.
“I looked at Trump’s law about returning kids to their families, compared to Bill Clinton’s law. Trump’s law is on our side,” Powell said.
“The law should be stretched out for people in poverty because they only give you three months. … Even if you make it by the 90-day mark, they still ignore because you’re too poor to carry on. The jurors, the lawyers, everything. There has to be an extension of time for poor people to catch up,” Powell said.
“One of our kids has already been through six different fosters. They say they care about the children. They’re torturing them! As long as CPS can get a child’s parents to the 15-month line, they get a kickback for the kid,” Powell said. “It’s like the kids are cattle.”
“One of my reports said because I have a problem with the church, my kids shouldn’t be returned. So I have no First Amendment rights. I don’t know why I’m still in America, because I have to pay these taxes and I don’t have any family or any rights,” Powell said.
A National Issue
Powell’s story is similar to traumas suffered by parents all over the United States.
“I have at least 200 cases on file with evidence from people all over the nation,” Audra Terry of Texas told The Epoch Times, referring to whistleblowers who sent their stories to Terry through her RicoCPS.com database, which put out an open call for CPS abuse cases. “There are 10 people alleging sexual abuse.”
The RicoCPS website demands “solid evidence” be presented. Its goal is to “demand a federal RICO investigation to investigate every CPS agency nationwide for the purpose of transparency and justice.”
Terry is planning to give her information to Texas state senator Bob Hall, who is leading a push to reform CPS, and to Ted Cruz’s father, Rafael, at an upcoming event.
“The incentive money is the bonus check that goes to the state. They have different classifications for it. It is strictly a bonus check. It is really hard to track,” parental rights advocate Connie Reguli told The Epoch Times, referring to the checks that the federal government sends to states for each foster care adoption. Reguli practices family law in Tennessee and is the founder of the Family Forward Project.
“The Adoption and Safe Families Act originally established incentive payments equal to $4,000 for each foster child whose adoption was finalized over a certain base level and $6,000 for each special needs adoption above the base level,” according to a 2004 Congressional Research Service report.
In fiscal year 2016, the federal government paid 47 states a total of $55.2 million in adoption incentive payments under the ASFA, according to congressional budget records. As of April 2018, the federal government had paid states a total of $613.9 million in ASFA incentive money.
Foster parents who adopt their foster children are also entitled to checks, courtesy of the ASFA.
Perjury
The parents and their advocates see these financial incentives as distorting the entire system.
“They have social workers in place whose main objective is to commit perjury in the courtroom, to create a rationale for why to take the children and get paid. It’s almost like perjury is part of their job description,” Andrea Packwood, president of California Family Advocacy, told The Epoch Times, noting social workers’ proclivity to coach children about what to say in cases.
“If, for example, you have a neighbor who doesn’t like you or your politics, their allegations against you don’t even have to be substantiated. You could be the perfect parent, but if your garbageman doesn’t like you, that gets submitted as evidence,” Packwood said. “There’s a movement of people like Antifa who are using this for political motivations.”
In October 2016, lawyers for officials in California’s Orange County argued in a civil case that social workers whose lies resulted in the removal of children from their parents had the right to commit perjury in the case and were entitled to immunity. The U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected the argument.
Experts
Expert opinion has begun to validate the parents’ complaints that there’s something wrong with ASFA’s incentives.
DeLeith Gossett, a law professor at Texas Tech University, said in a 2018 Memphis Law Review article: “The act’s financial incentives have disrupted families permanently by the speedy termination of parental rights, without the accompanying move from foster care to adoptive homes. The programs that the Adoption and Safe Families Act govern thwart its very purpose as children continue to languish in foster care waiting for permanent adoptive homes, often until they age out of the system into negative life outcomes.”
Cassie Statuto Bevan helped draft the ASFA. She told the Chronicle of Social Change: “ASFA was blamed for leaving a lot of children as orphans, and that certainly wasn’t the intention of ASFA. There has been concern we moved to permanency, but didn’t pay attention to the parents’ needs.”
The ideology of the Clinton bureaucrats who worked on the law might explain its focus.
“What happens to children depends not only on what happens in the homes, but what happens in the outside world,” Mary Jo Bane, who served as the Clinton administration Department of Health and Human Services’ assistant secretary of children and families, said in a 1977 interview.
“We really don’t know how to raise children. If we want to talk about equality of opportunity for children, then the fact that children are raised in families means there’s no equality. It’s a dilemma. In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them.”
Calls for Reform
Thousands of parents are expected to attend a rally at the California state capitol in Sacramento on Oct. 4 calling for CPS reform, the same day the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families holds a meeting in Alexandria, Virginia, to discuss its response to the child sex trafficking crisis.
The Epoch Times recently uncovered multiple cases of alleged child sex abuse in the Contra Costa County foster care system in California. The State Department’s 2019 human trafficking report confirms that the foster care system is a breeding ground of human trafficking.
President Trump’s Family First Prevention Services Act fights back against the financial incentives that move children quickly to foster care, but parents are unsure whether Trump’s law will be enough to reverse the systemic damage.
With the Family First Prevention Services Act, states, territories, and tribes with an approved Title IV-E plan have the option to use these funds for prevention services that would allow ‘candidates for foster care’ to stay with parents or relatives. “States will be reimbursed for prevention services for up to 12 months,” according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
“The Family First Prevention Services Act also seeks to curtail the use of congregate or group care for children and instead places a new emphasis on family foster homes. With limited exceptions, the federal government will not reimburse states for children placed in group care settings for more than two weeks,” the National Council of State Legislatures states.
“Approved settings, known as qualified residential treatment programs, must use a trauma-informed treatment model and employ registered or licensed nursing staff and other licensed clinical staff. The child must be formally assessed within 30 days of placement to determine if his or her needs can be met by family members, in a family foster home or another approved setting.”
Follow Patrick Howley on twitter: @HowleyReporter
