While looking threw DFS file we came across a VERY odd statement made by DSS Worker David Capps to another State employee Marisa Maples this conversation was discussing them needing our marriage date and our {DIVORCE DATE} that’s odd, were not divorced and there is no plans to due so.
It then dawned on us and a bit of research reviled that Mr. Capps is a divorcee. It would seem, that due to the fact that he could not hold his marriage together then he expects everyone else to sercum to the pressure. Would be curious what the irreconcilable difference was that caused his marriage to terminate.
Makes you wonder if he took his job at DSS with the soul purpose of destroying families and relationships. It is obvious from his and Ms. Maples conversation is that it is the State’s intent to disrupt the sanctity of marriage threw harassment and intimidation. As they made the assumption that we had been divorced after the onslaught perpetrated by DSS workers and the State. That has hard as they tried, did not work! We will be celebrating our 18th wedding anniversary on February 14th of this year. And it would seem someone has a jealous streak and a malicious nature that they could not hold there’s together while we have perfect balance in our relationship.
Showing posts with label Socail Services. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Socail Services. Show all posts
Monday, February 8, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Caesar Had Brutus & Nixon Has Kinder
WOW Caesar had Brutus and Nixon has Kinder, listen to this State of the State address by Lt. Governor Peter Kinder. Really Peter the only thing I heard watching your address on OPT was you trash talking the Governor. Was it not you in another speech who stated in short you were going to work with Nixon to better Missouri and put politics aside for the betterment of the State. Wasn’t that the lame excuse used for cowering out of the election? All I see now is someone using State funds and critical time to climb upon a soap box and start an early campaign. Pretty pathetic over all, listing to you squawk about Mr. Nixon’s miss appropriation of funds for over a year now. Hmmm where have you been for a year and done nothing, you are just a culpable as him.
You whine there are no jobs in Missouri, yet you as well as Mr. Nixon allowed a profitable business from your State that employed numerous people as well produced revenue in many Missouri cities. This same business has the ability to employ, EVERY Missourian who wishes to work. Send us your tired your hungry your weak, we will be more than happy to employ them all. In our industry everyone has a fan base, even you.
You say you will not raise taxes, hmmm sounds like Bush and his speech and we all know how that ended. Expect to be held to your word, as shallow as it is. And truly if you were that worried about the tax payers then why would you do nothing to correct numerous issues that raise the tax payers liability. Just curios how the State will pay that debt, with its finances in such turmoil, as the ax is about to drop.
You outline SO MUCH wrong doing by Governor Nixon in “cooking the books” and that he held “closed door meetings” as well in your speech you say “In the past year, lawmakers have credibly charged Governor Nixon's staff with offering them jobs for their votes.” Which is a criminal offence, if these allegations are true why have you done NOTHING?
Have you pursued ethics violations have you requested an inquiry have you contacted the Attorney General? It would seem that all you want to do is bitch and wine to further your political career rather than come to a solution or to take action are you just lazy a moron or a coward. Get off your soap box, election time is a long ways away and you still have us to contend with when that time is reached, should you chose to re-run for ANY position. Oh and do not fear you are not being singled out we intended to do all we can to see that Nixon is not re-elected either should he to run for office. We are all ready designing t-shirts etc. to give to all those Missourians who are un-employed and homeless by your short comings. If you and Governor Nixon are going to take the shirt of there backs we will be there to put one of ours back on as many as we can.
In closing you speak of ethics and ethical change, you sir no NOTHING about either and are infantile to even speak of such things. Example is the fact you set by and let corruption run rampant in State and do NOTHING. But the reality and purpose is your on a soap box craving attention so as not to fade in to obscurity, and like a pre-mature ejaculator are blowing your load way be for the proper time to climax.
You whine there are no jobs in Missouri, yet you as well as Mr. Nixon allowed a profitable business from your State that employed numerous people as well produced revenue in many Missouri cities. This same business has the ability to employ, EVERY Missourian who wishes to work. Send us your tired your hungry your weak, we will be more than happy to employ them all. In our industry everyone has a fan base, even you.
You say you will not raise taxes, hmmm sounds like Bush and his speech and we all know how that ended. Expect to be held to your word, as shallow as it is. And truly if you were that worried about the tax payers then why would you do nothing to correct numerous issues that raise the tax payers liability. Just curios how the State will pay that debt, with its finances in such turmoil, as the ax is about to drop.
You outline SO MUCH wrong doing by Governor Nixon in “cooking the books” and that he held “closed door meetings” as well in your speech you say “In the past year, lawmakers have credibly charged Governor Nixon's staff with offering them jobs for their votes.” Which is a criminal offence, if these allegations are true why have you done NOTHING?
Have you pursued ethics violations have you requested an inquiry have you contacted the Attorney General? It would seem that all you want to do is bitch and wine to further your political career rather than come to a solution or to take action are you just lazy a moron or a coward. Get off your soap box, election time is a long ways away and you still have us to contend with when that time is reached, should you chose to re-run for ANY position. Oh and do not fear you are not being singled out we intended to do all we can to see that Nixon is not re-elected either should he to run for office. We are all ready designing t-shirts etc. to give to all those Missourians who are un-employed and homeless by your short comings. If you and Governor Nixon are going to take the shirt of there backs we will be there to put one of ours back on as many as we can.
In closing you speak of ethics and ethical change, you sir no NOTHING about either and are infantile to even speak of such things. Example is the fact you set by and let corruption run rampant in State and do NOTHING. But the reality and purpose is your on a soap box craving attention so as not to fade in to obscurity, and like a pre-mature ejaculator are blowing your load way be for the proper time to climax.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Interesting Compilation!
And so very true, of the puppy mill, Missouri and NUMEROUS other States have created. And the corruption does run rampant!!
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
A VERY Enlightening article wrote by, Barbra Hollingsworth of the Examiner
Is it child protection or legal kidnapping?
"Children being taken from their homes, based on tips from anonymous telephone callers alleging abuse or neglect, has been cast in a harsh spotlight in the Texas polygamy case, and there’s growing evidence that more than a few of the 510,000 children placed in foster care annually don’t belong there.
In February, Georgia state Sen. Nancy Schaefer released a blistering assessment of the bureaucrats entrusted to protect children there: “I believe Child Protective Services (CPS) nationwide has become corrupt and that the entire system is broken almost beyond repair. I am convinced parents and families should be warned of the dangers.”
Armed with court orders and protected by confidentiality statutes that function as bureaucratic shield laws, CPS workers need just one anonymous phone call to a hotline to swoop in and remove children, regardless of the facts.
Such calls can be legitimate, coming from a legally mandated reporter such as a doctor or teacher. But it could also be a fabrication from a vindictive ex-spouse, a nosy neighbor, or a disgruntled relative.
Since no laws clearly define child abuse and neglect, parents have been accused of these serious crimes when what they actually did was yell, withhold TV privileges, or “repressing” their children by supervising them too much.
Dr. Steven Krason, professor of political science and legal studies at Franciscan University of Steubenville, is writing a book on CPS wrongdoing based on two decades of research.
Krason says CPS itself now poses “a grave threat” because “it is almost impossible to fully insulate one’s family from...a system that on very little pretense can simply reach into the home and take away one’s offspring.”
He’s convinced the number of real child abuse cases has remained fairly steady over the last three decades; what has been growing is an unprecedented government assault on innocent parents.
And if it doesn’t take much to have your children placed in foster care, getting them back can be another story. An anonymous call about a 10-ounce weight loss by their then 3-week-old daughter triggered a legal avalanche that buried Arlington residents Nancy Hey and Christopher Slitor.
Their parental rights were terminated last year by Arlington Judge James Almand even though Hey and Slitor had been exonerated by of all neglect charges nine months earlier.
In another local case, Georgetown residents Greg and Juliana Caplan had to spend $75,000 on lawyers and wait two weeks before their children were returned, even after five doctors confirmed that an injury sustained by one of their twin daughters was not caused by abuse.
The Caplans are still listed as possible child abusers in D.C., however, because they refused to submit to psychological counseling. Despite the stigma, that might have been a wise decision.
The psychological evaluation trap is one of the least expected obstacles facing parents snared unfairly in the CPS system. Most panicked parents promise to do anything to get their children back, often agreeing to a battery of psychological tests they naively believe will prove their parental competence and end the nightmare. But it doesn’t always work out that way.
Arlington social workers told Hey that she had to undergo psychological testing before she could get her baby back, so the longtime Federal Communications Commission employee readily agreed.
She was diagnosed with two clinical disorders by Dr. Giselle Hass at the Multicultural Clinical Center in Springfield. This psychological evaluation was cited in the court ruling terminating Hey’s parental rights.
But an independent, expert analysis of the report obtained by The Examiner included scathing critique of the methodology used to evaluate Hey, saying it “...reads more like advocacy than a professional psychological assessment... clear and frequent evidence of error... Any graduate student who turned in as poorly scored and interpreted a test as did this evaluator would probably have failed the first semester.”
Besides violations of standard practice and professional rules of ethics, the analysis noted numerous illustrations of bias in the psychological profile and “a consistent failure to include data that would be favorable to Mrs. Hey,”including 17 computer-generated scores on the Parental Stress Index that were all in the normal range.
This was a significant omission, given that Judge Almand cited Hey’s tendency of “freezing...in times of stress” as one of the main reasons she could not be trusted to raise her own child.
Hey – who has never been convicted of either abuse or neglect – has had no contact with three-year-old Sabrina since Judge Almand allowed her to be adopted by the same foster family Arlington CPS workers originally selected to care for her baby.
Barbara F. Hollingsworth is The Examiner’s local opinion editor. "
"Children being taken from their homes, based on tips from anonymous telephone callers alleging abuse or neglect, has been cast in a harsh spotlight in the Texas polygamy case, and there’s growing evidence that more than a few of the 510,000 children placed in foster care annually don’t belong there.
In February, Georgia state Sen. Nancy Schaefer released a blistering assessment of the bureaucrats entrusted to protect children there: “I believe Child Protective Services (CPS) nationwide has become corrupt and that the entire system is broken almost beyond repair. I am convinced parents and families should be warned of the dangers.”
Armed with court orders and protected by confidentiality statutes that function as bureaucratic shield laws, CPS workers need just one anonymous phone call to a hotline to swoop in and remove children, regardless of the facts.
Such calls can be legitimate, coming from a legally mandated reporter such as a doctor or teacher. But it could also be a fabrication from a vindictive ex-spouse, a nosy neighbor, or a disgruntled relative.
Since no laws clearly define child abuse and neglect, parents have been accused of these serious crimes when what they actually did was yell, withhold TV privileges, or “repressing” their children by supervising them too much.
Dr. Steven Krason, professor of political science and legal studies at Franciscan University of Steubenville, is writing a book on CPS wrongdoing based on two decades of research.
Krason says CPS itself now poses “a grave threat” because “it is almost impossible to fully insulate one’s family from...a system that on very little pretense can simply reach into the home and take away one’s offspring.”
He’s convinced the number of real child abuse cases has remained fairly steady over the last three decades; what has been growing is an unprecedented government assault on innocent parents.
And if it doesn’t take much to have your children placed in foster care, getting them back can be another story. An anonymous call about a 10-ounce weight loss by their then 3-week-old daughter triggered a legal avalanche that buried Arlington residents Nancy Hey and Christopher Slitor.
Their parental rights were terminated last year by Arlington Judge James Almand even though Hey and Slitor had been exonerated by of all neglect charges nine months earlier.
In another local case, Georgetown residents Greg and Juliana Caplan had to spend $75,000 on lawyers and wait two weeks before their children were returned, even after five doctors confirmed that an injury sustained by one of their twin daughters was not caused by abuse.
The Caplans are still listed as possible child abusers in D.C., however, because they refused to submit to psychological counseling. Despite the stigma, that might have been a wise decision.
The psychological evaluation trap is one of the least expected obstacles facing parents snared unfairly in the CPS system. Most panicked parents promise to do anything to get their children back, often agreeing to a battery of psychological tests they naively believe will prove their parental competence and end the nightmare. But it doesn’t always work out that way.
Arlington social workers told Hey that she had to undergo psychological testing before she could get her baby back, so the longtime Federal Communications Commission employee readily agreed.
She was diagnosed with two clinical disorders by Dr. Giselle Hass at the Multicultural Clinical Center in Springfield. This psychological evaluation was cited in the court ruling terminating Hey’s parental rights.
But an independent, expert analysis of the report obtained by The Examiner included scathing critique of the methodology used to evaluate Hey, saying it “...reads more like advocacy than a professional psychological assessment... clear and frequent evidence of error... Any graduate student who turned in as poorly scored and interpreted a test as did this evaluator would probably have failed the first semester.”
Besides violations of standard practice and professional rules of ethics, the analysis noted numerous illustrations of bias in the psychological profile and “a consistent failure to include data that would be favorable to Mrs. Hey,”including 17 computer-generated scores on the Parental Stress Index that were all in the normal range.
This was a significant omission, given that Judge Almand cited Hey’s tendency of “freezing...in times of stress” as one of the main reasons she could not be trusted to raise her own child.
Hey – who has never been convicted of either abuse or neglect – has had no contact with three-year-old Sabrina since Judge Almand allowed her to be adopted by the same foster family Arlington CPS workers originally selected to care for her baby.
Barbara F. Hollingsworth is The Examiner’s local opinion editor. "
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Beliefs, Opinions,Morality & Mentality are in the 1600 in Barton County Missouri
Well it would appear that that like their beliefs, opinions, morality and mentality at the Barton County Missouri Court House.There transportation in the 1600’s as well!!!!
Come on get with the times people!!!!!!
Come on get with the times people!!!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
