Comments on: Werme Tricks – Pick On The Poor

By: MAMAWS3ANGELS

MAMAWS3ANGELS — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 20:21:04 +0000

THE MORE I READ ABOUT WHAT YOU OBJECT TO WITH WERME THE MORE I SEE THAT WERME HAS FOUND THE TRUTH, LIKE THE REST OF US. THANK GOD FOR ATTORNEY WERME AND ALL THOSE LIKE HER WHO AREN’T AFRAID TO FIGHT THE SYSTEM. SARA DO RESEARCH LIKE WE ALL HAVE AND YOU WILL KNOW WHO IS TRUTHFUL AND WHO ISN’T.

By: MAMAWS3ANGELS

MAMAWS3ANGELS — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 20:18:11 +0000

I’m baaaack. You mention services that the “poor” people can take advantage of and that perhaps DCS refers them to. In what world? It does state in the Policies and Procedures here in Tennessee that DCS is “supposed” to do this, but they don’t! They are supposed to offer services in the home to help teach mom how to clean house or if she has had parenting classes and still has problems with behavior, someone can come into her home and help with these. The biggest one is that DCS IS SUPPOSED TO DO ALLL THEY CAN TO KEEP A CHILD FROM BEING PLACED INTO FOSTER CARE! This includes finding family members, kin, or even a neighbor who has been an integral part of a child’s life to have custody, instead of putting them in foster care. This did not happen in our case. Our case was in Morristown and maybe they do it different, maybe it makes a difference in personnel and their frame of reference and how they [erceive their clients. It is an area of great poverty, so they should be accustomed to it unless they feel these people should try harder or get out of poverty somehow.
But, to show some of the inconsistencies, my sister was just given custody of her EX-HUSBAND’S GRANDSON, because they called the grandfather, the mother, the grandmother and nobody would take him. His father has had full custody of him for 8 years and is now a drug addict. I thought this only happened in an ideal world. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s wonderful to know there is or are some DCS offices that try to adhere to their own rules, this move was done right and it will be in this child’s best interest for my sister to raise him. I only regret we weren’t given this opportunity and that we will probably always suffer in some way because of the ill treatment we received.
We took our daughter out of the system for the sole purpose of “breaking the mold”, or so we thought. We were upper-middle class and wanted to make a difference in her life, give her opportunities she would not have otherwise had. She was into everything, took voice lesons, played the flute, etc., etc., a wonderful daughter growing up and she was registered to attend college in the Fall after high school graduation, but the condition of Bi-Polar reared it’s ugly head, she got married at 19, in 10 months gave birth to my first grandson, and the rest is history. This would disprove the theory that some continue to live in poverty because they choose to do so. Some suffer from inherited mental illness that goes on and on generation after generation. My daughter is exactly like her birth mom, with one exception, me and my husband. We have been a safety net, cheerleader, supporter. But, we are finished and she is on her own now at age 32 and she can either make it or break it, but not because she “wants” to, but because se has a mental illness and we have done all we know to do to help her deal with and hopefully learn to overcome the part of not wanting to take her meds because of the consequences, her children will be gone. I was the oldest of 7 and we were poor. We never lived on SSI or food stamps, but I didn’t want to be poor myself when I grew up, so I broke my own mold, most all 7 of us has in our own way. None of us have children. lol That’s not the reason, I don’t think. I have sometimes wondered if adopting was the right thing to do, knowing now of all the trauma and stress of the last 7 or so years. Except for the grandchildren I would say no, I wouldn’t do it again. Now, maybe we can break the mold with them? I pray so.

By: Jeanne

Jeanne — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 06:36:55 +0000

Not to mention that the removal of a child from his/her family releases lots of federal funds…

This allows DCYF to engage companies and individuals and agencies to be sole providers for DCYF “services.” I am shocked and sickened that I was called “most uncooperative” for not signing forms stating that I would receive a service very different from that proposed. When I questioned a bill of $1500 for less than 10hours of “supervised visits,” I was told that the agency had to bill that way or the state would not pay…..hmmmmm…sounds like fraud to me…

By: Greg Hanson

Greg Hanson — Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:00:52 +0000

You say that your Child Protection agency
doesn’t pick on the poor?

Do you have some official statistics to back
up your presentation?

AFCARS or NCANDS will show what your state
is reporting to the FEDS for their grant money.

But wait! ABUSE on the national stats doesn’t
mean actual abuse, it just means “risk of abuse”.
Look at the national stats definition of the
categories. Most of the kids counted as
abused were NOT abused, but “at risk of”.

Similar garbage is done with the “neglect” category.

And the agencies screw up BOTH ways.
They overlook obviously dangerous situations AND
they remove THOUSANDS of kids over trivia.

But, then, you’d KNOW THAT since you work
at your state’s agency, right?

Have you read your state Child Protection
caseworker manual? How thick is it?
Is your states two feet thick in printed form?

Who wrote the “risk assessment” form
you use in investigations there?
Do you make the “idiot sheet” scorecard
available to the public?

Let the PUBLIC see those idiotic items
you check off as “risk factors” to decide
if a family is “at risk” which means FUNDING
for your agency.
How many points does it take to decide
somebody is guilty?
How many places on the form are there
for OVERRIDES?

Look at that list of “risk factors”
and tell me your agency doesn’t pick
on the poor.

Greg Hanson
Cedar Rapids Iowa
Greegor@hotmail.com

By: cheryl mitchell

cheryl mitchell — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 00:56:52 +0000

I have a situation in that the dad has custody or well did of his 2 children. because of half truths on the mothers part he was not only thrown in jail for the night and a large bail but now he has lost his children. They have put the cart before the horse and there is alot more where this came from. I just do not feel comfortable stating so on the computer. He has had his children for 1 1/2 years now as she gave them up to him and the court stated he had physical sole custody. Now that is not the case and he has definitely been tried and convicted before he has had a chance to tell anyone about anything. His children are gone and he feels he has no rights and what rights he had have been violated in some way. We can not retain an attorney as it is at least 2-3 thousand dollar retainer! we have though contacted the Franklin Pierce College of Law hoping we can get a class of to be lawyers to take our case. Do you have any other suggestions?
I also looked into resources and all of them on fathers rights are just men voicing their horrible tragedys with the system. There seems to be no advocates you can get advice from of numbers you can call for help! However there is alot of info on women issues on this. thank you

By: Debi

Debi — Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:01:36 +0000

Many of these poor people include those that are mentally ill and stabilized by medication. It seems that DCYF feels that they have the right to pick on you if you cannot defend yourself.

By: Debi

Debi — Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:19:44 +0000

DCYF is more apt to get cooperation out of someone who is low income or “down on their luck” because they promise these families things they could not necessarily get or afford on their own.

How else could DCYF get a parent to go into their
office willingly for an interview. Does one honestly think that a wealthy or rich parent would be making a trip to DCYF? I personally would send Paula Werme, Esquire in my place instead.