Comments on: Werme Tricks – Picking On Neglectful Parents

By: unkown

unkown — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 14:11:35 +0000

dealing with dcyf let my oldest daughter be interviewed on video at a place while several people watched. got a pamphlet there about my rights didnt get to read it till after the whole process. The police are not charging ex with anything. Dcyf came to house i let them bastards in shouldnt have. Tricks of the trades were definatly used in my situation. They wanted to interview my youngest child i told her i had no problem with that at all but i wanted to be in the room she stated that that was concerning to her that i wouldnt let her do it alone and why would i let my oldest go and be interviewed with one person i told her she was video taped during the process and there were seven other people wathcing it. She stated statistics showed that childern do not speak in front of there parents making me feel like i was going to checks next to my name for not cowoperating. I then stated i have an idea if your telling me that its better to do it alone with me out of the room i have a video camra and i will set it up on the table and she can do it. Wouldnt you know she stated that she could not do that as they need to take a copy with them for evidence wouldnt you know i had two video camras and was willinhg for her to take a copy. then she got on the phone and spoke with her supervisor and they told her to say its because they get rid of all evidence after the case is closed. i also asked for copys of my case file as i read in the brochure and she said i cant have them until so many days after it is closed how the hell is anyone supposed to protect them selves against anything being used against them while a case is going on. Oh then she basicall threatened me with i can do whatever i want i can go to your daughters school and interview her there if i want..

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:36:43 +0000

I actually read part of your blog. I have recently had my daughter placed with my ex husband due to what is claimed to be “neglect” I never have recieved any type of pamphlets from any DCYF worker explaining any of my rights at all… perhaps all workers should be on the same page regarding the information provided to a parent. It’s horrible enough having to worry about your children going through this horrible process and ordeal never mind having to navigate the red tape as a parent.

By: Paul javaruski

Paul javaruski — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 02:11:34 +0000

Hi paula good site, Im currently under investigation for my son noah having a scratch on his back . I let them in my home and they interviewed all three sons in seperate rooms on tape recorder upon my approval before my friend lauri henderson told me of your site unfortunately . tHE COMPLAINT WAS ONLY FILED ON NOAH . And he supposbly told them two stories he is 7 one that dad rubbed him up against a wall and then that granma hit him . 3 yrs ago my wife died of cancer leaving me with our three sons noah 7 paul 14 and mason 4. DCYF tried toget me to sign the medical release forms i said i needed to speak with some people The girl young there were three of them the two couldnt have been over 20 and the boss maybe 30.Then said well ill mail you a envelope to make it easier for you so just sign them and mail that right back to me . I said no ill be in ports tomorrow ill drop them off , she said no no just send them in ok I said no im going to be in the area ill drop them off she said im trying to make it easier for you . I said thank you but ill drop them off . I read your site thank God and dropped them off unsigned and thanked them for visiting and then i filled out a request for coopy of report . The next day my older son said they were at the school talking to his the oldest s teachers .What do you think of there strategy to get me to sign by mailing me the envelope ?

By: Paula Werme

Paula Werme — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:47:06 +0000

I will add one thing here. A friend whose brother recently was convicted of shaking a baby to death sent me a May 2004 Michigan Bar Journal article where research is cited stating that there is no scientific evidence that Shaken Baby Syndrome is a real phenomenon. It is titled “Junk Science in SBS (Shaken Baby Syndrome) and Child Head/Brain Injuries.” Courts are starting to exclude the testimony of the so-called “experts” in these cases. What about these “proven” cases? I know for a fact that our own state medical examiner considers himself an expert in child abuse and is willing to testify in child abuse cases as an “expert.” I bet he can’t prove any more scientific evidence pointing to SBS as a real phenomenon himself.

If anyone is interested in a copy of the article, I have it on my computer. Contact me at paulawnospam@werme.8m.net Delete the “nospam”.

By: Louise Uccio

Louise Uccio — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:21:05 +0000

Let me ask you this?

Now that they (A panel of State Experts on Staten Island NY recently)have openly admitted that our children have had dollar signs on thier forheads via Government funding to States for the amt of children in Foster Care and children sucessfully adopted aka incentives to find parents guilty of abuse so the money keeps flowing in, can you honestly sit there and say only real abuse cases move foward?

If you can, then I have this bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell, are you interested?

I’ll sell it for a dollar!

Wake up and smell the coffee

By: Barbara Townley

Barbara Townley — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 18:12:41 +0000

I noticed that any report of abuse-not necessarily from the child-is considered reason to separate the father from the family. Then it is stated that if a mother chooses to believe the father over the child. Tht is one situation. It is quite another if the mother believes her husband over some anonymous caller who has made accusations. And if the caller remains anonymous then there is no way for the accused to show prejudice and ill will on the part of the caller. One lone call from an anknown person is sufficient to separate a family? Can anyone really believe that is fair, right or decent?

By: Sandra

Sandra — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:35:08 +0000

You say you follow the letter of the law. But the law says all citizens have the right to due process. You say that you do not file neglect charges unless neglect is proven. Proven by whose standards? It seems that if it is your opinion then it is proven as far as you and the courts are concerned. If children are only removed in cases of proven neglect then why am I advocating for so many families where the abuse or neglect has no basis in fact? Do you really have any idea of how many children are in foster care based on false allegations that are unfounded? If your allegations of neglect and abuse are proven then why do so many police and investigative reports declare the allegations unfounded yet the children remain in foster care? How many children who have been in the system or aged out of the system have you spoken with? I have spoken to many. When ask who caused the destruction in their lives they point the finger not at the falsly accused parent but at the system that destroyed their families. You submit your definitions of abuse and neglect as if we are to uneducated to fully understand what these things are. Let me tell you that we do fully understand. We understand what abuse is everytime we hear of a child dieing from abuse and or neglect while in foster care. We understand abuse in its most horrendous form when our children are stripped from our loving arms and sold to the highest bidder for the sake of federal funding. In your comments you refer to the agencies in the WE context. You are speaking of the agencies as if this is some sisterhood that you must defend. Maybe you play by the rules but I can assure you that not all child protective agencies and their empolyees play by those same rules. I would like answers, do you have them? Why does a large amount of unsubstantiated cases result with children still in foster care? If the case is substantiated then why were their no legal ramifications such as trial and sentencing? Why are a large percent of the children raised in foster care highly dysfunctional and report serious abuse at the hands of the fosterers and other children? If these children are so much better off in foster care then why does the agencies deem it necessary to medicate these children into submission? How much reasearch have you done on the other side of this issue? From your comments I suspect very little to none!!!

By: Jane Martin

Jane Martin — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 00:12:50 +0000

The following comments are directed towards the first post from “sarah”.

First you say – “DCYF would first look to this girl’s mother to protect her from future abuse. We generally ask that the alleged victim not have contact with the alleged perpetrator until we are able to interview the child (usually the same day, or the following day).

In one sentence you use the term “to protect her from future abuse”. The next sentence you use the term “alleged victim”. If you are as well versed in these terms as you proport to be than certainly you must realize that there is a vast difference between alleged and being proven guilty in a court of law, unless of course you are inferring that DCYF is exempt from that standard? Correct me if I’m wrong here, but the last time I checked there was a legal supposition in this country of innocent UNTIL proven guilty.

You go on to say – “If our investigation turns up evidence that this allegation might be true, then we would ask this girl’s mother to continue protecting her daughter”.

So in other words, even before you have proven this allegation to be true you are requiring that the family be broken apart to “save” the child from what boils down to nothing more than what may be a he said, she said situation. If the parents refuse to split apart to “protect” the child from future (as yet unproven) abuse then the DCYF will step in and charge the mother with neglect because she did not agree to the validity of the allegation. So in other words she either agrees with your assessment or she loses her child too. Sounds like Due Process to me!

You know what the bottom line here is…..if the DCYF is so sure that they possess adequate evidence that abuse has in fact occurred, than why are they so opposed to having parents zealously represented? Oh, and one other question, if there is so much physical abuse going on in this country why are the prosecution rates only at 32%????? Any thoughts?

By: Paula Werme

Paula Werme — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 20:25:07 +0000

Roger – you fail to mention that you attempted to alienate this child from her father’s affections two years before DCYF involvement – don’t worry – we’ll get to that in trial. I consider your “values” to be in the toilet if you think this is acceptable. How’s it that you want guardianship because this child desperately wants to be baptized Catholic, yet you list your religion on your foster care app as “lapsed Catholic.” You ought to be excommunicated.

There is NO reason why this child should not be with her father. He’s no more unfit than you, and really cosiderably more fit since you’re so arrogant that you think you have the right to do what you did.

By: roger royer

roger royer — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 14:53:05 +0000

In dealing with Ms Werme I have found that her interest are more selfish then a genuine concern for the parents she claims to represent, certainly the children who are the ones to suffer the most and the foster parents who give of themseleves. The court appoints a casa worker who works for the well being of the child independent from both the birth parents and dcyf.In my experience they do great job! The only mission Ms. Werme is engaged in that of self promotion. While we all recognize the shortcomings of the state run departments most are well run and staffed by people who genuinly care. They work long hours and could probaly fimd other profssions were they would be better compensated. They do their job because they feel stongly about what they do. Ms. Werme should spend more time dealing with why these children have been removed before taking on a case for a wrongly accused parents. At the end of the day the mission is the children those who seldom have a voice. Shame on Paula Werme for using a segment of our society that can not defend themselves and need to rely on others!