Can those phone calls and letters to our state and federal leaders make a difference? The hard work paid off in Texas.

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news151.htm

SWEET VICTORY: TEXAS GOVERNOR VETOES

“TAKE AWAY YOUR CHILD ACT”

 

By Sarah Foster
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
June 24, 2009
© 2009 NewsWithViews.com

AUSTIN – In a move that has parents and children’s rights advocates cheering, Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Friday vetoed

Senate Bill 1440, a contentious measure designed to make it easier for the state Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) to remove children forcibly from their homes for interrogation and examination during investigations of alleged child abuse or neglect.

In his veto statement the governor said the bill “overreaches and may not give due consideration to the Fourth Amendment rights of a parent or guardian.”

The governor’s action was the result of an intense veto campaign spearheaded by the Parent Guidance Center, an Austin-based grassroots organization that helps low- and middle-income families caught in the snares of the state’s child welfare and protection systems.

Launched by PGC co-founders Johana Scot and her sister Judy Powell as soon as the bill was passed on May 30, the three-week campaign mobilized an opposition that cut across political lines, generating 17,373 letters and phone calls to the governor’s office from concerned Texans and their sympathizers across the country, according to spokeswoman Allison Castle.

That count does not include the thousands of messages sent to state lawmakers who had voted for the bill in the first place, asking them to contact the governor and urge a veto.

There were 455 messages in support of the measure, requesting the governor to sign.

“A Collective Sigh of Relief”

 

Among those urging a veto was Republican Rep. Jerry Madden, who had sponsored SB 1440 in the House after it passed the Senate. In the final days of the legislative session Madden agreed to attach another bill – SB 1064 – as an amendment to SB 1440 a non-controversial, unopposed measure that had been placed on the Local and Consent calendar for automatic passage.

SB 1064 was one of dozens of measures that died on the calendar when time for debate ran out. Madden was assured by Democratic Rep. Patrick Rose, chairman of the House Human Services Committee, that like SB 1440 the bill was non-controversial and unopposed.

A written statement of opposition submitted by Judy Powell – communications director for PCG — had disappeared.

When Madden later learned that SB 1064 was anything but non-controversial, was not unopposed, and radically changed SB 1440, he e-mailed Tim Lambert – president of the Texas Home School Coalition – apologizing for his role in the fiasco:

“I would not have taken[n] any amendment to SB 1440 if I thought it in any way endangered the original contents of the bill,” Madden wrote. “We did not catch the fact the bill had changed significantly from the Senate passed version and that is our fault. As always I appreciate you and your work and expect the bill to be vetoed.”

Madden followed his e-mail to Lambert with a letter to the governor urging a veto.

Disappointed supporters – which included news reporters – insist the bill was intended merely to “clarify” rules on court hearings and criteria DFPS agents must meet to enter a house, remove a child, or review a child’s medical records, and that it didn’t grant the CPS additional authority.

“In simple terms, [SB 1440] clarifies the process for DFPS to obtain a court order that can aid in investigation of child abuse and neglect,” said Tina Amberboy, executive director for the Supreme Court Permanent Judicial Commission for Children, Youth and Families – as reported by The Facts, a Brazoria County newspaper.

“The current statute allows DFPS to obtain an order, but the statute is vague with regard to how an investigator actually goes about getting the order,” she said.

Two Court Rulings

 

The first case involved the infamous DFPS raid on the West Texas ranch owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) and the seizing of over 400 children. The Texas Supreme Court ruled that the “removal of the children was not warranted,” and upheld a lower court decision that the department had violated various state laws and not made “reasonable efforts to eliminate or prevent the removal of the … children.”

The second was that of Gary and Melissa Gates, whose 13 children had been removed from their home by CPS without a court hearing or probable cause. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that the law “was not clearly established” and should be clarified – particularly with reference to the Fourth Amendment protections — and that’s what it did. The Court concluded:

“… now that we have clearly established the law in this area, we expect that TDPRS, law enforcement agencies, and their agents and employees will abide by these constitutional rules and seek to involve the courts, who act as neutral magistrates in these complicated matters, as early in the process as is practicable.”

[NOTE: Texas Dept. of Protective Regulatory Services (TDPRS) was the name of the Dept. of Family and Protective Services when the Gates case began.]

Responding to the rulings, DFPS made significant changes in procedures. A legal advisory memo – sent out to the staff shortly after the Gates’ decision was handed down — shows that DFPS officials understood perfectly what they had to do (and could no longer do) and did not think the ruling was vague or needed clarification.

The decision “sets out a new standard that will require DFPS to obtain a court order prior to removal in a much larger proportion of our cases and affects whether we can transport or enter a home” and also “clarifies” that if this standard is not followed, staffers could be sued as individuals and lose qualified immunity.

DFPS’ Remarkable Job

That was just the beginning. A year later, in her call for a veto posted on the PCG website, Johana Scot noted approvingly:

“The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) in turn did a remarkable job after these rulings by changing, adjusting, re-educating, and clarifying their Policies and Procedures Hand-Book and employees knowledge so that these rulings would be upheld and their work in investigations and with families could be improved. DFPS was on the right track and they were getting the message!”

SB 1440 — would have placed “all that work in jeopardy as well as the efforts by DFPS to rectify how they are supposed to protect children and help families,” she wrote.

Gov. Perry chose to veto SB 1440 so that was stopped – but in his veto message he said he’d be directing DFPS though its parental advisory committee, “To develop and recommend statewide procedures to follow when seeking court orders to aid investigations, while protecting the rights of parents and families” – which is already being done.

 

A Smigen of Victory

Commenting on the veto Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, called it “Very good news for Texas children” – because it’s the children who are most hurt by CPS policies that forcibly remove them from their families and subject them to intrusive questioning and examination.

“The problem with the bill is what it would have done to the Fourth Amendment rights of children,” Wexler writes.

“But there are limits to this victory. I said in a previous post that the bill effectively reduced the amount of evidence needed for CPS to enter a home from a smidgen to a tenth of a smidgen.

“Now, if we can just increase the standard to, say, two or three smidgens,” he said.

Earlier Story

Sarah Foster: Coalition Asks Texas Governor to Veto “Take Away Your Child Act”: June 18, 2009

 

I was talking to another alienated child who is now an adult and her story was horrific.  She went through the battle of alienation as a child. Her mother turned her against her father at an early age. She like I lived in constant fear but now like so many others deals with this as an adult with her own children.  It seems to be a constant cycle of abuse that lasts a lifetime.  Children learn what they see and for some of us we get caught up in making our own bad decisions. These circumstances turn into bad choices for mates in our futures.

This woman who reached out for help left an abusive relationship.  Her worst fear came to light when the family that once hated her ex for years of abuse turned their back on her. She left and they all seemed happy about the break- up. It was a fresh start and a chance to gain back a life that was desolate and left with despair. The problem is like so many of us without our children, that her family went and fell trap to the alienator lies and fantasy world of “change”.  The parent in question helps the ex and suggests ideas to the children about the present relationship they are in.  They impose their own past relationship of alienation and abuse with the grandchild.  They bring fear into the child and leave them more confused and withdrawn.  The turmoil this brings to a child is horrible.  You would think as an adult they would know better but selfishness gets in the way.

I felt horrible for this woman that her own family who have lived through this and our educated in this have switched to the dark side. I asked her if her parent was living through them not to lose contact from their grandchild. Maybe this is the case maybe not.  

So what do we do when we are a fit parent and the odds are stacked against us?  Do we grin and bear it?  No because at some point in time the truth becomes real. People expose themselves in these matters and the narcissistic behavior becomes apparent. Keep doing what makes you feel that you can get through the day.  We know the truth no one else has had to live with the alienator but us. If your family member gets in the way of your relationship with your children know that they will surely hang themselves. A child does not develop the “independent thinker” theory on their own. It is a strategy that is forced on them without knowledge. Alienators come across to the world as a victim, one who will act out a role in a movie.  An alienator thinks with selfishness and uses their own thoughts and imposes them to the child. Who will break the cycle; in this case the grandparent’s keep the alienation in the family.

 

 

‘Deprogramming’ alienated children is science fiction

He said …She said…

Below is the video posted of the child and her statements about her father.

Today a comment was made by a viewer of the site referring me to the case of Bedwell V Thompson. I have spent the past few hours researching this case that has become a whirlwind of fascination. In the world of parental rights and advocacy I have seen and heard many unusual cases, this case is really not one out of the ordinary.

A video that was edited for time exposes the statements made by the 2 and a half year old daughter. She repeats the same wording over and over. It is horrific in nature and hard to view. But is it evidence or another nasty divorce case with the child as the trophy?

Many of the parents in the system are already aware of the underlining corruption of the family court system but in this case there really isn’t hard core evidence. I have seen mothers and fathers abuse the system to obtain custody. In one interview with Connie Bedwell, she made a statement that she obtained a PPO and that week her daughter starting implying abuse was happening from her father, Dustin Thompson.

The system believes she is making up the allegations, in return Connie says it’s because the system is corrupt and has not followed through on procedures. She also states that her ex’s family has close friendships with the judicial community. I will update this blog with more news when I can obtain valuable evidence. This is a sad day when we are at a loss on what is truth. It is another case of he said… she said. The truth of this case is someone is lying and either way the child loses. Either way injustice is continuing to make headlines.

Is this case the result of an adversarial court system where parents are pushed to the limit to gain custody or something else? In some cases there is abuse and until we know all the facts we can’t judge either way. The final result we all know to be truth is in some way this child has injustice in their life.

 

 

 

This is one of the video’s with a interview with Connie Bedwell

 

Below you will find a letter from the child’s therapist Mitzi Nay. In this letter it states that the mom is present in ALL 13 sessions.

 Mitzi will also be interviewed on blog talk radio with Sean McAllister on June 13th at 1pm EST.

~ It has been brought to my attention that Ms. Nay was not a guest on the show and their was no plans for her to be on the show. I read the blog incorrectly. Sorry for any confusion and retract the statement.

I had the chance to read this article and agree with some of the statements but not all. Yes, one must accept the fact that the ex daughter in law will not see her son in the same fashion. If the situation can be as easy as a lunch outing that is great. Most of the parents and grandparents do not have it so easy. The deadly words came out here “At one point, I told the mother that it wasn’t right that she not let the child see his father and the boy’s time with me ended – in fact – she called the police.”

 

Parents that behave this way only cooperate with others who have the same vision.  The statement made that parents really believe this is in the best interest of the child also does not follow the severe guidelines of Parental Alienation. A great number of parents who participate in withholding a child from a fit parent pursue revenge. The child becomes the trophy in a battle of pain and anguish. The family unit is abandoned to a higher calling of one person’s action of self worth. Grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, and in some cases siblings will be left holding their hands in the air asking why is this happening?

 

What is the opinion of the public on this?

 

Barbara Burrows, Special to The Windsor Star

Published: Thursday, May 14, 2009

Dear Barbara: I’ve been following the discussion on PAS (Parental Alienation Syndrome) and would like to tell you about my son’s child – who is forbidden access to his father by the mother – a women my son was never married to. I know of others with similar situations.

For awhile, I was on good terms with the mother who allowed the boy to come to spend two days/week with me and he had a good relationship with me and my daughter.

My son is a good person, gainfully employed, pays child support and has friends. It breaks our hearts that he can’t see his son.

 

At one point, I told the mother that it wasn’t right that she not let the child see his father and the boy’s time with me ended – in fact – she called the police.

My husband and I have sent e-mails, cards for special occasions etc. – but there is no response at all.

There are a whole group of children who are suffering because one parent has control and keeps the child from the other. Grandparents have no rights in Ontario.

I realize that this is not a black and white issue, but as desperate as the parents are, it is the children who need help.

Have you any suggestions?

 

Dear Grandmother: You must be feeling very helpless.

What comes to my mind is that there was a time that your grandson’s mother felt comfortable enough to let you spend time with him.

My thinking is that you may be able to rekindle that positive connection if you can figure out how you were able to establish it in the first place. My guess is that you somehow were able to put aside your hurt, critical feeling and likely anger towards the boy’s mother and maintain some neutral, low-key civility.

Mothers are usually intensely protective of their children and this is where situations can get out of hand. For some reason, they become extra sensitive and perceive that the father is a negative influence.

I suppose it is possible that parents intentionally withhold the children to punish the other, but my experience has been the withholding parent truly believes it is in the child’s best interest – in fact – that the child needs protecting from something in the other parent. This is often a distortion – but the overprotective parent cannot see it.

This mother will never see your son as you do – simply accept that – and see what you might need to do to secure her trust so that you may have an opportunity to continue to build a relationship with the boy.

I believe you will have to call her directly and say you are missing the boy very much and ask if you could please come and talk with her.

You need to find a way to find out what has upset her and see how this can be resolved so you can resume your relationship with this child. Perhaps inviting her out for lunch or coffee – into neutral territory might help the discussion.

If you can build a bridge to your family, the chances of your son connecting with his son will be much greater.

Barbara Burrows is a psychotherapist who works with a group of professional advisers to address the questions sent to her by concerned parents. Her column appears Thursdays. Questions or comments can be sent to barbaraburrows@cogeco.ca. Visit her website www.barbaraburrows.com

© T