Friday, August 23, 2013

CHILD PROTECTION RETALIATION

I was just visiting a support group for people who are advocating for victims of CPS.  They often mention that child protection services will retaliate. I was not quite sure what that was about until I read more examples.

According to the group, Retaliation is usually acted out on people who are in support of the parent or people who get in the way of their illegal adoptions of children who are not abused. In some cases family and friends of the parent have had their children taken away based on fabricated allegations.  Not in this case however 2 people have been victimized. The county denies a grandmother visitation and has a teacher breaking the law to prevent children from being signed up to head start.

I can present to you how the people who have shown support to the mother have experienced retaliation by Le Sueur County Child protection services. Supported by the Supervisor of Sally Schroer and head of Human services Sue Rynda.

In April 2013 before court GH's four year old was hit in the face in foster care. The blow to his  face split his mouth open and he was eating nothing but broth in school. His visit with his mom was cut short because of poor scheduling by Sally Schroer. When the four year old became aware he was not going to get a full visit with his mom he started crying and screaming running towards her and he fell in the parking lot running toward her reopenining his split lip getting blood all over his mom as she tried to comfort him.

The following day mom wants to document the injury to her sons mouth because this is now the second large injury to her sons face in foster care. Because Sally Schroer cut services forcing mom in to homelessness she was displaced to another town. She does not drive so she asked her former neighbor if she would go to head start and photograph the injury. She agreed and asked mom to get a police escort so there will be no problems.

Mom calls the school and the police department. The school Tri City United head start teacher called Sally Schroer asking her if the mother can document the abuse. Sally told the teacher to break the law and block the mothers legal right. Sally then had the police officer call the mother and tell her she will be losing her rights tomorrow so he does not care about her rights.

Months later the neighbor who was going to document the four year olds injury for the mother was kicked out of the headstart building when she went their to sign her child up for school......

Sally Schroer documents in her chronology report that the neighbor was kicked out of the school in the event she was spying to information about the mothers four year old son.

Please remember THE CHILD WAS REMOVED FOR BEING LEFT ALONE FOR 15 MINUTES.  According to all the specialists a parenting class is all she needed. She was zero risk to abuse she kept a clean house she had plenty of food the kids were clean and they had plenty of clean clothes.

Why does Sally Schroer have teachers breaking laws to keep her from documenting the now 2nd big  injury her son has incurred in a home Sally Schroer placed him in.

We know a former neighbors child to GH could not be signed up in headstart because Schroer was trying to punnish anyone who was exposing her for brokering out children to childless couples.

AB it is my understanding thought the mother was just being defensive and not willing to take responsibility for her actions. It would be a common reaction she thought. Plus she knows CB blames everyone else for the things he does never taking responsibility. AB just blows them off when they complaign that they know that Sally Schroer has brokered the children out to a childless couple and she will keep getting rid oof the mother to supply the demand for children to the childless couple.

When CB and GH go homeless something did not seem right with that? AB is in school to be certified for Human services and allowing the mother to go homeless when she is not allowed time to work is reckless on the social workers part. AB knows Schroer should have been offering mom services so she did not endupo alone on the street in the middle of February with no money or phone but schroer documents how she sees it as a good thing in her chronology report.

AB ends up with a penniless dirty, hungry, frozen, homeless GH on her door step. AB was not able to stay involved when her younger brother went in to a coma and then needed surgery following the recovery of her brother. GH went homeless right at the end of AB recovering from surgery and AB believed this was most likely still the fault of GH untill........ GH's four year old son has his mouth split open in foster care. GH returns to the home of AB right after a visit. GH is very upset and explains her son has a split open mouth. She wants the child to see a doctor. AB said thats fine it should be no problem just text the case worker and tell her. She can work with you to make that happen.

AB has an expectation of What Schroer will do based on her schooling and how she was educated to believe what a case worker should do with this type of situation..

AB says she is horrified by the gross disrespect the case worker dealt to the worried mother. Sally Schroer replied to the request to have her sons lip be seen by a doctor with; I am in the process of terminating your rights and we have court in two days so I do not want to talk to you until after court.

GH looks upset by the workers responce and AB asks what is wrong and she reads back what Sally wrote.  AB said you have to of misunderstood let me see...Sure enough the mothers request was regarded as garbage and dismissed.

AB texted Schroer and said this is AB. GH wants her son to see a doctor tomorrow thank you.
Schroer responds to the mothers phone he will be seen by the doctor tomorrow.

AB reads Schroers account of the Dr appointment that she submitted to the judge to find it full of lies. She did not document treating the mother like garbage asking a head start teacher to break the law. Now AB knows this lady has been using emotional violence on a trauma survivor to prevent her from getting her kids back. She is perjuring herself.

So far the only violent person here is the case worker. The teacher has broken the law and if the four year old is being abused she helped the case worker cover it up by breaking the law. Of course the case worker will scramble to cover her tracks especially this one. How do you all feel knowing a headstart teacher would cover up abuse of a child by breaking the law per request of a social worker who is also breaking the law.

AB takes it to the supervisor Schroer has discriminated against GH and refuses to talk to AB once she starts answering questions. Shortly after AB is banned from a building funded by tax payer dollars for being concerned about the well being of the mother and children involved.

AB is banned for 5 months now 6 from seeing the kids and told by an ambudsman that schroer has accused AB of fighting the system.  AB is using Minnesota and federal  laws. Minnesota child protection guide lines which Sally schroer says is fighting the system???????? Now AB has to go back to class the county is denying visitation not on the grounds that AB is a safety risk but because she believed the mother was being abused. ??? that violates everything about keeping family involved.,

HEAD OF HUMAN SERVICES IS INVOLVED IN THE RETALIATION I HAVE THE LETTER SITTING IN FRONT OF ME. JUDGE M MICHEL BAXTER. MEGAN GAUDETTE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY TELLS SCHROER TO LEGALLY DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THE MOTHER BY NOT HONORING FAMILY AND RELEASES THAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE INTITLED TO.

I JUST RECEIVED A LETTER RESPONDING TO MY LETTER TO SENATE MEMBERS.

THEY WRITE; AS FOR YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST I BELIEVE IT IS IMPORTANT A JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION GO IN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THAT IS NOT APPROPRIATE.