Friday, August 30, 2013

Minnesota Child Protection Practice Model

This is from 
Minnesota Child Protection Practice Model



I SCREAM ,  CRY  AND ARCH MY BACK IN THE CAR SEAT SO THEY CANT STRAP ME IN TO STOP THEM FROM TAKING ME AWAY FROM MY MOMMY AT THE END OF MY 4 HOUR A WEEK VISIT 
MY BROTHERS TELL MOMMY PLEASE I DON'T WANT TO GO


Communication:
Effectively sending and receiving information within the appropriate cultural context. Methods include verbal, non-verbal, electronic and written communication. Child protection should accommodate for A variety of ways to allow for effective communication.

LE SUEUR COUNTY ON THE OTHER HAND HANDLES COMMUNICATION LIKE THIS:
AB is informed by the caseworker Sally Schroer that she is never to speak to her again. What would prompt such a response? The four year old of GH had his mouth busted open when he was hit in the face by a ball thrown by a 13 yr old in foster care. When mom has a off schedule visit due to an appointment the 4 year old has a therapy apt at the same time. When the 4 year old realizes he will have a short visit with his mom he runs screaming and crying to his mother and falls reopening the wound in his mouth. When mom gets home she tells AB what happened. AB said just text the worker and tell her you want him to see the doctor its an easy fix. Mom texts the worker letting her know she wants her son to see the doctor. Mom receives a response from the caseworker; it is best we not talk until after court in two days.  GH is upset by the response and AB does not understand how something like that could go poorly. GH tells AB what the case worker's reply was. AB says let me see you must of misunderstood. A case worker would not respond that way. GH shows AB and sure enough Sally Schroer responds to the mother's request for her son see a doctor, with we have court in two days I think it best we do not speak until after court. 

This is an example of Le Sueur County Caseworker's effective communication that is offered to a mother whose children have been taken by the county. 

AB texts the worker and says a child under your authority was injured in foster care the mother wants him to see a doctor thank you.  


Schroer responds for your information I was informed of the injury earlier today.
Schroer has texting and phone communication capabilities with the mother and never informs the mother of the child that her 4 year old had his mouth busted open in foster care.
Also another example of effective communication

 I already made an appointment for him tomorrow and  this is abuse of a personal phone line and to never contact her again. If you need to talk to someone contact my supervisor Lowell Freeman.....
Also another example of effective communication to the grandmother of the children she has taken custody of. 

Schroer never tells the mom when and where she needs to be for the doctor's appointment.
Once the appointment is over Sally Schroer never contacts the mother to let her know what the doctor said
Mom texts Sally Schroer asking what happened
Schroer responds happy as a clam this morning follow up as required


AB texts Sally Schroer back from GH's phone for GH and asks the worker to please  explain further?
Schroer responds I think its best we do not talk until after court.
Also another example of effective communication

Mom calls the DR who will not elaborate on what follow up as required means, because the DR cannot verify its mom over the phone. The physician is in Montgomery and mom is in Faribault without transportation.

GH finds out 2 days later the day of court what actually happened in a letter to the judge. AB notices right away the social worker is submitting fraudulent events in her documentation. AB witnessed all of the correspondence that took place.  The documentation is setup to make a mother look like a liar.

AB called Sue Rynda HEAD of human services and asked for the complaint process because one of her employees had been submitting fraudulent information in her documentation to the judge, plus a number of other things that work against the reunification process of the mother with her children.

Sue Rynda responds by cutting all forms of communication for AB with the exception of one. She will be required to purchase stamps and forced to use a system that will delay correspondence up to three days.
example of effective communication

Threats So many Threats why


AB just got off the phone with the drug treatment counselor who told AB if you show up for that meeting then Sally Schroer has said she will not attend. She will go down to the judge and lie to him by saying GH is refusing to work with human services. Then GH never sees her kids again.

AB sent an email to the social worker, and Lawyer after receiving the threat Sally Schroer made as an attempt to control AB by hurting someone she cared about. If AB did not do as she was told by Sally Schroer that was the price she would pay. AB sent an email to  let Sally Schroer know that the kind of threat she made to control what AB did is seriously inappropriate, and NEEDS to stop and that her conduct has been documented.  


Sally Schroer responds with an additional threat; If you contact me again I will press a harassment charges on you??? Sally has spent quite a bit of time controlling people with threats and when she meets someone who points it out she still cannot stop trying to control the person with threats.
example of effective communication

Suddenly Lowell Freeman is saying my lawyer Megan Gaudette is telling me I am not allowed to talk to you ? despite the signed release. Lowell freeman is not the only person who Gaudette tells to not speak with AB. Gaudette tells everyone in Child protection and Shari Solheim to have no contact with AB.  
example of effective communication

 AB writes in her journal that she struggles to wrap her head around all of this guilty behavior pouring out of a child protection department and is in constant disbelief and awe struck by the county employees behavior!  AB knows how important family support is in these issues and any positive support is an asset for a caseworker. Yet this county is given supporting evidence that the social worker is unfit to help this mother and blocks the concerned family member rather than replace her. 
  

AB called to see why there WAS a problem with her attending the meeting if it helped the mom. AB was transferred to Shari Solheim. Shari picks up the phone AB explains she would only like to be there for support to help mom through because Schroer has become a trigger for mom. Shari says who is this and AB responds responds AB. Shari says I am not allowed to talk to you and hangs up????? 
example of effective communication

The letters sent by HEAD OF HUMAN SERVICE SUSAN RYNDA AND ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY MEGAN GAUDETTE Informed AB  that she was no longer allowed to contact anyone in the human services department unless it was through the mail.AB already pays their wages with tax dollars. Why should she be restricted to forms of communication she has to spend additional money on.  Megan Gaudette goes on to explain please tell Anita she will not be allowed to do what she wants. 

 It says in AB's notes she is worried the months of abuse and violation of the mothers rights with the constant bragging about how mom will never get her kids back because Sally Schroer has found them new parents was tormenting the mother. After giving supportive evidence to Sally's supervisor AB says he still refused to take the abuser off GH's case. So AB says than allow me to be with her during interaction so she will not be as triggered by her abuser. The worker cannot help a former child abuse victim by abusing her it wont work. Megan Gaudette has no problem protecting Sally Schroer to enable her to further abuse the mother by blocking AB She also enables further abuse by isolating a trauma survivor from having someone present on her behalf

IRONY: Gaudette writes in her bio that it might sound cheesy but I like helping people? I assume she is referring to her boss's childless cousins. Not people who need help. 

Drug treatment center Fountain Centers counselor: There is no question that Sally Schroer is grossly abusing GH but it does not matter she still has to do what she has to do to get her kids home. AB says yes she does but she will do it with out being abused. The counselor says why cant you stay out of it!!!! This mom came in to this world a victim she does not need to be victimized by an agency I am funding with my tax dollars to help hold families together.  In the real world mental health professionals would tell her to get out of the relationship with the abuser. Where does a drug treatment counselor get off saying she needs to stay in a relationship with her abuser. She put AB in place so she could do what she needed to do and AB took on the abuser.  







The family is both the fundamental unit of society as well as the root of culture. It ... is a perpetual source of encouragement, advocacy, assurance, and emotional refueling that empowers a child to venture with confidence into the greater world and to become all that he can be.
MARIANNE E. NEIFERT, Dr. Mom's Parenting Guide




Lowell Freeman and Sally Schroer EVENTUALLY  blocked GH and AB's email addresses so they could not send emails TO THEM. 
example of effective communication

Hi Carie Minnesota law says I should present to you why I think it is in the best interest of the children to transfer custody. So can I tell you why I think it is in the child's best interest? 

Carie Krenik; NO
example of effective communication

Hi Carie I will need in writing that you refused to hear why it was in the best interest of the child to do a transfer of custody 

Letter from lawyer 4 days later. Only willing to terminate rights and then you can hire attorney to fight it in court to get kids. 

This is evidence that she is in on selling the children like schroer was. If they don't terminate the people placing the order to keep her kids, wont be able to keep them. The same people who are related to the county Attorney Brent Christain 

Hi Carie why is it that the visits are isolated
Carie: Because County officials said 
example of effective communication

hi Carie   the mother has the right to have someone present to represent her during visits why is it she cant have someone with her? Because county officials say so. so you don't have a reason why that the decision was made to violate the mothers rights? NO.  If you do not like it get a lawyer and fight me in court.
example of effective communication

All the above Taken from AB's Journal 

WHY WOULD COUNTY OFFICIALS JUDGES AND SOCIAL WORKERS NOT HAVE RESPECTABLE UNDERSTANDABLE REASONS TO GIVE TO CONCERNED FAMILY WITH QUESTIONS. WELL THEY CAN EXPLAIN THAT IN A CIVIL SUIT TO A FEDERAL COURT..... 

THIS IS GROSS NEGLECT WHEN A COUNTY IS UNABLE TO JUSTIFY DECISIONS. THE JUDGE ALSO IGNORES SUPPORTING EVIDENCE TO RULE IN A PREFERRED OUTCOME FOR HIS FRIENDS.  

Minnesota Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board

http://lprb.mncourts.gov/complaints/Pages/default.aspx


Contact

Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board
Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility

1500 Landmark Towers
345 St. Peter Street
St. Paul, MN 55102-1218

651-296-3952
1-800-657-3601
Fax: 651-297-5801

TTY users call MN relay service toll free:
1-800-627-3529

Resources

Links

Office of the Board on Judicial Standards

http://www.bjs.state.mn.us/body.html
The Board on Judicial Standards is an independent state agency that receives and acts upon complaints about Minnesota judges for judicial misconduct or wrongdoing. The Board also handles judicial disability matters. In addition, the Board issues advisory opinions and seeks to educate judges and others about judicial ethics.
Since its inception, the Supreme Court has removed, involuntarily retired, and censured several judges based on the board's recommendation. Many more have been privately disciplined by the board.

Board on Judicial Standards
2025 Centre Pointe Blvd.
Suite 180
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
Telephone - (651) 296-3999 Fax (651) 688-1865
TTY - use the State Relay service: call toll-free, 1-800-627-3529
E-mail - judicial.standards@state.mn.us
 
(Complaints will not be accepted by e-mail)
It is the policy of the Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards to comply with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and ensure that individuals with disabilities have equal access to our services.
The office is accessible to all visitors. Disability parking is available near the door of the building. All of our services are provided verbally on the phone or in writing. If you have a hearing disability, you can communicate with us by TTY using the State Relay service (call toll-free 1-800-627-3529).
If you require special accommodations, please make an appointment two weeks in advance letting us know of your needs, so we can have your information ready and make any necessary arrangements. For example, we can contract with a sign language interpreter or a foreign language interpreter. We can provide written information in different forms or larger type, and staff is available to read documents.
Back to:
Judicial Standards' Home Page
MN Northstar Main Menu
 

Directions for filing a complaint
Any individual or group may file a complaint. Your complaint should be made in writing. Simply write a letter specifically describing the judge's conduct. Be sure to include the name of the judge, relevant dates, names of witnesses, and sources of information. You may wish to attach copies (do not send originals) of court documents or transcripts if these support your allegations against the judge. Complaints will not be accepted by e-mail.
If you have questions concerning the filing of a complaint, call the board's office at (651) 296-3999.
The board does not have jurisdiction over federal judges or lawyers. Complaints against lawyers should be directed to the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility, (651) 296-3952. Complaints against Administrative Law Judges and Workers' Compensation Judges, you should contact the Office of Administrative Hearings, (612) 341-7600, and federal judges should be directed to Michael Gans, Clerk, Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, 316 N. Robert St, St. Paul, MN, 55101, (651) 848-1100.
Back to:
Judicial Standards' Home Page
MN Northstar Main Menu

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

If your rights are being violated by employees that you have been paying for with tax dollars, to keep vulnerable citizens safe like (Human? service workers) Sally Schroer and Carie Krenik you have options and do not need a lawyer.

 They assume that you will not have money to hire a lawyer.  You do not need money to hire a lawyer it is  important that you use the process that will target their jobs.

A lawsuit won't  stop them from hurting someone else. there is a 2001 case that describes similar abuse that Sally Schroer inflicted on a trauma survivor and her family. That means she has been hurting people she should have been helping for at least 13 years.
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/VOCAL-NASVO/conversations/topics/922

 we need these people trained to conduct their jobs so they are not hurting children and trauma survivors for the purpose of providing the their friends for example the  County Attorneys childless cousins with children.


If you are told get a lawyer to protect yourself from them you have options that do not involve getting a lawyer

  U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
Extended circumstances are ongoing situations for example the people involved requested a new worker continuously for 11 months.


http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/complaints/index.html

How to File a Complaint


If you feel a health care provider, or state or local government agency, has discriminated against you (or someone else) based on race, national origin, disability, or age, you may file a civil rights complaint. OCR can also investigate disability-based discrimination complaints against programs operated by HHS. Under certain statutes and regulations, OCR also has limited authority to investigate complaints of discrimination based on sex and religion. If you believe your health care provider conscience protection rights have been violated, you may file a complaint with OCR.
For more information about the Civil Rights Laws and Regulations we enforce, please review our Understanding Civil Rights section or look at our Frequently Asked Question (FAQs).
The Case Resolution Manual for Civil Rights Investigations (CRM) provides OCR staff and managers with the procedures and strategies designed to promptly and effectively evaluate, investigate, and resolve complaints and compliance reviews, and to enforce violation findings where warranted.
COMPLAINT REQUIREMENTS - Your complaint must:
  1. Be filed in writing, either on paper or electronically via the OCR Complaint Portal, by mail, fax, or e-mail;
  2. Name the health care or social service provider involved, and describe the acts or omissions, you believed violated the civil rights laws or regulations; and
  3. Be filed within 180 days of when you knew that the act or omission complained of occurred. OCR may extend the 180-day period if you can show "good cause."
ANYONE CAN FILE! - Anyone can file electronically via the OCR Complaint Portalor through written complaints with OCR. We recommend that you use the Civil Rights Discrimination Complaint Form Package to submit a written complaint. You can also request a copy of this form from an OCR regional office. If you need help filing a complaint or have a question about the complaint or consent forms, please email OCR at OCRComplaint@hhs.gov.
THE CIVIL RIGHTS NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS AND REGULATIONS PROHIBITRETALIATION - Under Civil Rights Laws an entity cannot retaliate against you for filing a complaint. You should notify OCR immediately in the event of any retaliatory action.
HOW TO SUBMIT YOUR COMPLAINT TOOCR - To submit a complaint to OCR, please use one of the following methods.
If you mail or fax the complaint, be sure to send it to the appropriate OCR regional office based on where the alleged violation took place. OCR has ten regional offices, and each regional office covers specific states. Send your complaint to the attention of the OCR Regional Manager. You do not need to sign the complaint and consent forms when you submit them by email because submission by email represents your signature.

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

UP DATE ON CARIE KRENIK

  • WHATEVER YOU THINK OF FOSTER CARE AND ADOPTION, 

    KEEP IN MIND THAT IT SHOULD BE ABOUT FINDING A HOME 

    FOR A CHILD WHO NEEDS ONE RATHER THAN ABOUT FINDING

     A CHILD FOR A FAMILY THAT WANTS ONE. WHEN THOSE TWO 

    SITUATIONS COINCIDE, ADOPTION IS A WONDERFUL OPTION. 

    BUT WHEN AN EXISTING FAMILY IS TORN APART NEEDLESSLY

     IN ORDER TO CREATE AN ADOPTIVE FAMILY, IT’S CRUEL.




DON'T GIVE UP HOPE BABIES YOUR MOMMY WILL NEVER STOP FIGHTING.  MINNESOTA SUPREME COURT HAS BEEN ACTIVELY REPRIMANDING THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN LAWLESS ABDUCTIONS TO GET CHILDREN OUT OF THE CARE OF DANGEROUS PEOPLE LIKE CHILD PROTECTION WORKERS WORKING WITH GALS AND COUNTY ATTORNEYS AND JUDGES AND HEAD OF HUMAN SERVICES.

This week, Minnesota’s State Court of Appeals sent a strong message of support to abused children trapped in the system when it overturned Caroline Rice’s convictions on three counts of deprivation of parental rights.

NOTE: As I have pointed out this article recognises ANY unnecessary separation of the parent and child as abuse to the child!!!!!!!!! it is also abuse to the parent because it forces the parent into a victim position. A social worker like Sally Schroer will do this job for a lifetime because of her own self esteem issues. The job allows her to abuse people who have been victims most of their life. They are people who struggle as adults because of their childhood. Sally is the equivalent to the school yard bully She thrives on control and she thrives on judging the struggles of former abuse victims because seeing the people who are screw ups also boosts her ego. Her paper work is full of materialistic judgement and lies.   

 In the case of State v. Rice, the Appellate Court decided that the reason why Caroline’s convictions were illegitimate was that Judge Perkins and the State’s prosecutor had engaged in various forms of misconduct during trial that violated Caroline’s civil rights and deprived her of a fair hearing.


I just got off a phone call where I was allowed to listen in on the other end. AB has been telling me what it has been like dealing with this county and she allows me to listen in.Honestly I was just like AB at first. I struggled to believe these people were in a job position that would allow them to hurt someone.

 Carie Krenik the new county worker  was on one end AB and I were on the other.  I have this conversation recorded. The worker turned pure evil as soon as she realized that it was AB on the phone? AB asked her for a detailed reason why she cannot see the children. ONE would think if children are being placed in the hands of theses people they should be required to have a reason for the decisions they make for the children in their charge. If they don't then I have every reason to question the safety and well being of the children being placed in their authority.

State guideline have no room for unexplainable reasoning.


Carie explains that she did not call AB back because she told her why she cannot see the children. AB  explains no you did not. Carie replies yes I did ; County Officials and I all agree that the visits are with just mom. Why is that AB asked, Carie said we all agree, agree on what? they just all agree she said.

So there is no safety reason ? So maybe they are isolated with just mom because Minnesota policy also wants visitation to be productive working toward reunification for example a parent who may require education will have visits structured to provide that education. However that is not the case. In court it was concluded that though the county took the kids because mom required education to correct conditions, Le Sueur has not offered the mother any education to correct conditions.

So basicly Carie and anyone else involved who agreed to this isolation and restricted time frame is participating in alienating the children from the people in their lives. Minnesota state guidelines also require family to be involved. There would be some level of discrimination going on if they had no explanation for this.

The County officials Carie  is referring to have all participated in breaking laws, for example The GAL Guardian Ad Litem Rose Valdez as mentioned before; has perjured herself twice in court. She should be conducting her investigation independently, however appears to be besties with the child protection worker and even makes statements like I support social services. She goes to lunch with Sally Schroer.Then there is Sally Schroer who was violating the laws and fair treatment  rights of a trauma survivor ((the mother ))to broker out her children. There is also documented proof Sally Schroer abused a 5, 4 and 1 year old by means of parental alienation.

I think Carie Krenik  is referring to the same county officials related to the foster people who willfully hid conflict of interest to terminate the mother's rights while entertaining her children in their home for the week end for example Brent Chritian the Le Sueur County Atornmey. The other is Megan Gaudette assistant county attorney and current employee of Brent Christain. Gaudette is good friends with Sally Schroer and protected her violation of the mothers rights. She is also the former employee and good friend of the presiding judge who is in the process of terminating the mothers rights.


when AB explains the mother has a right to have someone present on her behalf and the child protection worker  Carie Krenik who we are paying with our tax dollars to keep children safe and families together replies to AB with;

 If you don't like it get an attorney 

I HAVE A HUGE FLIPPING PROBLEM WITH THAT!!!!!! 


I just heard Carie Krenik a (HUMAN? service employee) Who is paid with my tax dollars for the purpose of  keeping our most vulnerable citizens safe, tell someone concerned about the safety of a traumatized mother that if she does not like the fact that they are violating the mothers civil rights she will need to get a lawyer!!! If we have to get lawyers to protect ourselves from human service workers, I think we have a big problem on our hands. These people are suppose to be there to help our most vulnerable citizens and they are paid for with our tax dollars to keep them safe. Yet we need to pay lawyers to protect ourselves from them We have to pay lawyer to stop human service worker from violating the rights of vulnerable citizens who are paid with our tax dollars ?

This is why I have been emailing Patty Fritz with all this documentation. We need reform.. If flipping ( Human?) service WORKERS ARE VIOLATING  people's rights, their families, their children, the elderly the lower income bracket class, the disabled we have a huge problem on our hands.

Not to mention the fact that they are taking peoples children and are not able to provide a viable reasons for a decisions they make. I guess if I were going to violate someone's rights I would have a ready answer as to why I was agreeing to victimize them. The County does not have one to provide.

SOCIAL WORKER CARIE KRENIK has no explanation as to why the visits are supervised by only a county worker. The isolated visits for just mom are violating her right to have someone present as a witness in case the visitation supervisor lies under oath for a preferred outcome.


Under normal circumstances  a child protection worker would have to be able to explain every action they make with a reason backing that action that promotes  the reunification of the mother and child and also keep them safe. 




The county documentation describes how much pain these kids are in



What happens when these kids are removed from the mentally unstable childless couples care. They will continue to use foster care as a shopping cart? Another community child/children with struggling parent/parents is going to again be at risk of being torn from a loving nurturing parent. They come out of a clean child proof age appropriate homes, with plenty of healthy food, with plenty of clean clothes and they are listed as being properly bathed kids at the time of their abduction. A mother who was rated by parent specialists in her termination of parental rights as a zero risk to ever abuse her children, and a mother who is loving and nurturing. Downfalls are learning age appropriate safety and is not comfortable with discipline. As mentioned earlier mom was severely abused so her fear of discipline is likely the result of fear of doing the same. Parenting classes would help her with that.

Get a lawyer to make a human service worker uphold the rights of  another human being... That was just brain numbing to hear. This is a day I will never forget... Now the dominos must fall. I want to thank Carie Krenik for allowing me to see what she does to people... It has been an enlightening experience. 

THIS QUOTE NEEDS TO BE TWEETED AND CREDITED TO THE CHILD PROTECTION WORKER I HAVE BEEN PAYING FOR. 

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Relative Placement Options


https://www.facebook.com/wesuecps2returnthestolenchildren
Join other parents who's children have been abducted by child protection services for the purpose of supplying children to childless couples in the community.


TRANSFER OF CUSTODY
is another option this would allow the mother to transfer custody and the TPR would go away. The TPR has maltreatment on the mothers record. She is a CNA and cannot work as a CNA because of the two 15 minute time periods she left her children home alone. Ever since she was young she dreamed of becoming a nurse and she starts school in two weeks for nursing. She will be forced to drop out with maltreatment on her record. The transfer of custody allows her to stay involved in her children's lives daily. She can also earn custody back from AB who has raised four children of her own and has no personal desire to destroy the lives of a mother and trauma survivor and the three children to meet personal needs. AB is able to recognize that education is a simple problem to fix and not a sufficient reason to take children from their parent. Had the county offered some kind of education to the parent rather than the foster parents this could have been corrected. The children have not improved because their mother is loving nurturing and kept a clean house and clean kids with plenty of food. She was rated by parent specialists as a zero risk to ever abuse but needed education.
Mom also has Complex post traumatic stress syndrome which is the result of prolonged abuse in captivity with no viable means to escape.  She wants to get treatment for this and needs support from her family while she does this. Dismantling her family to supply children to a childless couple is unethical and immoral.

Cari Krenik has informed the attorney that she is only interested in terminating the mothers rights. She is not willing to listen to why a transfer of custody is in the best interest of the children. This I am sure is about  the unstable foster parents adopting the children. She is not willing to consider relative placement in violation of federal law and said AB can get an attorney and fight to adopt the children in family court.

The fact that Carie has not conducted a a relative search background check is evidence of her trying to manipulate the situation to help the unstable foster people shopping for children who were never abused.

`
PREDICTION : County Retaliation To AB will likely remain ongoing. The county is retaliating because she has asked questions about fair treatment and the reunification process. She is the only one who seems to be mentioning the best interest of the child and the best interest of the family.
There is anticipation the county will use some delay strategy or try to dirty up a back ground check.  That is why I willingly submitted my own back ground check on AB to make sure that the county can be sued for tampering. It is my understanding that Carie Krenik has all ready started screwing with the back ground check by delaying appropriate procedure. She had a lawyer send a letter explaining that she is not willing to consider or uphold Minnesota state law. She has however submitted a non relative background search despite the fact that AB meets the definition of a relative under   Minnesota state law.

Defi.nition.of.Relative.in.Minnesota
Family members are the first placement consideration for children who are not able to live with their parents or guardians. Relative, as defined in
Minnesota Statutes, section 260C.007, subdivision 27is a person related to the child by blood, marriage, or adoption, or an individual who is an important friend with whom the child has resided or had significant contact.
The majority of children placed in family foster care or pre-adoptive families in Minnesota are not living with adults to whom they are related, or with whom the child had a significant relationship with prior to entering foster care.

Statutory.Authority
The responsible social service agency must consider placement with a relative without delay Conduct a reasonable and comprehensive search lasting up to six months, or until a fit and willing relative is identified consider a relative as a placement resource for any subsequent placements, even if the relative declined to care for the child at the beginning of the placement.


Consideration of relatives when the agency is no longer considering reunification as the permanency plan for the child, such as in the case of: Transfer of permanent legal and physical custody Adoption Long-term foster care, when appropriate.


In order for MINNESOTA to receive Federal payments for foster care and adoption assistance, Federal law under title IV-E of the Social Security Act requires that they "consider giving preference to an adult relative over a nonrelated caregiver when determining placement for a child, 

provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant State child protection standards."1 Title IV-E further requires States to exercise due diligence to identify and provide notice to all grandparents and other adult relatives of the child (including any other adult relatives suggested by the parents), that the child has been or is being removed from the custody of his or her parents, explains the options the.  

Monday, August 26, 2013

Trial Court Judges, Social Workers, Attorneys, Police Officers, and GAL’s who work collaboratively

How often does this happen? Low income families are targeted by a corrupt group of individuals. The Guardian Ad Litem, county attorney, assistant county attorney, the foster people, the Judge, and two social workers and head of social services are removing children from low income homes and placing them with unstable childless couples. These people are paid with tax dollars and they are telling family members who are entitled to get these children to pay for a lawyer and fight them??????

The Rice decision represents an increasingly frequent trend where the Appeals court has refused to tow the line for corrupt trial court judges, social workers, police officers, and GAL’s who work collaboratively to undermine the safety of children and the civil rights of the parents desperate to rescue them from the profitably dangerous homes the courts order them to live in.


After studying the judges code of conduct ( Judges Cannons )
The judges rule book which with in theory would allow one to predict how an unbias judge would rule
The Minnesota state laws/rules under the termination of parental rights.
Minnesota State Guidelines for a Responsible Social Worker's conduct
The Social workers code of Ethics.
The GAL responsibilities

All of it violates serious rights and laws. Yet they all work together to take her children. The appeal will go in front of a federal court judge to make sure the county workers are held accountable for the constitutional state and federal laws that they broke to illegally keep the children with unstable people.

To start with the conflict of interest  approved by head of Human services Susan Rynda, When she is informed of misconduct the sends a letter out blocking the person/informant rather than investigate.

The two people who placed orders to have the mother removed so they could keep her children.  They are related to the prosecuting attorney MR. Christian working for him is Megan Gaudette Assistant county attorney friends with abusive Social worker Sally Schroer and Social worker Carie Krenik also in suport of child brokering. Megan Gaudette is also the former Law Clerk for the presiding judge. I have notes here that in the court hearing for May 22, 2013 that it was so obvious by the way the judge conducted himself he had some kind of relationship with the assistant attorney Megan Gaudette. Confirmation of that was discovered after court with a little research. Megan Gaudette is also the former law clerk to the Honorable Judge M Michael Baxter. Megan has to step down once the conflict of interest that the two attorneys were hiding is discovered. By then she had terminated services that never began from the county. GH'S Children spend the week end at county attorney's home.

Hell the foster people actually placed orders for the children the same way they would order a big mac at a  Mc Donalds drive through. I guess they could always just walk in to the McDonalds and take someone else's hamburger because they have never had a hamburger before. They show up at every hearing like it is a custody battle they deserve to win. Getting off on destroying the children and the mother because they never had kids. These people are treated like royalty by the county they are tucked away with county lawyers, the GAL, county social workers, while mom sits out on the bench. She gets invited in to court only after the judge is done having off the record conversations with the prosecution and the unstable foster people.

The beginning of the Termination of parental rights actually starts off like it is a parenting competition between the children's mother and the unstable foster care people. The defending attorney puts a stop to it because it is about the mother not the unstable childless couple. When asked if the mother had ever left the children home alone again for 15 minutes the county said no. When asked what they did to correct the conditions or educate the mother, the county offered classes to the foster people to be better parents? There was nothing for the mother. The GAL perjured herself to keep the children away from the mother and grandmother along with a handful of other people.

This is wrong on so many levels and now its time to get this ladies kids home and unstable foster people will need to seek out an adoption agency. Not try to take their neighbors kids.


http://carvercountycorruption.com/minnesota-rigged-cases/mn-out-of-control-judges-and-lawyers/

Appeals Court Finds Judge Richard Perkins Guilty of Misconduct

Minnesota court overturns Mom's conviction, sends message of hope

Minnesota Court overturns conviction of a Mom on criminal charges, ruling authorities conspired to deprive her of her civil rights. 
 
Photo: Minnesotta Court of Appeals
WASHINGTON, August 23, 2013 — Caroline Rice’s criminal trial on three felony counts of deprivation of parental rights followed several years of malicious prosecution in the family courts before Judge Richard C. Perkins, the same judge who presided over her criminal trial. This week, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled in Caroline’s favor when it overturned her convictions on the grounds that Judge Perkins and prosecutors conspired at trial to deprive Caroline of her civil rights and access to due process.
Caroline insists that staying positive and looking for the blessings in life have helped her survive the loss of her children, being left penniless, even spending time in jail for trying to rescue her own children from their violent father and what many claim is a corrupt court system.
On numerous occasions, Brent Rice’s daughters say they were so terrified of him that they feared for their lives.  When the system failed to protect them, one daughter (A.R) repeatedly ran away from home to the forbidden safety of her mother Caroline Rice’s care. Each time, Caroline was forced to return her daughter to a home she says was dangerous.  Eventually, they made a plan to escape across the border to Canada for safety.
In 2006, Caroline Rice was a devoted soccer mom going through a difficult divorce with Brent Rice, the Vice President of a well known investment corporation. A nurse by trade, Caroline set her own career aside so that she could stay home and raise the couple’s five children while Brent built his career.
Court documents show the Rice children had legitimate reasons to fear for their immediate safety in their father’s care.  The children alleged in court documents that Brent Rice was violent towards them and had hit, punched, dragged, and smashed them on numerous occasions. Daughter L.R. testified at trial about an incident when Brent Riced dragged her sister K.R. down a flight of stairs by her ankles while L.R. and A.R. watched.
When the children reported to authorities that their father had assaulted them, Brent Rice was not arrested or charged with violent crimes. Instead, Judge Perkins handled the case in family court, then awarded Brent Rice sole custody of his alleged victims.  Although Caroline Rice had no history of abusing or neglecting the children, Judge Perkins revoked all her custody rights and ordered her to purchase her parenting time from a supervised visitation provider Jackie Cardinal.
Despite overwhelming evidence that the children were telling the truth, Hennepin County social worker Susan Olson and Carver County social worker Nicole Mercil, LSW were unwilling or unable to substantiate the children’s claims.  Guardian ad Litem Brenda Dehmer also sided against the children and with Brent Rice in her recommendations that the father should have sole legal and physical control of his alleged victims.
Instead of removing the Rice children from their father’s care, the children were ordered to attend counseling, which was paid for out of pocket and through the Rice’s private insurance according to Caroline Rice.  Eventually, Brent Rice voluntarily placed A.R. into the State’s foster care system.
Vendor payment records obtained from Carver County show that:
·      Family Innovations, Inc. charged Carver County more than $107,800 for counseling services allegedly provided to the Rice family.
·      Northland Counseling Center, Inc. also billed Carver County $1,575 for marriage counseling and life skills counseling, allegedly provided to the Rice’s several years after their divorce was finalized.
·      Foster parents Thomas and Carmen Huesman collectively billed Carver County over $6,000 for, among other things, A.R.’s foster care.
Caroline Rice says some of these providers may have double bill the Rice’s and Carver County for the same services.
“We had private insurance,” says Caroline. “The county also billed for L.R. in foster care- starting June 26-2009 her 18 birthday. L.R. did not spend one day in foster care ever. Billed for a year- this is in addition to the other invoices. We did not attend counseling sessions billed for, but when we did attend we paid through private insurance.”
According to Caroline Rice, her family was not eligible for needs based public assistance during the billing periods alleged in the invoices submitted by the providers to Carver County due to her ex husband’s extra ordinarily high income. 
“When A.R. was in foster care, we used private medical insurance and we were billed for foster care since Brent had voluntarily placed A.R.,” says Caroline.
Caroline says she fears retaliation if she were to bring the billing discrepancies to the attention of the authorities.
In January of 2012, Chief Judge Edward Lynch reviewed the Rice cases and several others where children were placed at risk at the request of State Senator Julianne Ortman.
In his response to Senator Ortman, Judge Lynch concluded that “…I have found no evidence of any conspiracy, collusion, or corruption related to Carver County court proceedings…If any mistakes were made in any of the matters I reviewed, I am confident that they were not the result of any intentional disregard of the facts of the law or any conspiracy or corruption.”
This week, Minnesota’s State Court of Appeals sent a strong message of support to abused children trapped in the system when it overturned Caroline Rice’s convictions on three counts of deprivation of parental rights. In the case of State v. Rice, the Appellate Court decided that the reason why Caroline’s convictions were illegitimate was that Judge Perkins and the State’s prosecutor had engaged in various forms of misconduct during trial that violated Caroline’s civil rights and deprived her of a fair hearing.
The appellate court decided that Judge Perkins improperly excluded evidence of Brent Rice’s prior assaults on the children at trial. In the context of domestic abuse, the authorities failure to substantiate the children’s reports of violence occurring in the privacy of their own home was not evidence that the events did not occur. “While the police may not have believed K.R. or A.R., the jury may have.”
The court failed to comment on the numerous jury members that Judge Perkins allowed to be seated on Rice’s trial, despite Caroline’s objections that the jurors personally knew the Rice family for years before the case was heard.
The Rice decision represents an increasingly frequent trend where the Appeals court has refused to tow the line for corrupt trial court judges, social workers, police officers, and GAL’s who work collaboratively to undermine the safety of children and the civil rights of the parents desperate to rescue them from the profitably dangerous homes the courts order them to live in.
Does keeping Judge Perkins on the bench and the court industry professionals involved with the Rice case employed to oversee the care of Minnesota’s most vulnerable families pose a risk to public safety?



Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/speaking-family/2013/aug/23/minnesota-court-overturns-moms-conviction-sends-me/#ixzz2dC3gwIAo
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter