Posts Tagged ‘Child Protective Services’

California School District Implements “Spying on Students” Program

by Stephen Levine on Monday, September 16th, 2013

This is article 211 of 257 in the topic Education

I wonder how many false positives will result in grief for parents as the consultant attempts to “prove” its worth to the school district and to expand their activities outward? I also wonder about their connection with law enforcement and other aggressive government services like child protective services?

In their fervor to prove their corporate worth, do these people even know what a joke looks like? Or is this the thought police?

California school district hires firm to monitor students’ social media

A suburban Los Angeles school district is now looking at the public postings on social media by middle and high school students, searching for possible violence, drug use, bullying, truancy and suicidal threats.

The district in Glendale, California, is paying $40,500 to a firm to monitor and report on 14,000 middle and high school students’ posts on Twitter, Facebook and other social media for one year.

Frydrych’s firm scours the social media postings of Glendale students aged 13 and older — the age at which parental permission isn’t required for the school’s contracted monitoring — and sends a daily report to principals on which students’ comments could be causes for concern, Frydrych said.

The company won’t disclose its methods and practices in gathering the students’ messages, but it does use key words in its searches. The firm also didn’t disclose how it confirms the youths are indeed students of the district.

Some experts in digital media and privacy, however, take exception.

“This is the government essentially hiring a contractor to stalk the social media of the kids,” said Lee Tien, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit that defends privacy, free speech and consumer rights.

“When the government — and public schools are part of the government — engages in any kind of line-crossing and to actually go and gather information about people away from school, that crosses a line,” Tien said. He disagreed with school officials who say they are monitoring only public postings.

“People say that’s not private: It’s public on Facebook. I say that’s just semantics. The question is what is the school doing? It’s not stumbling into students — like a teacher running across a student on the street. This is the school sending someone to watch them,” Tien said.

Read more at California district hires firm to monitor students’ social media – CNN.com

Bottom line …

The progressive socialist democrats, once again, are monitoring students. Who knows if they will expand the program to include political activities that might be harmful to the regime in power.

And, again, the public taxpayer is on the hook for any malfeasance or bad act connected with the consultant’s activities in monitoring student activities outside of the classroom and off school property. This is a potential disaster waiting to happen. One can only imagine a swat team doing a dynamic entry on a home and accidently killing a child over something they posted outside of school?

Unlike the NSA spying scandal, there is no pressing national security need for this level of surveillance of private citizens by any government organization, and certainly no legal justification in profiling or targeting children. I wonder if the firm will be compiling dossiers on certain students, say those with republican or libertarian leanings?

– steve

Go straight to Post

Is Critical Thinking no longer P.C.

by Rev. Austin Miles on Saturday, July 6th, 2013

tn_ThinkingMan_Rodin.jpgIn days long past they were called, “Philosophers.” The term engendered respect toward those hearty individuals upon whom the title was bestowed. A philosopher was considered an intellectual scholar whose observations pierced the veneer of society, probed beneath the surface of outward actions that accompanied the art of semantics, and peeled away layers of  rhetoric (and in many cases, hypocrisy) to lay bare the essentials of truth.

Today those same skilled individuals would, in many cases, be considered trouble makers, rabble-rousers, whistle blowers and misguided social activists. Society today does not want thinking people who might, with their observations, upset the apple cart of profitable bureaucratic conduct.

This turn-about on intellectual thought may have begun in the days of Christ. He certainly qualified as a critical thinker. One of his disciples, Thomas, while being visibly moved at the resurrection of Jesus, still wanted to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate the phenomenon by asking to see the nail marks in his hands and feet, and the hole in his side from the spear.

It was a proper inquiry for a critical thinker. Yet, to this day, the mention of Thomas carries the label, “Doubting Thomas,” a somewhat negative connotation propagated by many churches. Very few bouquets for a legitimate critical thinking inquiry.

Today is not a question of how society views critical thinkers. It is rather, does society think at all? In the present age it may not be politically correct to do so. Twentieth Century society does not really want anyone probing its surface.

From a personal vantage point, the critical thinker must be more than a scholar seeking truth and understanding. This individual must be strong, unwavering and willing to “suffer the slings and arrows of the outrageous fortune” of those who have their own agendas and who feel their own surface intellect and opinions are far superior to any scholars’.

So passionate are they in their quest for their own voice to be heard that the result could be character assassination and at times, violence. Write a letter to the editor stating a religious or political view point, make a public statement regarding a specific class of people, or indeed speak on any issue and watch the flood of negative responses.

Criminal charges were once filed against this writer for questioning and criticizing the actions of Child Protective Services for illegally taking a child from his mother.

But despite the inconvenience of being dragged to court and becoming the subject of front page headlined newspaper stories, an enormous amount of good resulted. The Washington Times ran a series on abuses by Child Protective Services due to this well publicized case. NBC TV did a special on the program and laws were proposed and passed against these unwarranted procedures along with making the adoption of foster children easier and faster, which all came directly as a result of this case becoming a national concern.

Parent’s groups were formed all over the United States to unite against abuses by CPS. And best of all, with all the noise, Superior Court Judge Barbara Zuniga investigated the case of Adrian Chavez, who was forcibly taken from his home, ruled that it was an illegal action and ordered the system to release him back to his mother.

Click to continue reading “Is Critical Thinking no longer P.C.”
Go straight to Post

California Medical Tyranny

by Bob Livingston on Wednesday, May 1st, 2013

This is article 3 of 3 in the topic Child Protective Services
California Medical Tyranny

SCREENSHOT
While Sammy Nikolayev was in Child Protective Services custody and in the hospital, his parents could see him only for short periods of time.

Medical tyranny received judicial sanction in California Monday when a judge ruled that parents fighting to get their baby back from Child Protective Services kidnappers must follow all medical advice including not taking their baby from the hospital until the Big Pharma-trained goon squad gives the OK.

Anna and Alex Nikolayev’s ordeal with the medical police state began when they took 5-month-old Sammy to Sacramento’s Stutter Memorial Hospital for treatment after he began exhibiting flu-like symptoms. They chose Stutter because that’s where Sammy had been receiving treatment for a heart murmur since birth. The attending physician prescribed antibiotics for the child’s viral infection — despite the fact that antibiotics are ineffective against viral infections — and admitted him to the pediatric intensive care unit for observation. When they questioned a nurse about why the doctor had prescribed antibiotics, the nurse told them she did not know.

Within days, the physician began talking about the possibility of heart surgery for Sammy. Anna Nikolayev said she had grown increasingly concerned about the care Sammy was receiving and decided to take him to Kaiser Permanente for a second opinion. The family admits they didn’t get a discharge before removing their son. The doctor at Kaiser Permanente told them Sammy didn’t need antibiotics.

While the family was still at Kaiser Permanente, police officers showed up. They told the Nikolayevs that the people at “Sutter was telling them so much bad stuff that they thought that this baby is dying on our arms,’” Anna Nikolayev said.

The Kaiser Permanente doctor told police and the Nikolayevs that Sammy could go home and there was no concern for his safety in their care. But police arrived at the Nicolayevs’ home a couple of days later with a CPS worker, pushed Alex Nikolayev against the house, threw him to the ground and took his house keys. Police then took Sammy from Anna Nikolayev’s arms, telling her: “I’m going to grab your baby, and don’t resist, and don’t fight me, OK?”

While Sammy was in CPS custody and in the hospital, his parents could see him only for short periods of time but had no control over his care.

After Monday’s hearing the Sacramento County judge ordered Sammy be transferred to Stanford hospital. The Nikolayevs cannot remove him without a “proper discharge” and must allow a county government functionary to make regular house visits — to ensure the family is reminded who really owns their child — once Sammy goes home.

Go straight to Post

Saving the children…by destroying the family

by American Grams on Monday, October 15th, 2012

This is article 1 of 3 in the topic Child Protective Services

The government claims it is all about “saving the children,” but is it? In a current battle with Child Protective Services (CPS) in Arizona one family finds it isn’t about saving the children but is all about destroying the family.

Has your family ever had financial difficulties? Ever had to apply for food stamps, WIC, state health insurance/Medicaid, or housing assistance? Do you believe in alternative medicine, spacing out vaccinations, nursing infants, or being environmentally conscience by using cloth diapers instead of disposables? Do you have a large family? You could become a target of CPS and lose your children forever. Any unsubstantiated report from a teacher, counselor, neighbor or “friend” could launch an investigation into your family with further claims that you cannot provide for the basic needs of your children because you have received or are receiving government assistance! As your children are being whisked away to be sent off to foster care, you remain helpless in an out of control system that seems intent on punishing the parents through their children rather than helping out a struggling family who may need additional assistance or minimal intervention.

The Arizona Republic reported on September 2, 2012, in their article “Kids Far From Home”, a dramatic increase in CPS intervention is taking place in Arizona with children being removed from their homes and placed in foster care, but the question they failed to ask was why. While the increase in children is taking place there is a decrease in foster homes, so often times children are placed in group homes or shelters. Many of these families are facing difficult economic times and rather than helping the families CPS removes the children and puts the family, as well as extended family, under additional pressures all under the pretext of saving the children.

The long-term affects to the children is also in question. Studies have shown that children in foster care are at an INCREASED risk of becoming a high school drop out, getting involved in illegal activities such as prostitution, drugs, gangs and encounters with the law. Further it is shown that there is a 25% increase of risk to children in foster care of being abused or killed by foster families.

In fact, one of the families interviewed proves just how “responsible” and serious CPS is in protecting the children.

  • The children were removed from the home and all parents, grandparents and extended family members were denied custody as well as all visitation and contact with the children. Family placement consideration as required by law was ignored and the children were immediately placed in foster care.
  • The siblings were not placed together as required by Arizona law but were all placed in separate homes. Some of the children remain in group homes or shelters.
  • Arizona law also states the children are supposed to remain in their home school, but once again the law was ignored and none of the children are in their home schools even though the CPS case worker documented that they are!
  • The educational needs of the children are being ignored. In fact one of the children has not even attended one day of school since being removed from the family home.
  • Foster families have remained out of contact with CPS workers, refusing to answer the phone or door.

Click to continue reading “Saving the children…by destroying the family”
Go straight to Post

Just Asking: Innocent Question or Precursor to Backdoor Gun Registration?

by Stephen Levine on Friday, July 6th, 2012

This is article 188 of 558 in the topic Gun Rights

When a doctor asks you about “guns in the home” is it an innocent question or something far more serious?

  • Could it lead to a form of de facto gun registration?
  • Could your doctors report their findings to the health department or other authorities?
  • Could it instigate a records check for unregistered weapons?
  • Could a notation be made on the drivers license database, turning a traffic ticket into a “felony stop” with drawn guns?
  • Could a medical finding such as epilepsy or another debilitating condition require authorities to confiscate your weapons; much in the same manner that people with seizures may temporarily or permanently lose their driving privileges?
  • Could there be issues with Child Protective Services is there is a known weapon in the home?
  • Could it be used as prima facie evidence of a potential threat in a domestic dispute?

Why am I asking these questions?

Because I do not trust liberals and their stealth ways of using rules, regulations and the court where they cannot obtain voter approval or legislative consensus. Similar to President Obama using signing orders and directives to Administrative agencies to usurp the Congressional rights as the nation’s sole lawmaker.

Federal Judge Throws Out Fla. Gun Law: A federal judge in Miami has sided with doctors in the Sunshine State over a controversial gun law.

“U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke barred the enforcement of a law passed last year that forbid doctors and other medical providers from asking patients about guns in their homes, according to the News Service of Florida. Judge Cooke said lawmakers had failed to make the case that gun owners were being unduly burdened.

“What is curious about this law—and what makes it different from so many other laws involving practitioners’ speech—is that it aims to restrict a practitioner’s ability to provide truthful, non-misleading information to a patient…,” Cooke wrote. “The purpose of preventive medicine is to discuss with a patient topics that, while perhaps not relevant to a patient’s medical safety at the time, inform the patient about general concerns that may arise in the future.” <Source>

Perhaps the law should have been written to prohibit a physician from annotating a patients file or passing that information to any local, state or federal agency under the protection of physician-patience confidentiality.

Bottom line …

There is little or no doubt in my mind that liberal-run public health organizations would love to have this information on file. To make their oft-stated case that “guns in the home” present a clear and present danger to children and that stronger legislation is needed to prevent needless, and tragic, deaths. As with all liberal causes, they want to get the camel’s nose under the tent – and then pursue their agenda with the salami tactic of  “one slice at a time” until the entire salami (or their agenda) has been eaten.

– steve

Full disclosure: I am a Life Member (Endowment Level) of the NRA (National Rifle Association)

Go straight to Post

An Update On Maryanne Godboldo And Medical Tyranny

by Bob Livingston on Friday, May 6th, 2011

This is article 1 of 59 in the topic Courts

An Update On Maryanne Godboldo And Medical Tyranny

A Wayne County (Mich.) Family Court judge has ruled that a Detroit teenager stolen from her mother by armed thugs of the Detroit medical police must be turned over to the custody of her aunt this afternoon.

We told you April 20 in The Medical Police State about Maryanne Godboldo, who took her 13-year-old daughter, Ariana, to the Detroit Children’s Center last year after the girl began experiencing behavioral problems following a series of State-mandated immunizations.

The doctor at the DCC prescribed a treatment plan for Ariana that included a psychotropic drug. But the “treatment” only worsened Ariana’s condition, so Maryanne did what any rational person would do: She sought a second opinion.

The second doctor recommended removing Ariana from the drug and prescribed a holistic plan to help Ariana, who also has a physical disability. Maryanne agreed with the new treatment.

But medical goons from the DCC and tyrants from Detroit Child Protective Services did not and gave Maryanne two choices: Put her daughter back on the “treatment” plan first prescribed — a treatment plan that she sought voluntarily and, therefore, should be able to stop — or give up her daughter. Maryanne chose none of the above.

So on March 24, the DCC and CPS fascists, aided by a Detroit Police SWAT team, crashed into Maryanne’s home, took Ariana into custody of the State and incarcerated Maryanne for resisting the armed intrusion.

Ariana has been detained ever since. And to make the case even more bizarre, a doctor treating Ariana while she was in custody decided she didn’t need the psychotropic drug after all. And if the whole ordeal wasn’t enough trauma for the State to inflict on one of its citizens, Ariana was apparently assaulted while in State custody, as Maryanne’s attorney claims Ariana has contracted a sexually transmitted disease.

The DCC and CPS are trying to fight the judge’s order to turn Ariana over to her aunt (notice that she still will be separated from her mother), according to the Detroit Free Press. But the judge said she would have none of it.

Let’s hope rationality finally reigns in this case and Ariana can be returned quickly to her mother, who apparently is one of the few people who truly has the girl’s best interests at heart.

Go straight to Post

‘A Government of Laws, and Not of Men’: The Electoral College

by Nancy Salvato on Friday, April 29th, 2011

This is article 11 of 184 in the topic US Constitution

James Madison (1751 – 1836), Fourth President of the United States, and an author of the Federalist Papers.

In Federalist 51, James Madison writes,
“In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”

Madison’s concern is that, even though the people are sovereign, hold the ultimate authority over the government, there need be additional mechanisms to assist in preventing the possibility of power becoming consolidated within a particular faction of those charged with governing on our behalf. Should power become consolidated under one entity, and the faction abuse its authority, the people would be ruled through tyranny, denying them their ultimate sovereignty unless they take drastic measures to remove the authority from power.

Perhaps what Madison is saying here is better understood through an analogy of what can happen when those charged with looking after our best interests give greater concern to selfish motives. Until a child grows into an adult, he or she cannot make all the decisions associated with being grown up. In such a case, all power is vested in one or two parents who are expected to make decisions in the best interest of the child. Sometimes one or both parents make really bad decisions that can cause irreparable damage to a child. This might require a drastic measure, such as a child protective services agency stepping in to remove the child from the situation. James Madison feared that those in a position of power may not always put our rights first. This problem would become much worse, and more drastic measures would need to be taken, when all authority is vested in one entity that is in charge of all decision making, as in the situation of a child with abusive parents.

The Framers built a number of checks and balances into the government to prevent authority from being held by one entity where it could quickly develop into tyranny; kind of like the fail safe systems we put in place to protect ourselves and others from possible dangers. Did you ever wonder why lawnmowers have a hand-closed lever that must be held down at all times? When it’s released, the blade stops or the motor shuts off automatically. There are many examples of fail safes, they shut down reactors in nuclear plants, automatically brake some of the more expensive cars when they’re too close to another object, prevent missile launches from deploying, prevent children from being able to open cabinets with hazardous materials, prevent surges of electricity from harming electronic equipment. All sorts of mechanisms can be employed to help prevent something from going terribly wrong, in a rapid progression.

In Federalist 51, Madison continues,
“In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.

1 2 3 4 5 6
Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin