.
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/story/244450.html
Posted on Sun, Sep. 23, 2007
Program pays for private eye to locate kids
By ALEX BRANCH
Star-Telegram staff writer
As any Child Protective Services caseworker can tell you, the first step in helping endangered children is to find them.
Many low-income families with CPS files move nomadically from relatives' homes to apartments to rent houses. Locating them can require the skills of a private investigator.
And often that's whom caseworkers turn to for help.
Under a program funded by United Way of Tarrant County, a licensed private investigator has tracked down more than 300 families that seemed to have vanished from the Earth.
"We've found some children in homes with needles on the floor, drugs on the tables, dirty dishes, dirty clothes, filth and slime," said private investigator Geoffrey Tait, who has helped CPS since 2005. "Empty homes with no furniture, just blankets on the floor where they sleep. Kids who needed to be rescued."
They might not have been, if not for one miserable, battered little boy who wasn't found until it was too late.
A child dies
In 2004, a series of child-abuse deaths made headlines.
One of the most disturbing to Pat Cheong, an assistant vice president for United Way, was the killing of 9-year-old Davontae Williams. Police found his malnourished body covered with cuts and bruises inside an Arlington apartment.
His mother and her partner often tied him up or locked him in the pantry, police said. He hadn't attended school since the first grade.
It turned out, Cheong learned, that CPS caseworkers had tried to help the family, but Davontae's mother evaded them by moving from one home to another. In fact, in 2003, CPS had received an allegation of abuse or neglect for about 400 area families but had been unable to locate them for investigation, she said.
"These CPS workers had a very high number of cases to investigate and had to try to track down all these families who had moved," Cheong said. "It was an overwhelming task, and I thought there must be someone out there specifically trained to find people."
That led the United Way's Families Impact Council to create a grant for CPS to contract with a private investigator. Starting in November 2004, when CPS caseworkers exhausted their own resources to find a family, referrals were sent to the investigator. This year the grant was $63,000.
"It has been a tremendous help," said Marissa Gonzales, a spokeswoman for CPS. "Children who vanish with their families are often the most vulnerable. We wish we had this program in every county."
Finding families
A few years ago, Tait's three-person investigation company, Cat's Eye Intelligence Service in Fort Worth, was doing work for 40 law firms throughout the Metroplex.
In early 2005, when the first private investigator and CPS parted ways, Tait got the contract.
"Generally, a PI's job is to find things," Tait said. "We can find virtually anything on everybody. So I thought I could help."
After a family disappears, CPS caseworkers give Tait whatever information they have on the family, such as accusations against them, last known addresses, whether the adults received public assistance.
The first thing Tait does is run Internet searches. Some are public information searches, but licensed private investigators also have access to state databases usually open only to law enforcement personnel.
Tait can locate about 10 percent of the families without leaving his desk, he said.
For those who aren't so easy, Tait and his investigators -- one of whom speaks Spanish -- hit the streets, knocking on doors, asking relatives, former neighbors or ex-employers for information. Once found, the families are often stunned to find a private investigator at their door.
"In many cases, they didn't even know CPS was looking for them," Tait said. "Sometimes they say, 'Well, I called CPS, but nobody answered so I just hung up.' And, occasionally, they are angry that we are there."
The program's success led United Way to create a $48,000 grant for Tait to train CPS caseworkers on investigative skills. Ideally, caseworkers will soon be better-equipped to track families on their own.
"We're excited," Gonzales said. "Every bit of knowledge we can gain to find these families will help."
Finding families
Results of the private investigator project paid for by a grant from United Way of Tarrant County from November 2004 through Aug. 15:
530 Cases referred to private investigator
330 Families found by investigator
Types of abuse found
73 Neglectful supervision
34 Physical abuse
9 Medical neglect
11 Physical neglect
4 Sexual abuse
1 Abandonment
Note: In some cases, more than one type of abuse and/or neglect was found.
Source: Child Protective Services
How to donate
United Way of Tarrant County kicked off its annual fundraising campaign Sept. 7.
The goal is $24 million, which will be used to fund nonprofit social-service agencies in the region.
.
Texas system
Moderators: family_man, LindaJM
.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 65028.html
Sept. 25, 2007, 11:53PM
State high court considers ways to repair foster care
Experts, CPS officials urge justices to create judicial commission to help
By JANET ELLIOTT
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN — Crowded dockets, poorly trained judges and lawyers and lack of collaboration with child protective caseworkers contribute to a legal system that consistently fails abused and neglected children, legal experts and child welfare officials told the Texas Supreme Court on Tuesday.
The court is considering establishing a permanent judicial commission to help courts better serve children, youth and families in the foster care system.
A goal would be getting children returned to their families or placed in a safe and permanent home more quickly.
"What we're finding is that there needs to be more judicial leadership to improve outcomes in child protection cases," said Justice Harriet O'Neill. "Courts act as gatekeepers for families in crisis.
"No child enters foster care, leaves foster care, or does anything significant in between, without a court order," she said.
More than two dozen witnesses at a public hearing urged the justices to use their rule-making authority to create a commission.
Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson said the court would take the matter under advisement.
Scott McCown, a former Travis County state district judge, said nothing in his legal education or law firm practice prepared him for handling his first child abuse case.
McCown told of his decision to remove an abused child from its mother's home and place the child with its father and stepmother, even though Child Protective Services workers said the family hadn't been thoroughly investigated.
Weeks later, McCown was met outside his courtroom by a CPS worker who told him the stepmother had killed the child.
"We do not have adequate judicial resources given to these cases," he said, recalling how he would spend hours on a civil dispute but have only "15 minutes on a good day" to review CPS cases.
Could make a difference
McCown, now executive director of the Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates for low-income Texans, said a commission could make a difference in judicial training and court organization, legal training for lawyers who represent the children and public awareness of the need for adoptive families.
About 20,000 children are in foster care and 3,500 are waiting for an adoptive home.
The Legislature responded to a series of child deaths in 2005 by spending $258 million to hire more investigators.
That has resulted in an increase in children being removed from their homes, and now the caseworkers who must find placements for those children are overburdened, said Houston attorney Stephen Ryan.
Caseworkers overburdened
He said the Legislature increased funding this year by $100 million for foster care improvements, but that money is expected to reduce caseloads from 46 per worker to 41, still well above the national average of 24 per caseworker.
Joyce James, assistant commissioner for CPS, said children should be better off when the state intervenes to remove them from a dangerous home but "too often this is not the case in our system."
"We need to change the way business is done, so children spend less time in foster care," she said.
Alternate strategies
She said she'd like to see more use of mediation, family group sessions and other services when children first are removed to possibly avoid a lengthy court case.
James said older children who want to be in court when decisions are made about their future sometimes aren't able to attend, a problem that video conferencing or other technology might help.
Court personnel need training in issues of poverty, substance abuse, domestic violence and mental illness, she added.
Patchwork system
The effort to improve child welfare cases could be complicated by Texas' patchwork system of courts.
Some areas have specialized juvenile or family courts while others have general jurisdiction courts that handle everything from criminal cases to civil disputes.
O'Neill said the commission could apply for federal grants, seek private funds and tap into local community resources even if the state doesn't increase funding.
"These cases are different than traditional adversarial court cases," O'Neill said. "They really do require a more cooperative multidisciplinary approach that many courts aren't used to."
.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 65028.html
Sept. 25, 2007, 11:53PM
State high court considers ways to repair foster care
Experts, CPS officials urge justices to create judicial commission to help
By JANET ELLIOTT
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN — Crowded dockets, poorly trained judges and lawyers and lack of collaboration with child protective caseworkers contribute to a legal system that consistently fails abused and neglected children, legal experts and child welfare officials told the Texas Supreme Court on Tuesday.
The court is considering establishing a permanent judicial commission to help courts better serve children, youth and families in the foster care system.
A goal would be getting children returned to their families or placed in a safe and permanent home more quickly.
"What we're finding is that there needs to be more judicial leadership to improve outcomes in child protection cases," said Justice Harriet O'Neill. "Courts act as gatekeepers for families in crisis.
"No child enters foster care, leaves foster care, or does anything significant in between, without a court order," she said.
More than two dozen witnesses at a public hearing urged the justices to use their rule-making authority to create a commission.
Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson said the court would take the matter under advisement.
Scott McCown, a former Travis County state district judge, said nothing in his legal education or law firm practice prepared him for handling his first child abuse case.
McCown told of his decision to remove an abused child from its mother's home and place the child with its father and stepmother, even though Child Protective Services workers said the family hadn't been thoroughly investigated.
Weeks later, McCown was met outside his courtroom by a CPS worker who told him the stepmother had killed the child.
"We do not have adequate judicial resources given to these cases," he said, recalling how he would spend hours on a civil dispute but have only "15 minutes on a good day" to review CPS cases.
Could make a difference
McCown, now executive director of the Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates for low-income Texans, said a commission could make a difference in judicial training and court organization, legal training for lawyers who represent the children and public awareness of the need for adoptive families.
About 20,000 children are in foster care and 3,500 are waiting for an adoptive home.
The Legislature responded to a series of child deaths in 2005 by spending $258 million to hire more investigators.
That has resulted in an increase in children being removed from their homes, and now the caseworkers who must find placements for those children are overburdened, said Houston attorney Stephen Ryan.
Caseworkers overburdened
He said the Legislature increased funding this year by $100 million for foster care improvements, but that money is expected to reduce caseloads from 46 per worker to 41, still well above the national average of 24 per caseworker.
Joyce James, assistant commissioner for CPS, said children should be better off when the state intervenes to remove them from a dangerous home but "too often this is not the case in our system."
"We need to change the way business is done, so children spend less time in foster care," she said.
Alternate strategies
She said she'd like to see more use of mediation, family group sessions and other services when children first are removed to possibly avoid a lengthy court case.
James said older children who want to be in court when decisions are made about their future sometimes aren't able to attend, a problem that video conferencing or other technology might help.
Court personnel need training in issues of poverty, substance abuse, domestic violence and mental illness, she added.
Patchwork system
The effort to improve child welfare cases could be complicated by Texas' patchwork system of courts.
Some areas have specialized juvenile or family courts while others have general jurisdiction courts that handle everything from criminal cases to civil disputes.
O'Neill said the commission could apply for federal grants, seek private funds and tap into local community resources even if the state doesn't increase funding.
"These cases are different than traditional adversarial court cases," O'Neill said. "They really do require a more cooperative multidisciplinary approach that many courts aren't used to."
.
.
http://www.houstonpress.com/2007-11-08/ ... ing-apart/
Child Protective Services: Problems, Reforms and More Problems
A quick fix may only have created more problems for CPS and the families it serves
By Paul Knight
Published: November 8, 2007
Daniel Kramer
Rafael Sierra smiles as he watches the face of his girlfriend, Maria Martinez, with their newborn son. It's a July afternoon and sunlight pours into their hospital room at Bayshore Medical Center in Pasadena. It's the couple's second son in as many years. Rafael hasn't slept in almost two days, too anxious from the delivery. He sits by a window to fall asleep.
Maria rests in the hospital bed, holding her baby. She's glad the big day is over and her son was born without complications. During the last couple months, Maria had checked in at Bayshore several times for intense stomach pains. She had been a little worried. But now, Maria can relax.
Rafael had left the couple's first son at his mother and stepfather's house, though he would rather have his boy with him. The relationship between Rafael and his mother has deteriorated in recent years, especially since he started dating Maria, who, at 26, was almost eight years younger than Rafael. When Maria became pregnant with the couple's first child, it certainly didn't help. But sitting with his family, Rafael is convinced life's conflicts are behind him.
Then they hear a knock on the door. Wale Babalola, an investigator with Child Protective Services, stands outside. He has some things he wants to talk about.
When Maria checked in at Bayshore on May 7 for stomach pains, a urine sample came back positive for marijuana and cocaine. A hospital social worker had contacted CPS, which dispatched Babalola.
During the investigation, someone told Babalola that Maria used drugs at least twice a week, including the night before going into labor. Babalola had another urine test result from July 17, four days before Maria gave birth. Positive again for cocaine and marijuana.
Rafael's head spins. He goes into a separate room with Babalola. Rafael tells the investigator that he has never witnessed Maria taking drugs. He never thought she was stoned or high or whatever he wanted to call it.
"I wouldn't put my baby in harm's way like that," Maria says.
Rafael wants the children for himself. Nobody is accusing him of doing anything wrong, he argues. Babalola tells him that won't work. Not as long as he's living with Maria.
An emergency custody hearing is scheduled for July 24, the day after Maria checks out of the hospital. The judge rules that there is enough evidence to extend the investigation and orders Maria to give a hair follicle sample for a more accurate drug test.
Maria never brings her newborn home. Instead, the baby goes to Rafael's mother and stepfather's home, where the couple's first son remains. They can't afford it, but Maria and Rafael persuade an attorney to take the case.
"I'll do whatever it takes to get my babies back," Maria says.
Maria and Rafael have now entered the CPS system. A threat to children was presented, investigated and a decision made. Maria's case isn't hopeless. Her rights to the children were not immediately terminated, and if she and Rafael can prove capable of being good parents in the months ahead, they might get their children back.
But Maria and Rafael don't know they're about to enter the system at the worst possible time. During a two-year, statewide reform, the system has stacked the deck against itself. Caseworkers are overworked and quitting in droves. CPS is taking on more cases than it can handle, with children in state custody staying nights on cots and in cribs at a CPS office in Houston. In July, Maria and Rafael prepare to do anything to get back the kids, but the system that guards their fate is spinning wildly out of control.
_____________________
Bad things happened for Child Protective Services in 2004. A string of child deaths revealed a system incapable of caring for the children it was supposed to protect.
On Christmas Day 2003, the body of four-year-old Jovonie Ochoa was taken to a San Antonio hospital. The boy was dead. He weighed 16 pounds and was covered in bruises.
About two months before the boy died, Jovonie's mother left him with his grandparents, who then duct-taped and tied the boy to his bed, beat him and left him to starve. Jovonie died covered in bed sores, his brain bleeding from the beatings.
In the months that followed Jovonie's death, investigators discovered that three complaints were filed to CPS against Jovonie's mother in 2002. A CPS employee had attempted to contact the mother but couldn't find her, and Jovonie's case was closed.
Then, in April 2004, again in San Antonio, CPS reunited two-year-old Diamond Alexander-Washington with her mother. About eight weeks later, the little girl peed in her pants. The mother beat Diamond with a vacuum cleaner hose until she was dead.
During those final eight weeks, Diamond's mother went to jail for two weeks and police were called to her apartment twice, all unknown to Diamond's caseworker. Shortly before Diamond's death, her CPS caseworker left for vacation. When the cases were handed over to coworkers, Diamond was ignored.
Politicians responded to the amount of press given to these deaths. A judge in San Antonio's juvenile court urged Governor Rick Perry to do something. Lawmakers promised reform.
To understand the problems that faced the agency, legislators asked how the system works.
First, a complaint is filed to the agency, which is routed through the state office in Austin. If someone decides the call warrants further attention, the case is given to a CPS investigator.
The investigator must complete the case within 30 days. If the investigator closes the case, he can still refer the child to other programs funded by Harris County Children's Protective Services such as "Pal," which gets foster children ready for independent adult life.
page 2
The investigator can also determine the state needs to take custody. That's what happened to Maria Martinez, and even though her children were placed with Rafael's mother and stepfather, the state technically has custody. Finding a relative for the child is the preferred option, but if there's no relative, the child goes to a foster family or a foster facility. Wherever the child goes after the investigation is complete, the state assigns a CPS caseworker until the child is back with his or her family, is adopted or turns 18 and graduates from high school.
After lawmakers looked at the structure of the system, they decided to increase the pay of investigators and to hire more of them. The goal was to lower investigators' caseloads. The agency also planned to gradually privatize the duties of the caseworkers and the foster system itself by doing away with state-run facilities.
In September, the Department of Family and Protective Services, under which Child Protective Services operates, issued its fourth report on the progress of the 2005 reform, and state officials painted a pretty picture of "tremendous improvement."
Agency officials cited a reduction of 1,000 children in foster care between March and September. This reduction is attributed to lower investigator caseloads resulting in an improved investigative force. According to the top officials at the agency, the reform is passing through CPS like a cool breeze.
But former and current CPS investigators and caseworkers, along with state advocacy groups, say the 2005 plan may have made problems worse. Employee turnover has actually risen since 2005. About 34 percent of CPS investigators and caseworkers quit during their first year, and that number is about 10 percent higher in Harris County. Children in Texas still die at a rate that almost doubles the national average. Harris County is tops, with almost four deaths per 100,000 children. The number of Harris County children in foster care has dropped by about 100 since last year, but has actually risen by almost 1,000 since 2005.
"There are definitely faults by the legislature," says Jodi Smith, a public policy director for the child advocacy group Texans Care for Children. "They're very reactive, very short-term."
Smith says her group advised lawmakers in 2005. The idea that was championed by the legislature — lowering caseloads for investigators — should have been done years earlier, Smith says. But privatizing parts of the system was an idea that child advocacy groups strongly opposed.
"There really is a wide range in the quality of the [private] care," Smith says. "With children in the state's care, we think the state should have the authority to make decisions on the children's behalf."
The privatization idea has gone horribly awry. A pilot program started in the San Antonio area was unable to secure bids from foster care providers. This year, the legislature voted to kill the plan.
Furthermore, the 2005 measures created a backlash among CPS caseworkers. After the agency beefed up the investigator position — better pay, more positions, lower caseloads — many employees simply left the caseworker side to become investigators. This created a larger strain on the caseworkers that stayed. They were paid less and doing more work. And until this year, the agency had plans to cut caseworkers for the looming privatization.
Then, in March, the state entered a foster placement emergency. The state had failed to renew contracts with foster care agencies, and several group homes shut down. CPS officials alerted caseworkers in Houston that they would have to start working weekend shifts at the agency's Chimney Rock office to care for foster children who had no place to go.
That was the breaking point for many of the overworked employees, according to former caseworker Lee Welborn, who left the agency in July.
"We felt like we shouldn't give up our weekends because they couldn't get a contract signed," Welborn says. "Some people who I never thought would leave are leaving."
Before working as a caseworker, Welborn was a middle school teacher, where, among other things, he taught journal writing. Welborn read some dark, sordid writing from his students, things he considered abuse. He wanted to protect these kids, not just teach them. He left for CPS.
"I went there hoping I could stay. I did love it," Welborn says. "There are times I feel guilty for leaving, but when you have 72 cases, you feel like you can't really help a kid."
Ursula Christian had worked as a CPS caseworker for a year and a half when she heard the weekend order. Already, Christian says, she was handling 75 to 80 cases. Christian was told she'd have to add three weekend shifts a month. Sometimes that meant working an overnight shift at Chimney Rock, then returning to her regular office at 8 a.m. It became too much.
"Here we are an agency supposed to be protecting children, you know, what's in their best interest," Christian says. "But is it in my best interest to work a 14- or 15-hour shift and ignore my own children?"
During Welborn's tenure at CPS, he had trouble sleeping. He often felt nauseated and suffered from ulcers. Gray whiskers sprouted from his charcoal beard. He tried to stay despite the weekend order, but then he received e-mails from his bosses that said the standards of work needed to rise. Welborn felt insulted.
"The system was in so much crisis this summer, it could not make the right decisions," he says.
This summer, CPS investigated Stephanie and Giselle Garibay. The women lived with their seven young children at Bissonnet Gardens, an apartment complex deep in southwest Houston. The children would often wander around the complex alone, wearing little more than diapers, according to Ofelia Cruz, the manager at Bissonnet Gardens. On September 12, CPS investigated a complaint that there was no food in the apartment for the children. There wasn't.
"They don't take care of the kids. It was like, where is the mother at," Cruz says.
About a week later, Giselle was arrested for child neglect. Three of her children had strayed from the apartment, and Giselle left to look for them. When officers arrived at the apartment looking for Giselle's brother, who was wanted on an auto theft charge, they saw an infant lying face down on the floor. When police told Giselle they would call CPS, she said an investigator had already been to the apartment and done nothing.
page 3
Three days later, Rosalio Banuelos-Manrique, a 19-year-old male friend of Stephanie, showed up at the apartment. He tucked a loaded pistol behind a bed. Stephanie's three-year-old son wandered into the bedroom, found the pistol and accidentally shot himself in the face.
_____________________
Maria and Rafael were discovering that their CPS case was full of holes. Maria took the court-ordered hair follicle drug test and waited, mulling over the allegations against her. Positive for cocaine and marijuana on May 7 and July 17. She tried to remember if the hospital had even taken urine samples during those visits.
She dug up her hospital records for those dates and found the nurse's notes:
07/17 14:30: pt changed into gown and given instruction to obtain clean catch urine... pt states she can not give a urine sample at this time...
On the last page of the hospital records from July 17, under the section labeled "Procedures," it shows that no urinalysis was done. Maria thought the hospital probably mixed up the test results from May. Maria and her baby tested negative on the birth date, July 21, and Maria thought she had a pretty good case.
At the next court hearing, Maria and Rafael learned that Maria passed her hair follicle test. Maria's attorney, Ralph Alvarez, argued that the original allegations should be dropped. But the judge reset the hearing for ten days later, to see if investigators could determine anything new.
They did. As it turns out, Maria had a child before meeting Rafael. Four years earlier, she was homeless in Houston, bouncing between friends' sofas and her sister's spare bed. Maria became pregnant for the first time. Several months after that son was born, Maria traveled to Texarkana to work on a construction crew. She desperately needed the money, and it would only be temporary. She left her newborn with a friend.
When Maria arrived back in Houston, the friend told her that someone from Child Protective Services had taken Maria's baby. The CPS report from that investigation maintains that Maria's son was taken in with a lice infestation. The baby's head was bleeding from lice bites and scratching. When Maria met Rafael nearly two years later in Seguin, after both had fled the city and Hurricane Rita, she didn't know the fate of her first son.
Things had gotten better for Maria. Rafael was a godsend, and she loved him immensely. Rafael loved her back. After some time in Seguin, they returned to Houston and Rafael found a steady job at HydroChem Industrial Services in La Porte. Eventually, the couple moved to a modest home in a trailer court not far from his work. Maria liked staying home cooking and cleaning and caring for the couple's son while her boyfriend spent his days at work.
Now Maria had lost her kids again. The judge granted temporary custody of the couple's two sons to Rafael's mother and stepfather. Maria and Rafael were ordered to meet with a caseworker and their investigator to develop a parenting plan — counseling, classes, drug tests — which would be the key to getting back their children.
At the meeting, the investigator didn't show. Wale Babalola had left the agency to pursue a nursing career. Rafael and Maria were granted visitation twice a month, for one hour, at a CPS location in Houston.
_____________________
Texas caseworkers handle anywhere between 40 and 80 cases at a time. Investigators' caseloads have dropped since 2005, but remain at 30 to 40 per month.
The Child Welfare League of America suggests that caseworkers and investigators should carry between 12 and 17 cases a month. The national average is about 24.
Critics of CPS say the root of problems within the agency is high employee turnover, which is caused by the enormous caseloads.
"That's a fact of life," says Houston attorney Brian Fischer, one of around 65 lawyers in Texas to be board-certified in juvenile law.
Fischer recently represented a white couple who were trying to get custody of an Asian baby they had fostered since CPS took the child from its parents. The baby's mother was mentally handicapped, and the father signed away his rights to the child.
Fischer's clients hoped to eventually adopt the baby, but 15 months into the case, the child's aunt and uncle stepped forward wanting custody. Leaders in Houston's Asian community criticized CPS for taking a child from its family and culture. The case went to jury trial, a rarity in CPS cases. It was a messy situation, but the jury sided with Fischer's clients. During the 18-month case, the child had four different caseworkers.
The average length a child stays in foster care in Texas is about 21 months. If the child isn't adopted or returned to the family before that time, the average stay jumps to almost five years, meaning the child most likely turns 18 and leaves.
The agency doesn't keep records on how many caseworkers a child has while in foster care, but Estella Olguin, a CPS spokeswoman in Harris County, says it will most likely be more than one.
According to a report from the nonprofit Texas Association for the Protection of Children, a child with one constant caseworker has a 75 percent chance of placement in a permanent home within a year. Switching caseworkers once almost cuts that chance in half, and multiple changes drop the chance to almost zero.
Kathy Reinhard and her husband live in Spring, and started keeping CPS foster children about three years ago. They tried to have their own kids 20 years ago, but were unsuccessful. They have also adopted two children.
Currently, one of their foster children is John, a two-year-old with some serious medical problems. The first year and a half the Reinhards kept John, they never heard from the child's caseworker, and CPS never went to their house despite a federal law that requires monthly visits. Kathy says they had no luck reaching the caseworker by phone or e-mail.
"That's more like the experience we've had with CPS," Kathy says. "It makes it difficult on us to get things done."
page 4
Working as a CPS investigator is a stressful job, says Javier Bernal, who has been with the agency for about five years. The main cause of stress, he says, is the amount of work. Bernal says that his monthly caseload is supposed to be 15, but he usually gets 20 new cases each month. Add that to the backlog of work he's trying to finish, and his actual number of cases is about 40.
"No, it's not manageable. It's very hard," Bernal says.
Since Bernal is one of the few Spanish-speaking investigators working in Harris County, he's often called on to translate for other caseworkers.
"That's when you want to pull your hair and think, 'Oh my gawd.' It's like, oh my gawd, I have to do this," Bernal says.
Each investigation he works should be complete in 30 days, but considering his caseload, that's not realistic. Cases can be extended to 60 days, but they often linger past that deadline. Plus, Bernal spends about half his time doing administrative work such as writing reports and appearing in court.
"We just don't have time," Bernal says. "It becomes a routine, where you already know what you're going to do."
Bernal moved to Texas from Mexico about nine years ago to work as an accountant. Then he started doing some modeling. Then he started teaching teenagers how to model. He liked working with the kids, so when a friend suggested CPS, it seemed like a good idea.
Bernal wasn't prepared for the emotional drain of the job. One of his toughest cases involved removing children from their parents on Christmas Eve. Another was the investigation of a teen who was killed by his father three days after Bernal had been to the house.
"You do feel bad. But whenever you feel like you did everything you could, you just have to move on," Bernal says. "Sometimes it's out of our hands."
Ursula Christian, the CPS caseworker who thought about quitting after receiving orders to spend weekends at the CPS office on Chimney Rock, decided to stay after she transferred to an adoption preparation unit. The duties are similar, but now she has a caseload of about 40.
Still, some cases put on top of her pile are too much to bear, including that of 16-year-old Melissa Flores. Melissa's mother was a crack addict, her father in prison. She had wanted to find an adoptive family when she entered the CPS system nine years earlier, but as she got older, that dream died.
Shortly before Christian switched units, she visited Melissa at her group home. Then, on July 11, the girl called Christian and said she had run away. Melissa had just celebrated her 17th birthday and wanted Christian to know she was doing fine.
Three days later, Christian received another phone call. The girl was dead, found in an apartment courtyard in southwest Houston. She had been shot in the back of the head.
Christian had to visit the morgue and identify the girl, had to select a casket, had to choose how Melissa would wear her hair and pick out Melissa's dress for the burial. On the morning of the small service, Christian arrived early to place some plants and flowers around the girl's gravesite.
"There are so many things mandated by the state. So many things, so many due dates," Christian says. "You're doing all you can...to maintain your sanity just to eat lunch."
Maria and Rafael were also having a hard time staying sane. They felt CPS had determined their guilt without sufficient evidence. Maria wanted her attorney to fight harder to have the case dismissed because of the hair follicle test.
"I think it's unfair the way they have done me," Maria says. "They just took my kids because they think I'm some kind of drug addict."
Maria's attorney, Ralph Alvarez, told her that she needed to be patient and complete each step of the plan that CPS had outlined for her and Rafael. Maria needed to participate in a psychological evaluation, a substance abuse treatment program, individual counseling, couples counseling and parenting classes. Rafael was urged to attend a drug program, individual counseling, couples counseling and parenting classes.
Rafael took the agency's plan as an indictment of him as a father. "I feel like they're bullshitting me," Rafael says. "You're messing with someone's life." The family's caseworker told them it would take at least a year before they could think about getting the kids back.
Rafael's boss at HydroChem had understood him missing work for the first couple of court dates, but Rafael feared that the numerous parenting classes and counseling sessions in upcoming months would hurt his good standing with his boss. It all would certainly hurt his paycheck.
Maria and Rafael's caseworker and attorney told them to be careful. If they failed to comply with the CPS plan — miss a parenting class or counseling session or get in trouble with the law — the agency could use that as another reason to keep the kids.
_____________________
The outcry for CPS reform came up again in the state legislature this year. Child advocacy groups urged lawmakers to reduce the amount of work for caseworkers to balance the one-sided approach of 2005.
Some money was earmarked, but only enough to lower the average caseload from about 48 to 43. Reformers squawked that legislators had bigger mouths than guts.
Madeline McClure, director of the Dallas-based nonprofit TexProtects, prepared a report for members of the committee charged with fixing CPS.
"No matter what other reforms are enacted," McClure wrote, "...all are wasted costs and worthless if we cannot retain our No. 1 asset: our workforce."
McClure suggests that salaries must rise to keep caseworkers and investigators. The average starting salary is $28,740. McClure says that many workers leave CPS for jobs in teaching, where they can make about $10,000 more a year and have a summer vacation.
"You probably need to pay them $100,000 a year to keep them there," McClure says, "but at least a salary that's comparable to a teacher. Probably even a small premium."
Texas should also require that investigators or caseworkers have a bachelor's degree in a human service or behavioral science field, McClure says. Texas is one of eight states without that requirement.
"You can't teach someone empathy in two hours as part of an afternoon training session," McClure says.
page 5
Lawmakers in Delaware started requiring the degree about ten years ago, during their reform of the state's CPS equivalent, the Delaware Children's Department.
In the late 1990s, children in Delaware died at a rate similar to children in Texas. Employee turnover within the Children's Department neared 50 percent. The caseloads were enormous.
A string of high-profile child deaths led Delaware lawmakers to push reform. They dumped money in the system, allotting enough funds to cap caseloads at 18. The results have been astonishing, says Joseph Smack, a spokesman for the Children's Department.
The cap on investigative caseloads was recently lowered to 11, and Smack expects future funding to drop caseworker caseloads to 12. The Children's Department currently operates with a turnover rate of about 7 percent.
Comparing Texas to Delaware is tough, McClure says, because of the enormous size difference in the states' child welfare systems. Texas has a child population of over six million; Delaware's is about 200,000. Last year, CPS responded to nearly 100,000 reports of abuse; Delaware's Children's Department responded to about 5,800.
But according to Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, size shouldn't hinder lawmakers from fixing the system.
"Not if you have the will to do it and look at what is proven to work elsewhere," Wexler says. "There are some very big places that do better than Texas."
Wexler says that Illinois has become somewhat of a model state in recent years by shifting its focus away from child removal and increasing its programs that keep families out of the system.
Those programs deal with poverty, the biggest problem in child welfare, according to Wexler. And, he says, the main fallacy among child protection agencies is confusing poverty with neglect.
Counseling and parenting classes do nothing to fix that problem, Wexler says, and more money should be spent on programs, such as rent subsidies, that allow parents to focus on being parents.
In Alabama, which Wexler cites as another improving state, caseworkers have money to use on things not usually associated with child abuse. If a mother can't get to work because her car won't start, the caseworker can pay for repairs. Or a caseworker can pay for daycare while a father attends a drug treatment.
But in Texas, only $1 from every $100 the agency spends goes toward programs designed to keep families out of CPS.
"They need to reverse course," Wexler says. "They're going in precisely the wrong direction."
_____________________
Maria and Rafael have faced hard times before. After returning to Houston from Seguin, the couple slept in Rafael's car when they couldn't find a friend or relative to stay with. When Maria got pregnant, Rafael knew he had to get his life straight, and he did.
But since CPS got involved, life has unraveled. Maria and Rafael are working on their parenting plan but are becoming disillusioned with the system.
"I don't ask the government for anything. I pay my bills, I pay my taxes," Rafael says. "It's weird the way they handle these CPS cases. It's like you lose your kids if you don't have any money."
Now Rafael can rarely sleep, and his doctor has prescribed Lexapro, an antianxiety and antidepression pill. Rafael doesn't like the way the pills make him feel, but they help him relax.
At HydroChem, Rafael's bosses have cut back on his hours, and the bills keep stacking up. All Rafael can think about are his sons in some strange home. Once, he tried to stop taking his pills.
"I started to lose my mind," Rafael says. "I'm pretty much bonded to the pills now."
On the night of October 9, Rafael couldn't sleep. He lay in bed, thinking about his kids and everything else. It had been a week since he last saw his children, and that was for only an hour. Maria had switched on the lights in the couple's bedroom. Rafael asked her to turn them off. She said no.
Rafael sprang out of bed, and he and Maria yelled at each other across the room. The fight moved from the bedroom to the living room. He swung open the front door and pushed Maria in the back. She tumbled down the three wooden steps leading out of their trailer. Rafael slammed the door shut.
Maria had injured her arm, but she didn't know how badly. She staggered over to her neighbor's trailer and they called the police. Rafael spent the night in jail.
"He's not an abusive man," Maria says. "I think he's just pissed off at everyone in the world, because of the kids. Things have just gotten out of hand."
A week later, Maria and Rafael attend visitation with their children at the Human Services building on Scott Street, the one behind the HEB grocery store. It's the type of office where people are tired of waiting, tired of standing in line. Women in black uniforms with pistols on their hip guard the lobby in case anyone gets out of hand.
After about an hour, Maria, Rafael, their caseworker and the two children emerge from behind a door marked Hall 1. The children are handed back to Rafael's mother and stepfather. Rafael appears on the verge of tears. Maria stares at another place.
"I miss them a lot," Maria says. "Just missing my baby grow, I'm missing a lot, and that hurts."
Their CPS caseworker disappears down Hall 1, and Rafael's mother and stepfather leave the office with the kids. Rafael and Maria sit down in two black metal chairs, not yet ready to leave.
They're not sure what will happen with CPS. Their caseworker knows about Rafael's arrest, but the couple is uncertain how it will affect their case. Maria thinks the charges can be dropped. They have another custody hearing in January, but Rafael says he doubts anything good can happen by then.
All they can do is wait. They say they'll hold on. But Maria and Rafael have little faith in the agency that has taken over the lives of their children and their own.
[email protected]
.
http://www.houstonpress.com/2007-11-08/ ... ing-apart/
Child Protective Services: Problems, Reforms and More Problems
A quick fix may only have created more problems for CPS and the families it serves
By Paul Knight
Published: November 8, 2007
Daniel Kramer
Rafael Sierra smiles as he watches the face of his girlfriend, Maria Martinez, with their newborn son. It's a July afternoon and sunlight pours into their hospital room at Bayshore Medical Center in Pasadena. It's the couple's second son in as many years. Rafael hasn't slept in almost two days, too anxious from the delivery. He sits by a window to fall asleep.
Maria rests in the hospital bed, holding her baby. She's glad the big day is over and her son was born without complications. During the last couple months, Maria had checked in at Bayshore several times for intense stomach pains. She had been a little worried. But now, Maria can relax.
Rafael had left the couple's first son at his mother and stepfather's house, though he would rather have his boy with him. The relationship between Rafael and his mother has deteriorated in recent years, especially since he started dating Maria, who, at 26, was almost eight years younger than Rafael. When Maria became pregnant with the couple's first child, it certainly didn't help. But sitting with his family, Rafael is convinced life's conflicts are behind him.
Then they hear a knock on the door. Wale Babalola, an investigator with Child Protective Services, stands outside. He has some things he wants to talk about.
When Maria checked in at Bayshore on May 7 for stomach pains, a urine sample came back positive for marijuana and cocaine. A hospital social worker had contacted CPS, which dispatched Babalola.
During the investigation, someone told Babalola that Maria used drugs at least twice a week, including the night before going into labor. Babalola had another urine test result from July 17, four days before Maria gave birth. Positive again for cocaine and marijuana.
Rafael's head spins. He goes into a separate room with Babalola. Rafael tells the investigator that he has never witnessed Maria taking drugs. He never thought she was stoned or high or whatever he wanted to call it.
"I wouldn't put my baby in harm's way like that," Maria says.
Rafael wants the children for himself. Nobody is accusing him of doing anything wrong, he argues. Babalola tells him that won't work. Not as long as he's living with Maria.
An emergency custody hearing is scheduled for July 24, the day after Maria checks out of the hospital. The judge rules that there is enough evidence to extend the investigation and orders Maria to give a hair follicle sample for a more accurate drug test.
Maria never brings her newborn home. Instead, the baby goes to Rafael's mother and stepfather's home, where the couple's first son remains. They can't afford it, but Maria and Rafael persuade an attorney to take the case.
"I'll do whatever it takes to get my babies back," Maria says.
Maria and Rafael have now entered the CPS system. A threat to children was presented, investigated and a decision made. Maria's case isn't hopeless. Her rights to the children were not immediately terminated, and if she and Rafael can prove capable of being good parents in the months ahead, they might get their children back.
But Maria and Rafael don't know they're about to enter the system at the worst possible time. During a two-year, statewide reform, the system has stacked the deck against itself. Caseworkers are overworked and quitting in droves. CPS is taking on more cases than it can handle, with children in state custody staying nights on cots and in cribs at a CPS office in Houston. In July, Maria and Rafael prepare to do anything to get back the kids, but the system that guards their fate is spinning wildly out of control.
_____________________
Bad things happened for Child Protective Services in 2004. A string of child deaths revealed a system incapable of caring for the children it was supposed to protect.
On Christmas Day 2003, the body of four-year-old Jovonie Ochoa was taken to a San Antonio hospital. The boy was dead. He weighed 16 pounds and was covered in bruises.
About two months before the boy died, Jovonie's mother left him with his grandparents, who then duct-taped and tied the boy to his bed, beat him and left him to starve. Jovonie died covered in bed sores, his brain bleeding from the beatings.
In the months that followed Jovonie's death, investigators discovered that three complaints were filed to CPS against Jovonie's mother in 2002. A CPS employee had attempted to contact the mother but couldn't find her, and Jovonie's case was closed.
Then, in April 2004, again in San Antonio, CPS reunited two-year-old Diamond Alexander-Washington with her mother. About eight weeks later, the little girl peed in her pants. The mother beat Diamond with a vacuum cleaner hose until she was dead.
During those final eight weeks, Diamond's mother went to jail for two weeks and police were called to her apartment twice, all unknown to Diamond's caseworker. Shortly before Diamond's death, her CPS caseworker left for vacation. When the cases were handed over to coworkers, Diamond was ignored.
Politicians responded to the amount of press given to these deaths. A judge in San Antonio's juvenile court urged Governor Rick Perry to do something. Lawmakers promised reform.
To understand the problems that faced the agency, legislators asked how the system works.
First, a complaint is filed to the agency, which is routed through the state office in Austin. If someone decides the call warrants further attention, the case is given to a CPS investigator.
The investigator must complete the case within 30 days. If the investigator closes the case, he can still refer the child to other programs funded by Harris County Children's Protective Services such as "Pal," which gets foster children ready for independent adult life.
page 2
The investigator can also determine the state needs to take custody. That's what happened to Maria Martinez, and even though her children were placed with Rafael's mother and stepfather, the state technically has custody. Finding a relative for the child is the preferred option, but if there's no relative, the child goes to a foster family or a foster facility. Wherever the child goes after the investigation is complete, the state assigns a CPS caseworker until the child is back with his or her family, is adopted or turns 18 and graduates from high school.
After lawmakers looked at the structure of the system, they decided to increase the pay of investigators and to hire more of them. The goal was to lower investigators' caseloads. The agency also planned to gradually privatize the duties of the caseworkers and the foster system itself by doing away with state-run facilities.
In September, the Department of Family and Protective Services, under which Child Protective Services operates, issued its fourth report on the progress of the 2005 reform, and state officials painted a pretty picture of "tremendous improvement."
Agency officials cited a reduction of 1,000 children in foster care between March and September. This reduction is attributed to lower investigator caseloads resulting in an improved investigative force. According to the top officials at the agency, the reform is passing through CPS like a cool breeze.
But former and current CPS investigators and caseworkers, along with state advocacy groups, say the 2005 plan may have made problems worse. Employee turnover has actually risen since 2005. About 34 percent of CPS investigators and caseworkers quit during their first year, and that number is about 10 percent higher in Harris County. Children in Texas still die at a rate that almost doubles the national average. Harris County is tops, with almost four deaths per 100,000 children. The number of Harris County children in foster care has dropped by about 100 since last year, but has actually risen by almost 1,000 since 2005.
"There are definitely faults by the legislature," says Jodi Smith, a public policy director for the child advocacy group Texans Care for Children. "They're very reactive, very short-term."
Smith says her group advised lawmakers in 2005. The idea that was championed by the legislature — lowering caseloads for investigators — should have been done years earlier, Smith says. But privatizing parts of the system was an idea that child advocacy groups strongly opposed.
"There really is a wide range in the quality of the [private] care," Smith says. "With children in the state's care, we think the state should have the authority to make decisions on the children's behalf."
The privatization idea has gone horribly awry. A pilot program started in the San Antonio area was unable to secure bids from foster care providers. This year, the legislature voted to kill the plan.
Furthermore, the 2005 measures created a backlash among CPS caseworkers. After the agency beefed up the investigator position — better pay, more positions, lower caseloads — many employees simply left the caseworker side to become investigators. This created a larger strain on the caseworkers that stayed. They were paid less and doing more work. And until this year, the agency had plans to cut caseworkers for the looming privatization.
Then, in March, the state entered a foster placement emergency. The state had failed to renew contracts with foster care agencies, and several group homes shut down. CPS officials alerted caseworkers in Houston that they would have to start working weekend shifts at the agency's Chimney Rock office to care for foster children who had no place to go.
That was the breaking point for many of the overworked employees, according to former caseworker Lee Welborn, who left the agency in July.
"We felt like we shouldn't give up our weekends because they couldn't get a contract signed," Welborn says. "Some people who I never thought would leave are leaving."
Before working as a caseworker, Welborn was a middle school teacher, where, among other things, he taught journal writing. Welborn read some dark, sordid writing from his students, things he considered abuse. He wanted to protect these kids, not just teach them. He left for CPS.
"I went there hoping I could stay. I did love it," Welborn says. "There are times I feel guilty for leaving, but when you have 72 cases, you feel like you can't really help a kid."
Ursula Christian had worked as a CPS caseworker for a year and a half when she heard the weekend order. Already, Christian says, she was handling 75 to 80 cases. Christian was told she'd have to add three weekend shifts a month. Sometimes that meant working an overnight shift at Chimney Rock, then returning to her regular office at 8 a.m. It became too much.
"Here we are an agency supposed to be protecting children, you know, what's in their best interest," Christian says. "But is it in my best interest to work a 14- or 15-hour shift and ignore my own children?"
During Welborn's tenure at CPS, he had trouble sleeping. He often felt nauseated and suffered from ulcers. Gray whiskers sprouted from his charcoal beard. He tried to stay despite the weekend order, but then he received e-mails from his bosses that said the standards of work needed to rise. Welborn felt insulted.
"The system was in so much crisis this summer, it could not make the right decisions," he says.
This summer, CPS investigated Stephanie and Giselle Garibay. The women lived with their seven young children at Bissonnet Gardens, an apartment complex deep in southwest Houston. The children would often wander around the complex alone, wearing little more than diapers, according to Ofelia Cruz, the manager at Bissonnet Gardens. On September 12, CPS investigated a complaint that there was no food in the apartment for the children. There wasn't.
"They don't take care of the kids. It was like, where is the mother at," Cruz says.
About a week later, Giselle was arrested for child neglect. Three of her children had strayed from the apartment, and Giselle left to look for them. When officers arrived at the apartment looking for Giselle's brother, who was wanted on an auto theft charge, they saw an infant lying face down on the floor. When police told Giselle they would call CPS, she said an investigator had already been to the apartment and done nothing.
page 3
Three days later, Rosalio Banuelos-Manrique, a 19-year-old male friend of Stephanie, showed up at the apartment. He tucked a loaded pistol behind a bed. Stephanie's three-year-old son wandered into the bedroom, found the pistol and accidentally shot himself in the face.
_____________________
Maria and Rafael were discovering that their CPS case was full of holes. Maria took the court-ordered hair follicle drug test and waited, mulling over the allegations against her. Positive for cocaine and marijuana on May 7 and July 17. She tried to remember if the hospital had even taken urine samples during those visits.
She dug up her hospital records for those dates and found the nurse's notes:
07/17 14:30: pt changed into gown and given instruction to obtain clean catch urine... pt states she can not give a urine sample at this time...
On the last page of the hospital records from July 17, under the section labeled "Procedures," it shows that no urinalysis was done. Maria thought the hospital probably mixed up the test results from May. Maria and her baby tested negative on the birth date, July 21, and Maria thought she had a pretty good case.
At the next court hearing, Maria and Rafael learned that Maria passed her hair follicle test. Maria's attorney, Ralph Alvarez, argued that the original allegations should be dropped. But the judge reset the hearing for ten days later, to see if investigators could determine anything new.
They did. As it turns out, Maria had a child before meeting Rafael. Four years earlier, she was homeless in Houston, bouncing between friends' sofas and her sister's spare bed. Maria became pregnant for the first time. Several months after that son was born, Maria traveled to Texarkana to work on a construction crew. She desperately needed the money, and it would only be temporary. She left her newborn with a friend.
When Maria arrived back in Houston, the friend told her that someone from Child Protective Services had taken Maria's baby. The CPS report from that investigation maintains that Maria's son was taken in with a lice infestation. The baby's head was bleeding from lice bites and scratching. When Maria met Rafael nearly two years later in Seguin, after both had fled the city and Hurricane Rita, she didn't know the fate of her first son.
Things had gotten better for Maria. Rafael was a godsend, and she loved him immensely. Rafael loved her back. After some time in Seguin, they returned to Houston and Rafael found a steady job at HydroChem Industrial Services in La Porte. Eventually, the couple moved to a modest home in a trailer court not far from his work. Maria liked staying home cooking and cleaning and caring for the couple's son while her boyfriend spent his days at work.
Now Maria had lost her kids again. The judge granted temporary custody of the couple's two sons to Rafael's mother and stepfather. Maria and Rafael were ordered to meet with a caseworker and their investigator to develop a parenting plan — counseling, classes, drug tests — which would be the key to getting back their children.
At the meeting, the investigator didn't show. Wale Babalola had left the agency to pursue a nursing career. Rafael and Maria were granted visitation twice a month, for one hour, at a CPS location in Houston.
_____________________
Texas caseworkers handle anywhere between 40 and 80 cases at a time. Investigators' caseloads have dropped since 2005, but remain at 30 to 40 per month.
The Child Welfare League of America suggests that caseworkers and investigators should carry between 12 and 17 cases a month. The national average is about 24.
Critics of CPS say the root of problems within the agency is high employee turnover, which is caused by the enormous caseloads.
"That's a fact of life," says Houston attorney Brian Fischer, one of around 65 lawyers in Texas to be board-certified in juvenile law.
Fischer recently represented a white couple who were trying to get custody of an Asian baby they had fostered since CPS took the child from its parents. The baby's mother was mentally handicapped, and the father signed away his rights to the child.
Fischer's clients hoped to eventually adopt the baby, but 15 months into the case, the child's aunt and uncle stepped forward wanting custody. Leaders in Houston's Asian community criticized CPS for taking a child from its family and culture. The case went to jury trial, a rarity in CPS cases. It was a messy situation, but the jury sided with Fischer's clients. During the 18-month case, the child had four different caseworkers.
The average length a child stays in foster care in Texas is about 21 months. If the child isn't adopted or returned to the family before that time, the average stay jumps to almost five years, meaning the child most likely turns 18 and leaves.
The agency doesn't keep records on how many caseworkers a child has while in foster care, but Estella Olguin, a CPS spokeswoman in Harris County, says it will most likely be more than one.
According to a report from the nonprofit Texas Association for the Protection of Children, a child with one constant caseworker has a 75 percent chance of placement in a permanent home within a year. Switching caseworkers once almost cuts that chance in half, and multiple changes drop the chance to almost zero.
Kathy Reinhard and her husband live in Spring, and started keeping CPS foster children about three years ago. They tried to have their own kids 20 years ago, but were unsuccessful. They have also adopted two children.
Currently, one of their foster children is John, a two-year-old with some serious medical problems. The first year and a half the Reinhards kept John, they never heard from the child's caseworker, and CPS never went to their house despite a federal law that requires monthly visits. Kathy says they had no luck reaching the caseworker by phone or e-mail.
"That's more like the experience we've had with CPS," Kathy says. "It makes it difficult on us to get things done."
page 4
Working as a CPS investigator is a stressful job, says Javier Bernal, who has been with the agency for about five years. The main cause of stress, he says, is the amount of work. Bernal says that his monthly caseload is supposed to be 15, but he usually gets 20 new cases each month. Add that to the backlog of work he's trying to finish, and his actual number of cases is about 40.
"No, it's not manageable. It's very hard," Bernal says.
Since Bernal is one of the few Spanish-speaking investigators working in Harris County, he's often called on to translate for other caseworkers.
"That's when you want to pull your hair and think, 'Oh my gawd.' It's like, oh my gawd, I have to do this," Bernal says.
Each investigation he works should be complete in 30 days, but considering his caseload, that's not realistic. Cases can be extended to 60 days, but they often linger past that deadline. Plus, Bernal spends about half his time doing administrative work such as writing reports and appearing in court.
"We just don't have time," Bernal says. "It becomes a routine, where you already know what you're going to do."
Bernal moved to Texas from Mexico about nine years ago to work as an accountant. Then he started doing some modeling. Then he started teaching teenagers how to model. He liked working with the kids, so when a friend suggested CPS, it seemed like a good idea.
Bernal wasn't prepared for the emotional drain of the job. One of his toughest cases involved removing children from their parents on Christmas Eve. Another was the investigation of a teen who was killed by his father three days after Bernal had been to the house.
"You do feel bad. But whenever you feel like you did everything you could, you just have to move on," Bernal says. "Sometimes it's out of our hands."
Ursula Christian, the CPS caseworker who thought about quitting after receiving orders to spend weekends at the CPS office on Chimney Rock, decided to stay after she transferred to an adoption preparation unit. The duties are similar, but now she has a caseload of about 40.
Still, some cases put on top of her pile are too much to bear, including that of 16-year-old Melissa Flores. Melissa's mother was a crack addict, her father in prison. She had wanted to find an adoptive family when she entered the CPS system nine years earlier, but as she got older, that dream died.
Shortly before Christian switched units, she visited Melissa at her group home. Then, on July 11, the girl called Christian and said she had run away. Melissa had just celebrated her 17th birthday and wanted Christian to know she was doing fine.
Three days later, Christian received another phone call. The girl was dead, found in an apartment courtyard in southwest Houston. She had been shot in the back of the head.
Christian had to visit the morgue and identify the girl, had to select a casket, had to choose how Melissa would wear her hair and pick out Melissa's dress for the burial. On the morning of the small service, Christian arrived early to place some plants and flowers around the girl's gravesite.
"There are so many things mandated by the state. So many things, so many due dates," Christian says. "You're doing all you can...to maintain your sanity just to eat lunch."
Maria and Rafael were also having a hard time staying sane. They felt CPS had determined their guilt without sufficient evidence. Maria wanted her attorney to fight harder to have the case dismissed because of the hair follicle test.
"I think it's unfair the way they have done me," Maria says. "They just took my kids because they think I'm some kind of drug addict."
Maria's attorney, Ralph Alvarez, told her that she needed to be patient and complete each step of the plan that CPS had outlined for her and Rafael. Maria needed to participate in a psychological evaluation, a substance abuse treatment program, individual counseling, couples counseling and parenting classes. Rafael was urged to attend a drug program, individual counseling, couples counseling and parenting classes.
Rafael took the agency's plan as an indictment of him as a father. "I feel like they're bullshitting me," Rafael says. "You're messing with someone's life." The family's caseworker told them it would take at least a year before they could think about getting the kids back.
Rafael's boss at HydroChem had understood him missing work for the first couple of court dates, but Rafael feared that the numerous parenting classes and counseling sessions in upcoming months would hurt his good standing with his boss. It all would certainly hurt his paycheck.
Maria and Rafael's caseworker and attorney told them to be careful. If they failed to comply with the CPS plan — miss a parenting class or counseling session or get in trouble with the law — the agency could use that as another reason to keep the kids.
_____________________
The outcry for CPS reform came up again in the state legislature this year. Child advocacy groups urged lawmakers to reduce the amount of work for caseworkers to balance the one-sided approach of 2005.
Some money was earmarked, but only enough to lower the average caseload from about 48 to 43. Reformers squawked that legislators had bigger mouths than guts.
Madeline McClure, director of the Dallas-based nonprofit TexProtects, prepared a report for members of the committee charged with fixing CPS.
"No matter what other reforms are enacted," McClure wrote, "...all are wasted costs and worthless if we cannot retain our No. 1 asset: our workforce."
McClure suggests that salaries must rise to keep caseworkers and investigators. The average starting salary is $28,740. McClure says that many workers leave CPS for jobs in teaching, where they can make about $10,000 more a year and have a summer vacation.
"You probably need to pay them $100,000 a year to keep them there," McClure says, "but at least a salary that's comparable to a teacher. Probably even a small premium."
Texas should also require that investigators or caseworkers have a bachelor's degree in a human service or behavioral science field, McClure says. Texas is one of eight states without that requirement.
"You can't teach someone empathy in two hours as part of an afternoon training session," McClure says.
page 5
Lawmakers in Delaware started requiring the degree about ten years ago, during their reform of the state's CPS equivalent, the Delaware Children's Department.
In the late 1990s, children in Delaware died at a rate similar to children in Texas. Employee turnover within the Children's Department neared 50 percent. The caseloads were enormous.
A string of high-profile child deaths led Delaware lawmakers to push reform. They dumped money in the system, allotting enough funds to cap caseloads at 18. The results have been astonishing, says Joseph Smack, a spokesman for the Children's Department.
The cap on investigative caseloads was recently lowered to 11, and Smack expects future funding to drop caseworker caseloads to 12. The Children's Department currently operates with a turnover rate of about 7 percent.
Comparing Texas to Delaware is tough, McClure says, because of the enormous size difference in the states' child welfare systems. Texas has a child population of over six million; Delaware's is about 200,000. Last year, CPS responded to nearly 100,000 reports of abuse; Delaware's Children's Department responded to about 5,800.
But according to Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, size shouldn't hinder lawmakers from fixing the system.
"Not if you have the will to do it and look at what is proven to work elsewhere," Wexler says. "There are some very big places that do better than Texas."
Wexler says that Illinois has become somewhat of a model state in recent years by shifting its focus away from child removal and increasing its programs that keep families out of the system.
Those programs deal with poverty, the biggest problem in child welfare, according to Wexler. And, he says, the main fallacy among child protection agencies is confusing poverty with neglect.
Counseling and parenting classes do nothing to fix that problem, Wexler says, and more money should be spent on programs, such as rent subsidies, that allow parents to focus on being parents.
In Alabama, which Wexler cites as another improving state, caseworkers have money to use on things not usually associated with child abuse. If a mother can't get to work because her car won't start, the caseworker can pay for repairs. Or a caseworker can pay for daycare while a father attends a drug treatment.
But in Texas, only $1 from every $100 the agency spends goes toward programs designed to keep families out of CPS.
"They need to reverse course," Wexler says. "They're going in precisely the wrong direction."
_____________________
Maria and Rafael have faced hard times before. After returning to Houston from Seguin, the couple slept in Rafael's car when they couldn't find a friend or relative to stay with. When Maria got pregnant, Rafael knew he had to get his life straight, and he did.
But since CPS got involved, life has unraveled. Maria and Rafael are working on their parenting plan but are becoming disillusioned with the system.
"I don't ask the government for anything. I pay my bills, I pay my taxes," Rafael says. "It's weird the way they handle these CPS cases. It's like you lose your kids if you don't have any money."
Now Rafael can rarely sleep, and his doctor has prescribed Lexapro, an antianxiety and antidepression pill. Rafael doesn't like the way the pills make him feel, but they help him relax.
At HydroChem, Rafael's bosses have cut back on his hours, and the bills keep stacking up. All Rafael can think about are his sons in some strange home. Once, he tried to stop taking his pills.
"I started to lose my mind," Rafael says. "I'm pretty much bonded to the pills now."
On the night of October 9, Rafael couldn't sleep. He lay in bed, thinking about his kids and everything else. It had been a week since he last saw his children, and that was for only an hour. Maria had switched on the lights in the couple's bedroom. Rafael asked her to turn them off. She said no.
Rafael sprang out of bed, and he and Maria yelled at each other across the room. The fight moved from the bedroom to the living room. He swung open the front door and pushed Maria in the back. She tumbled down the three wooden steps leading out of their trailer. Rafael slammed the door shut.
Maria had injured her arm, but she didn't know how badly. She staggered over to her neighbor's trailer and they called the police. Rafael spent the night in jail.
"He's not an abusive man," Maria says. "I think he's just pissed off at everyone in the world, because of the kids. Things have just gotten out of hand."
A week later, Maria and Rafael attend visitation with their children at the Human Services building on Scott Street, the one behind the HEB grocery store. It's the type of office where people are tired of waiting, tired of standing in line. Women in black uniforms with pistols on their hip guard the lobby in case anyone gets out of hand.
After about an hour, Maria, Rafael, their caseworker and the two children emerge from behind a door marked Hall 1. The children are handed back to Rafael's mother and stepfather. Rafael appears on the verge of tears. Maria stares at another place.
"I miss them a lot," Maria says. "Just missing my baby grow, I'm missing a lot, and that hurts."
Their CPS caseworker disappears down Hall 1, and Rafael's mother and stepfather leave the office with the kids. Rafael and Maria sit down in two black metal chairs, not yet ready to leave.
They're not sure what will happen with CPS. Their caseworker knows about Rafael's arrest, but the couple is uncertain how it will affect their case. Maria thinks the charges can be dropped. They have another custody hearing in January, but Rafael says he doubts anything good can happen by then.
All they can do is wait. They say they'll hold on. But Maria and Rafael have little faith in the agency that has taken over the lives of their children and their own.
[email protected]
.
.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/ ... e.html?npc
Child Protective Services' issues 'worse now,' follow-up reveals
Web Posted: 02/08/2008 11:21 PM CST
Elizabeth Allen
Express-News
.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/ ... e.html?npc
Child Protective Services' issues 'worse now,' follow-up reveals
Web Posted: 02/08/2008 11:21 PM CST
Elizabeth Allen
Express-News
.
.
http://www.newschannel5.tv/2008/2/28/98 ... estigation
NEWSCHANNEL 5 Investigation: Foster Care Investigation
Thursday , February 28, 2008 Posted: 11:35 PM
NEWSCHANNEL 5 Investigation
The system that's designed to protect children may also be hurting them
CORPUS CHRISTI - A foster mother called NEWSCHANNEL 5 for help after she was unable to get a few belongings to her former foster child.
Traci Jordan was just trying to send a few items the child owned to him, after he was pulled out of foster care.
"Something we'd take for granted if we move we take our belongings, a foster child can't take that for granted," she says.
The child, named Sean, was from the Valley. He was shipped to Corpus Christi, after Child Protective Services was unable to find him a home here.
Jordan tells NEWSCHANNEL 5 the boy's case workers sporadically visited the home, despite a mandated monthly visit.
When we asked CPS why the case workers didn't visit as often as required. All they could say is they can't comment.
A spokesman did tell NEWSCHANNEL 5 that if case workers aren't visiting every month, their supervisors should be told.
A CPS handbook does not outline any rules for shipping belongings. Nor does it specifically lay out how case workers are regulated.
Sean's biological father says his son has several medical conditions, but he never got any medical records or even his son's birth certificate.
Tonight, Sean is lucky. He has a biological parent and a foster parent working to make sure he's safe.
.
http://www.newschannel5.tv/2008/2/28/98 ... estigation
NEWSCHANNEL 5 Investigation: Foster Care Investigation
Thursday , February 28, 2008 Posted: 11:35 PM
NEWSCHANNEL 5 Investigation
The system that's designed to protect children may also be hurting them
CORPUS CHRISTI - A foster mother called NEWSCHANNEL 5 for help after she was unable to get a few belongings to her former foster child.
Traci Jordan was just trying to send a few items the child owned to him, after he was pulled out of foster care.
"Something we'd take for granted if we move we take our belongings, a foster child can't take that for granted," she says.
The child, named Sean, was from the Valley. He was shipped to Corpus Christi, after Child Protective Services was unable to find him a home here.
Jordan tells NEWSCHANNEL 5 the boy's case workers sporadically visited the home, despite a mandated monthly visit.
When we asked CPS why the case workers didn't visit as often as required. All they could say is they can't comment.
A spokesman did tell NEWSCHANNEL 5 that if case workers aren't visiting every month, their supervisors should be told.
A CPS handbook does not outline any rules for shipping belongings. Nor does it specifically lay out how case workers are regulated.
Sean's biological father says his son has several medical conditions, but he never got any medical records or even his son's birth certificate.
Tonight, Sean is lucky. He has a biological parent and a foster parent working to make sure he's safe.
.
http://www.kvia.com/global/story.asp?s=8770702
07.31.08
Report: Hundreds of CPS employees have criminal histories
Posted: July 31, 2008 08:09 PM EDT
Updated: Aug 2, 2008 07:55 PM EDT
By ABC-7 Reporter Darren Hunt
EL PASO -- A recent state-wide investigation found nearly 400 employees of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services have criminal histories.
Among the offenses by these employees revealed by this investigation are assault, burglary, driving while intoxicated, theft, domestic violence, indecent exposure, prostitution, drug possession and even selling alcohol to minors.
One of those employees named in the investigation works for Child Protective Services in El Paso.
...
07.31.08
Report: Hundreds of CPS employees have criminal histories
Posted: July 31, 2008 08:09 PM EDT
Updated: Aug 2, 2008 07:55 PM EDT
By ABC-7 Reporter Darren Hunt
EL PASO -- A recent state-wide investigation found nearly 400 employees of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services have criminal histories.
Among the offenses by these employees revealed by this investigation are assault, burglary, driving while intoxicated, theft, domestic violence, indecent exposure, prostitution, drug possession and even selling alcohol to minors.
One of those employees named in the investigation works for Child Protective Services in El Paso.
...
http://www.waxahachiedailylight.com/art ... 248930.txt
Handling of CPS case questioned
Judge subject of writ filing at appellate court
By JOANN LIVINGSTON
Daily Light Managing Editor
Published: Wednesday, August 6, 2008 3:48 PM CDT
More than a month after an Ellis County jury reached a verdict in a Child Protective Services case, all sides continue to await Judge Greg Wilhelm’s entering of that judgment.
Bearing down on the case is a state-mandated deadline. If a judgment isn’t entered by Sept. 1, it would be as if the case never happened. The three children would go back to their biological mother – whose parental rights were terminated by the jury after hearing evidence the girls had suffered physical abuse by pediatric falsification.
Pediatric falsification is a recognized form of child abuse in which a child is repeatedly subjected – at a parent or guardian’s insistence – to unnecessary medical visits or procedures that are often intrusive or painful. Certain cases of pediatric falsification have been referred to as “Munchausen by proxy” – and that was an early allegation in this case.
The jury rendered its verdict June 30 in the case, which began in March 2007 and culminated with a 30-day trial for which more than 17,000 pages of medical history had been compiled relating to the three girls.
Testimony was received from numerous professionals – including depositions taken in the state of Iowa – and, as of July 31, the 17-month-long case had documented costs of more than $138,000. At the district clerk’s office, a pleadings listing for the case contains more than 720 line items – each pertaining to another filing, such as a motion or letter.
CPS concerns with the mother first arose in 2004 in Iowa, with the children removed in Texas in March 2007, by which time she had three girls, ages 1, 3 and 5.
A caseworker’s affidavit at the start of the case notes, “Although there do appear to be legitimate illnesses for these children, the concerns with this case are the multiplicity of treatments, physicians and medications administered for these children … . Additionally, there are concerns that the severity of these illnesses is often over-exaggerated by (the mother), consequently resulting in more invasive and possibly more frequent treatment than the children need, which places them at risk of ongoing abuse.”
During the trial, jurors heard testimony and evidence that one of the children might have a mild form of cerebral palsy, with the other wo not having any illnesses.
In their decision, the jurors voted unanimously to terminate the mother’s rights and further voted 10-2 to remove the children from the maternal grandparents’ care. (Two jurors wanted CPS and the maternal grandparents to have joint custody.)
The jurors also voted 10-2 to give custody of the middle girl to her biological father, with two jurors wanting joint custody between the father, CPS and the maternal grandparents. (Any father’s rights to the other two girls were previously terminated in the case).
In civil cases, which CPS cases are, a 10-2 verdict counts the same as a unanimous one.
“None of the jurors felt that the children would be safe in the custody of the grandparents alone if CPS did not continue to monitor them,” five of the jurors wrote in a co-signed letter to the editor published in the Aug. 6 edition of the Daily Light, saying that, although the maternal grandparents had been warned by CPS in two states, “they chose to defend and make excuses for (their daughter) as the children’s bodies were mutilated with unnecessary surgeries, procedures and toxic medications.”
The state’s attorneys for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (CPS) and their children have now taken their concerns to the Tenth Court of Appeals, filing a writ of mandamus to compel Wilhelm to render the jury verdict – “and enter a final judgment pursuant to the jury’s verdict.”
The writ notes, “ … while the trial court suggests a final ruling and entry of judgment consistent with the jury’s verdict by Sept. 1, 2008, there is no guarantee and certainty for (the biological father or CPS) that this will, in fact, be the case.”
In their letter, jurors express their concerns with the delay in their verdict being entered.
“(The jury verdict was) for immediate placement with this non-offending and protective father and for her other two siblings to be adopted out to a safe, protective and loving home and immediately removed from the grandparents’ home,” the five jurors wrote in their letter. “We came to a verdict on June 30 and the children are still in the home with the grandparents. …
“We do not know why the court wasted 12 jurors’ time, as well as tens of thousands of dollars in taxpayer money on this case,” jurors Randy Flynt of Ennis, Joe Clark of Midlothian, Royce Brown of Red Oak, Doreen Gonzales of Waxahachie and Cindy Lantz of Red Oak wrote.
State-mandated deadline for action
CPS cases are under a one-year state-mandated deadline to reach a resolution. A one-time six-month extension can be applied by a judge – and was in this case. After the 18 months, however, if there is no resolution – in this case, the entering of the jury’s verdict – the matter simply goes away as if it were never filed.
CPS asserts in the writ of mandamus, which was filed July 30 with the Tenth Court of Appeals in Waco, that Wilhelm has “committed a clear abuse of discretion by failing to timely render the jury verdict and enter the judgment … .”
This is in “contravention of the clear legislative intent of obtaining permanency for the children of the state of Texas,” the writ further reads, noting that if the state-mandated deadline is exceeded, “there is no adequate remedy at law for (Child Protective Services).”
In particular, the writ questions an order signed July 25 by Wilhelm that appointed “special masters” new to the case to put together a transition plan for the children.
Several court documents filed by Wilhelm in the case have indicated his intent to enter a judgment in the case. Most recently, he submitted a letter July 30 to the Tenth Court in which he wrote that he had set an Aug. 6 hearing “for entry of judgment … as well as a hearing on objections to the trial court’s Memorandum, Order Appointing Transition Master, Order Appointing Transition Coordinator and Order for Placement of Children.” Wilhelm subsequently amended the letter to note a new hearing date of Aug. 11 due to the maternal grandparents’ attorney having previously filed a notice of being on vacation.
On July 31, the Tenth Court justices issued an order requesting responses from the different parties by 5 p.m. Aug. 6 on the writ of mandamus to compel Wilhelm to take action. The justices also stayed his order that set up special masters in the case.
The maternal grandparents’ attorney, Michael Hartley, offered an explanation for the delay in a July 31 letter to the editor, saying in part, “Since the jury’s verdict requires that (the children) be removed from the home in which they have been living for the last year, the judge asked each party to submit a plan for the transition of these children that they thought would address the concerns expressed by the experts at trial.
“After receiving this input, he crafted a plan for the transition of these children into foster care and the move to Iowa. He made it clear in his order that he is not going to set aside the jury's verdict, but wants to ensure that the method and timing of the transition does as little damage to the children as possible,” Hartley wrote. “To be sure, there has been disagreement among the parties about the need for the judge's plan, but, if you study the actual order of the court, there is no question that he has given careful consideration to the needs of the children.”
It is unclear at this time how the upper court’s involvement affects the Aug. 11 hearing.
In his letter to the appellate court, Wilhelm also wrote, “As a courtesy, upon entry of the trial court’s judgment, a copy will be promptly forwarded to you for review and consideration.”
Handling of CPS case questioned
Judge subject of writ filing at appellate court
By JOANN LIVINGSTON
Daily Light Managing Editor
Published: Wednesday, August 6, 2008 3:48 PM CDT
More than a month after an Ellis County jury reached a verdict in a Child Protective Services case, all sides continue to await Judge Greg Wilhelm’s entering of that judgment.
Bearing down on the case is a state-mandated deadline. If a judgment isn’t entered by Sept. 1, it would be as if the case never happened. The three children would go back to their biological mother – whose parental rights were terminated by the jury after hearing evidence the girls had suffered physical abuse by pediatric falsification.
Pediatric falsification is a recognized form of child abuse in which a child is repeatedly subjected – at a parent or guardian’s insistence – to unnecessary medical visits or procedures that are often intrusive or painful. Certain cases of pediatric falsification have been referred to as “Munchausen by proxy” – and that was an early allegation in this case.
The jury rendered its verdict June 30 in the case, which began in March 2007 and culminated with a 30-day trial for which more than 17,000 pages of medical history had been compiled relating to the three girls.
Testimony was received from numerous professionals – including depositions taken in the state of Iowa – and, as of July 31, the 17-month-long case had documented costs of more than $138,000. At the district clerk’s office, a pleadings listing for the case contains more than 720 line items – each pertaining to another filing, such as a motion or letter.
CPS concerns with the mother first arose in 2004 in Iowa, with the children removed in Texas in March 2007, by which time she had three girls, ages 1, 3 and 5.
A caseworker’s affidavit at the start of the case notes, “Although there do appear to be legitimate illnesses for these children, the concerns with this case are the multiplicity of treatments, physicians and medications administered for these children … . Additionally, there are concerns that the severity of these illnesses is often over-exaggerated by (the mother), consequently resulting in more invasive and possibly more frequent treatment than the children need, which places them at risk of ongoing abuse.”
During the trial, jurors heard testimony and evidence that one of the children might have a mild form of cerebral palsy, with the other wo not having any illnesses.
In their decision, the jurors voted unanimously to terminate the mother’s rights and further voted 10-2 to remove the children from the maternal grandparents’ care. (Two jurors wanted CPS and the maternal grandparents to have joint custody.)
The jurors also voted 10-2 to give custody of the middle girl to her biological father, with two jurors wanting joint custody between the father, CPS and the maternal grandparents. (Any father’s rights to the other two girls were previously terminated in the case).
In civil cases, which CPS cases are, a 10-2 verdict counts the same as a unanimous one.
“None of the jurors felt that the children would be safe in the custody of the grandparents alone if CPS did not continue to monitor them,” five of the jurors wrote in a co-signed letter to the editor published in the Aug. 6 edition of the Daily Light, saying that, although the maternal grandparents had been warned by CPS in two states, “they chose to defend and make excuses for (their daughter) as the children’s bodies were mutilated with unnecessary surgeries, procedures and toxic medications.”
The state’s attorneys for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (CPS) and their children have now taken their concerns to the Tenth Court of Appeals, filing a writ of mandamus to compel Wilhelm to render the jury verdict – “and enter a final judgment pursuant to the jury’s verdict.”
The writ notes, “ … while the trial court suggests a final ruling and entry of judgment consistent with the jury’s verdict by Sept. 1, 2008, there is no guarantee and certainty for (the biological father or CPS) that this will, in fact, be the case.”
In their letter, jurors express their concerns with the delay in their verdict being entered.
“(The jury verdict was) for immediate placement with this non-offending and protective father and for her other two siblings to be adopted out to a safe, protective and loving home and immediately removed from the grandparents’ home,” the five jurors wrote in their letter. “We came to a verdict on June 30 and the children are still in the home with the grandparents. …
“We do not know why the court wasted 12 jurors’ time, as well as tens of thousands of dollars in taxpayer money on this case,” jurors Randy Flynt of Ennis, Joe Clark of Midlothian, Royce Brown of Red Oak, Doreen Gonzales of Waxahachie and Cindy Lantz of Red Oak wrote.
State-mandated deadline for action
CPS cases are under a one-year state-mandated deadline to reach a resolution. A one-time six-month extension can be applied by a judge – and was in this case. After the 18 months, however, if there is no resolution – in this case, the entering of the jury’s verdict – the matter simply goes away as if it were never filed.
CPS asserts in the writ of mandamus, which was filed July 30 with the Tenth Court of Appeals in Waco, that Wilhelm has “committed a clear abuse of discretion by failing to timely render the jury verdict and enter the judgment … .”
This is in “contravention of the clear legislative intent of obtaining permanency for the children of the state of Texas,” the writ further reads, noting that if the state-mandated deadline is exceeded, “there is no adequate remedy at law for (Child Protective Services).”
In particular, the writ questions an order signed July 25 by Wilhelm that appointed “special masters” new to the case to put together a transition plan for the children.
Several court documents filed by Wilhelm in the case have indicated his intent to enter a judgment in the case. Most recently, he submitted a letter July 30 to the Tenth Court in which he wrote that he had set an Aug. 6 hearing “for entry of judgment … as well as a hearing on objections to the trial court’s Memorandum, Order Appointing Transition Master, Order Appointing Transition Coordinator and Order for Placement of Children.” Wilhelm subsequently amended the letter to note a new hearing date of Aug. 11 due to the maternal grandparents’ attorney having previously filed a notice of being on vacation.
On July 31, the Tenth Court justices issued an order requesting responses from the different parties by 5 p.m. Aug. 6 on the writ of mandamus to compel Wilhelm to take action. The justices also stayed his order that set up special masters in the case.
The maternal grandparents’ attorney, Michael Hartley, offered an explanation for the delay in a July 31 letter to the editor, saying in part, “Since the jury’s verdict requires that (the children) be removed from the home in which they have been living for the last year, the judge asked each party to submit a plan for the transition of these children that they thought would address the concerns expressed by the experts at trial.
“After receiving this input, he crafted a plan for the transition of these children into foster care and the move to Iowa. He made it clear in his order that he is not going to set aside the jury's verdict, but wants to ensure that the method and timing of the transition does as little damage to the children as possible,” Hartley wrote. “To be sure, there has been disagreement among the parties about the need for the judge's plan, but, if you study the actual order of the court, there is no question that he has given careful consideration to the needs of the children.”
It is unclear at this time how the upper court’s involvement affects the Aug. 11 hearing.
In his letter to the appellate court, Wilhelm also wrote, “As a courtesy, upon entry of the trial court’s judgment, a copy will be promptly forwarded to you for review and consideration.”
http://www.waxahachiedailylight.com/art ... 277918.txt
Timeline of CPS case and jury trial
By JOANN LIVINGSTON
Daily Light Managing Editor
Published: Thursday, August 7, 2008 1:28 PM CDT
June 30 –
Jury verdict. In a unanimous vote, jurors terminate all parental rights of the mother. In a 10-2 vote, jurors place the youngest and oldest girls in the state’s custody and place their middle half-sibling with her biological father.
July 2 –
Original date set by Judge Greg Wilhelm for entry of final judgment. Entry wasn’t made, but Wilhelm issued instead a letter ruling enjoining “all contact between the sole managing conservators and their charges, as well as any contact between the ad litems and the children. The court also ordered continued placement with the (maternal grandparents) indefinitely,” as noted in a July 25 motion filed by Sara Spector of the district attorney’s office on behalf of CPS; Gloria Ortiz, the attorney ad litem for the children and Susan Mason and Dan Altman, co-counsels for the middle girl’s biological father.
In his letter, Wilhelm requested transition plans for the children out of their maternal grandparents’ home, where they had been placed since July 2007.
CPS files its transition plan with the court that would have included movement of the children that same day from the maternal grandparents to a protected and secured foster/adoptive placement, with further transition of the middle girl to her biological father in Iowa.
The mother’s attorney, Mark Griffith, sends a letter to the court from a licensed professional counselor working with the girls saying she doesn’t support the immediate transition of the children.
“However, if it is the court’s decision to move forward with this decision, the girls and their grandparents should have regular unsupervised visitation weekly. Their mother should maintain her previous visitation schedule,” the counselor writes, saying the middle girl (after her move to Iowa) should continue to have phone calls and in-person visits with her maternal grandparents and mother.
“I am unwilling to comment on the level of supervision for her mother as I have never spoken with the mother and have no knowledge of her appropriateness to visit with the children unsupervised,” the counselor writes. “However, if the grandparents have been trusted to supervise the visits, thus far, it is my opinion that (they) be allowed to continue supervising.”
Wilhelm issues additional orders allowing a CPS caseworker and a court investigator the authority to have physical access to the children without notice to the maternal grandparents. He grants the biological father of the middle girl daily telephone contact with his daughter and restrains the mother from any access, communication or contact with the children.
Wilhelm warns that any violation of any of his orders “may mandate the immediate removal of the three children” from the maternal grandparents home.
July 8 –
Attorneys for the biological father of the middle girl file a transition plan for her to join him in Iowa.
The maternal grandparents also file a transition plan and note their intent to appeal if Wilhelm denies their motion for judgment notwithstanding the jury’s verdict. The plan asks the judge to name them temporary managing conservators of the children and prevent CPS and the biological father of the middle girl from removing the girls during the appeal. Their plan notes that the mother “should not see any of her daughters for a minimum of one year and then only with the consent of the appropriate counselor and custodial caregiver.”
Griffith files a motion on behalf of the mother asking Wilhelm to “disregard all of the jury’s findings” and verdict. The motion proposes allowing the mother severely limited rights, continued placement of the children in the maternal grandparents’ home and continued involvement by CPS. The biological father would be allowed “one weekend a month of his choosing with 15 days’ notice” and additional days per Texas’ standard visitation.
Hartley files a motion on behalf of the maternal grandparents asking for judgment notwithstanding the jury verdict.
“The jury’s verdict is not supported by even a scintilla of evidence that the findings were in the best interest of the children and is, therefore, legally insufficient,” the motion reads, adding that there were only “unsubstantiated inferences that the (maternal grandparents) knew of the respondent mother’s mental health condition or that she was falsifying pediatric conditions resulting in the excessive medical treatment of the children.”
July 9 –
Wilhelm requests electronic and editable copies of recently filed motions. He also asks CPS to provide an electronic and editable copy of its proposed final judgment.
Attorneys for CPS, the children and the biological father file responses, including one against the requests to overturn the jury’s verdict.
On behalf of the children’s attorney, a psychiatrist writes a letter refuting previous comments by the licensed professional counselor who advocated against an immediate transition. The psychiatrist said more harm exists in the girls’ remaining in the maternal grandparents’ home, noting, “Based on court documents, it is clear that (the maternal grandmother) is unable to put the children’s physical and emotional well-being before that of her daughter … who has an established and protracted history of mental illness.”
July 11 –
Hearing held relating to motions filed in the case. A transcript of Wilhelm’s closing remarks in the case includes, “… the court is not going to belabor and delay its ruling on all of those orders. … I will be working over tonight and over the weekend and on Monday evening and Tuesday evening, whatever time it takes to make sure that we are not dragging this thing waiting for a long process.
“I believe that the law gives me discretion in timing the entrance of that judgment,” the transcript reads, “but I don’t think it is unlimited nor would I want it to be. Worst thing you need is a judge to wait 18 months to enter a jury verdict if they’re going to. That clearly is improper. That doesn’t help these children.”
July 15 –
Wilhelm issues a “clarifying order” allowing CPS and the children’s attorney ad litem (Ortiz) and guardian ad litem (Melissa Bousquet), immediate access to information and the children.
July 17 –
Susan Mason, co-counsel to the biological father, writes Wilhelm asking for his immediate attention to the entry of the jury’s verdict, noting, “Immediately following the verdict, this court recognized the need to avoid the very delay now occurring. If anything, it appears that this court may be seeking to find some middle ground that will allow the terminated mother to regain rights to the children based on some speculative promise of improved future behavior.”
Mason cited the Fourteenth Court of Appeals, which stated in a similar proceeding, “There will always be a temptation to find a middle way between leaving a child in a dangerous situation and terminating all possibility of reunification. But such compromises inevitably mean leaving the children in limbo, when what they need is permanency and security. By requiring all termination suits to be completed within a year, the Legislature made clear that courts cannot leave children in foster homes indefinitely while existing parents try to improve themselves and their conditions.”
July 18 –
Wilhelm denies the mother’s motion for judgment non obstante veredictor and maternal grandparents’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
July 24 –
Guardian ad litem Melissa Bousquet files a letter of concern with the court, saying, “It is imperative that these children are no longer left, not only in limbo, but in a placement situation (with the maternal grandparents) that a jury has determined was not in their best interest. Further delay only causes further harm to three children who have experienced way too much harm already.”
July 25 –
Wilhelm sends out a 14-page document, “Trial Court’s Memorandum, Order Appointing Transition Master, Order Appointing Transition Coordinator and Order for Placement of Children.” He directs all parties to correspond with the coordinator as “due to the transition master’s existing professional commitments, I believe that you may be delayed in receiving timely replies to any telephone calls, faxes and such directed to her office. In the alternative, one of the transition coordinator’s duties will be to communicate with each of you in a timely fashion.”
In the memorandum, Wilhelm writes he “is not now questioning the jury’s verdict” and notes a timeline of seven to 10 days for the girls to be transitioned from the maternal grandparents to a foster placement – with the middle girl transitioned from there to her father in Iowa.
July 28 –
The district attorney’s office on behalf of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, the attorney ad litem for the children and attorneys for the middle girl’s biological father file a motion objecting to the appointment of masters and re-urging placement per the jury’s verdict.
July 30 –
The district attorney’s office on behalf of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services files a writ of mandamus with the Tenth Court of Appeals in Waco. The filing seeks to compel Wilhelm to enter the jury verdict and also stay the motion appointing masters.
July 31 –
The appellate court requests briefs from parties in the case on the writ, giving a deadline of 5 p.m. Aug. 7. The court also orders a temporary stay of Wilhelm’s order appointing the masters.
July 31 –
Wilhelm sends a letter to Waco advising the justices that he intends to enter the jury verdict and that he had already set a hearing Aug. 11 on the district attorney’s office and others’ motion objecting to the appointment of masters. (The hearing was originally set for Aug. 6, but was cancelled due to Hartley, the maternal grandparents’ attorney, being on a pre-scheduled vacation).
Aug. 1 –
The transition coordinator writes Wilhelm saying that she and the transition master had ceased their work on the case until further notice as a result of the appellate court involvement. The coordinator provides a “tentative” transition plan that indicated the children were to have been removed from the maternal grandparents’ home Aug. 4, with good-bye visits with the mother and grandparents Aug. 8. The plan indicated the middle girl was to have moved to Iowa on Aug. 18 to start school Aug. 21.
“I feel it is important that I provide you with the tentative transition plan as outlined by (the transition master) in hopes that these children are placed in their respective homes without further delay,” the coordinator wrote, adding her prayer that the parties involved “may continue to work together for nothing other than … the best interests of these children.”
Aug. 7 –
Responses due to the appellate court.
Aug. 11 –
Hearing set in Wilhelm’s court.
Timeline of CPS case and jury trial
By JOANN LIVINGSTON
Daily Light Managing Editor
Published: Thursday, August 7, 2008 1:28 PM CDT
June 30 –
Jury verdict. In a unanimous vote, jurors terminate all parental rights of the mother. In a 10-2 vote, jurors place the youngest and oldest girls in the state’s custody and place their middle half-sibling with her biological father.
July 2 –
Original date set by Judge Greg Wilhelm for entry of final judgment. Entry wasn’t made, but Wilhelm issued instead a letter ruling enjoining “all contact between the sole managing conservators and their charges, as well as any contact between the ad litems and the children. The court also ordered continued placement with the (maternal grandparents) indefinitely,” as noted in a July 25 motion filed by Sara Spector of the district attorney’s office on behalf of CPS; Gloria Ortiz, the attorney ad litem for the children and Susan Mason and Dan Altman, co-counsels for the middle girl’s biological father.
In his letter, Wilhelm requested transition plans for the children out of their maternal grandparents’ home, where they had been placed since July 2007.
CPS files its transition plan with the court that would have included movement of the children that same day from the maternal grandparents to a protected and secured foster/adoptive placement, with further transition of the middle girl to her biological father in Iowa.
The mother’s attorney, Mark Griffith, sends a letter to the court from a licensed professional counselor working with the girls saying she doesn’t support the immediate transition of the children.
“However, if it is the court’s decision to move forward with this decision, the girls and their grandparents should have regular unsupervised visitation weekly. Their mother should maintain her previous visitation schedule,” the counselor writes, saying the middle girl (after her move to Iowa) should continue to have phone calls and in-person visits with her maternal grandparents and mother.
“I am unwilling to comment on the level of supervision for her mother as I have never spoken with the mother and have no knowledge of her appropriateness to visit with the children unsupervised,” the counselor writes. “However, if the grandparents have been trusted to supervise the visits, thus far, it is my opinion that (they) be allowed to continue supervising.”
Wilhelm issues additional orders allowing a CPS caseworker and a court investigator the authority to have physical access to the children without notice to the maternal grandparents. He grants the biological father of the middle girl daily telephone contact with his daughter and restrains the mother from any access, communication or contact with the children.
Wilhelm warns that any violation of any of his orders “may mandate the immediate removal of the three children” from the maternal grandparents home.
July 8 –
Attorneys for the biological father of the middle girl file a transition plan for her to join him in Iowa.
The maternal grandparents also file a transition plan and note their intent to appeal if Wilhelm denies their motion for judgment notwithstanding the jury’s verdict. The plan asks the judge to name them temporary managing conservators of the children and prevent CPS and the biological father of the middle girl from removing the girls during the appeal. Their plan notes that the mother “should not see any of her daughters for a minimum of one year and then only with the consent of the appropriate counselor and custodial caregiver.”
Griffith files a motion on behalf of the mother asking Wilhelm to “disregard all of the jury’s findings” and verdict. The motion proposes allowing the mother severely limited rights, continued placement of the children in the maternal grandparents’ home and continued involvement by CPS. The biological father would be allowed “one weekend a month of his choosing with 15 days’ notice” and additional days per Texas’ standard visitation.
Hartley files a motion on behalf of the maternal grandparents asking for judgment notwithstanding the jury verdict.
“The jury’s verdict is not supported by even a scintilla of evidence that the findings were in the best interest of the children and is, therefore, legally insufficient,” the motion reads, adding that there were only “unsubstantiated inferences that the (maternal grandparents) knew of the respondent mother’s mental health condition or that she was falsifying pediatric conditions resulting in the excessive medical treatment of the children.”
July 9 –
Wilhelm requests electronic and editable copies of recently filed motions. He also asks CPS to provide an electronic and editable copy of its proposed final judgment.
Attorneys for CPS, the children and the biological father file responses, including one against the requests to overturn the jury’s verdict.
On behalf of the children’s attorney, a psychiatrist writes a letter refuting previous comments by the licensed professional counselor who advocated against an immediate transition. The psychiatrist said more harm exists in the girls’ remaining in the maternal grandparents’ home, noting, “Based on court documents, it is clear that (the maternal grandmother) is unable to put the children’s physical and emotional well-being before that of her daughter … who has an established and protracted history of mental illness.”
July 11 –
Hearing held relating to motions filed in the case. A transcript of Wilhelm’s closing remarks in the case includes, “… the court is not going to belabor and delay its ruling on all of those orders. … I will be working over tonight and over the weekend and on Monday evening and Tuesday evening, whatever time it takes to make sure that we are not dragging this thing waiting for a long process.
“I believe that the law gives me discretion in timing the entrance of that judgment,” the transcript reads, “but I don’t think it is unlimited nor would I want it to be. Worst thing you need is a judge to wait 18 months to enter a jury verdict if they’re going to. That clearly is improper. That doesn’t help these children.”
July 15 –
Wilhelm issues a “clarifying order” allowing CPS and the children’s attorney ad litem (Ortiz) and guardian ad litem (Melissa Bousquet), immediate access to information and the children.
July 17 –
Susan Mason, co-counsel to the biological father, writes Wilhelm asking for his immediate attention to the entry of the jury’s verdict, noting, “Immediately following the verdict, this court recognized the need to avoid the very delay now occurring. If anything, it appears that this court may be seeking to find some middle ground that will allow the terminated mother to regain rights to the children based on some speculative promise of improved future behavior.”
Mason cited the Fourteenth Court of Appeals, which stated in a similar proceeding, “There will always be a temptation to find a middle way between leaving a child in a dangerous situation and terminating all possibility of reunification. But such compromises inevitably mean leaving the children in limbo, when what they need is permanency and security. By requiring all termination suits to be completed within a year, the Legislature made clear that courts cannot leave children in foster homes indefinitely while existing parents try to improve themselves and their conditions.”
July 18 –
Wilhelm denies the mother’s motion for judgment non obstante veredictor and maternal grandparents’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
July 24 –
Guardian ad litem Melissa Bousquet files a letter of concern with the court, saying, “It is imperative that these children are no longer left, not only in limbo, but in a placement situation (with the maternal grandparents) that a jury has determined was not in their best interest. Further delay only causes further harm to three children who have experienced way too much harm already.”
July 25 –
Wilhelm sends out a 14-page document, “Trial Court’s Memorandum, Order Appointing Transition Master, Order Appointing Transition Coordinator and Order for Placement of Children.” He directs all parties to correspond with the coordinator as “due to the transition master’s existing professional commitments, I believe that you may be delayed in receiving timely replies to any telephone calls, faxes and such directed to her office. In the alternative, one of the transition coordinator’s duties will be to communicate with each of you in a timely fashion.”
In the memorandum, Wilhelm writes he “is not now questioning the jury’s verdict” and notes a timeline of seven to 10 days for the girls to be transitioned from the maternal grandparents to a foster placement – with the middle girl transitioned from there to her father in Iowa.
July 28 –
The district attorney’s office on behalf of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, the attorney ad litem for the children and attorneys for the middle girl’s biological father file a motion objecting to the appointment of masters and re-urging placement per the jury’s verdict.
July 30 –
The district attorney’s office on behalf of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services files a writ of mandamus with the Tenth Court of Appeals in Waco. The filing seeks to compel Wilhelm to enter the jury verdict and also stay the motion appointing masters.
July 31 –
The appellate court requests briefs from parties in the case on the writ, giving a deadline of 5 p.m. Aug. 7. The court also orders a temporary stay of Wilhelm’s order appointing the masters.
July 31 –
Wilhelm sends a letter to Waco advising the justices that he intends to enter the jury verdict and that he had already set a hearing Aug. 11 on the district attorney’s office and others’ motion objecting to the appointment of masters. (The hearing was originally set for Aug. 6, but was cancelled due to Hartley, the maternal grandparents’ attorney, being on a pre-scheduled vacation).
Aug. 1 –
The transition coordinator writes Wilhelm saying that she and the transition master had ceased their work on the case until further notice as a result of the appellate court involvement. The coordinator provides a “tentative” transition plan that indicated the children were to have been removed from the maternal grandparents’ home Aug. 4, with good-bye visits with the mother and grandparents Aug. 8. The plan indicated the middle girl was to have moved to Iowa on Aug. 18 to start school Aug. 21.
“I feel it is important that I provide you with the tentative transition plan as outlined by (the transition master) in hopes that these children are placed in their respective homes without further delay,” the coordinator wrote, adding her prayer that the parties involved “may continue to work together for nothing other than … the best interests of these children.”
Aug. 7 –
Responses due to the appellate court.
Aug. 11 –
Hearing set in Wilhelm’s court.
http://www.myfoxdfw.com/myfox/pages/New ... geId=3.2.1
Judge OKs Jury's Custody Verdict
Last Edited: Tuesday, 12 Aug 2008, 3:52 PM CDT
Created: Tuesday, 12 Aug 2008, 3:52 PM CDT
.
DALLAS -- The mother of three girls allegedly sent to the emergency room at least 150 times for illnesses they never had has been stripped of her parental rights.
A judge's decision Monday in Ellis County sends a 6-year-old to her father and her two half-sisters, ages 8 and 4, into state custody.
...
Judge OKs Jury's Custody Verdict
Last Edited: Tuesday, 12 Aug 2008, 3:52 PM CDT
Created: Tuesday, 12 Aug 2008, 3:52 PM CDT
.
DALLAS -- The mother of three girls allegedly sent to the emergency room at least 150 times for illnesses they never had has been stripped of her parental rights.
A judge's decision Monday in Ellis County sends a 6-year-old to her father and her two half-sisters, ages 8 and 4, into state custody.
...
http://www.star-telegram.com/arlington_ ... 49849.html
Posted on Fri, Oct. 03, 2008
In Arlington custody case, children will stay with foster parents
By DOMINGO RAMIREZ [email protected]
FORT WORTH — A Tarrant County jury declined Thursday to terminate the parental rights of an Arlington mother who had tried to get custody of her three children, two of whom had amphetamine and methamphetamine in their systems last year.
But the jury of seven women and five men awarded custody of the children — ages 3, 2 and 1 — to the foster family who had been caring for the children.
"The Gormans are happy that the children will remain at their home," said Kellye Swanda of Arlington, the foster parents’ attorney.
Whitney Walker, 22, sobbed as visiting state District Judge David Cleveland announced the jurors’ 11-1 decision after they deliberated almost four hours Thursday.
"Jurors wanted her [Whitney Walker] to be a part of her children’s life," said Mike Schneider of Arlington, Walker’s attorney. "Whitney was holding out hope that she would be given her children back, but this was a very good decision."
What happens next
A judge will decide Oct. 24 about visitations for Walker. Attorneys said it will be a year before Walker could file a suit over custody.
A judge must also decide on the parental rights of Dustin Harris, the father. On Sept. 26, Harris relinquished his parental rights to Child Protective Services, but the jurors’ decision Thursday makes his rights unclear. Harris is in prison and was brought to court by authorities. Foster parents Laura and Carl Gorman had wanted to adopt the children, but the jurors’ decision ends that plan.
Mistrial
Last week, visiting state District Judge Mary Ellen Hicks announced a mistrial in the hearing after it was discovered that Hicks had not been authorized to preside over the case, court officials said.
The case
Child Protective Services placed three of Walker’s children, including an infant who was born in July 2007, in foster care after the oldest children were found to have ingested methamphetamine in April 2007 at the family’s Richland Hills home. Walker also tested positive for methamphetamine that day.
Walker had a fourth child a few months ago, but CPS did not take that child away. Walker and the children’s grandmother, Janna Beau, faced charges of endangering a child, but in December, a Tarrant County grand jury declined to indict them.
For 18 months, Walker has completed all programs required by CPS, and she has not tested positive for any drugs.
Posted on Fri, Oct. 03, 2008
In Arlington custody case, children will stay with foster parents
By DOMINGO RAMIREZ [email protected]
FORT WORTH — A Tarrant County jury declined Thursday to terminate the parental rights of an Arlington mother who had tried to get custody of her three children, two of whom had amphetamine and methamphetamine in their systems last year.
But the jury of seven women and five men awarded custody of the children — ages 3, 2 and 1 — to the foster family who had been caring for the children.
"The Gormans are happy that the children will remain at their home," said Kellye Swanda of Arlington, the foster parents’ attorney.
Whitney Walker, 22, sobbed as visiting state District Judge David Cleveland announced the jurors’ 11-1 decision after they deliberated almost four hours Thursday.
"Jurors wanted her [Whitney Walker] to be a part of her children’s life," said Mike Schneider of Arlington, Walker’s attorney. "Whitney was holding out hope that she would be given her children back, but this was a very good decision."
What happens next
A judge will decide Oct. 24 about visitations for Walker. Attorneys said it will be a year before Walker could file a suit over custody.
A judge must also decide on the parental rights of Dustin Harris, the father. On Sept. 26, Harris relinquished his parental rights to Child Protective Services, but the jurors’ decision Thursday makes his rights unclear. Harris is in prison and was brought to court by authorities. Foster parents Laura and Carl Gorman had wanted to adopt the children, but the jurors’ decision ends that plan.
Mistrial
Last week, visiting state District Judge Mary Ellen Hicks announced a mistrial in the hearing after it was discovered that Hicks had not been authorized to preside over the case, court officials said.
The case
Child Protective Services placed three of Walker’s children, including an infant who was born in July 2007, in foster care after the oldest children were found to have ingested methamphetamine in April 2007 at the family’s Richland Hills home. Walker also tested positive for methamphetamine that day.
Walker had a fourth child a few months ago, but CPS did not take that child away. Walker and the children’s grandmother, Janna Beau, faced charges of endangering a child, but in December, a Tarrant County grand jury declined to indict them.
For 18 months, Walker has completed all programs required by CPS, and she has not tested positive for any drugs.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests