fightcps.com

The foster parent was told by the social worker to let the parent attend doctors appointments. The foster parent told the parent that they couldn't and the parent pleaded to them to let them. This was brought up in court. The Judge ordered that the foster parent allow the parent to attend and give 3 days notice of any appointment. Fast forward 3 months. There is an appointment coming up. The foster parent informed the parent a few hours before the appointment. The parent couldn't attend do to same day notice. So what will the Judge do about it?

Unless there is evidence of intent to defy the court, I suspect nothing will happen.
While it does seem like a contempt, my experience suggests that foster parents are virtually immune.
Without going into stories, I'll just say the foster parents of my children were less qualified and provided worse conditions than home; and never faced consequences. Furthermore, the kids were moved several times for concerns just like some of the allegations against me.

I also saw my step-kid's father violate orders over and over and over, for which there was never a consequence.

Evidence of intent? Well, the Judge would not normally do an order for a parent to be informed of a Drs appt, because that is the parent's right already to attend. So the Judge had to go out of their way to spell it out in a court order. Intent? When you are told to specifically do something, then do something different, what is there to prove with intent? It's like, prove the foster parent isn't retarded, or deaf, or unable to read?

I look at it this way. Ignorance of the law is never an excuse. The court order was specifically directed at one person, yet thy chose not to follow simple instructions? Well, if that is ok, then surely foster parents are above the law.

I'm not at all surprised at this point. In the future, I will make sure we will keep CPS away by not answering the door or phone call and referring any investigations to a lawyer. You should treat CPS the same way as a snake.

If they can claim it was a sudden or emergency doctor visit, there's no intent to evade the order.

KDus wrote:If they can claim it was a sudden or emergency doctor visit, there's no intent to evade the order.

What the hell is a sudden doctors visit? That's the first time I heard that term. Well, yeah, it was sudden. It was suddenly made for no reason besides making it a pain in the ass to get to. No it wasn't emergency or urgent by any means. It was a routine check up.

Yes, I was referring to urgent care.

KDus wrote:Yes, I was referring to urgent care.

I meant to reply to this before. I just wanted to clarify that the appointment wasn't urgent. There was just an availability the same day.

I was pretty upset at the situation at the time, as I should have been. But now that months have past, I look back at the case, and I am in a way happy at all the BS the foster parent pulled, because all of that is on record and is a bit of a dirty spot on them. I realize that stuff like not following rules and court orders, is not going to harm the child at that moment, and removing them from the foster home will do more harm, so best to sweep it under the rug. But when it comes down to evaluating the foster parent for any larger future decisions, it is foolish. It's like trying at all cost to win a battle, to risk losing a war. Now this foster parent can be shown to violate a parents rights and go against a court order at any time in the furure that someone would benefit by showing that.