The children come first. The goal is reunification.

[sob900]

Yea I said a truce, I'm tired of this stupid bickering.
I apologize for any immature name calling.
No more from me.
Dano

Apology accepted.

I'll still help you if I can.

Please delete the statement we're talking about.

Dan

Thanks for the offer, but we just have too differing of views for you to be able to help.
Dano

[Dan Sullivan]

Yea I said a truce, I'm tired of this stupid bickering.
I apologize for any immature name calling.
No more from me.
Dano

Apology accepted.

I'll still help you if I can.

Please delete the statement we're talking about.

Dan

Thanks for the offer, but we just have too differing of views for you to be able to help.
Dano

My offer still stands if you change your mind.

And it's possible that my view, being at opposite ends from yours, may be just what you need to help resolve your problems with CPS.

I don't believe you've had much success so far.

If you've noticed a new poster named Greegor, he asked for my advice YEARS AGO yet he ignored what I said and he convinced his girlfriend to use his tactics, which seem to be the same as yours.

Her 7 yo daughter was removed in Feb of 2001.

More than five years later reunification is nowhere in sight.

I don't know how many years you're willing to go, but it's pretty plain something needs to change between you and CPS and they're not going to change anything.

You are right where they want you.

The Soviet Union claimed communism was the best form of government for years... but the life expectancy of the people kept getting lower and lower... down to less than 50, if I'm not mistaken

Eventually they gave up communism because the evidence didn't support their contention that what they were doing was making things better.

Dano, is what you are doing making things better?

[Dan Sullivan]

If you've noticed a new poster named Greegor, he asked for my advice YEARS AGO yet he ignored what I said and he convinced his girlfriend to use his tactics, which seem to be the same as yours.

Her 7 yo daughter was removed in Feb of 2001.

More than five years later reunification is nowhere in sight.

Did Greegor ask you to post this info?.... Nope... ..

This info is widely posted by Greg himself... in fact he posted it again today.

"Take my advice or you will suffer the same consequences as Greegor!" Dan says...

I didn't say that.

In case you don't know,You can't force someone to take your advice when it isn't wanted.....

I'm not forcing anyone to do anything.

"My offer still stands if you change your mind."

I simply left the door open.

Best, Dan

[Greegor]

Dan's complaint about my family is that we
have not cooperated with the service plan.
He has seen my postings that the service plan
was formed without required Family Active
Participation in the FORMATION of the service plan.
He has seen my explanation that the caseworker
poisoned most of the services with INPUT
designed to ensure a negative outcome.
One of the services was outright not available to us.

Dan knows all of this, and has never suggested
any means to repair the bad service plan, but
as on here Dan has chastized us for NOT doing
the service plan.

Dan knew our service plan was RIGGED
but pressed us to DO IT.

He never suggested any means to eliminate
any baseless service, impossible service or
RIGGING of a service first.

Whenever somebody complains that Dan wants
people to SUBMIT to anything CPS wants,
Dan says they should NOT do services
that have no basis.

How can I reconcile that with Dan's
DERIDING us for not doing the services?
He just posted comments like that again here!

Dan knows we have GOOD REASONS why we
have not cooperated for FIVE YEARS.

We refuse to do services that are baseless
and RIGGED through INPUT of lies and
distortions.

They did it to almost every service!

How much is a "psych eval" really an
evaluation of my psychology when the
agency sends along a one inch STACK
of garbage documents from
UNQUALIFIED CPS workers?

When I pointed out to Dan that the
perjury about my ""sex abuse history""
was input, but not the proof that it
was false, Dan only suggested taking
along the proof and showing the
psychologist. If that was the only
problem, rather than just one SYMPTOM
of the problem, I woulda done that!

But that abuse was only the tip of the iceburg.

How many OTHER ways was the input
poisoned?

My SO asked the COURT to review the
materials INPUT into the psych eval.

One of the "laundry list" items was to
ask the psychologist to predict what my
attitude would do to the child.

I called up the psychologist and asked
how he could determine my behavior
in a family setting without SEEING me
in a family setting. I questioned whether
he could determine that "in a vacuum".

When I didn't submit, He reported to CPS
that I had called him up and asked a lot
of ""legal questions"".

WHY does Dan urge cooperation without
advising repairs to the services FIRST?

[Greegor]

Isn't Dan just carrying the extortive message of the
agency, saying DO THESE SERVICES or we won't
reunify your family!?

While I understand that reunification is the
proper goal of everybody in here, I would
also say however that the goal should NOT
be REUNIFICATION AT ALL COSTS!

It's an EXTORTIVE situation, and Dan seems
to be saying to SUBMIT to services even when
the services are rigged to MAKE A TPR!

WHY do services so badly RIGGED that they
intend to MAKE A TPR?

While the FIVE YEARS has been grueling,
cooperating with RIGGED services would
basically guarantee a TPR.

Why does Dan chastize us for not going that road?

[Greegor]

The title of this thread
"The children come first. The goal is reunification."

Does everybody here know this is a CPS slogan?
It encourages submission to CPS.

A true Parents Rights advocate would say
"Families come first, without one a child is lost."

[Dan Sullivan]

The title of this thread
"The children come first. The goal is reunification."

Does everybody here know this is a CPS slogan?

http://tinyurl.com/e94rk

Google,

Your search - "children come first. the goal is reunification" - did not match any documents.

[Greegor]

Why didn't you say FAMILIES come first?

[Dan Sullivan]

Why didn't you say FAMILIES come first?

Because families don't get removed to CPS foster care... children do.

[Greegor]

"We've got your kids,
just surrender your civil rights
so your children can come home."

Isn't this extortion?

[Bob_Lynn]

"We've got your kids,
just surrender your civil rights
so your children can come home."

Isn't this extortion?

That's exactly how we got our children back, through extortion to surrender our civil rights. Sorry, I can't give details at this time yet.

[Dan Sullivan]

"We've got your kids,
just surrender your civil rights
so your children can come home."

Isn't this extortion?

That's exactly how we got our children back, through extortion to surrender our civil rights. Sorry, I can't give details at this time yet.

Why is it that the people who advise parents the loudest that they shouldn't cooperate with CPS without warrants and court orders are the very people who cooperated and got their kids back?

And the people who support the must have warrants and court orders position haven't got their children back.

[Bob_Lynn]

What is it you don't understand about "I can't give you details" and you jump to ignorant conclusions and twist (what else is new?) the point?

[Bob_Lynn]

Not to mention I never once said you should not do whatever is necessary to get your children back first and foremost.

[gideonmacleish]

Why is it that the people who advise parents the loudest that they shouldn't cooperate with CPS without warrants and court orders are the very people who cooperated and got their kids back?

And the people who support the must have warrants and court orders position haven't got their children back.

Umm, I support the "Must Have Warrants" position, and my kids were never taken in the first place...and NO home visit was ever executed. HSLDA supports the "Must Have Warrants" position, and has successfully prevented numerous illegal searches. Multiple higher court verdicts support the "Must Have Warrants" position, and have been consistently used to thwart CPS actions.

Dan, this is where you get my hackles up. The very words of your post MOCK standing up for the rights expressed in the Constitution, as if asserting our rights makes us fringe radicals and fools who will certainly lose our kids. While you claim not to support just going along with CPS from start to finish, almost every single response you post says otherwise.

I don't agree with every approach Bob takes. But, legally speaking, Bob's right more often than he isn't. These rights are not some esoteric ideal existing in some fantasy world; they are REAL, they belong to us as citizens, and most importantly, the courts have ruled pretty consistently that they apply even to CPS. The ONLY area where parents should cooperate with CPS is in abiding by the terms of papers they have ALREADY signed (pending appeal, in some cases), or abiding by the terms of a court order (also pending appeal, in some cases). If they are asserting their innocence, it is reasonable for them to make it abundantly clear that their obedience is not an admission of guilt.

I realize you're a hero to many people out there, Dan. You've made certain that we are all well aware of that fact. But that does not mean you are ALWAYS right, in every situation. I could offer up my own set of testimonials, too, if that was what this was about. But that is NOT what this is about; this is about our RIGHTS, and about asserting them in the face of an ever encroaching government.

One other thing, Dan (unrelated to this thread, but related to your comments). In one other post, you ridiculed Bob asking if he would join the John Birch Society. Well, I will tell you frankly that I have been in contact with JBS about some of the cases we are dealing with and that, while I may not agree with every part of their philosophy, I appreciate the fact they are using their bully pulpit to bring light to this horrible problem. JBS and the HSLDA have been our best media outlets in this fight, and we should not ignore them simply because we don't agree with every word of their missions statement.

I am going to ask you to agree to one ground rule on postings where I am concerned. I feel I have something to offer, and will continue to offer it where I feel my advice can be constructive. If you take issue with my advice in that particular situation, please do NOT address it on the board, but address it to me in PM's. We can fight in PM's as much as we want, but in the future, let's keep this crud out of the forums. Deal?

[Bob_Lynn]

All good points Gideon.

And your points do bring out the most glaring issue with Dan. Believe it or not, I would love to believe that Dan is actually on the level. The biggest problem is his position on the legal and legislative front (not to mention his abrasive, egotistical and arrogant personality).

He argues often and strongly that one must sacrifice their constitutional and other statutory rights to get their children back. He also argues that we should not interfere with or assert ourselves into the legislative process, which is our constitutional right and the very foundation and principle of our (intended) government.

Let's assume for a moment that Dan is on the level and he's a major hero (as he often brags) working to get children back from foster care and is highly successful at it. Well there's absolutely nothing wrong with that and in fact, that would be fantastic if true. But that works for only one family at a time (as you noted in the other thread Gideon). What that does is akin to stepping on a few roaches when there is a major infestation problem in the neighborhood.

Since Dan has seemingly unlimited time to help families get their children back, would he be willing to use some of that time to work on reforming CPS? In other words, find a total solution to the entire neighborhood's roach infestation problem? I haven't seen anything from Dan that suggests he has any such plan or is willing to work on one or contribute somehow and in fact, I've only seen just the opposite, to try to thwart any such attempts with constant ridicule and criticism and never offering anything reasonably constructive.

So now I'm going to ask Dan outright as you have suggested in your thread entitled "THOUGHTS ABOUT THE FIGHT, OR LACK THERE OF" to work on a plan in his state of New York and/or join us in that effort for every state. Note I've already asked Dan in the past to work with me on legislation and he wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole. So now I'm asking him once more to join us (because of his purported "vast" experience) in an effort to find a solution to the BIG PICTURE.

I think his answer or non-answer should reveal what Dan truly is all about. But if he joins us (no phony baloney), I am fully willing to welcome him in that effort and certainly will end all my accusations. But this has to be 100% genuinely on the level.

The ball's in your court Dan.

[Dan Sullivan]

Why is it that the people who advise parents the loudest that they shouldn't cooperate with CPS without warrants and court orders are the very people who cooperated and got their kids back?

And the people who support the must have warrants and court orders position haven't got their children back.

Umm, I support the "Must Have Warrants" position, and my kids were never taken in the first place...

Well then you don't fit the criteria... people whose children have been removed.

HSLDA...

I'm not talking about home schooling.

supports the "Must Have Warrants" position, and has successfully prevented numerous illegal searches.

I'm talking about people who've lost their children who believe it's to their advantage to force CPS to get court orders for simple things like parenting courses... and I'm not saying the parents should go to CPS' parenting courses.

I like to see people get a jump on CPS and at least start parenting classes on their own when their children have already been removed.

Dan, this is where you get my hackles up. The very words of your post MOCK standing up for the rights expressed in the Constitution, as if asserting our rights makes us fringe radicals and fools who will certainly lose our kids.

I'm talking about people who've already lost their children.

While you claim not to support just going along with CPS from start to finish, almost every single response you post says otherwise.

I've never said go "along with CPS from start to finish."

I try to negotiate everthing.

I don't agree with every approach Bob takes. But, legally speaking, Bob's right more often than he isn't.

I'm not an attorney so I really couldn't say one way or the other.

But look what Bob did in his own situation and he got his children home.

There was a guy on another child protection website who was almost identical in his advice as Bob Lynn.

But if you went to that guys website you learned he got his kids back the same way Bob did... by cooperating.

These rights are not some esoteric ideal existing in some fantasy world; they are REAL, they belong to us as citizens, and most importantly, the courts have ruled pretty consistently that they apply even to CPS. The ONLY area where parents should cooperate with CPS is in abiding by the terms of papers they have ALREADY signed (pending appeal, in some cases), or abiding by the terms of a court order (also pending appeal, in some cases). If they are asserting their innocence, it is reasonable for them to make it abundantly clear that their obedience is not an admission of guilt.

You don't think I disagree with that, do you?

I realize you're a hero to many people out there, Dan. You've made certain that we are all well aware of that fact.

I posted what I posted because I was being attacked as a CPS colluder... or an unpaid CPS worker.

Besides, people should know I'm not just someone who just talks and has no track record of successes to back up my position.

I'm proud of what I've done and what people like Doug Q from CPSWatch has said about me.

And I'm sure you noticed that I didn't bring up Doug Q till someone else made it necessary.

But that does not mean you are ALWAYS right, in every situation. I could offer up my own set of testimonials, too, if that was what this was about. But that is NOT what this is about; this is about our RIGHTS, and about asserting them in the face of an ever encroaching government.

My goal is getting kids out of fostercare.

That's what this is about to me.

And it's a chess game that I play very well.

One other thing, Dan (unrelated to this thread, but related to your comments). In one other post, you ridiculed Bob asking if he would join the John Birch Society.

When was that?

And all I did was ASK Bob if he'd join?

Well, I will tell you frankly that I have been in contact with JBS about some of the cases we are dealing with and that, while I may not agree with every part of their philosophy, I appreciate the fact they are using their bully pulpit to bring light to this horrible problem. JBS and the HSLDA have been our best media outlets in this fight, and we should not ignore them simply because we don't agree with every word of their missions statement.

You're changing the premise again.

I'm not referring to homeschooling problems.

I am going to ask you to agree to one ground rule on postings where I am concerned. I feel I have something to offer, and will continue to offer it where I feel my advice can be constructive.

I'm very happy to hear that.

It would be helpful if you would stay with the premise.

If you take issue with my advice in that particular situation, please do NOT address it on the board, but address it to me in PM's. We can fight in PM's as much as we want, but in the future, let's keep this crud out of the forums. Deal?

I'll give it a try.

Best, Dan

[Dan Sullivan]

All good points Gideon.

And your points do bring out the most glaring issue with Dan. Believe it or not, I would love to believe that Dan is actually on the level. The biggest problem is his position on the legal and legislative front (not to mention his abrasive, egotistical and arrogant personality).

I didn't write legislation that had an increase in funding for CPS with the hopes that I'd get a job out of it in the Family Advocate department.

He argues often and strongly that one must sacrifice their constitutional and other statutory rights to get their children back.

"Must sacrifice???

"Often?

You must have a lot of citations, Bob.

Post some.

He also argues that we should not interfere with or assert ourselves into the legislative process, which is our constitutional right and the very foundation and principle of our (intended) government.

SEE BELOW

Let's assume for a moment that Dan is on the level and he's a major hero (as he often brags) working to get children back from foster care and is highly successful at it. Well there's absolutely nothing wrong with that and in fact, that would be fantastic if true. But that works for only one family at a time (as you noted in the other thread Gideon). What that does is akin to stepping on a few roaches when there is a major infestation problem in the neighborhood.

Since Dan has seemingly unlimited time to help families get their children back, would he be willing to use some of that time to work on reforming CPS? In other words, find a total solution to the entire neighborhood's roach infestation problem?

I have no experience or expertise in that area.

I haven't seen anything from Dan that suggests he has any such plan or is willing to work on one or contribute somehow and in fact, I've only seen just the opposite, to try to thwart any such attempts with constant ridicule and criticism and never offering anything reasonably constructive.

"never offering anything reasonably constructive."

HILARIOUS!!!!

On 10-12-2005, I wrote,

"Bob, please go to the politician and tell him what's wrong with CPS. Ask him for HIS recommendations. Ask him who he would recommend you see. He should know if one of his associates is interested in CPS reform. I'm sure you won't be the first person complaining to the government about CPS. Let him help you.

Feel him out. See what he says. You can always get another appointment.

Leave the bill in your pocket till the end of the conversation.

Then decide what you want to do."

And,

"Why don't you explain the problems to the legislator and ask him for his recommendations. Maybe he'll put you in touch with one of his aides who could guide you through the process of writing a proper bill."

So now I'm going to ask Dan outright as you have suggested in your thread entitled "THOUGHTS ABOUT THE FIGHT, OR LACK THERE OF" to work on a plan in his state of New York and/or join us in that effort for every state. Note I've already asked Dan in the past to work with me on legislation and he wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole. So now I'm asking him once more to join us (because of his purported "vast" experience) in an effort to find a solution to the BIG PICTURE.

My experience and expertise is in helping families.

And my time is spent helping families get their children back from foster care... and I'm quite successful at it.

While you, Bob, have no success in writing legislation.

YOU should come work for ME.

I think his answer or non-answer should reveal what Dan truly is all about. But if he joins us (no phony baloney), I am fully willing to welcome him in that effort and certainly will end all my accusations. But this has to be 100% genuinely on the level.

You want me to work for you so you might get a job in a department created by your legislation.

And if I do that you'll "end all the accusations."

Who says money can't buy happiness.

Shows how much credibility you put in your accusations, Bob.

The ball's in your court Dan.

No, it's not, Bob.

You swung and missed.

[Bob_Lynn]

Thanks for once again making it so easy to prove my point about you. This is about the 5th time I asked you to work with me/us to reform CPS and your answer was to spit back in my face with your inane and juvenile ridicule.

Given the reverse situation, I would gladly drop any and all animosity toward anyone who extended a hand to join in the effort to reform CPS. I'm sure most posters here would do the exact thing. And I did make that offer in my request and would have honored it.

You keep claiming you have "no experience or expertise in that area" as your defense for not participating in reforming CPS. How much expertise did you have in allegedly helping families with their CPS problems before you started, eh fraud? How much expertise do you think anyone in this world has in successfully reforming CPS? Are you implying no one should try it because no one has the "qualifications"? So we're all wasting our time here?

Your claim that I'm looking for a job is so pathetic it can only come from a despicable lunatic such as you. This is along the same lines as your other inane attempt at ridicule: "And your motives for your proposed legislation were... well, Bob, you know what they were."

Noting from the number of posts (0) you made in the thread entitled "THOUGHTS ABOUT THE FIGHT, OR LACK THERE OF", it's easy to see what kind of fraud you are.

Anyway, I could have bet my life savings on the kind of response I was going to get from you, you are so predictable.

[sob900]

[quote="gideonmacleishI am going to ask you to agree to one ground rule on postings where I am concerned. I feel I have something to offer, and will continue to offer it where I feel my advice can be constructive. If you take issue with my advice in that particular situation, please do NOT address it on the board, but address it to me in PM's. We can fight in PM's as much as we want, but in the future, let's keep this crud out of the forums. Deal?[/quote]


I agree with you gideon, and this goes for me too.
Dano

[Dan Sullivan]

I am going to ask you to agree to one ground rule on postings where I am concerned. I feel I have something to offer, and will continue to offer it where I feel my advice can be constructive. If you take issue with my advice in that particular situation, please do NOT address it on the board, but address it to me in PM's. We can fight in PM's as much as we want, but in the future, let's keep this crud out of the forums. Deal?

I agree with you gideon, and this goes for me too.
Dano

I have no problem with this.

Please stay on premise.

Best, Dan

[Greegor]

Dan says that insisting on a warrant hasn't
been working. Where did you get that info Dan?

Dan suggest parents should negotiate with
the agency/court.

Even when my own family was being cooperative,
the caseworkers acted like they were gods
or dictators, later they displayed outright malice.
When somebody is so blatantly NOT operating
"in good faith" negotiating or bargaining is impossible.
Asking the smallest question was like asking
a brick wall.

WHY does Dan act like it's so easy to
negotiate, deal or bargain with CPS?

Do any individual bureaucrats have the power
to speak for the agency regarding negotiation?

How do you negotiate when Dan also advises
that parents NOT discuss the case with them?

Keeping things private/secretive?
That is the way of the agencies and serves them well.

[Dan Sullivan]

How much expertise did you have in allegedly helping families with their CPS problems before you started,

I had been thru three investigations and a Fair Hearing which I won.

Your claim that I'm looking for a job is so pathetic it can only come from a despicable lunatic such as you.

Didn't come from me.

[Bob_Lynn]

you, Bob, have no success in writing legislation.

Sure I do. I succeeded in writing the Family Preservation Act of 2006 and the Family Advocate Act. That's 2 pieces of proposed legislation I succeeded in writing.

How much expertise did you have in allegedly helping families with their CPS problems before you started,

I had been thru three investigations and a Fair Hearing which I won.

So you had no success in helping families with their CPS problems before you started.

[Dan Sullivan]

you, Bob, have no success in writing legislation.

Sure I do. I succeeded in writing the Family Preservation Act of 2006 and the Family Advocate Act. That's 2 pieces of proposed legislation I succeeded in writing.

Success in writing legislation isn't the fact that you wrote something on a piece of paper.

The proof of success in writing legislation occurs when it's voted into law.

How much expertise did you have in allegedly helping families with their CPS problems before you started,

I had been thru three investigations and a Fair Hearing which I won.

So you had no success in helping families with their CPS problems before you started.

That's not true.

I succeeded in helping my family get thru three CPS investigations and a Fair Hearing... unscathed because I demonstrated that CPS had no credible evidence.

And that was the start of my helping other families follow in my footsteps... prevailing against CPS.

And that's why people have thanked me (just last week) on FightCPS for helping them get their children back.