GamerXY: I am still confused because you keep referring to
CPS SW when the correct term is caseworker.
Firstly, most CPS caseworkers are NOT SW's.
Most contract SW's here in Iowa are not even licensed SW's.
I did run across one MSW working for the state agency,
and that encounter (cross exam) was a disaster for
both him and the agency.
In the same hearing I also cross examined three
caseworkers and none of them have a SW license
but one was a BSW. The one who committed the
initial perjury had actually had a SW license and per
typical SOP and to avoid accountability let it lapse.
Has California begun to require that caseworkers must
have SW licenses? If you were a caseworker here you
would either be an "adoption specialist" caseworker
like the one I grilled, or you might be an invisible internal
supervisor (Apparently).
In the last 6 months I have basically rediscovered the
true meaning of certain bits of caselaw that every
Family Rights group lists in their caselaw.
US Santosky v Kramer and the burden of proof.
Typically a state's law says "Preponderance" 51%
but the Constitution, US Santosky v. Kramer and
various caselaw that descends from it says that
Juvenile court (every hearing) involves a LIBERTY
INTEREST more compelling than mere prison.
This liberty interest is referred to as "sacred".
And the "Clear and Convincing" 80% standard for
burden of proof is called for in every and ANY
hearing in Juvenile Court. Every quarterly review,
etc.
But basically NONE of the attorneys going in
to Juvenile Court ever file motions or caselaw
to demand this higher standard for any of their
clients.
The BAR, the courts and the legislators are
all partly responsible for this violation of
clearly defined Constitutional Rights.
States typically have exceptions to the
rules of evidence for Juvenile Court also.
Pondering the ongoing ripoff of the burden
of proof, I am certainly questioning the
constitutionality of these rules of evidence.
The hearsay exception appears to be unconstitutional.
There is even caselaw that precludes hearsay
in any legal process, including Juvenile Court.
It seems that the state legislation lowered
the standards BELOW what is constitutionally
required in an effort to make it easy for caseworkers
to "make cases" without proving their case
to the required higher standards.
Where you are there in CA, do they use
Preponderance 51% for the burden of proof,
or have they upgraded to "Clear and Convincing"
80% for the burden of proof?
Have you heard of any family filing in court
to get the higher standards?
How about the rules of evidence hearsay exception?
What is the typical % of cases that stipulate
rather than go to an actual adjudication hearing?
Are there statistics on that publicly available?
GamerXY Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:22 am
Wow, it has been nine months already. Sorry for the late reply.
Here's a little update...
I finished my MSW and got hired by the county (in California). I started working as an official CPS SW two months ago. However, I've been there for a year (including my internship).
Greegor:
Typically, the SW makes the decision on a referral after staffing with his supervisor. However, the supervisor may ask the SW to do more for the family or change the conclusion if she feels necessary based on the findings.
_________________
According to national data from the Child Welfare League of America, investigative caseworkers' qualifications fall into the following categories:
No degree: 5 percent
Bachelor's degree, any field: 26 percent
Bachelor's degree, related field: 45 percent
Bachelor of Social Work: 14 percent
Master of Social Work: 2 percent
Other: 7 percent
http://ndas.cwla.org/
Back to top
katgotsteve Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:05 am
i have had many experiences in the past year with social workers. as a whole you are probably right. i found that a seasoned social worker is more likely to just cough up things to bad judgement and fresh out of school one has a view they need to change the world and a text book view of raising children. i personally think that social workers need to have some experience with children, they need to be aware of behaviors associated with certain disorders, ie bipolar, schzophrenia, rad, adhd, ect., not just the base behaviors but the mania associated with alot of them, they also need to read the case files of the family they are visiting if they have one. i had a caseworker assigned to me last november, fresh out of school, her first job, we butted heads from the beginning. she came out to my home the monday before thanksgiving, her first day without reading my file. i had been in this situation for almost 3 months and she wanted me to rehash it, after she tells me that my husband who had not seen his daughter in 3 months could not spend thanksgiving with us. she then asks me if i thought my niece had seduced my husband, i could have slapped her out of the chair. then i find out that at this time, none of the allegations had been substaniated. me and her did not get along, at all. after her, i got a caseworker with 18 years under her belt, she setup visits after hours so my husband could our daughter, she kept trying to get us in court for a review, but the attorney would not take us, she kept trying to get the case closed, but kept being told, if it happened we have to stay involved. my services that were offered were counseling, not for sexual abuse or sexual offender, but for the trauma my family was going through because of the court intervention. we had a total of 4 session in a year, the court order lapse, they just closed the case. they kept blaming the judge for the prolonging of the case, stating, they would not have even intervened if the judge had not ordered it, but by law they always had the option to close the case and could have handled it differently. i lost custody of my child for 36 days, it was awful not just for me as an adult, but for child to have to be removed at the age of 11 for something that we all knew were lies, not for evidence, but for lies, because they have "err on the side of the child" a child who has accused so 3 men and 4 boys of sex with her, yet there was no physical evidence at all and no one else was ever put through this and there was not one consistant story she told. when is it going to be "err on the side of the family", when will common sense take presidence over covering asses.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Greegor wrote:
Some of the people who did the worst things in our
case are ones that have been there awhile and
seem to feel a need to defent their garbage excuses
for ""authority"" over us. One seasoned caseworker
is so hostile she testified in court that I had sent her
an e-mail threatening that if she showed up at my door
I was going to "roll her up in a rug". Yet she never
mentioned this ""threat"" in any quarterly review paperwork,
never filed a POLICE report, and could not produce
the e-mail. Even the Judge who is a complete stooge
for anything the agency wants was rolling his eyes
when he heard this testimony.
This malicious garbage was from a SEASONED caseworker!
