Speaking of KS Case Managers - Dr. Milfred ‘Bud’ Dale – Submits Amicus To Appellate Court – Case Manager Bud Dale’s Report To Court and his Comments on Private List Serve About the ‘gravy train’ wagon. In His Own words…..

• Mother speaks on case management bill

• Fight for Daughter Could Change Law in Kansas

• Kansas Senate Bill 304

• Dr. Milfred 'Bud' Dale Amicus Brief - Karen Williams- Case Managers Kansas

 

Dr. Dale Case Manager Report to Court in the Claudine Dombrowski Case;

“..forcing a battered mother to not complain about sexual and physical abuse - it’s confrontational, and if mommy wants to see child again.. then mommy will do as told.”

2002 april 2 dr. dale evaluation forensic ordered by court to get mom out of SV from Dec. 2000 ex-parte order

In Bud Dale’s OWN WORDS Courtesy of TheLizLibrary Psychology in Family Court

Case Managers; CUSTODY EVALUATORS
AND  PARENTING COORDINATORS
IN THEIR OWN WORDS

What Litigation Abuse Looks Like! It Boggles The Mind That Each ...

A Topeka Kansas Evaluation: Teaching the mother to NOT REPORT sexual or physical Abuse: As Ordered by the Courts;

 Dr. Milford “Bud” Dale.

 

9. For example, the below commenting MHP — who has been a parenting coordinator (“case manager”)

on at least one case known to the author in which a severely battered woman lost custody of her daughter to the abusive father,and who regularly performs custody evaluations as well — appears oblivious to the impact of MHP fees (which typically are divided equally between the parents) on a parent with substantially lower income than the other:

[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “If you want the parents to cooperate, why not add a provision that they must go back to mediation or to a parent coordinator if they cannot come to an agreement. As long as the mediator or parent coordinator changes a reasonable fee, the financial incentives for the parents to cooperate is maintained (assuming each wants to avoid paying a mediator or parent coordinator) and there is a solution for persistent disagreements that is fair…” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP, October 24, 2005).

More examples:

[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “…issues of child support are totally separate from custody and parenting time determinations. Yet in one case… the attorney continually referenced the fact that I was ‘failing to consider and give weight’ to the fact that the father was $20,000 behind in child support… Fortunately, my appointment letter addressed that my role was separate from the financial issues… Indeed, I had not failed to give weight to the financial issues. I had totally ignored and disregarded them all along – because that’s what I was required to do by law. Some attorneys will attempt to backdoor this issue; that is, they will claim that the child support arrearage represents a character flaw or defect – which might or might not be true. By the way, researching the literature about how fathers get so behind in child support yields some interesting claims on both sides of the issue.”(Kansas doctorate-level MHP, February 12, 2006).

[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “…issues of child support are totally separate from custody and parenting time determinations. Yet in one case… the attorney continually referenced the fact that I was ‘failing to consider and give weight’ to the fact that the father was $20,000 behind in child support… Fortunately, my appointment letter addressed that my role was separate from the financial issues… Indeed, I had not failed to give weight to the financial issues. I had totally ignored and disregarded them all along – because that’s what I was required to do by law. Some attorneys will attempt to backdoor this issue; that is, they will claim that the child support arrearage represents a character flaw or defect – which might or might not be true. By the way, researching the literature about how fathers get so behind in child support yields some interesting claims on both sides of the issue.”(Kansas doctorate-level MHP, February 12, 2006).

72.The reason for this has been decades of MHP lobbying and propagandizing to the legislatures and legal community.

[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE CALL TO ARMS]: “There is a new bill in the California state legislature which will be of some interest and concern to all of us who do custody evaluations, especially California psychologists. The bill prohibits the use of psychological testing in custody evaluations unless the court grants “a motion for a mental or psychological examination of a parent only for good cause shown…” (California doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “…The legislator is sponsoring this bill on behalf of women’s rights groups, who think that parental alienation is diagnosed too frequently through the use of psychological testing…” (California doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “This bill appears to prohibit considerably more than psych testing… “Controversial, nonscientific labels, such as parental alienation syndrome, parental alienation, or alienated child, are specifically excluded as allowable diagnoses and for court use.” (California doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I am responding from a strategic and tactical point of view. In addition to being a forensic psychologist, doing CCE, I am also legislative chair of the Florida Psychological Association. In my experience…” (Florida doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I’ll go ahead and forward this to her if that’s ok with you.  the annual Legislative and Advocacy day is coming up mid-March, altho I’m guessing they’ve already selected the legislation they want psychologists to discuss with legislators… do you know how far along this bill is in the legislative process… I think CPA’s stand in general is to strongly oppose any bill that limits psychologists’ scope of practice…” (California doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “Perhaps a letter from those of us who write and teach about use of psychological tests in CCEs might be useful?…” (North Carolina doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).
[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I agree also and think a letter from professionals that know testing is a great idea.  It seems that if the legislature wants to “do something”  perhaps advocating for  required continuing education of so many hours in order to allow people to use the tests…” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP, February 23, 2007).

115. http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/index.html#myths-and-facts

116. As is usually recognized by the MHP, e.g. Pickar, supra, note 66b, but only when convenient or desired. Compare the following.

The first two commentators are uninterested in acknowledging past financial issues that have wreaked family havoc, and arguably bear on character as well as explain motives and feelings of the parties; the third is interested in supporting a father’s request to relocate, and so believes that it is within his province to gather and analyze data about prospective financial matters:

[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “Tax returns?? Simple issues like one parent claimed 4 kids and there are only two, I can probably figure that out and that speaks to honesty and maybe tracking reality. But I agree that we should not be analyzing tax issues. If it is that complex I can’t think how that would be relevant to custody/parenting issues. If it is, both parent provide information and you hire a tax consultant to review it. I can’t imagine what could be relevant… I have a case right now where there are federal indictments on one parent to the tune of over 1/2 millions and all kinds of issues around money. Very little of it is relevant (except possible prison and honesty) and the other parent wants to make it all relevant. She brought me a notebook of financial records. That’s about her anger about the money – which is relevant to know how angry she is at dad and how that affects her children.”(Kansas doctorate-level MHP, November 23, 2005).

124. For an example of how background might influence the MHP’s investigation, perceptions and conclusions, see Lisa D. Cromer & Jennifer J. Freyd,What Influences Believing Child Sexual Abuse Disclosures? The roles of depicted memory persistence, participant gender, trauma history, and sexism, 31 Psych. Women Q. 1 (2007). From the abstract: “Men believed abuse reports less than did women, and people who had not experienced trauma were less likely to believe trauma reports. Gender and personal history interacted such that trauma history did not impact women’s judgments but did impact men’s judgments. Men with a trauma history responded similarly to women with or without a trauma history. High sexism predicted lower judgments of an event being abusive. Hostile sexism was negatively correlated with believing abuse disclosures.” The study at the University of Oregon found that “young men who have never been traumatized are the least likely population to believe a person’s recounting of child sexual abuse.” (News release, Believing child sexual abuse claims, U. Or. Univ. News, February 13, 2007, at http://www.uoregon.edu/newsstory.php?a=2.13.07-disbelievers.html)

[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE PRECURSOR]: “I just haven’t noticed higher abilities in hypothesis testing among psychologists or other mental health professionals. I realize that you have to take a couple of courses in research and statistics to get a graduate degree (in most fields). It doesn’t seem to translate into skills in decision-making across the board. E.g. the recent thread on the Kansas custody evaluation and Virginia side trip. Some very off thinking and relevant point missing.
One might take arguments similar to that you have made and point out that psychologists just aren’t trained as investigators when it comes to obtaining information outside of psychological data (police officers are better.) And that lawyers are better trained at issue spotting and weighing information. And that judges have more experience decision-making.
I also point out that mental health training does not provide actual information and experience relevant to many of the issues that ought to be considered in a custody determination. For example, the financial aspects. For example, educational opportunities. For example, what it’s like to actually be a parent with day-in and day-out responsibility for children, how the home is run, the pragmatics of life. An unwed childless 28-year-old Ph.D. just out of school probably hasn’t a clue — and I for one see this lack influencing unworkable recommendations.
I also point out that skill in testing and coming up with psychological diagnoses does not qualify anyone ipso facto to translate that into parenting ability or even to understand with what kind of or which parent a child’s best interests is most likely to be fostered. There is very little translating dsm diagnoses into parenting abilities and child outcomes, especially when neither parent is perfect and foibles and personality defects have to be weighed…” (liz, May 2, 2005).

124. For an example of how background might influence the MHP’s investigation, perceptions and conclusions, see Lisa D. Cromer & Jennifer J. Freyd, What Influences Believing Child Sexual Abuse Disclosures? The roles of depicted memory persistence, participant gender, trauma history, and sexism, 31 Psych. Women Q. 1 (2007). From the abstract: “Men believed abuse reports less than did women, and people who had not experienced trauma were less likely to believe trauma reports. Gender and personal history interacted such that trauma history did not impact women’s judgments but did impact men’s judgments. Men with a trauma history responded similarly to women with or without a trauma history. High sexism predicted lower judgments of an event being abusive. Hostile sexism was negatively correlated with believing abuse disclosures.” The study at the University of Oregon found that “young men who have never been traumatized are the least likely population to believe a person’s recounting of child sexual abuse.” (News release, Believing child sexual abuse claims, U. Or. Univ. News, February 13, 2007, athttp://www.uoregon.edu/newsstory.php?a=2.13.07-disbelievers.html)

125. [ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE QUERY]: “My 8 year old son is complaining a lot about being bored in school, to the point it seems to be affecting his overall happiness… I experienced similar problems throughout elementary and high school.. Will talk with the school but am seeking ideas to help him cope…” (Doctorate-level MHP father, April 21, 2005).

[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “While such “purity balls” are not something that I and my daughters (ages 14 and 12 next week) have ever or would ever participate in, I can indeed tell you that as a father I feel a desire to help protect my daughters from predators and even poor choices on their part.” (Idaho doctorate-level MHP father, April 19, 2006).
[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I asked my stepdaughter what stores my granddaughter likes… One of the stores she mentioned was Victoria’s Secret. Why would a high school junior want to buy anything in Victoria’s secret? Has it changed in terms of what it sells? I know they all like to dress like streetwalkers, but this is ridiculous.” (Minnesota masters-level MHP mother, February 28, 2005).
[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “School is important for kids… why not look and take the time to get good data from people who see them more than we do? And who see them sometimes more than their parents do. I’m going to stop now and call my son’s school. Seems there is an academic counselor… who is helping my son with sending emails to college soccer coaches. She’s helping my son and deserves my support… the students at school call this counselor, “Momma.” And I know why. Aren’t some kids just luckier than others?” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP father, May 10, 2005).

…When There Still Isn’t Enough Work, Doing Trainings for Everyone (especially those that push make-work ideas) and Reviewing Other MHPs

[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I do CCEs and I function as a court-appointed “Case Manager” in Kansas. Kansas calls parent coordinators “Case Managers” to avoid confusion – lol. I have also twice attended AFCC sponsored training on parent coordination. The Colorado group (Christie Coates, Robert LaCrosse, And Betsy Duvall) did a 2 day training in St. Louis in November, 2003, and Joan Kelly did a 2 day training in Chicago in June 2004. Both of these training programs emphasize the “Divorce Impasse” Model that Janet Johnston put together. This is a model that I find helps in CCEs and parent coordination/case management. The second AFCC task force has just completed its task of developing model standards for parent coordinators (See AFCC website or request backchannel)…” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP, May 16, 2005).

“Do a Bonding Assessment”

[ANONYMOUS LISTSERVE COMMENT]: “I do not know of a research based protocol for a ‘bonding assessment.’ It seems the folks that do them around here do an observation of touching, smiling, eye contact, warm interactions etc which are good and important and look at basic needs and are they met. I was wondering if there are protocols that are considered ‘standard of care’ and or are reseach based.” (Kansas doctorate-level MHP, January 14, 2007.)

For more about the GREAT Dr. Milford “Bud” Dale please visit the following links.

http://www.thelizlibrary.org/therapeutic-jurisprudence/index.html

http://washburnlaw.edu/news/2009/2009-03cflc-horizons.php

KANSAS CASE MANAGERS; CHILD CUSTODY COURT APPOINTED 3RD PARTIES, PSYCHOLOGY; CUSTODY EVALUATIONS; THERAPY, GAURDIAN AD LITEMS, COPARENTING, SUPERVISED VISITATION, ACCESS VISTITATION and ‘Therapeutic Jurisprudence’.

Therapeutic jurisprudence in the family courts, i.e. a "mental health approach to the law" substitutes the opinions of mental health practitioners for traditional evidence and decision-making procedures. Because these persons actually do not have any kind of "expertise" to opine this way, what originally was thought to be a helpful idea (in this medicalized and psychologized world) has become merely economic opportunism, harming not only the litigants and children in the system as well as the court system itself, but also perverting substantive and procedural law. It is not science, but compensated yenta-ism that has permeated the courts under the pretexts that engineering family affectional relationships is within the ability of mental health "science" practitioners to accomplish, and that this is an appropriate goal of the government, court system, and state police power because children "need" something it has to offer.

This completely denies the Constitutional Right to a Court of Law governed by FACT.

Mother Speaks On Case Management Bill

Source: Topeka Capitol Journal

Excerpt;

“Karen Williams previously had full custody of her daughter before a case manager appointed by the court to work with her and her ex-husband decided to limit her to one or two hours a week of supervised visitation at a Lawrence facility called The Farm.”

“Williams says her rights to due process were violated when the judge allowed the new custody arrangement without giving Williams a full hearing to respond to any evidence for the case manager's decision.

"I still have parental rights, supposedly, but effectively I've been stripped of them," Williams said.

Williams stopped by the Statehouse on Tuesday after her case was heard by the Kansas Court of Appeals. Continue Reading

 

 

 Caesars Ghost A Commenter sums it up well:

In any other area of law

In any other area of law "confidential conversations between judges and case managers" would constitute ex parte communications that would subject the parties-- including the Judges-- to disciplinary procedures and possible sanctions. This is a joke to provide such exceptions to the due process rights of either parent, as well as the rights of the children whose custody and visitation is being determined by the court.

If the Judges don't want to do their job and wish to abdicate their role to "case managers" then perhaps the Judges need to step down and be replaced by Judges who do want to do their job of hearing all of the facts in a case in full light, view and scrutiny of the opposing parties.

The 6th amendment grants criminals the right to confront their accusers and to be presented with the claims and evidence against them and the right to contest those claims and evidence.

Why does our legislature grant fewer rights to parents than they do to criminals, pedophiles, murders, etc.? And why are children denied access to parents based on what a case manager says.

I don't care if the case manager has specialized training in psychology, family therapy, domestic issues or anything else. That specialty gives the case manager nothing more than "expert witness" status constitutionally speaking. It does NOT make that case manager the default judge.

The best way to fix this is not to revise the statute and required qualifications to serve as a case manager. The best way to fix it would be to repeal the statute that created case managers in the first place and go back to how Kansas handled these cases for nearly a century and a half prior to 2002.

The whole case manager position never existed in Kansas before 2002, and so it isn't like this is just something that HAS to exist for Courts to function. Instead it is part of the reason courts are NOT functioning for families or for those who believe in due process principles of the Constitution or for those of us who abhor seeing more tax dollars going to create quasi authority figures by turning expert witnesses into defacto unlicensed judges while we continue to pay the salaries of both the abdicating judges and the defacto unlicensed judges.

---

PSYCHOLOGY; CUSTODY EVALUATIONS; THERAPY, CASE MANAGERS, GAURDIAN AD LITEMS, COPARENTING, SUPERVISED VISITATION, ACCESS VISTITATION

Case Managers; Forensic Psychology; Guardians ad Litem; Therapeutic Jurisprudence
The sociological and psychological research on families and child well-being impacts public policy and the issues of child custody in family law. The research frequently is misrepresented, and mis-cited by mental health professionals, lawyers, forensic psychologists and others, as well as interest groups lobbying for laws. Also review the sections pertaining to the issues impacted by the "therapeutic jurisprudence", such as child custody, parental alienation theory, research pertaining to child development, the subsection for research Myths and Facts in FAMILY LAW, and other family law issues. Also see the subsection on Child Custody in FAMILY LAW. The Therapeutic Jurisprudence index page contains links to recommended off-site locations as well as the on-site articles http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/child-custody-evaluations.html

Index: Therapeutic Jurisprudence

Are Psychologists Hiding Evidence? A Need for Reform by Lees-Haley and Courtney SCHOLAR

Child Custody Evaluations and Measuring Attachment (limited science) by Jean Mercer 2009 PDF SCHOLAR

Child sex abuse, the limits of Loftus, and overblowing the memory research LIZNOTES, CITES

Children's Associational Rights: Why less is more by Emily Buss PDF SCHOLAR

Collaborative Law: What's Wrong with Multidisciplinary Practice? by liz

Court-appointed Parenting Evaluators: The Case for Abolition by Margaret Dore PDF SCHOLAR

Custody Evaluations: Ten Signs of Questionable Practices by Joel V. Klass, M.D. SCHOLAR

Custody evaluators' arguments about test records -- and why they're wrong by liz

Custody Evaluators' Beliefs About Domestic Abuse Allegations, U.S. Dept Justice October 31, 2011 PDF SCHOLAR

Caveat: recommendations in the above paper are NOT endorsed by thelizlibrary.org

Disciplining Divorcing Parents: Social Construction of Parental Alienation by F. Besset PDF SCHOLAR

Family Court is Not a Family-Friendly Place by Lisa Marie Macci, Esq.

Guardians ad Litem in Custody Litigation: The Case for Abolition by Richard Ducote PDF SCHOLAR

Parental Alienation Syndrome -- getting it wrong in child custody cases by Carol S. Bruch PDF SCHOLAR

Parenting Coordination Issues by liz

Psychiatric experts assess parental alienation by David Crary

Psychology in Court: A Trial Within a Trial by liz

Psychology in Court: The Detectives by liz

Psychology in Court:The Diagnosticians by liz

Psychology in Court: Discovery of Test Data by liz

Psychology in Court: How to Respond to the MMPI-2 by liz

Reevaluating the Evaluators (overview of the problem) by liz CITATIONS TO RESEARCH

Custody Evaluator Quotes by liz (companion to above article)

Signs of a Bad Custody Evaluation by Joel V. Klass, M.D. SCHOLAR

Socialization, Personality Development, and the Child's Environments by Judith Rich Harris SCHOLAR

Sound Research or Wishful Thinking in Custody Cases? by Carol S. Bruch PDF SCHOLAR

Stupidity Inherent in Promoting Supervised Visitation Centers by liz

Troubling Admission of Supervised Visitation Records in Court by Stern/Oehme PDF SCHOLAR

What Does the Guardian ad Litem do in Family Court? by liz

Warren Farrell Does a Custody Evaluation by liz

What's Wrong with Parenting Coordination by liz

Why "Therapeutic Jurisprudence" Must Be Eliminated From Our Family Courts by liz

Why "Therapeutic Jurisprudence" Must Be Eliminated From Our Courts by liz (pub. version)

Critical Assessment of Child Custody Evaluations by Emery, Otto, Donohue off-site PDF SCHOLAR

"Father's Right's" Movement: How to Legally Stalk, Harass, and Intimidate Victims of Domestic Violence after a Restraining Order has been Issued

http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/FRtactic.html

STALKING THROUGH THE COURTS
by Janet Normalvanbreucher

Table of Contents:

• Introduction
• Historical Background of the Father's Rights Movement
• The Quest for Dominance and Control
• Mom, Country, and Apple Pie -- Why People Help Them
• Differentiating Legitimate Fatherhood Groups from Illegitimate "Father's Rights" Groups
  -- Ten Tips for Single Dads
• IS There Bias in the Courts?
• The "Father's Manifesto" - A Political Platform to Repeal the 19th Amendment
  -- Father's Manifesto Signatories
• Practicing Law Without A License -- A Pro-Se Army
• Use of the Internet to Disseminate Information
• The Seduction of the Media
• Father's Right's Advocates in High Places
• How the Father's Right's Movement Hurts Men with Legitimate Disputes
• Mein Kampf -- Indoctrination Tactics of The Father's Rights Movement
• Brief History of VAWA and the Restraining Order
• Are Restraining Orders Widely Abused by Women as a Tactical Maneuver in a Divorce?
• Attacking Her Credibility
• DOJ -- Profile of an Obsessive Stalker
• "She Deserved It" -- How the Criminal Process Fails Victims
• Malicious Prosecution and Abuse of Process in the Courts
  -- Victoria D.'s story
• Vindictive Custody/Visitation Suits
• Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
• Parental Alienation Syndrome
  -- if Psychologists Discredit this Theory, Why Is it So Widely Accepted by the Courts?
• Harassment of Judges, the Legislature, and Potential Jurors
• Lawyers Who Knowingly Help Men Harass their Victims
• Possible Solutions:
  -- Screening of Pro-Se Lawsuits, Criminal Charges, Motions for Reconsideration
  -- Criminal Sanctions for Filing Frivolous Charges with State Administrative Agencies
  -- Tighter Enforcement of Stalking Laws
  -- Rule 11-type Pro-Se Sanctions for Abuse of Process
  -- Prosecuting Groups who are Practicing Law Without A License
  -- Law School Programs - Helping the Victims Fight Back
  -- Lawsuits against FR Groups under the VAWA as Unincorporated Associations.
  -- Legislative Action

A Proposed Constitutional Amendment

Kansas Court of Appeals To Hear a Child Custody Case Involving The Role of Case Managers (and other 3rd party interferers) in Child Custody Matters.

“Therapeutic Jurisprudence - The sociological and psychological research on families and child well-being impacts public policy and the issues of child custody in family law. The research frequently is misrepresented, and mis-cited by mental health professionals, lawyers, forensic psychologists and others, as well as interest groups lobbying for laws. http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/child-custody-evaluations.html

Case Managers, Guardians ad Litem; Parenting Coordinators; Custody Evaluators, etc. the various forms of so-called ADR (alternate dispute resolution) practitioners, such as GALs, parenting coordinators, parenting evaluators, forensic psychologists, recommending mediators, special masters, court-ordered therapists, other court-appointed mental health professionals, supervised visitation centers, and other profiteers of "therapeutic jurisprudence", whose methods involve -- intrusion and coercion under the threat of court sanctions, and actual or de facto extra-judicial decision-making, which have multiple things wrong with them, not the least of which is denigration of due process, and the diminution of a publicly observable, regulated, and appealable "rule by law" by substituting the caprice of men and women.

These practices have been promoted as "cures" for ailings of the court system and the litigants in it by self-serving persons who apparently are ignorant, or else just do not care about the harms they cause to children and their parents because they make money from the ideas they promote, churning profit in proceedings that fly in the face of the foundations of our justice system. http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/child-custody-evaluations.html

Also; the majority of 'high conflict' divorce case's are Domestic Violence and or Abusive. Good parents 90% of them never have to go through the above, it is the 10 % the abusive ones or aka "High Conflict" that the above make their living on. Return the Judge back to the Court room, get rid of the non factual 'opinion and belief' of third party $ hand outs who block access to Justice/ e.g. the Judge.”

 

Kansas Court to Consider Case Manager Custody Case Appeal

TOPEKA — The Kansas Court of Appeals is set to hear a child custody case next month that addresses the role of case managers in custody matters in the state.

The case, which is scheduled for a May 15 hearing before the appeals court, involves Karen Williams, who lost full custody of her child in March 2011 after a case manager recommended to the judge that custody go to the child's father. Williams said the decision to separate her from her daughter was made based on confidential conversations between the judge and the case manager.

Williams and her attorney argue that she has a constitutional right to a hearing in which the case manager must present the evidence to back up her custody recommendation and allow Williams to respond to it, The Topeka Capital-Journal reported Monday.

"I've not been allowed due process, and I want a day in court," Williams said.

In Kansas, case managers, who work with parents in "high-conflict" relationships on their visitation schedules and custody, are appointed by judges and aren't required to have a professional license.

"The only qualification currently is that a judge appoints them," said Ron Nelson, a Lenexa lawyer who specializes in family law.

Nelson said the use of case managers has been authorized for about 10 years, and concerns about them overstepping their bounds have mounted due to a lack of clear guidelines about their responsibilities and authority. He said the case management concerns are about non-judicial officers making custody decisions that should be the purview of the courts. .

The Legislature is also considering a bill requiring specific qualifications for case managers. It would restrict judges to appointing only licensed psychologists, psychotherapists, counselors, therapists, social workers or lawyers.

Rep. Joe Patton, R-Topeka, a lawyer who serves on the judiciary conference committee, said he has "mixed feelings" about the bill.

"It's certainly very important to have someone qualified," he said. "It's very possible someone can be qualified without a particular license, but as a general rule we want someone qualified."

Cheryl Powers, the case manager on Williams' case, declined to comment on the Williams brief with the hearing pending. But she said she believes the backlash against case managers is coming from a group of disgruntled lawyers.

"There are certain attorneys that are less than happy with the fact that some of us have quasi-judicial powers without a license," she said. "They're attorneys and don't have that much power. They are not happy with that."

Child Custody Evaluators' Beliefs About Domestic Abuse Allegations: Their Relationship to Evaluator Demographics, Background, Domestic Violence - Knowledge and Custody-Visitation Recommendations Final Technical Report Submitted to the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice

Entire article follows below the excerpts or read here

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

High rates of domestic violence exist in families referred for child custody evaluations. These evaluations can produce potentially harmful outcomes, including the custody of children being awarded to a violent parent, unsupervised or poorly supervised visitation between violent parents and their children, and mediation sessions that increase danger to domestic violence victims. Past research shows that domestic violence is frequently undetected in custody cases or ignored as a significant factor in custody-visitation determinations. Previous research also indicates that violence—and its harmful effects on victims and children—often continues or increases after separation.

Today the family law arena is increasingly identified as needing reform to protect battered women and their children (Goodmark, 2011). Research has documented the ongoing and sometimes escalating dangers faced by victims and their children after they leave violent relationships. Homicidal threats, stalking, and harassment affect as many as 25 to 35 percent of survivors who have left a violent relationship (e.g., Bachman & Saltzman, 1995; Hardesty & Chung, 2006; Tjaden & Thoennes,2000a). In addition, as many as one fourth of battered women report their ex-partners threatened to hurt or kidnap their children (e.g., Liss & Stahly, 1993). Many abusers also use the legal system to maintain contact with and harass their ex-partners (Bancroft & Silverman, 2002).

Domestic abuse survivors and their children may experience serious harm as a result of family court decisions. Offenders may be able to continue their abuse of their ex-partners and children due to unsupervised or poorly supervised visitation arrangements (Neustein & Lesher, 2005; Radford & Hester, 2006); sole or joint custody of children may be awarded to a violent or potentially violent parent rather than a non-violent one; and mediation may be recommended or mandated in a way that compromises victims’ rights or places them in more danger. Tragically, in some cases post-separation contacts end in the homicide of a mother and/or her children.(Saunders, 2009; Sheeran & Hampton, 1999). Ironically, battered mothers’ attempts to protect their children may be used against them in custody and visitation decisions.

One widely cited educational booklet from the American Judges Association states that, “studies show that batterers have been able to convince authorities that the victim is unfit or undeserving of sole custody in approximately 70% of challenged cases” (American Judges Association, n.d., p. 5)

Gender Bias in the Courts

Battered women are at higher risk of negative custody-visitation outcomes due to gender bias by courts, as documented by many federal, state, and local commissions that have studied such bias since the 1980s (e.g., Abrams & Greaney, 1989; Czapanskiy, 1993; Danforth & Welling, 1996; Dragiewicz, 2010; Meier, 2003; Zorza, 1996)4. Negative stereotypes about women seem to encourage judges to disbelieve women’s allegations about child abuse (Danforth & Welling, 1996; Zorza, 1996). A lack of understanding about domestic violence also leads judges to accuse victims of lying, blaming victims for the violence, and trivializing the violence (Abrams & Greaney, 1989;Maryland Special Joint Committee on Gender Bias, 1989).

Gender bias is frequently uncovered in custody disputes (Rosen & Etlin, 1996) and often leads to mistrust of women—in particular to the belief that they make false allegations of child abuse and domestic violence. Dragiewicz (2010) provides a comprehensive summary of gender bias reports pertaining to custody decisions. In addition to the tendency to disbelieve or minimize women’s reports of abuse, or to disregard evidence for it, Dragiewicz also describes other problems uncovered during investigations. These include mothers being punished for reporting abuse.

Half of men who batter also physically abuse their children (Straus, 1983.

Beliefs About False Allegations of Domestic Violence in Relation to Other Beliefs and Recommendations

Among evaluators, the belief that allegations of domestic violence are usually false was part of a constellation of beliefs, including beliefs that false allegations of child abuse and parental alienation by DV survivors are common. DV educators need to provide accurate information on: the rates and nature of false allegations and alienation; the ways in which survivors are reluctant to co-parent out of fear of future harm; the mental health consequences of DV; and the importance of understanding coercive-controlling forms of violence. In addition, the significant relationships between beliefs about custody and broader beliefs about patriarchal norms, justice, and social dominance suggest links to deeper values. Professional educators can use value awareness exercises that may help change beliefs and behavior. These recommendations apply to judges as well, since their beliefs about DV and custody were significantly related to the outcomes recommended in the case vignette.

Friendly Parent Statutes

The friendly-parent standard works against survivors because any concerns they voice about father-child contact or safety for themselves are usually interpreted as a lack of cooperation (Zorza, 1996).

Survivors are therefore placed in a no-win situation: If they do not report abuse, then protections for them and solid grounds for custody are not available; yet reporting the abuse may be viewed as raising false allegations in order to gain advantage in divorce proceedings (Dore, 2004). Research shows that parents who raise concerns about child sexual abuse can be severely sanctioned for doing so (Faller & DeVoe, 1995). The sanctions include loss of custody to the alleged offender, restricted visitation, and court orders not to report further abuse or take the child to a therapist (Faller & DeVoe, 1995; Neustein & Goetting, 1999; Neustein & Lesher, 2005; Voices of Women, 2008). In practice, friendly-parent provisions, together with statutes presuming joint custody, tend to override presumptions against awarding joint legal custody with the abuser (Morrill, Dai, Dunn, Sung, & Smith, 2005).

Further compounding victims’ experiences are contradictory messages from criminal courts, family courts, child protection investigations, and visitation services (Hester, 2009). For example, criminal courts support victims’ testimony about the abuse, but in family court the same testimony might be interpreted as non-cooperation. To overcome these inconsistencies some states have introduced integrated DV courts (Aldrich & Kluger, 2010).

Labeling Survivors as “Alienating Parents”

Similar to the emphasis on cooperative parenting, use of the label “parent-alienation syndrome” (Gardner, 1998) or, more recently, “parental-alienation disorder” (Bernet, 2008; Bernet, von Boch-Galhau, Baker, & Morrison, 2010) can also place battered women in a no-win situation.

Battered mothers are vulnerable to these labels when they make formal child abuse allegations or raise concerns about the possible abuse of the children by an ex-partner. Many child abuse professionals believe that mothers coach their children to make false allegations in contested custody disputes (Faller, 2007).

Practitioners who apply parent-alienation syndrome (PAS) or parent-alienation disorder formulations tend to automatically label a parent as an “alienator” without a thorough investigation of the allegations (Brown, Frederico, Hewitt, & Sheehan, 2000; Brown, Frederico, Hewitt, & Sheehan, 2001; Meier, 2009). As a result, battered mothers may be viewed as both pathological and abusive.

Fathers’ Rights Groups

The influence of fathers’ rights groups on evaluators and judges is unclear outside of anecdotal accounts (Kurth, 2010). Some types of groups lobby for the presumption of joint custody and co-parenting and doubt the validity of most domestic violence allegations(Dragiewicz, 2008;Williams, Boggess, & Carter, 2004). For example, the National Fathers’ Resource Center (NFRC), along with Fathers for Equal Rights, “demands that society acknowledge that false claims of Domestic Violence are used to gain unfair advantages in custody and divorce cases” (NFRC, 2006). They further state:

Fathers’ organizations now estimate that up to 80% of domestic violence allegations against men are false allegations. Since society offers women so many perks for claiming that they are victims of DV (we call these perks “warm milk and cookies”), false or staged DV allegations now appear to be even more frequent in family court cases than false sex abuse allegations. . . . Simply stated, women know, and are often advised by their attorneys, that if they want to get custody of the children, they had better try to nail dad with some sort of domestic violence accusation (NFRC, 2006).

Underlying the patriarchal beliefs and victim blaming are likely to be deeper, “core” beliefs (i.e. general, value-laden beliefs) about justice and equality. For example, the belief that the world is basically a just place has been related to various forms of victim blaming or denigration. It asserts that good things can happen only to good people and bad things can happen only to bad people (Rubin & Peplau, 1975). Likewise, holding a basic belief that hierarchies are an inherent part of society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) and having inequality as a core value (Ball-Rokeach, 1976) are related to beliefs supporting gender inequality. 

In 2007, ten mothers and a victimized child (now an adult) and national and state organizations filed suit against the United States with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. They claimed that the human rights of abused mothers and children were not protected because custody was awarded to abusers and child molesters (Klein, 2007).

 

 

Child Custody Evaluators' Beliefs About Domestic Abuse Allegations: Their Relationship to Evaluator Demographics, Background, Domestic Violence - Knowledge and Custody-Visitation Recommendations Final

Guardians ad Litem; Parenting Coordinators; Custody Evaluators, etc.

Guardians ad Litem; Parenting Coordinators; Custody Evaluators, etc.

Social Workers, Visiting programs, batterer so called treatment bullshit TREC --- Safe Visit, Connie Sanchez and all those others who have created job security by protecting bad dad, hating women, and getting kick backs perks and pay offs for spilling the blood of mothers and their children. Horizons Bud Dale, Sherri Keller Shawnee County Courthouse…… and many more.

This category includes the various forms of so-called ADR (alternate dispute resolution) practitioners, such as GALs, parenting coordinators, parenting evaluators, forensic psychologists, recommending mediators, special masters, court-ordered therapists, other court-appointed mental health professionals, supervised visitation centers, and other profiteers of "therapeutic jurisprudence", whose methods involve -- in non-criminal cases -- intrusion and coercion under the threat of court sanctions, and actual or de facto extra-judicial decision-making. This website heavily criticizes all of these practices, which have multiple things wrong with them, not the least of which is denigration of due process, and the diminution of a publicly observable, regulated, and appealable "rule by law" by substituting the caprice of men and women. These practices have been promoted as "cures" for ailings of the court system and the litigants in it by self-serving persons who apparently are ignorant, or else just do not care about the harms they cause to children and their parents because they make money from the ideas they promote, churning profit in proceedings that fly in the face of the foundations of our justice system.

The bulk of these materials are listed in the section on PSYCHOLOGY. Also see the sections on the specific substantive issues, such as child development or parental alienation.

Court-appt'd Parenting Evaluators and GALs: The Case for Abolition by Margaret Dore PDF SCHOLAR

Guardians ad Litem in Custody Litigation: The Case for Abolition by Richard Ducote PDF SCHOLAR

Guardians for Profit: LA Times expose, elder abuse by professional conservators by LA Times Staff

Parenting Coordination Issues (outline) by liz

Parenting Coordinators, Practical Considerations by liz

Proper Role of Mental Health Professionals in Domestic Violence Cases by Barry Goldstein, Esq. Editorial

Psychological Testing in Family Court - Discovery Issues by liz

Psychological Testing in Family Court - How to Respond to the forensic MMPI-2 by liz

Signs of a Bad Custody Evaluation by Joel V. Klass, M.D. SCHOLAR

Stuart A. Greenberg, Ph.D., Fraud and Sexual Perversion in a "Top" Custody Evaluator

Troubling Admission of Supervised Visitation Records in Court by Stern/Oehme PDF SCHOLAR

What's Wrong with Parenting Coordination by liz

Los Angeles County DCFS Child Social Workers violating Laws - Philip L. Browning Los Angeles County Children and Family Services

Another PAS (Parental Alienation Syndrome) Scandal.This came from a grandfather seeking help for his daughter and grand-daughter. Please scroll down to read the letter sent to all major media and the DA who refuses to protect a child from her pedophile father. DCFS et el --Google your names now, you have been exposed. California Highway Patrol Report

 

Morning,

I just want to share with you the problems our daughter and granddaughter are having with Los Angeles County DCFS.  On Sunday April 1 at 7:00 pm I will be on Straight Talk with John Narzarin (link http://www.straighttalkwithjohnjnazarian.com/ )I will be discussing the problems with Professional monitor Phyllis Block and DCFS violating policies, procedures, court orders,etc and continue to do so with no regards to our granddaughter's safety and health.

I myself never thought this could happen to my family, but here we are fighting to save our granddaughter who was raped by her father Jason Moncibais.  Our granddaughter continues to be molested and abused by Jason's father Sal Moncibais and his wife Margaret (Killeen) Moncibais and DCFS is not doing anything to stop it.  In fact, they charged my daughter for emotional abuse, fabricated lies and had the judge drop the molestation charges against the father and asked for custody to be switched to the child abuser and molester father.  This is totally sick minded people and my tax dollar is paying for DCFS to punish my daughter and granddaughter...just sick

I have also attached an email sent to Philip Browning who is suppose to be in charge of LA County DCFS, but I believe he is just window dressing,   Hopefully the file won't be too big for most of you, where I will find a bunch of return emails.

Rick Perez

Reseda, CA 91335

818-825-1953

BCC to other moms and advocates

---------- Forwarded Message -----------
From: "Rick" <rperez@wmelab.com>
To: pinquiries@dcfs.lacounty.gov, pbrowning@childsupport.co.la.ca.us, finkld@dcfs.lacounty.gov, lmandel@bos.lacounty.gov, mayor@lacity.com,
Cc: staff@talkamerica.com,terry@catholicradio.com,timmer@premrad.com,tommartin@worldradio.org,tommydouglas@pgatourradio.com,troman@theprovider.com,weber@swnetworks.com,world@flpradio.com,wrestrepo@radiounica.com,yourtwc@mindspring.com,48hours@cbsnews.com,60m@cbsnews.com,abenitez@univision.net,accuracy@usatoday.com, betsy.fischer@nbc.com,brianhill@metronetworks.com,browne@foxnews.com,cochs@ap.org,comments@www.lifetimetv.com,danschiedel@kozk.pbs.org,dateline@nbcuni.com,dibella@foxnews.com,diefenbach@foxnews.com,dij@cbsnews.com,dmedrano@telemundo.com,earlyshow@cbs.com,ElRushbo@eibnet.com,evaldez@univision.net,evening@cbsnews.com,fair@fair.org, Foxreport@foxnews.com,frontlineworld@flworld.org,ftn@cbsnews.com,gil.pimentel@abc.com,GlennBeck@foxnews.com,gramshaw@newshour.org,hannity@foxnews.com,info@ap.org,info@cnbc.com,jcohen@bloomberg.net,jonathan.wald@nbc.com,letters@usnews.com,letters@washpost.com,lisa.hsia@nbc.com,lmn@mylifetime.com,mail@uttm.com,mark.nelson@abc.com, maureensm@ffww.com,mcurtis@njn.org,meredith.white@abc.com,metro@sfchronicle.com,mimi.gurbst@abc.com,muriel.pearson@abc.com,newseditors@wsj.com,news-tips@nytimes.com,newstips@upi.org,nightly@nbc.com,nytnews@nytimes.com,ombudsman@washpost.com,onlineda@newshour.orgg,ontherecord@foxnews.com,oreilly@foxnews.com,penny.britell@abc.com, phil.boyce@citcomm.com,pjh@cbsnews.com,plorris@univision.net,pls@cbsnews.com,readers.representative@latimes.com,realitycheck@cbsnews.com,rod.prince@nbc.com,rvizcon@telemundo.com,sharon.newman@abc.com,sheberer@pbs.org,special@foxnews.com,stella.dawson@reuters.com,steve.majors@nbc.com,stu.schutzman@abc.com,sundays@cbsnews.com, susan.dutcher@nbc.com,thismorning@cbsnews.com,today@nbc.com,tom.lea@nbc.com,virginia.moseley@abc.com,webmail@lifetimetv.com wsj.ltrs@wsj.com,wsjcontact@dowjones.com,WT@nbc.com,acsok@gol.com,admin@ltembassyus.org,aitarc@mail.ait.org.tw,albertod@intr.net,ambadane@erols.com,Ambassador@roembus.org,amembusadm@msn.com, angola@angola.org,ask@israelemb.org,azerbaijan@tidalwave.net,bulgaria@access.digex.net,cambemb@hotmail.com,cbartoli@elsalvador.org,Claire.Sambrook@ukrep.mail.fco.gov.uk,congenny@AOL.com,croatia@mail.idt.net,cubaseccion@igc.apc.org,Cultural@roembus.org,cvefont@sysnet.net,DCM@roembus.org,ecfin-info@cec.eu.int,Education@roembus.org, emb@uzbekistan.org,Embaguat@sysnet.net,embalgus@cais.com,embanic_usa@amdyne.net,embassy@costarica.com,embassy@haiti.org,Embassy@kyrgyzstan.org,embassy@moldova.org,embavene@dgsys.com,embdomrepusa@msn.com,Embofbih@aol.com,embpol@dgs.dgsys.com,emjam@sysnet.net,esa@un.org,ethiopia@tidalwave.net,fijiemb@earthlink.net, gamembdc@gambia.com,ge-embus@ix.netcom.com,guyanaem@erols.com,hagan@cais.com,HKJEmbassyDC@aol.com,icemb.wash@utn.stjr.is,indonsia@dgs.dgsys.com,info@bahrainembassy.org,info@chadembassy.org,info@dg12.cec.be,info@dg5.cec.be,info@embassyofkuwait.com,info@estemb.org,info@finland.org,info@kenyaembassy.com,info@maliembassy-usa.org, info@rmiembassyus.org,info@saudiembassy.net,info@spainun.org,info@stkittsnevis.org,info@sudanembassyus.org,info@turkey.org,info@yemenembassy.org,infolook@aol.com,irishcgsf@aol.com,irishconchicago@aol.com,irlcons@aol.com,irqun@undp.org,itembtky@gol.com,korinfo@koreaemb.org,Kunduwash@aol.com,laoun@undp.org,latvia@ambergateway.com, malagasy@embassy.org,MAURITIUS.EMBASSY@prodigy.net,mecuawaa@erols.com,mikailov@mnts.msk.su,monemb@aol.com mysun@undp.org,nhema@erols.com,norun@undp.org,nzemb@dc.infi.net,osmik@mid.ru,peru@peruemb.org,portugal@portugalemb.org,postmaster@nobel.no,rmacedonia@aol.com,root@k5241.mnts.msk.su,rwood@ap.org,safrica@southafrica.net, Science@roembus.org,science@was.rep.admin.ch,scitech@brasil.emb.nw.dc.us,singemb@bellatlantic.net,slembasy@clark.net,slovenia@embassy.org,svkemb@concentric.net,sweden@un.int,thai.wsn@thaiembdc.org,trade@was.rep.admin.ch,turkmen@earthlink.net,twawashington@mindspring.com,ugaembassy@rocketmail.com,uruguay@embassy.org, vbs-ddps@defence.ch,veronica@embassyeritrea.org,vertretung@was.rep.admin.ch,vietnamembassy@msn.com,vmwnl@aol.com,washington@diplobel.org,washington@embassy.mzv.cz,WDCpe@aol.com,webmaster@china-embassy.org,webmaster@colombiaemb.org,webmaster@embassyofmexico.org webmaster@laoembassy.com,webmaster@russianembassy.org, Webmaster@www.nobel.se,worldservice.letters@bbc.co.uk,yuembassy@compuserve.com,zimweb@zimweb.com,AskDOJ@usdoj.gov,Policy@dcfs.lacounty.gov,LADCFS-SUCKS@Gmail.com,contact@kcet.org,socalconnected@kcet.org,granpachuck99@gmail.com,cpsvictim@gmail.com,fightcpscalifornia@gmail.com,kdesa@mercurynews.com,circulation@bakersfield.com, dogpatch1940@yahoo.com,focustotomorrow@yahoo.com,aunt2all@sbcglobal.net,vickimcswain@aol.com,getinfo@haworthpressinc.com,ProtectingOurChildren2004@yahoo.com,MRRCAZ@yahoo.com,jmcelwee@ncronline.org,CACourtoisPhD@aol.com,darves-bornoz@wanadoo.fr,LMConradi@alliant.edu,therosschildren@yahoo.com,gsweat@usm.maine.edu, saunddan@umich.edu,Ducotelaw@aol.com,jtalancon@ncjfcj.org,pinquiries@dcfs.lacounty.gov,andral@dcfs.lacounty.gov,pbrowning@childsupport.co.la.ca.us,misac@dcfs.lacounty.gov
Sent: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 01:04:54 -0700
Subject: Los Angeles County DCFS Child Social Workers violating Laws

TO: Philip L. Browning Los Angeles County Children and Family Services

Phone: (213) 351-5600 Fax: (213) 427-6125

E-mail: pinquiries@dcfs.lacounty.gov, pbrowning@childsupport.co.la.ca.us, Philip L. Browning finkld@dcfs.lacounty.gov, Paul Freedlund lmandel@bos.lacounty.gov, Lisa Mandel mayor@lacity.com, Antonio Villaraigosa

Morning Mr. Browning,

Los Angeles County DCFS Child Social Workers are violating Local Laws, Court Orders, DCFS Policies / Procedures and Violating my Daughter’s and Granddaughter’s rights as victim of crime in the California Constitution and the U. S. Constitution. Whether it’s the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) or U.N. Declaration of the Rights of the Child (1959) they would be in the eyes of the world as violators of International laws. How can the United States dictate to other countries how to treat human beings when they don’t enforce their own laws at all levels of government?

Los Angeles County Child Abuse and Neglect Protocol (ICAN) were developed for all agencies to work together quickly and efficiently to assure the protection, safety, and health an alleged child abuse and neglect. The Los Angeles County Child Abuse and Neglect indicated in their Mission Statement:

“Protocol is promulgated to serve as a guideline for professionals countywide to protect victims of abuse, to maximize successful interventions, to hold abusers responsible and accountable for the harm done, and to prevent new victimizations.”

I have sent to you the attached letter once before with no response from you concerning children’s court case CK90067and Jason Moncibais DUI Arrest report, which I have sent to various officials at DCFS and to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, but apparently they have no concerns in the regards to the continuation of our granddaughter being abused, molested and endangered by her father Jason Moncibais and the paternal grandfather Sal Moncibais and step-grandmother Margaret Killeen.

Deviation from these guidelines will not promote protection to the children who are victims of abuse and neglect, our granddaughter is an example of that deviation.

Please see the attached letter and I do have the California Highway Patrol Narrative/Supplemental dated February 4, 2012 and the Arrest Investigation report dated February 25, 2012. Please note the time when Jason Moncibais was tested for alcohol levels was over 2 ½ hours after he picked up our granddaughter at the LAPD Topanga Police Station and it was entered as .23 @ 1409 hrs .26 @ 1413 hrs and .22 @ 1417 hrs in the report. Blood Alcohol Count levels diminishes .015 per hour and just think what his BAC level was at the time when CHP officer Hines first observed Jason Moncibais driving into the church parking lot with our granddaughter in the vehicle, as high as .29 BAC @ 1210 hrs. My daughter requested for an officer at the front counter to check if Jason Moncibais was intoxicated and the officer refused to check him, because they do not want to get involved. LAPD at their finest moment, “Serve and Protect”

CHP Officer Hines observed on 02/04/2012 at about 12:11 PM a white pickup truck drive into the parking lot and stop directly in front of the stairs where he was standing and saw a Hispanic male (Jason Moncibais) and a young female child.

CHP Officer Hernandez observed the subject exit vehicle and he lost his grip and almost fell out of the vehicle. While the office was speaking with him he smelled the overwhelming odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from his breath, his eyes were red and watery. Mr. Moncibais failed the pre-field sobriety tests.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/87504041/Los-Angeles-County-DCFS-Child-Social-Workers-violating-Laws-March-262012-Letter-0001#fullscreen