Dan, a high court, in effect, said that a lower court screwed
up badly when they rubber stamped for Child Protection in TX.
This blatantly reveals a problem in the system,
checks and balances, etc.
I would suggest that "Citizens Review Boards"
should be made up of actual citizens and
changed to be an avenue of redress when
families are wronged by the agency.
I would suggest that "dependency courts"
need better checks and balances, and I
don't mean rigged or stacked like the
Citizen Review Boards have been.
To people new to this, they might see
"Citizen Review Boards" and not understand
that we have this so-called (checks and balances)
function but that it's NOTHING like what
the name implies.
It's basically a SHAM!
It's not "citizens". It's a pack of insiders
with huge conflict of interest. It's full
of people like you Dan, "system sucks".
Families wronged don't even have access
to the Citizen Review Boards!
Who is allowed to start investigations there?
NOT Citizens!
There is no access for wronged families
to take their case to the "Citizen Review Board"
at all!
There is ANOTHER process where citizens
wronged do have access to start process,
but guess who decides whether or not
they are allowed access? THE AGENCY!
Yup! Before a person in Iowa gets to be
before the Administrative Law Judge, the
CPS agency gets to turn them down!
The registry review process, not only
is it done outside the rules, no transcript,
no tape recording, done over phone over
the families objection, and rigged to
be nothing but an echo of the Juvenile Court.
The whole thing was rigged to be a scam.
The Grant decision partly changed that,
but mostly exposed the fact it WAS a scam.
Right there are three things that on the
face of them are "avenues of redress" but
what are actually dead ended.
The system has engaged in CYA
at an AGENCY and legislative level.
Yet Dan says the laws are just fine.
|
