There appears to be a new and dangerous trend afoot as “child protection” agencies across the country gain greater and greater levels of authority to interfere in the lives of average American citizens. We know of at least two cases in 2004 in which “child protection” agencies have abducted or attempted to abduct newborn babies from their blind parents for the sole reason that they happen to be blind. These cases are just two more examples of our need to be constantly vigilant to fight for what is right against that which is unequivocally wrong.
In early December 2004, shortly after the birth of their baby boy, Marco and Adelina Zepeda were visited by a hospital social worker and representatives from Child Protective Services. The social workers were concerned about how blindness might negatively impact the ability of the Zepeda’s to care for their child. Threats were made and the parents were forced to sign papers allowing Child Protective Services the right to take the baby away if it felt such action was warranted. The information on these documents was not provided to this blind couple in any accessible format. After strenuous advocacy from the blind community, this situation was ultimately reversed and the Zepeda’s are no longer being threatened with the removal of their child from their rightful custody.
In April of 2004, representatives of a Child Protective Service agency actually removed a baby daughter from the custody of her blind parents Tyrone and Pianne Jordan just two days after her birth! Safety issues concerning their blindness and the condition of their home were cited as the reason for this action. Agency social workers demanded that the Jordan’s retain round-the-clock sighted assistance as a condition of their child’s return to their custody. After six months of negotiation and exceeding to the agency’s unreasonable demands, their daughter was finally returned.
The issue is really twofold. First, the staff of “child protection” agencies represent a cross section of society. They bring their personal attitudes and misconceptions in to their work. Those harboring poor attitudes about blindness will be more likely, especially without strict policy directives to the contrary, to look for reasons to remove a child from the custody of blind parents. Second, “child protection” agencies have been given too much overall authority. Representatives of these agencies are empowered to remove children from their parents and take other actions without even the need to charge anyone with a criminal act! We hear about other cases, having nothing at all to do with disabilities, in which overzealous “child protection” workers take actions that interfere in the lives of otherwise relatively “normal” families.
There are ultimately two courses of action that must be taken to prevent future cases of unnecessary interference in the lives of children and parents on the part of these so called “child protection” agencies. The first, shorter term, action is to improve the attitudes and knowledge about the abilities of the disabled on the part of “child protection” agency staff. The second involves a longer term strategy to control the timing and the severity of the actions such agencies may take against children and their parents.
Organizations such as the American Council of the Blind and the National Federation of the Blind are already increasing their efforts to educate the staff of “child protection” agencies concerning the ability of blind parents to care for their children. We in the blind community are also proposing legislation to insure that disability, in and of itself, is not a factor when “child protection” workers consider taking action.
The empowerment of these “child protection” agencies goes far beyond their actions with respect to the blind. The solution would seem simple enough. Reduce their authority to interfere. Force these agencies to operate within the good old American standard of “innocent until proven guilty” and within the justice system. Place the following restrictions on the actions these agencies may take:
- CPS agencies should be allowed to take action only when the parents have been charged with a crime by the police department.
- Approval to continue taking action must then be saught from a judge within 48 hours or a similar time frame as dictated for other criminal acts.
- Any permanent action taken by the state against the parents of one or more children should be permitted only after the parents have been convicted of a criminal act in a court of law.
Placing restrictions on CPS agencies should serve to stop some of their Gestapo tactics and to focus their attention on real cases of child abuse or neglect.
Only the following basic education is really necessary concerning blindness:
- We are centient, fully living and breathing human beings deserving of the same rights and responsibilities as sighted human beings.
- Some blind parents do a great job raising their children while others do not. It is the same with us as it is with the sighted.
- All actions being considered must be taken without factoring blindness in to the equation.
I’d like to make a couple of quick clarifications. I place my references to CPS agencies in quotes because I believe they often do not actually protect the best interests of children. Anyone who would rip a baby out of the arms of loving blind parents in favor of placing that child in to the state’s foster care system bares this out quite clearly. My reference to “abduction” in the title of this article is appropriate, since the child is being taken by government agents without cause and without the consent of the parents.
We in the blind community will not continue to stand by while attrocities such as those committed against the Jordan’s and Zepedaâ€™s continue. We must challenge these actions at every possible opportunity!
For more information, read Social Services Agencies May Be A New Danger to Blind Parents as published in Voice of the Nation’s Blind, an online publication of the National Federation of the Blind.
CPS/DPSS CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT (RIVERSIDE, CA) FOR KIDNAPPING OUR CHILDREN WITHOUT CAUSE
We are organizing a class action lawsuit against the County of Riverside, the State of California, and all parties involved in unlawfully detaining and holding our children against our will, and without cause. We have documented the deep, imbedded corruption in the â€œsocial servicesâ€ agencies in California. We have filed three lawsuits so far, and are looking for other families who have also been annihilated by this evil. Email us at FightCPScalifornia@gmail.com or go to the link at http://www.Fightcps.com to join the fight to save our children.
â€¢ CPS manufactures multiple nonexistent/fictitious abuse case scenarios to offset true statistical abuse case information.
â€¢ CPS concurrently processes these children from foster care to Adoption, in order to obtain perverse monetary incentives in the form of bonuses.
â€¢ CPS provides a market to neighboring agencies and the courts (Judges, psychologists, visitation monitors, court mandated behavioral class instructors, court appointed legal counsel, etc…), in order for them to financially benefit from the foster care/adoption system they themselves perpetuate.
â€¢ CPS victimizes innocent financially challenged families, and draws them into a corrupt system to utilize their children as pawns for this corrupt child commerce.
â€¢ CPS is utilized by family court officials and attorneys as an adverse tool to extricate children from one parent to the other, with reference to "parental alienation syndrome," where in truth, the CPS caseworkers are the ones initiating the alienation of these children from their own birth parents. Caseworkers are never allowed to testify in court under the cloak of "CPS Authority" due to possible misuse or conflict of interest related to right to privacy laws (Very convenient)
â€¢ CPS utilizes unlawful & coercive measures to persuade vulnerable parents to submit to statements of nonexistent abuse, forcing desperate parents to "plea bargain" to a CPS fabricated crime, for the return of their children from foster care.
â€¢ CPS fabricates false allegations and most of their "investigations" to purposely mislead or misdirect a case.
â€¢ CPS intentionally fails to prosecute Parents accused of child abuse, since in the majority of cases, no initial crime has been committed. However, CPS continues to claim a crime has been committed, as THEY abuse/neglect the children.
â€¢ CPS knowingly abandons children into the foster care system, conscious that some individuals in these homes physically and/or sexually abuse those in their "protective" custody. CPS ignores crimes committed in foster care through failure to investigate.
â€¢ CPS fails to question these individuals for their abusive conduct, whereby, if it were a birth parent or not a foster care parent, these individuals would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law in criminal court.
â€¢ CPS represents themselves in positive personas by omitting, altering, and falsifying documents, so as to mislead the public and or government of their true actions as listed above. Thereby publicly grandstanding, displaying an inaccurate social martyrdom for the well being of children.
The Police should determine if children need protection from their own parents, since child abuse is a Criminal offense.
"THE CLUB" PLAYERS IN RIVERSIDE, CA
ALL THE FOLLOWING ARE GUILTY OF KNOWINGLY LYING IN THIS ABDUCTION OF OUR CHILD:
Dr. Shelley Susman = OB/GYN who knew mother had no drug history and confirmed her health, but allowed this abduction
WILLIAM MICHAEL BILES = NEWBORN BABY SNATCHER AT CPS – physically threatened mother and child with serious harm
Nurse Heather = DRMC Supervising Nurse, present at child abduction and backed up serious harm/threats to mother and child
Ms. Flores = DRMC records dept. supervisor, stated we have NO access to our child's records or birth certificate [since CPS illegally abducted our newborn and adoptive parent's names are on birth certificate]
Valerie Bedore = Banning City CPS newborn baby abduction cohort, on 9/20/07admitted baby had negative meconium [no drugs in mother confirmed back to 16 weeks gestation pregnancy]
Karrene (Kay) Phillips = Banning City CPS baby abduction cohort, harassed parents repeatedly at visitations
Ben Brandon = next CPS caseworker, threatened to stop visitations when he brought child late to visits, demanded Parents sign a "case plan" in attempt to prove innocent Parents guilty, when parents refused "case plan" threatened to stop visitations
Shawnee English = Moreno Valley CPS assistant who ripped newborn out of mother's arms at visitation when child was sick and parents were demanding medical attention; she refused medical treatment & parents had to call "911" to get help
Judge Christopher J. Sheldon = Juvenile Judge on Oasis Street in Indio, made mistaken rulings, refused Due Process to parents, refused Evidence and Facts in this case, finally recanted his rulings back to Jurisdiction Hearing, case transferred to Murrietta
Indio Juvenile Court Clerk = refused all submissions and legal filings from parents, refused to take amendments to case, refused to take any Evidence of parent's innocence to fight the wrongdoing by CPS, handed back all filings of Evidence by Parents
Modesto Rios = First attorney assigned to father by Judge Sheldon; Rios refused all calls and refused to communicate with father, refused all requests of father, failed to submit anything for defense of father, failed to state he had contact with father from the start of the case, admitted it finally in court as the transcripts prove = fired
David Weisen = First attorney assigned to mother by Judge Sheldon; Weisen refused all calls and refused to communicate with mother, failed to submit anything for defense of mother, failed to state he had contact with mother from the start of the case, admitted it finally in court as the transcripts prove = fired
Karen Cote = 2nd attorney assigned to father by Judge Sheldon; Cote stated that father could do nothing to help in this case, refused to submit anything for father, and stated father was to "do nothing"&"just wait" until Jurisdiction = fired [she refused to give father her email, refused to do her job, refused to work – last words to Father were "go F*** yourself and DIE!"]
Maria Soliz = 2nd attorney assigned to mother by Judge Sheldon; Soliz insisted on hair follicle test of mother, refused to give test, and then she refused to get hospital "sealed" records to disprove this misinterpretation
Riverside County and CPS adopted out our beautiful, healthy, infant daughter, completely AGAINST OUR WILL, and against the law when she was only EIGHT HOURS OLD. They already had it all set up with their KANGAROO COURTS AND THEIR TURN-KEY ADOPT-A-WHITE-BABY COMMERCE SYSTEM. Neither parent had any history nor usage of any illegal drugs, and our daughter was born with an APGAR score of 9.8, with absolutely NO DRUGS in her or her motherâ€™s systems. The Palm Springs Desert Regional Medical Center staged a urine test that was tampered with and was wrong, and they refused to use the motherâ€™s blood or re-test her at all. The one urine test was the ONLY basis for their illegal abduction of our newborn infant, and it has been an illegal "legal loophole" battering of our daughter and our Parental rights ever since. On August 8, 2007, our newborn daughter was illegally and forcefully taken by William Michael Biles of Banning CPS, with the help of eight others at Desert Regional Medical center, with no court order nor warrant, and no police present. He physically threatened mother and newborn with the statement â€œGive me that baby NOW, or you and her will be physically hurt!â€ and we have fought for our daughter since. CPS contrived multiple hearsay untruths and presented falsifications to the court, without our knowledge. Judge Christopher Sheldon approved the criminal ADOPTION, then granted us a "Contested Jurisdictional Hearing," and then suddenly, the case was transferred to Southwest Adjudication Center, where Commissioner Fernandez declared he lacked the power to render a Judgment on another Judge's decision to have the Contested Jurisdiction Hearing, then Fernandez took it off calendar, where it stands today……we have been denied our daughter in this illegal kidnapping, and we have located proof that the County of Riverside and DRMC routinely set new mothers up this way, very often to take newborn white, healthy, drug-free babies to sell them on their own twisted underground baby market. We have been violated entirely, and we will keep fighting for our daughter.
CONTACT US AT email@example.com for more information about the lawsuit.