The future of children in foster homes is not too bright! Why?

See the source image

Study after study shows that children in foster care do not grow up to live the most successful and well-adjusted lives. Actually, Instead report after report form the Department of Corrections, the Children’s Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, and many other agencies show that foster care is a failed experiment.

Foster care is meant to help vulnerable children and prevent abuse. Instead, reports continue to come in that show that children in foster care are more likely to be abused, 8% more likely to be abused in a foster home, 28% more likely to be abused in a group home. Statistics are staggering, but let’s look at what is happening to children around the world and how it affects their lives. Just one child being destroyed by foster care is too many.

There is no definition for “family”. HHS workers are just now since the passage of the Family First Preventative Services Act in 2018 beginning to see a definition for family in their own handbooks, and most often the definition does not pertain to biological family but rather adoptive and foster families. As of the beginning of 2020, Arkansas had one paragraph at the end of the handbook that pertained to biological family. The rest of the book instructed workers to place children in foster and adoptive placements and gave tips for how foster and adoptive “parents” should deal with situations with the children passing through their homes.

Not only are the HHS handbooks a joke as far as meeting the needs of children, but courts do not have a definition of “the best interest of the child”. This means that it is up to the court actors to decide what is in a child’s best interest based upon their own opinions. There is no scientific evidence to show that the courts are doing what is best for the children.

Instead, court’s often remove children from biological family and place them with complete strangers. Even when children are placed in the same state, they are often placed hours from family members or anyone that they know. Sometimes children are moved out of state. The result is unhappy children being prescribed psychotropic drugs “to help them cope” with their new life and new “family”. The children often end up running away.

Children that runaway brings me to another point. Runaways, especially runaway youth are sometimes found living in uninhabitable dwellings and even though the Department of State says year after year that foster care is a problem, City Reports continue to show that most 60% at the least number, and sometimes as many as 99%) children rescued through trafficking stings were in state custody when they were trafficked.

Foster children lose everyone and everything they know. 80% of foster children are prescribed drugs to help them cope. They runaway. They end up being homeless or trafficked. And for those that do age out, the Department of Corrections shows that about 75% of them will be incarcerated within two years!

Their futures are not that bright! What are some solutions? (1) Localize foster care so that children do not lose everyone and everything they know, (2) place children with family members and even friends of the family so that they remain in familiar areas, (3) shift the funding to pay for family placements so that children do not have to live with strangers where they have to take prescribed drugs to cope, (4) create programs that teach youth how to apply for college (foster children are eligible for free college tuition though only about 2% will ever apply) (5) create programs that help foster children learn life and job skills, (6) get involved with local churches, legislators, and community organization to create peer support groups where foster children can relate with each other. Let them know that they are not alone.

If anyone else has ideas about how we can improve future generations, please let us know in the comments or send and email through the contact page. Thanks. I hope this helps.

Judge says the Indian Child Welfare Act is racially discriminatory against white people.

The Lakota Peoples Law Project says that the American Association of Adoption  Attorneys filed six federal lawsuits in six different states and that Judge O’Conner struck down the Indian Child Welfare Act declaring that “it is an unconstitutional violation of the Equal Protection Act and stated that it racially discriminated against white people because they gave preference to Indian people or Indian children”.

“The issue has been appealed to the United States Supreme Court and it’s likely that they’re going to take up the case of the Indian Child Welfare Act, so this is part of an across-the-board assault that Trump and McConnell have packed the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and they have upheld the anti-voting rules and regulations in Texas. They’ve upheld the ban on abortions. They’ve upheld the ban on gay marriages, and it’s now reached down even into going after a 47-year-old Indian Child Welfare Act that the white lawyers happen to have objected to because they’re making they’re making approximately $100,000 a piece for every one of the Indian children that they adopt out to a white couple”, stated Daniel Sheehan from the Lakota Peoples Law Project.

Here at Minding Hearts will never see us complain about the abortion ban because that prevents babies from being born and oftentimes causes the mother’s life to spiral out of control too, but to say that the Indian Child Welfare Act discriminates against white people brings up issues. Adoption is not the blessing that states make it out to be. Less than 3% of adopted children ever go to college. Many are placed on psychotropic drugs to “help them cope”. Sometimes before they are even a year old.

In 2018, while President, Trump passed the Family First Preventative Services Act that is supposed to be in place now and requires states to place children with family members first. The Indian Child Welfare Act states much of the same, but also requires that children removed from their biological parents and taken into states custody has to be placed with someone from their own tribe.

For Judge O’Connor to say that placing children with their own extended family where they are not denied the right to own heritage is absurd! More children are trafficked in the United States than anywhere else in the world. City reports show that between 60% to as many as 99% of the children rescued in sex trafficking stings were in state custody when they were trafficked. The Department of State every year in their Trafficking In Person Report reports that foster care is a problem and that trafficker’s prey on vulnerable children in foster care and children that run away. Children in foster care are more likely to run away, and when they are taken out of their neighborhoods and away from the people and places that they know, they are more likely to fall victims to traffickers. So what Judge O’Connor is doing is not “in the best interest of the children”.

Whether we agree on abortion or not I hope that we agree that keeping families intact whenever possible is the best thing that can happen for a child and for society as a whole. I plan to keep my eyes on this lawsuit and follow Judge O’Connor’s decisions and I hope that you will too. We cannot continue to destroy our own children. Let the tribes take care of their own and let the rest of the American families and families around the world take care of their own. Children are far better off with family than they are with complete strangers. Children are better off in their own communities with people they know and trust than they are when states take them off to far away places where they do not know anyone and cannot find their way back. Children just want to go home! States cannot even justify about 90% of removals!

Child Protection agencies failed to respond to multiple calls that would have prevented 4-year-old Charlie Garay from being killed in Rotterdam foster care.

The home where Dequan and Latrisha Greene fostered and killed Charlie Garay. 2734 Broadway in Rotterdam. Photo by Peter Barber. Dequan Greene faces second-degree murder charges.

A lawsuit filed in State Supreme Court in Albany County says that “The agencies ignored repeated red flags and bypassed established procedures, leaving Charlie in the care of at the home of Dequan and Latrisha Greene for months longer than he should have been and even bypassed procedure to initially place him there.

Charlie and his 5-year-old sibling were removed from their biological parents and placed in the Hellish placed in Schenectady County foster home by Albany County Department of Social Services in September 2020 where they were ignored and abused until Charlie was dead. Of course, none of the parties profiting from this child’s preventable death will comment. Lorraine Silverman is the attorney bringing the lawsuit.

The lawsuit names  multiple employees in both counties including case workers, supervisors and a CPS intake specialist, employees from the St. Anne Institute, a counselor, case manager and social worker.

Allegations include:

Employees did not interview and assess the two children’s needs.

Officials knew that Latrisha Greene was running an unlicensed day care out of her home.

Latrisha hurt children and placed them in a dog crate as punishment.

The state did not follow procedures and policies to certify the Green’s as a foster placement, nor did they ever check on the children in the home.

The state failed to respond to multiple calls that would have prevented Charlie from being killed.

The foster parent certification process was never properly completed even though Dequan Greene acknowledged fasting as a “self-care practice,” and stated that he had a short temper, and both Latrisha and Dequan Greene indicated their parenting styles were authoritative.

The state “failed to warn” (the murderous people that they paid to kill Charlie) the foster parents that Charlie was on complex medications and that he suffered from complex issues even though the killers said they did not want children with issues several times.

The Greens were never trained to manage, care for, and parent foster children who had the medical and other conditions.

The weekend the children were supposed to be in the Hellish foster placement turned into three agonizing months for the children.

Albany County called for an extension and advised lied saying that the Greenes wanted to keep the children in the home. Schenectady County agreed.

The children missed appointments.

“From the start of the foster care placement … the defendants did not make the required visits, assessments, evaluations, referrals, and checks to determine if they were properly and safely placed in the Greene foster home”.

In October, Latrisha Greene reported a behavioral issue but no one from the state would talk to her about it.

Latrisha Greene asked that the children be removed for a variety of reasons. One reason included that she did not have sleeping accommodations for the children.

“Rather than remove the children, Albany County asked Schenectady County whether one of the children could sleep in a walk-in closet. Albany County also recommended placing the other child in the basement”.

Schenectady County employee indicated that Charlie could not sleep there, and Albany County lied saying that it would remove the children the next day. They never showed up.

Albany County even sent an emergency removal 10-day letter Oct. 22, 2020. “Following that letter, Albany County DCYF and Schenectady County CFSO deliberately, willfully and intentionally chose to keep the infants in the Greene foster home”.

Albany County “bullied” Schenectady County and Latrisha Greene to keep the children. Schenectady County never visited the home again.

After missing several appointments and using Covid as a reason for not having the children in school, on Dec. 6, Latrisha Greene indicated the children were sick with the flu and she could not allow “in person” visits, but the counties did not require documentation.

Four days before Charlie was murdered, Albany County caseworkers showed up at the home to drop off a door alarm for a bedroom of one of the children.

“The children were beaten with sticks or switches, hands struck with pots and pans, made to do wall sits, force fed, had their mouths filled with food as punishment, food withheld, hit in their stomachs with jugs, sprayed with cold water, forced to take cold showers, pushed down, choked, confined to a dog cage as punishment and denied medical care and schooling”.

The lawsuit also alleges that Dequan Greene stomped on them.

“The surviving child suffered a torn frenulum, swollen lip, bruising to the torso and face, ear and bruising and scarring to the neck and bruising to the pelvis, among other injuries.

Charlie died from blunt force trauma that severed his liver.

“If the defendants had acted properly and had complied with their obligations and duties … the children would have never been placed with Latrisha Greene and Dequan Greene. The children even if wrongfully placed, would have been removed before they were beaten, abused, and murdered.”

Dequan Greene’s attorney says that Dequan claims that Charlie died by “choking”.

Latrisha Greene does not face charges in Charlie’s death.

ASFA 1997 Incentivized Foster Care ~a result

ASFA is the adoption and safe families act set up by Hillary Clinton in 1997. ASFA is set up under CAPTA which is the child abuse and prevention act of 1974 and is set up under the Mondale Act of 1974. CAPTA will tell you how the system is set up. ASFA will show you the money. Also, look up “adoption incentive payments“. From Analee Bobbitt;

Let’s break something down as far as Title IV-E goes. The Department makes a TON of money off our kids when they remove them. Incentive based kidnapping is the real plague in the states. I’ll use numbers based on where I live. First, they receive the report. Doesn’t matter how true or false it is. It’s their foot in the door to your livelihood. They’ll create a false claim of immediate danger because Title IV-E must have proof of a “Service plan” and they have to show reason for removal. Once removed the department gets paid $3k/child and $4k if they are disabled or handicapped.

That’s only within the first month. Afterwards, they take the children to doctors, psychologists, and therapists under their grant and pay. They claim one child as 3 to triple the money back on their efforts. Once again, libel and slander. Not to mention coercion and collusion.

Lastly, they put them into foster care such as emergency foster facilities or foster homes. No check are made for the welfare of the children so practically ANYTHING could happen to our babies and they exercise plausible deniability, yet won’t investigate the claims of the children or yourself if you find out.

The foster facility gets a check for $3k/mo per child. This is suppose to go towards food, medical and clothes. Yet time and again we see children with dirty or worn clothes, dirty faces, bruises and so on.

You may be wondering how much does 1 state’s “Department” gets out of all of this? Our state got $2.2 BILLION in August of 2020 alone!!! Scary huh? Sadly I’m sure it’s more in some other states but this is the real truth! Look it up. I’m sure you’ll find it. We need to protect our children from these kidnappers and abusers and speak out!!!

Contact your Senators, mayors, governors and all public officials about the corruption they are Blowing through their absolute refusal to act!!! Tell your Senators to REPEAL the Adoption and Safe Families Act and to return our children!! Remember these children are the future of our nation and if we give up now the future is lost! Speak out! BE HEARD!! DON’T GIVE UP!! ~ Annalee Bobbitt

See the source image

Related Articles : What I wish I had known. Case Preparation Child Welfare CasesFrom a mom shoved in the system:,How to approach a legislator, lawyer, judge, and any other important person in a legal case., Think it won’t happen to you? Mom, who got $9.6M in same case, daughter sued Orange County. A look at the Right To Lie Case.

Parents are birdnesting to keep their children in their homes.

So what is birdnesting? Birdnesting is like nesting. Parents take turns going back to the nest to care for their little ones. Separated parents rotate in and out of the family homes so the children do not have to bounce back and forth from one parent to the other. Exes may stay in a spare bedroom, built in apartment, or some other way that the house is converted for nesting.

Many millennials believe this is the best way to raise stable children. Others disagree. Malin Bergström, a scientist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm and a child psychologists disagrees that birdnesting parents are doing the right thing for their children. “This is a type of protecting children and sheltering them from reality, basically. I think that is a threat to mental health.” Instead she thinks that moving the children about makes them resilient and gives them the “tools they need”.

A health equity study Malin Bergström was involved in shows little difference in the mental health of children who lived in a traditional nuclear family with two parents and children that live with typical joint custody arrangements. Nonetheless. Divorce can be unsettling for children as well as for the rest of the family and many parents are choosing to birdnest as a way to keep family stability.

Lawyers say that birdnesting is on the rise in family courts. A study by Coop Legal Services out of the United Kingdom says that 11% of divorced or separated parents have tried it. In Sweden, divorced parents have rotated homes since the 1970s. Recently westerners are picking up on the idea and it is showing through pop culture. Mad Men’s Anne Dudek and Matthew Heller went public about nesting after their divorce in 2016. Splitting Up Together is a television show about birdnesting on-again off-again parents. Off duty parents get the garage which seems kind of “normal” to me.

A family law attorney from Britain Stephen Williams, says that birdnesting cuts court fees and is a cost-effective solution for parents that split up. Another British lawyer from Ashtons Legal believes that birdnesting is more about an increase awareness to children’s mental health. “People have become far more savvy about needing to think about their children’s development,” he says. “I think that is a really, really good progression, basically, because often those issues were pushed to the background, and it was the parents’ often problematic separations which came to the fore.”

Birdnesting parents believe that they are raising healthier children. Linnea Andersdotter who was birdnested as a child and is now 36 says that “It felt like a very dramatic thing when they first let me know that they were going to split up, and when I found out I didn’t have to move, that really helped me not freak out about the situation,” she says. “I was kind of kept in a safe little bubble whilst they were sorting out the break-up thing.”

But critics argue it can create a “halfway house” situation which doesn’t help children process the reality of their parents’ separation. Eline Linde, who lived in a nesting household says she found the experience “strange and confusing”. “I didn’t know if it was mum or dad’s house, or if they were working out if they were getting back together”.

Family-law solicitor Ben Evans believes it works for some couples because it can help “buy them a bit of time and ease the pressure on them. Both parties can mull over future steps, he argues, and avoid knee-jerk or costly decisions”. Buscho says a nesting period also provides “breathing space” that can facilitate reconciliation or help partners figure out what they want their long-term co-parenting plan to look like. t Bergström argues that nesting stalls the divorce. Åse Levin, a 50-year-old graphic designer agrees with Bergström’s argument and says that birdnesting made it difficult for her to move on with her life. “I know that both of us had real anxiety being in that apartment… you didn’t have your things, so it wasn’t a cosy place to go to,” she recalls. “You’re stuck in some kind of bubble or something, you cannot do anything. You cannot go forward.” I wonder though of maybe the apartment was too small to feel like a home to begin with and if a bigger home would have made a difference in her perceptions about birdnesting. Nesting can raise new challenges for parents though because they may have to change their routine. Bodil Schwinn says birdnesting is working well for her and her former partner, “You need to have a good relationship with your ex,” she states.

I like the idea of birdnesting parents and believe that this new trend will make stronger healthier families. Let me know what you think.

Mom got $9.6M. Now the daughter is suing the state after a wrongful removal. A look at the Right To Lie Case.

A look at the “Right To Lie” case where Mom got $9.6M and then, the daughter sued Orange County.

Child Protection workers costs taxpayers billions every year in lawsuits that most people are completely unaware of, and would be outraged about if they understood. I found Kathlee Arthur a few years ago in my research on the subject. Kathlee Arthur is a woman from Washington State who advocates nationally for foster children and their biological families. She informed me about the “Right To Lie” case that at the time she was using to raise awareness to legislators to show how devastating it is when social workers get away with lying on the stand to keep children separated from their biological families.

Deanna Fogerty-Hardwick lost custody of her minor children, Preslie and Kendall. Deanna Fogerty-Hardwick filed suit and won. Later, her daughter Preslie filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against the County and employees of the SSA. In 2011, a jury awarded Fogarty-Hardwick $4.9 million in damages. Orange County then appealed the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court at the taxpayer’s expense. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case. During that time though, interest and additional attorney fees were racking up the costs that Orange County was charging taxpayer’s to fight for the “Right To Lie”. The total payout came to $9.6 million. The county also incurred an additional $1 million for its own legal costs on the case. None of the social workers that fought were ever held accountable for lying in court to destroy the family. None of the people making the decisions to fight for the right to lie in court ever had to pay out of their own pocket to make that argument.

Preslie showed the courts that the social worker employees acting under color of state law maliciously used perjured testimony and fabricated evidence to secure her removal from her mother and that the state abused it’s power when it violated her Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment constitutional rights to her familial relationship with her mother. Federal appellate court No. 15-55563 D.C. No. 8:13-cv-01390-JLS-AN opinion affirmed that Orange County is not immune from liability when workers perjure themselves to adopt a child out to complete strangers.

The ruling issued by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is based on the same events that caused a jury to award Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick $9.6 million from Orange County in 2011 after she alleged that social workers used fabricated evidence to cause a court to remove her two daughters from her custody for six and a half years! The district court denied absolute and qualified immunity to the individual defendants.

Preslie’s complaint targets conduct well outside of the social workers’ legitimate role as quasi-prosecutorial advocates in presenting the case. The court concluded that Beltran v. Santa Clara County disposes of the issue. In Beltran, the court held that social workers are not entitled to absolute immunity from claims that they fabricated evidence during an investigation or made false statements in a dependency petition affidavit that they signed under penalty of perjury, because such actions are not similar to discretionary decisions about whether to prosecute. The court also concluded that defendants’ use of perjured testimony and fabricated evidence in court in order to sever Preslie’s familial bond with her mother was unconstitutional. In this case, Preslie has produced more than sufficient admissible evidence to create a genuine dispute as to whether her removal from her mother’s custody violated her clearly established constitutional rights, and defendants’ case for qualified immunity from these charges is not supported by the law or the record. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment. (Justia, Hardwick v. County of Orange, No. 15-55563, 9th Cir. 2017)

The County could be on the hook to pay out once again. Still, California’s social worker employees that are fighting for the right to lie in court have not been held accountable for perjuring themselves. Those workers did not lose their jobs, go to jail, or spend any money out of their own pocket. Instead, after trying to destroy this family completely and then lying about it, they get to spend money they can access that we put in the Social Security Fund for retirement and disabled people. And Congress let’s state employees get away with this every day.

“No official with an IQ greater than room temperature in Alaska could claim that he or she did not know that the conduct at the center of this case violated both state and federal law,” Judge Stephen Trott wrote in the opinion. “Perjury is a crime under both federal and California state law, as is the knowing submission of false evidence to a court. … Because they are supported by the record as a whole, we construe the facts Preslie offers in support of her allegations in the light most favorable to her.”

Hardwick’s allegations are the same as her mother’s. In 2000, Orange County Social Services agents Marcie Vreeken and Helen Dwojak fabricated testimony “that (Fogarty-Hardwick) had caused her daughters to skip a mandatory visit with their father, when in fact the problem was caused by a visitation monitor.”

Hardwick said that there are other lies that the social workers delibertly and maliscously told the court; when they said that Fogarty-Hardwick had turned her daughters against their visitation monitor and when they told the court that Fogarty-Hardwick had told her children that their father was trying to take them away from her.

Thankfully the court disagreed with the assertion that Orange County attorneys argued that it was not clearly established in civil court at the time of the events in question that in situations such as Hardwick’s, those involved had “the right to be free from deliberately fabricated evidence.”

Orange County officials have maintained that its social workers never wronged Fogarty-Hardwick or her family. Neither employee was disciplined and Vreeken was later promoted to a position in which she trains other social workers. County records show Vreeken was still employed in 2015, when she earned $132,466 in total compensation. County Supervisor Todd Spitzer said that social workers often face difficult decisions when deciding when and whether to separate a child from their parents and that it was important for those employees to know that the county backs their decisions. “Social workers have an immense responsibility to protect children, and I’d much rather have a social worker err on the side of taking a child from the home than leave a kid where there might be suspected child abuse,” Spitzer said. “It’s a delicate balance, and social workers needs to know that if they do that the county will back them up.”

I have to disagree that social workers are lying In court to protect children. They are lying in court to get away with destroying the very people they are created to serve. I hope others will consider this case and seriously ask themselves if anyone should ever have a right to lie about another in court.

Related Articles : What I wish I had known. Case Preparation Child Welfare CasesFrom a mom shoved in the system:,How to approach a legislator, lawyer, judge, and any other important person in a legal case.