Child Protection Services Fixer uper sign now

Emancipation Proclamation Petition

For The Sanctity And The

Protection of Families

And Children





We the People of the United States of America hereby petition the Congress of the United States of America under article I of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States. This petition is to be construed as a formal Petition to the Government for Redress of Grievances and do here by Declare the following.

The history of the present Government is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations against the inherent sovereignty of the American family, designed to undermine the authority and control of parents over their children and to deprive their children of their inherent birthright.




Our nation's parents and children labor under burdensome state-sanctioned violations of their inalienable rights, and of their enumerated rights which are guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America:

The right to the free exercise of their religion. Children are removed for various religious practices including reading the Bible, disciplining with spanking and home-schooling.

The right to free speech. Many parents are ordered by the courts not to speak publicly about the violations of rights that they and their children suffer at the hands of the State or in court-ordered custody arrangements. Others have their children held hostage to the demands of CPS workers that they silence their public outcry against the injustices perpetrated against them and their children, with visitations being denied until they comply.

The right to freedom of the press. Parents and children have been ordered by the Court to remove all Internet web sites that publicize the injustices perpetrated against them by CPS (Child Protection Services and all other child welfare agencies by whatever name they are known) agencies and the Family Court. Flyers published at the parents' own expense have been ordered removed from local businesses by CPS agents. Parents have been denied the right to purchase and publish advertising in local papers requesting other abused families to contact them.

The right to peaceably assemble. Parents have been penalized by CPS agencies when they gather with other falsely accused parents and become pro-active. There are documented cases where, in open court, CPS representatives have questioned parents about membership in these groups and used that information against other member parents.

The right to petition the Government for redress of grievances. Parents' petitions to elected representatives at the local, state, and federal levels go unanswered and unresolved while their and their children's rights are casually trampled by CPS agencies. Our representatives tell us the CPS agents are protected by immunity and there is nothing anyone can do. Our pleas are ignored by the courts. Our funds are drained and we lack the resources or the availability of competent legal representation to take our petitions to higher courts. Our cries and the cries of our children fall on deaf ears.

The right to keep and bear arms. Thousands of parents daily are being denied the right to keep and bear arms under the domestic violence laws. They are threatened, intimidated, and coerced into accepting false plea bargains of child abuse, which then costs them their right to own firearms, even though they are not convicted felons. This is unconscionable.

The right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. While nobody can enter someone's home and simply confiscate their television, CPS agencies routinely enter a family's home without probable cause, without warrants, without court orders and many times with force and casually remove the children to places unknown without any evidence of abuse or neglect. This happens three thousand times a day and the parents have no recourse. With the children in the custody of the state, and with possession being nine-tenths of the law, it can take years to get their children back despite the fact that, in the absence of evidence, probable cause, or a warrant, these children have been taken illegally.

The right to be free from Warrants issued, but on probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmations and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. CPS agents and police officers, as a matter of routine, steal children without warrants, and search homes for evidence without warrants or evidence of any crime. This is all done in the name of protecting the children.

These warrantless searches are used by CPS agencies to obtain access to the children and interview them on the spot in a separate room, completely disregarding the trauma they inflict on the children and with complete disregard for the right of parents to oversee and protect their children. These children are often strip searched and their naked bodies photographed. If the parents object to such intrusions and interviews, they are accused of hiding something and this assertion of their rights is presumed to be proof of guilt.

They conduct their warranted searches for children illegally, by looking in places where children could not possibly be hidden in their illegal endeavors to obtain more evidence to manipulate against innocent parents.

The right to not be compelled to be a witness against himself. Parents are routinely ordered by the court to cooperate with CPS agencies, which means to disclose information that is often twisted and manipulated into lies and is presented as fact to the court. They are never informed by any CPS agent that what they say will be used against them. They are court-ordered to sign releases of private medical and psychiatric information which once again is a violation of their right not to be a witness against themselves. Failure to sign these releases results in either contempt charges or the court ordering the information released against the parent's will.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right not to be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Parental rights are effectively terminated when the CPS agent leaves the home with the children. This does not protect the right to due process. Parents are automatically denied the right to be present at interviews and examinations or to even speak with their children. If they have visitation, they are forbidden to speak about the case, or to initiate a hug lest the visitation be immediately terminated. They have no say in any aspect of their children's life, who will care for them and how, or in the treatments the children will receive.

The children's right to due process is also violated by these actions. To all appearances, they are being punished because they are being denied access to their beloved parents, to their family, their home, their friends. They are patted on the head and told this is for their own good. When they act out their anger and fear due to the State's ill-advised action, they are drugged into compliance against their wishes and the wishes of their parents, all at the unilateral whim of a case worker.

Parents have been ordered out of the courtroom during hearings where the decisions about their children are being made, leaving them without a voice in their defense or in the disposition of the children, or even the means to cross examine witnesses and impeach testimony. Parents are denied the admission of evidence in their favor - many times under the guise of protecting the child's confidentiality - and are subjected to hearsay evidence against them which is accorded the unjustified status of truth. Their children are removed from their homes and placed with strangers where they are at far greater risk of abuse than they were at home. Parental rights are terminated and the child is never seen or heard from again, all without due process.

Parents are often not notified of hearings pertaining to their case or their child. When they don't show up, they have no say in the process, can present no defense and cannot answer any accusations. Many times when parents are notified of hearings, they are told it is only a formality, you don't have to be there.' Once again they have been lied to, to their own and their child's detriment. If they are notified, it can be as short as one hour before the scheduled hearing.

Parents are denied access to their children without having been found guilty of any crime against them. This is often denied arbitrarily, and often as punishment for the parents' refusing to admit guilt or accept a plea bargain. Not only is this a denial of due process, it is cruel and unusual punishment for both the parents and the child.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The process of intervention is fundamentally unfair and a gross violation of both the child's and the parents' rights.

The right to a trial by jury. In all cases of Dependency & Neglect, where a child can be ordered removed from the home, where the parent can be ordered to comply with expensive and dubious treatment plans, a parent is denied the right to a trial by jury. This is unconscionable as the very heart and soul of the parent, his progeny, is at risk and left to the whims of a Family Court judge, who is, in far too many cases, predisposed against the parent. It may be allowed during termination hearings, but this is too rare. A trial by jury must be allowed for all Family court proceedings to protect the rights of both the parents and the children. Many times, children are removed from their parents to the detriment of the child. Juries could provide a process of checks and balances against this.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to be confronted with the witnesses against him and the inherent right to have free and unfettered access to all evidence and witnesses against them. Accused parents are denied the right to know and face their accusers, be they anonymous reporters, mandated reporters, or the child himself. Parents are denied access to many forms of so-called evidence against them under the guise of confidentiality' laws. They are often denied access to their children to determine if any disclosures have been obtained through questionable tactics such as intimidation, deceit, the administration of drugs to the child, and the threat of never seeing their parents again unless they disclose abuse.

Additionally, the motive of many child abuse reporters is never investigated, resulting in many custody disputes being resolved through false reports against the other parent - as many as 80\% of these reports. The accused must have the right to confront the witnesses against him.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor. Parents often find that the witnesses they subpoena do not appear for court hearings, including social workers, Guardians ad Litem, and therapists. The court sanctions these violations without allowing the parents the remedies they need to compel these witnesses to appear.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense and the inherent right to effective counsel for his defense. Again, we are dealing with an important issue, THE most important issue to most parents; their children. A parent is denied court appointed counsel UNLESS his rights are being terminated or he is facing criminal charges. Too sadly, most charges do not meet the burden of proof for criminal charges and CPS agencies file charges in civil - or family - court. This is an illegal ruse to avoid the fact that they do not have a legitimate case against the parent. By the time parental rights are being terminated, too much time has passed, too many violations of the parents' and the children's rights have been perpetrated and too many opportunities have been missed due to lack of competent counsel. It becomes a slam-dunk for the CPS agency.

Additionally, most cases are lost, not because the parent was guilty, but because there is virtually no attorney out there who will effectively represent a defendant. By their own admission, attorneys have too much to lose by presenting a vigorous and effective defense. They advise their clients to accept a false plea bargain, to cooperate and give up all their rights, just to make their own jobs easier.

Many parents, having been drained of funds and unable to find competent counsel, attempt pro-se defenses, only to find the courts biased against them. Still others look for help outside the Bar Associations only to find that while their non-licensed counsel may be truly competent, he is not allowed to represent them in court.

The amendment states "Assistance of Counsel" and does not include the qualification that said counsel be licensed to practice law.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. Removing a child from a loving and non-abusive home is cruel and unusual punishment, for the child and for the parents. Doing so without due process exacerbates the injustice. These children ostensibly have a voice through the GAL, but in substance, their voice is ignored by all who profess to protect them, and their voice is silenced to their parents whose hands are tied to protect their beloved child. This unwarranted and unsubstantiated separation is cruel and unusual punishment whether it comes before or after a conviction or without a conviction. The substance of the action is to punish.

Alternatively, the CPS agencies and the courts routinely leave truly abused children in the homes of their abusers, ignoring the pleas of the children and non-custodial parents to protect the children from the ongoing abuse, be they in State custody or in a divorced parent's home. These are the children who die, and CPS agencies knew of the abuse and did nothing to prevent it.

The States actively cover up the abuse of children they have in their custody and there are no provisions for independent investigations into such complaints. The children suffer at the expense of CPS agencies.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to decide whether to have children or not, without fear of having those children forcibly or unwillingly removed without true due process of law. Under the law, parents whose parental rights have previously terminated involuntarily are now subject to having their rights terminated on any other existing children as well as any child yet to be born, without due process, and without any reason given. This is unconscionable.

Additionally, the state cannot mandate that a person have a child, nor can it mandate that they do not have a child. Children are part of a family, the family is an institution that predates any government, and has rights that Government cannot intrude on. The family is as inviolate as a man's home. Our Government has displayed a casual disregard for this institution which is the backbone of our society. As families are destroyed willy nilly, so our society crumbles.

If the State wishes to raise children, let the State bear its own children. Since this is impossible, the State has no right to interfere with family matters unless they present a real danger to the child.

The right to raise said children with the values and teachings that the parents see fit, whether or not the State agrees with those values or teachings. Children are being removed from homes for home-schooling, for Bible reading, for having guns in the home, for having their children born at home, for teaching the Constitution, and for any number of reasons that deal with the values and teaching the parents chose to impart to their youngsters.

The State has no right to remove children from non-abusive homes regardless of the State's position on certain teachings or beliefs.

The right of a child to be raised by blood relatives rather than the State. The State does not make a good parent, it has no vested interest in the welfare of the child, and cannot love and nurture a child. In the tragic event that a child must be removed from their home to protect their safety, the best way to mitigate the resultant trauma is to place the child with blood relatives. This is the child's RIGHT.

This is also the right of the blood relatives, be they grandparents, aunts or uncles, or siblings. Theirs is the vested interest, theirs is the ability to comfort and protect that child better than any State agency, because they have a blood tie to that child that will serve to genuinely nurture and love the child. Placing the child with any but a blood relative should only be done as a last resort.

Additionally, blood relatives should not be required to meet the same requirements as strangers who apply to be foster parents or adoptive parents. The blood tie should suffice along with the presumption of innocence. The blood relatives will be more likely to have the best interests of the child at heart, much more so than strangers or the State would. To require more is a violation of the integrity of the family bond and patently immoral.

If the child is to be adopted, blood relatives should have the first option, and they should be given the child in all cases except for previously proven abuse or neglect against the relative who wishes to adopt. To give a child to strangers is cruel to the child and to the blood relatives who have been denied the right to raise their own kin.

The right to refuse unwanted or unneeded medical or psychiatric evaluations, treatments or drugs, for themselves and for their children. Parents whose children are taken often find their children are placed on dangerous or questionable drug therapies, subjected to offensive and unnecessary medical examinations by practitioners whose expertise in certain areas is questionable, and forced to undergo traumatic therapies designed to help the child disclose nonexistent abuse. The child's fragile psyche is manhandled and manipulated until the child succumbs to the demands of the interrogator. They are exposed to adult sexual situations under the questionable guise of therapy and their natural inhibitions are brutally torn from them in the attempt to get a disclosure.

Their natural reactions to the separation trauma from their parents are misinterpreted as signs of sexual abuse and they are hammered to disclose.

Normal, happy, healthy children become traumatized drug-addicts, and dysfunctional while in state care, and the state erroneously treats the child as if the trauma was inflicted in the home instead of triggered by their very actions of taking the child from his parents.

When the parents plead to have their children back and state that they never had these problems at home, the CPS agencies refuse to listen and continue on their destructive course of intervention.

These agencies use the courts to order the parents into therapies designed to treat' their nonexistent domestic relations problems; therapies in which the parent must admit guilt before being allowed to complete it successfully. Non-abusive, falsely accused parents must either falsely admit guilt or refuse to comply and risk losing their children permanently.

CPS agencies actually recommend medications and dosages, in some cases requiring parents to take Antabuse and increasing the dosage over and above what the doctor prescribed causing toxic side effects. In other cases, they put traumatized children on Ritalin and other drugs in an attempt to control the child's behavior problems that have been caused by the agency's intervention.

Most parents vehemently oppose these drug therapies in vain. The child learns to turn to a pill to solve his problems which cannot, in any way, be portrayed as a good thing. The parent must have the right to choose whether or not their children will be examined, treated and medicated.

The right of parents to select therapists, mental health professionals and medical practitioners of their own choosing, for themselves and for their children. Parents and children are ordered by the courts to attend therapies, and do not have the option of choosing who will treat them. The therapists they must go to are often whores' of the CPS agency and will produce any diagnosis that agency wants or risk losing that source of income.

If a parent/child rightly suspects the evaluation might not be unbiased, they will further taint it by not trusting the therapist.

The true issue is that the patient must be able to trust their health care provider, and ordering them to providers that they don't trust or don't agree philosophically with is a violation of their right to choose their own providers, whether the State is paying for these services or not.

Furthermore, many of these whores' casually disclose private information to unauthorized sources, leaving another reason for not trusting them.

The right of children to be with their parents and of parents to be with their children. This speaks for itself. When two people have a child, a bond exists that cannot be severed easily, either for the parents or for the child. To attempt to sever it or to interfere with it is the ultimate cruelty. So harsh are the repercussions to the interference with that bond, that any intervention MUST be based on evidence, not supposition, of abuse.

This means both parents, under all circumstances. To deny a child access to either parent, or to restrict that access is a violation of that special bond, and an act of extreme cruelty.

We are not breeders' for the state. Our children do not belong to the state. They are OURS! We bear the ultimate responsibility for them, and the state has no right to interfere for anything less than real danger to the health or safety of the child.

The right to be free from threats, duress, coercion, or intimidation in their dealings with the State; to be assured that their children will not be held hostage to the illegal demands of the State. Parents are routinely subjected to threats, duress, and coercion during interviews with CPS agencies. Their children are held hostage for a guilty plea. They are told they will never see their children unless they confess. Innocent people have nothing to confess, but this is irrelevant to the CPS agents.

Children are also told that unless they disclose, they will not see their parents again. This emotional manipulation of children, some who are as young as three years old, is cruel and brutal. Children are torn between believing the agents who say they will only help mommy and daddy and not throw them in jail, and telling the truth and running the risk of not seeing their parents again. If they make a false disclosure, the parents are put in prison and the children realize that the agents lied to them, further traumatizing them.

Such tactics are torture, to parents and to children. Without the presumption of innocence and accountability, any agent of the State can brutalize families with impunity.

The right to privacy; to refuse to sign releases or to have private information forcibly taken from them without their permission. Court orders to sign releases is a violation of personal privacy. This allows any number of people associated with CPS agencies to have access to personal medical and psychological information on the parents or the children. This is a gross violation of the inherent right to privacy and the right not to be a witness against oneself, and violates the patient/doctor confidentiality.

The right to refuse to participate in unwanted or unneeded treatment plans. All treatment plans proposed by the CPS agencies do not have a clearly defined termination point. Parents are given hoops to jump through, and when they do it - expecting to get their children back - they are only given more hoops to jump through. CPS agencies can keep hapless parents dancing to their tune indefinitely.

Most treatment plans are irrelevant to the circumstances that precipitated the intervention. Sober parents are ordered to alcohol and drug treatments, and are required to submit to random urinalysis. Nonviolent parents are ordered to anger management classes and domestic violence classes. All parents are ordered to parenting classes that often teach ineffective discipline techniques and oppose spanking. Parents cannot 'pass' these classes unless they admit non-existent guilt and comply with the suggested techniques, whether those techniques violate the family's values or not. This is an undisguised attempt to maintain control over the family as long as possible, and is also an illegal fishing expedition' to gain more evidence' to use against the parents.

Is it any wonder that parents are reluctant to comply with treatment plans?

The right to refuse to contract and to place themselves in debt at the order of the state. The right to contract also implies the right to refuse to contract. When the court orders therapies, examinations, classes, drug testing, etc. they are forcing a parent to contract with various agencies against his will, and forcing him to incur unwanted, unneeded and/or unaffordable debt. It also forces action that may be against the parent's values and beliefs, or forces punishment/treatment without a finding of guilt. This ties up funds that could be available for his defense and limits his ability to protect his and his children's rights. To force anyone to incur debt, without having been found to have committed a crime or breached a contract by a competent court of law, is tantamount to stealing. Families are bankrupted daily by these actions.

The right to be legally protected from slanderous or libelous reports against them; and the right to be able to seek real retribution for any such violations against their character. When a parent's name is entered on a registry' of child abusers, without having been convicted of the crime of child abuse, it publicly presents this person as a though he were a convicted criminal and has the effect of legally slandering and libeling his character. This registry is accessed by employers, schools, police agencies, and even neighbors. People assume that a name on the registry means a conviction. Even parents who have never been found guilty of child abuse/neglect have their names entered on the registry for the mere suspicion of abuse/neglect, whether founded or not. The presence of a person's name on the registry is stigmatizing in the extreme, especially if the person is innocent.

The process of placing a person's name on a registry has no procedural safeguards, nor is it employed only after due process, in order to protect the rights of the persons listed and is therefore facially unconstitutional.

A false report of child abuse is in and of itself slanderous and libelous in nature. There are numerous documented cases of an irate neighbor or one party in a custody dispute using a false report of child abuse to get even or to resolve a disputed custody issue in their favor. The existing laws designed to punish such malicious actions have no teeth and the damaged party has, in substance and in practice, no recourse against the offender. Prosecutors refuse to prosecute these cases.

These malicious reports invariably cost the victims their reputations, thousands of dollars in their defense and deny them access to their children. The subject children are denied the necessary contact with their parents and are traumatized, making the children victims of this malice, too.

Mandated reporters have taken to turning virtually everything over to CPS agencies, whether the incident or circumstances can reasonably be construed to be abuse or not. This is a cowardly effort to cover their own backsides at the expense of innocent families. These mandated reporters can get away with this because of the absolute immunity they enjoy against making a false report. They have no motive to avoid making a false report, even though such a false report violates the rights of the children and the parents.

The right to be free of debtors' prison. Many parents are being ordered to reimburse the CPS agencies for foster care, to pay for Guardian ad Litem fees, and forced to spend money on unwanted and unneeded therapies and treatment plans. When the parent cannot or will not pay for these items, many have been threatened with and actually found in contempt of court and imprisoned at the whim of the judge for their failure to pay. Even parents who have filed bankruptcy, with the associated charges included on the filing, are imprisoned for not paying.

The right to assert their rights without suffering repercussions. CPS agencies use intimidation to force their services on families. When parents know and assert their rights, these agencies become even more belligerent and use cruel tactics such as telling the parent that if they don't cooperate, they will never see their child again, and telling the children that their parents don't want them or love them. Many times, CPS agencies will move these children to other jurisdictions and deny the parents any contact with their children. These tactics are inhumane and malicious, and are most strongly targeted at parents who assert their innocence and their rights. These families, in effect, suffer harsher repercussions for their righteous assertions.

The right to the presumption of innocence. The fact is, that in substance and in practice, in a child abuse case, a person is guilty until he can prove his innocence. There is no provision for innocence that is not proven.

The right that all men must live under the law; that no man who is in a position of authority over them is above the law; that those who have been victimized have the real ability to seek civil and criminal punishment against those who use the authority of the state to act outside the law with impunity. CPS agents, mandated reporters, and the courts have all been placed above the law, by being granted unqualified immunity to act against any person in this country. By not being held accountable for their actions, whether these actions be legal or illegal, has created a class of person who can act with impunity and without fear of justified action against them. They can destroy a family by tearing it apart, bankrupting them, driving parents and children to mental anguish and suicide, refuse to protect known abused children, and demand unfair and unreasonable treatments, all against innocent victims of their state sanctioned arrogance. They have no motive to act reasonably, or within the law, and as a matter of routine, act capriciously. These people have been corrupted by absolute power and our children are paying the price.

Parents and children who have been abused by these people have, in practice and in substance, no recourse against the violations perpetrated against them, and the violators know it.

The right to not be subjected to hearsay evidence against them. In a child abuse case, be it civil or criminal, hearsay evidence is routinely admitted into court. In many cases, the children, who were the only witnesses to the alleged abuse, are not permitted to testify. This he said, she said' testimony is a violation of a fundamental constitutional right. To put someone on trial, or to convict someone, based on hearsay is a travesty.




These wholesale violations of parents' and children's rights are cloaked in secrecy under the guise of the confidentiality laws and are actively championed in Family Courts across this country. The actions of the Child Protective Services (CPS) agencies and the Family Courts are accorded the unjustified status of due process' while these vile practices are, in substance and reality, state sanctioned tyranny and oppression on a wholesale scale against innocent parents and children.

As we have been reminded by the supreme Court in Marbury vs. Madison (1803), "...that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument."

The CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT ACT (CAPTA) and associated Child Protection laws and regulations which sanction all of the above violations against Our Rights and the rights of Our Children, are repugnant to the constitution and must be repealed. This is to serve notice that you, hereby having knowledge of these violations, that your failure to prevent or correct these violations makes you complicit in these violations and opens you to civil and criminal remedies under the law.




We DEMAND the following REMEDIES

1. DEFINE that the first best interest of the child is to be under the control of and in the physical custody of his biological parent(s). Failing that due to clear and convincing evidence of abuse, that the best interests of the child includes the right to be raised and/or adopted by blood relatives before being turned over to strangers or the State.



2. DEFINE that the parent-child bond is more precious than any bond linking the child with the state; that the right of a parent to the companionship, care, custody, and management of the child and the right of the child to be under the custody and protection of his parent is a fundamental right protected by the U.S. Constitution.

3. DEFINE that the State is not the best parent for a child, and that the State cannot give the same loving quality of care and nurturing to a child that a parent can, nor can the State know the best interests of the child better than the parents and/or blood relatives do; and that the child is at greater risk of abuse and/or neglect while in State custody than in the home.

4. DEFINE that the children's rights cannot be artificially separated from the parents' rights nor the parent's rights artificially separated from the children's rights; and that any attempts by any outsider to separate these rights; or to pit the child against either parent; or to dis-empower the parent; or undermine the parents' authority over the child is prima facie evidence of bad faith and severs the offender from all immunity protections.

5. DEFINE that to err on the side of the child' is a phony excuse for laziness on the part of officials involved; and that it allows them to adopt a self-righteous veneer as a concerned child saver while loftily sanctioning and ignoring the devastating traumatic effects intervention has on such a large majority of children and families; and that if there is a choice between erring and not, that the choice should be to not err; and that it takes much more effort to actually investigate and determine whether an allegation is founded than to simply take the child and warehouse him somewhere while the witch hunt commences; and that whenever someone errs on the side of the child', the child is invariably seriously injured by that error; and that the higher purpose is to not err at all; and that goal admittedly takes some effort, but if one is unwilling to put the effort required into conducting a fair and reasonable investigation, then they are probably in the wrong profession; and that to employ this line of reasoning severs them from their immunity.

6. DEFINE that any disability - either the child's or the parent's - is not sufficient grounds in and of itself to remove a child from the home.

7. REQUIRE that if a child is suspected of being abused or neglected due to a disability suffered by either the child or the parent, that CPS agencies cannot remove the child until sufficient, relevant in-home services have been provided to correct the deficiency in the home; and that if said disability is permanent, that said in-home services are not to be withdrawn simply to allow grounds to remove the child; and that the deficiencies in the home due to said disability presents clear and convincing evidence of danger to the health and safety of the child or that the parent's disability is so debilitating that he cannot properly care for or protect the child even with in-home assistance; and require extraordinary efforts to keep the family with disabilities together; and that removal of the child from parents solely due to the child's disability is not permitted.

8. DEFINE NEGLECT as not being sufficient grounds in and of itself to remove a child from the home.

9. REQUIRE that if a child is suspected of being neglected, that CPS agencies cannot remove the child until sufficient, relevant in-home services or training classes have been provided which would be required for a reasonable person to remedy the neglectful situation; and that said neglect has not been reduced or eliminated in that reasonable time; and that said neglect presents a clear and present danger to the health or safety of the child.

10. DEFINE that no ties are more precious than those binding parent and child and few decrees are so grave in their consequences as a court order to remove a child from the home or permanently severing the parent-child bond.

11. REQUIRE that said parental custody and control can ONLY be interfered with based upon probable cause of serious injury or neglect, which cause is willful and/or intentional, and is substantiated by bona fide evidence to the same.

12. REQUIRE that the States shall not prosecute the parents or caretakers nor intervene for cases of abuse and/or neglect that are beyond the parent's or care givers control. Establish the presumption that if the child is in the home or residence at the time of the incident, and if a reasonable person could have prevented the abuse and/or neglect and did not prevent it, that that person can be held accountable for allowing it to happen and for failing to protect the child.

13. REQUIRE that in all cases of suspected child abuse and neglect, the burden of proof be upon the CPS agency and the State, whether the case is heard in criminal or civil (family) court.

14. REQUIRE that no CPS agency nor the state can prosecute for nor force intervention on, nor force treatment plans on, nor force separation of the child from the parents or anyone else for what might be or what might happen or for anything that has not actually happened and which has been substantiated by evidence.

15. REQUIRE that any CPS agency and the Family Courts recognize and act on the premise that a parent or anyone accused of child abuse or neglect is innocent until proven guilty.

16. DEFINE serious injury as that which jeopardizes the life or health of the child; and require the States to implement such definition into their statutes.

17. REQUIRE that mandated reporters must only meet the standard of reasonably believed' that injuries were the result of willful intent to injure; and that an organization's policies for reporting an incident of child abuse must not be based on anything other than an individual, reasonable analysis of each case or they may be held liable for slander and libel; and eliminate the vague standards that provide for the wholesale reporting of innocent circumstances as abuse to the detriment of innocent families.

18. ELIMINATE the provisions for immunity from prosecution under State and local laws for persons who report instances of child abuse or neglect from circumstances arising from such reporting.

Institute qualified immunity for persons reporting who knew or reasonably should have known that an instance was in fact child abuse or neglect. If the person knew or reasonably should have known that the reported incident was not abuse or neglect, that person will not be protected from prosecution.
Any person working in the capacity of a social worker, investigator, or other child protection professional will be presumed to have known that a reported instance was not in fact child abuse or neglect if they ever, in the course of their investigation and/or intervention, employ lies and/or deceit with, or withhold evidence from, the parents, children, departments, or courts in an effort to provide services to a family.
Require all states to vigorously pursue RICO and/or criminal felony prosecutions against all persons who act alone, or conspire, to violate the rights of any family member, or who act outside their statutory authority during the course of an investigation or intervention; and to immediately sanction them against ever working in the capacity of child protective services; and to enter their names on a national data base of sanctioned social workers; and mandate the States to prosecute for perjury any state agency worker who lies in any report to the court or while under oath.
19. REQUIRE an immediate (within 24 hours) trial by a jury of twelve (12) in order to remove a child from the home for more than 48 hours.

20. REQUIRE the clear and convincing' standard of proof to keep a child out of the parents' home.

21. REQUIRE a trial by a jury of twelve (12) to terminate parental rights.

22. REQUIRE the clear and convincing' standard of proof to terminate parental rights.

23. REQUIRE all investigations of child abuse to be conducted by the law enforcement agency of the appropriate jurisdiction; and that child abuse is a crime and should be treated as such; and that social workers are not trained to conduct investigations, to interview ALL knowledgeable parties, to completely document all findings, to properly preserve evidence, and to respect legal rights.

24. REQUIRE that during any intervention by child protection agencies, the parents and the children are to be informed of their right to remain silent, and that anything they say can and will be used against them.

25. REQUIRE the parent is to be informed that to confess to a crime they did not commit (to accept a false plea bargain) is perjury.

26. REQUIRE that the State inform the parents in writing of every hearing scheduled in their case that pertains to themselves or their children; and that such notice clearly details the consequences for failing to appear; and that such notice is delivered to the parent no less than 48 hours prior to said hearing.

27. REQUIRE that during any intervention by child protection agencies, the parents be informed in writing of their right not to sign releases of private information; and of their right to participate in the formation of a treatment plan; and of their right to refuse participation in a treatment plan if they have not been found guilty of child abuse and/or neglect.

28. REQUIRE that CPS agencies shall not hold the child hostage to their demands that the parents separate, break up or get a divorce; and that to set forth such conditions for the return of the child will be prima facie evidence of bad faith and removes all immunity protections for the social workers involved.

29. REQUIRE that during any intervention by child protection agencies, any treatment plan devised must include a definite termination point, either a time frame or the completion of certain criteria and that upon completion of the time or stated criteria, the children must be returned to the family and intervention must cease.

30. REQUIRE that any treatment plan be relevant to the circumstances that instigated the intervention, and include an explanation as to why and how each element is relevant and the proposed benefits of each element.

31. REQUIRE that the States provide for an effective administrative appeal process for any proposed treatment plan, including but not limited to presenting the appeal before a citizen's review panel, before asking the court to order it; and advise parents in writing of their rights to appeal certain elements of any treatment plan in court for being irrelevant to their situation.

32. REQUIRE that the CPS agency prove to the Court the necessity of all elements of the treatment plan or the court must deny the agency's request; and that said proof must include the fact that the parent(s) has a past history of actions that warrant the requested element of treatment; and that said history constitutes a violation of the law.

33. REQUIRE that child protection agencies provide written guidelines for dealing with parents who assert their innocence and where there is no evidence of abuse, and have real provisions for immediately terminating intervention and returning children to their parents' custody when no probable cause can be found to continue intervention.

34. REQUIRE that all child protection agencies provide written guidelines of rights and remedies for complaints against the agency upon initiating an intervention; and that there are provisions for a truly independent citizen's review panel to deal with complaints that are not satisfactorily addressed internally; and that said panel is not to be under the influence of or suffer the presence of any CPS agency representative during their investigations and that the CPS agency is required to follow the recommendations of said citizen's review panel; and said panel will have the power to compel evidence to be produced and to compel witnesses to testify before them.

35. REQUIRE that all efforts to place children with relatives be documented in the case file by transcripts of tape-recorded conversations and/or certified letters, which unedited tapes are to be made available to any party upon request; which records will include the names of the relatives contacted, including date, time, results of the contact.

36. REQUIRE that all efforts to reunify the family are defined as such in writing and be included in the case file as a reunification report; and that such efforts describe exactly how these efforts are relevant to the family's dynamics; and describe how they will benefit the family; and require that these efforts are approved by the parents and validated with the parents' signatures on the said reunification report; and that the parent is permitted to submit their own analysis of the reunification efforts that must also be included as part of the case file and must be presented to the court.

37. REQUIRE that all interviews with children who are suspected of being abused or neglected be video tape recorded in their entirety; and that fact subscribed and sworn to under the penalty of perjury; and that the parents have a right to have their representative present at such interviews; and that such representative is not required to be a lawyer licensed to practice law; and that the parents have the right to video or audio tape said interviews themselves, or to have free access to unedited, true copies of said interviews upon request; and that all persons present at said interviews must be visible on the video tape at all times; and if anyone present during the interview is not visible on the tape at any time, it is prima facie evidence of inappropriate interview techniques and any disclosures made under those conditions may be rendered invalid in court.

38. REQUIRE that the CPS agency, its agents or assigns may not isolate the child from his parents or other relatives unless there is a real threat to the child's life or safety that is substantiated by hard evidence; and if any CPS agent denies the parents access to the child without said evidence of danger, the agent is severed from immunity from civil and criminal penalties.

39. REQUIRE that the parents' access to the child be frequent and lengthy so as to maintain the parent-child bond and relationship; and that the CPS agency may not limit visitations because it is inconvenient for the agency.

40. REQUIRE an objective, age-appropriate definition of abuse and neglect that cannot be subject to individual interpretation and biases; and in this definition, spanking or slapping, in and of itself, cannot be construed to be abuse; and that any condition that is statutorily defined as an injury must be proven medically to be an injury that requires medical attention to preserve the health of the child; and that any definition of mental abuse must conform to the science of psychology, not to theory.

41. REQUIRE that the laws protect the practice of the parent's religious beliefs which do not seriously endanger the health or safety of the child; and provide stiff punishments for agency representatives who remove children from their homes due to the parents practicing their religion.

42. REQUIRE laws to protect the right of parents to home-school their children; and to control who the child will associate with; and to control the child's medical care where the life of the child is not in danger by their inaction; and to direct the religious and secular education and upbringing of their children in all cases where there is no clear and convincing evidence of danger to the child's health or safety.

43. ELIMINATE anonymous reporting; and REQUIRE that the names and addresses of all persons who report child abuse be made freely available to any party to the complaint; and that the accused be allowed to face the person reporting abuse against them in court; and make all persons who report child abuse subject to qualified immunity based on the standard that they knew or reasonably should have known the report of abuse was true and accurate and within the statutory definition of abuse; and make them accountable for false reports with severe criminal and civil penalties; and REQUIRE the states to ENFORCE these penalties upon the penalty of losing funding.

44. REQUIRE the states to advise any child reporting child abuse against himself of the existing criminal liabilities he faces for making a false report.

45. REQUIRE all social workers to be licensed, and bonded.

46. REQUIRE all Guardians ad Litem (GAL) to be bonded.

47. REQUIRE that GALs conduct bona fide investigations on behalf of the child; and make the results of that investigation available to all parties; and make the falsification of this investigative report punishable by mandatory fines, imprisonment and revocation of their license to practice law.

48. ELIMINATE the requirement for secrecy and sealed records in all unfounded cases; and open these records for public inspection so that abuses by the system can be exposed.

49. ELIMINATE the confidentiality protections which in reality are a cloak of secrecy which protects the parties in power from having their illegal activities uncovered; and open all records and hearings to the public, censoring only the name of the child, and of the parent if they request it. See if they can stand the scrutiny of the public eye.

50. REQUIRE that the falsification of any records related to child abuse investigations punishable by mandatory fines and imprisonment, based on the standard that the person making the report knew or reasonably should have known they falsified the report; and REQUIRE prosecutors to prosecute such crimes vigorously.

51. ELIMINATE all instances of hearsay evidence against the accused in court.

52. REQUIRE that all complaints of the abuse or neglect of children while in state custody and under state care be investigated both by the CPS agency and by the independent citizen's review panel; and that these investigations be conducted independently of each other.

53. REQUIRE that any child protection agency worker who knew or reasonably should have known a child is being or has been abused regardless of whether the child is in State custody or not; and/or conceals the abuse of that child; and/or fails to take action to protect that child; is liable for triple the fines and prison terms as the abuser is subject to for committing the crime; and make the director of the CPS agency ultimately responsible for following through with all reports of abuse; and that the director will be presumed to have known or reasonably should have known of all reports that come into the agency by whatever means.

54. MAKE the true and actual numbers of children in foster care or other state custody arrangements publicly available annually; along with the true and actual numbers of reported cases of abuse against children in stated custody; and the true and actual numbers of deaths - including accidental, intentional, and suicides - of children while in state custody; and the true and actual numbers of state custodians or caretakers prosecuted for these abuses.

55. REQUIRE that the states protect the rights of the accused by allowing them to face their accusers; even if they are children, in court.

56. REQUIRE that a child may refuse medical treatment and/or examinations without his parent or his parent's representative present. The child must be informed of this right, prior to any examination or treatment and said statement must be video taped and the accuracy and completeness of said taped statement sworn to under the penalty of perjury.

57. REQUIRE that a child may refuse to speak to anyone without his parent or his parent's representative present. The child must be informed of this right prior to any interview and said statement must be video taped and the accuracy and completeness of said taped statement sworn to under the penalty of perjury.

58. REQUIRE that before the state can order a child into therapy, put the child on any drugs, or give the child medical treatment against the parent's will, that the state have clear and convincing evidence of abuse or neglect against the parent; and that such treatment or examinations are conducted by independent providers; and that the state meets the burden of proof that failure to provide the child with the requested examinations and treatments will seriously injure the health or life of the child; and that the parents may present a case in court against allowing any such treatments or therapies based on the treatment's validity, the validity of the diagnosis, and the instance where the need for such examination or treatment is precipitated by the removal of the child from his family and the symptoms can be alleviated by reunification; and to allow the parents to demand that their children see the medical professionals of their own choosing; and allow a provision for the administration of emergency medical treatment for injuries and acute illnesses for children legally in state custody without the parent's immediate consent.

59. REQUIRE that all hearings involving the parent or the child, both the parent and child must be allowed to be present if they so desire; and make it illegal to order either one from the courtroom for anything less than threatening behavior, and require Judges to make every attempt to make it possible for all parties to remain in the courtroom during the hearing.

60. REQUIRE the judge to allow the child to speak to the judge in chambers if the child desires; and make it a punishable offense if any social worker, GAL or other child protection worker conceals the child's request from the judge.

61. REQUIRE the States to diligently protect the rights of families who are involved with CPS agencies; and that failure to protect their rights as defined above against illegal activities by the State will result in the denial of Federal funds to the State for the following year in the amount of 25\% of the current year's allocation for the first offense, 50\% for the second offense, and 100\% for subsequent offenses; and that said denials of Federal funds are cumulative and can be carried forward into subsequent years.




In this great nation, We the People are the government. We are holding all of our elected officials accountable for these devastating and immoral violations to Our Rights and to the Rights of Our Children.

We Declare the Family, by its very nature as an institution that predates any government, whose sovereign rights are fundamentally inherent, to be inviolate to government intrusion. We will no longer let the agents of the state meekly into our homes to snatch our children. We will no longer cooperate with CPS agencies who lack the experience, the authority or the moral character to judge us as parents. We stand resolute in our innocence and demand that these agencies obey the law of the land in all their doings.

Sign The Petition

Sign with Facebook
OR

If you already have an account please sign in, otherwise register an account for free then sign the petition filling the fields below.
Email and the password will be your account data, you will be able to sign other petitions after logging in.

Privacy in the search engines? You can use a nickname:

Attention, the email address you supply must be valid in order to validate the signature, otherwise it will be deleted.

I confirm registration and I agree to Usage and Limitations of Services

I confirm that I have read the Privacy Policy

I agree to the Personal Data Processing

Shoutbox

Who signed this petition saw these petitions too:

Sign The Petition

Sign with Facebook
OR

If you already have an account please sign in

Comment

I confirm registration and I agree to Usage and Limitations of Services

I confirm that I have read the Privacy Policy

I agree to the Personal Data Processing

Goal reached !
1000 / 1000

Latest Signatures

  • 18 February 20161000. Kathleen O
    2 years without my daughter, no due process, no facts to support false statements. instead of correcting errors the cps and family courts continue to bury my case never allowing my case to be heard. this system is completely corrupted and needs immediate
  • 15 February 2016999. Candice B
    CPS unjustly removes children and strips parents of their rights for whatever reasons are fitting for CPS. This could be a disability, religious preference/practice--which CPS distorts and twists the meanings of the scriptures regarding how children are r
  • 15 February 2016998. Cediath Ad
    we should beable to have more rights for us to sue them for detrying the familes Zip Code 32570 Name cediath a davis
  • 11 February 2016997. Connie Maem
    These changes are required Zip Code 98528 Name Connie Mae Moen
  • 11 February 2016996. Laura W
    Well over-due! Zip Code 97071 Name Laura Woodall
  • 09 February 2016995. Robert M
    BRING MY SON HOME WHERE HE BELONGS!!! CPS never gave me a chance,never looked for me,but said they did.They are Unlawful Criminals and they must be STOPPED NOW!! BRING SAM HOME TO HIS FAMILY WHERE HE BELONGS Zip Code 74129 Name Tobe
  • 08 February 2016994. Brenda M
    I do not beleive in Corporal Punishment, but find it reprehensible that there is a State Law in North Carolina that allows for my public schools to paddle my child at their discretion, when the same act would bring CPS to my door to remove my children fro
  • 07 February 2016993. Jamie Dk
    Something needs to be done ASAP about DHS and them stealing are children Zip Code 97045 Name JAMIE D. KESSELL
  • 06 February 2016992. Peggy Braun
    this is the truth Zip Code 16503 Name peggy
  • 06 February 2016991. Dawn R
    n/a Zip Code 91978 Name Dawn
  • 05 February 2016990. Sherry S
    I fully agree with this petition want it sent to the indiana congressman and to president Obama I'm positive he will do something about this total witchhunt on our children. Zip Code 46327 Name Sherry Sagan
  • 02 February 2016989. Mattie Lg
    Sad that this happens to parents & their children. Zip Code 56304 Name Mattie L. Garrison
  • 01 February 2016988. Iwanna Lloyd
    this is needed to prevent more death's of children and to protect the youth of our nation from people who have become increasingly more violent Zip Code 07036 Name Iwanna Lee Foris
  • 01 February 2016987. Crystal N
    My 4 babies are in the system right now.. CPS lied and twisted everything. Zip Code 48111 Name Crystal Nicholson
  • 31 January 2016986. Tonya Mt
    This needs to be Heard Zip Code 02360 Name Tonya M. Torrey
  • 31 January 2016985. Cindy T
    My brother and his wife are going through a similar case now if you know anyway to help please contact me @ email , PLEASE ! Zip Code 30705 Name Cindy Thorn
  • 27 January 2016984. Shannon J
    im all for this. Zip Code 21075 Name shannon
  • 19 January 2016983. Minna S
    Many things can be changed for the better. Zip Code 45211-5344 Name Minna Snow
  • 19 January 2016982. Jodie H
    Cps needs to investiagte BEFORE they take your children-not after Zip Code 75021 Name Jodie Hayes
  • 18 January 2016981. Allen C
    Those who make unproved or false reports of child abuse should be held liable and prosecutable for to the FULLEST extent of law for damage caused mentally, financial,mental anguish,and when found guilty receive the same sentence the accused who have recei
  • 17 January 2016980. Carrie Lynnh
    parent of 4 Zip Code 98372 Name carrie
  • 12 January 2016979. Granpa C
    Although Petitions are not the best means to change the law. Anything that makes all parties not only responsible for their actions, but also gives everyone an equal right to express their views, is certainly a move in the right direction. nfpcar.com/Refo
  • 09 January 2016978. Lori K
    Please help the children .. they are the victims Zip Code 52339 Name Lori Keahna
  • 03 January 2016977. Lacey W
    I am a victim, I need help Zip Code 77670 Name LACEY WALHOOD
  • 31 December 2015976. Barbara S
    cps is NOT GOD despite what they think Zip Code 89183 Name barbara sprouse
  • 30 December 2015975. Vicki H
    Thanks so much for this. There is alot of this going on here in Stephens County, Ga. We are trying to fight but cant find anyone to help. Zip Code 30577 Name Vicki Harmon
  • 30 December 2015974. Marcos Efraing
    No ablo muy bien el ingles pero ami (cps) se metio en mi vida cuando nacio mi primer nino . sabe no uso drogas ,trabajo de jardinero, y estaba esable en mi casa y mi trabajo. Cuando nacio mi Hijo que Dios me lo Quide mucho mentras esta lejos de mi. mi Nov

browse all the signatures

Information

Jacklyn DavenportBy:
Business and CompaniesIn:
Petition target:
To change child protection services court process

Tags

No tags

Share

Invite friends from your address book

Embed Codes

direct link

link for html

link for forum without title

link for forum with title

Widgets