Beware Of Greeks Bearing Gifts: Family First Prevention Services Act of 2017
After reading @vickibarker's excellent article on the Family Protection Act yesterday there were a few things that just didn't seem quite right. I don't mean in any way to take away from the superb effort she did writing the article- her post was very well done and I sincerely hope she's right and I'm wrong- but my inherent distrust of government tells me otherwise.
First, when looking at any piece of legislation, never trust the title- it always sounds great so that the mainstream media can push it on the public... remember the "Affordable Care Act"? I rest my case. The second thing that put me off was the sponsors. Anything that involves Carl Levin makes me immediately suspicious. Although touted as a "bipartisan effort," both parties favor more government intervention into the lives of average people. The third thing is that when the rhetoric used to sell the legislation makes you uncomfortable- there's usually something to it. You have to be familiar with "governmentspeak," this time it's from the Bill's sponsor Vern Buchanan...
~"Provide parent training and family therapy to keep kids at home and out of the child welfare system." This can only mean one thing, more government and government sponsored "experts."
I spent the morning (starting at 2:30) reading the Bill itself... HR 253 (link below for anyone crazy enough to be interested). I'll start with what I consider to be the most important part. If you want to kill a snake, you cut off its head. If you want to kill corruption and abuse, cut off the funding. If you remember one of the things that drives CPS abuse is the federal cash incentives behind adoptions... the "Kids For Cash." Beginning in 1999 adoption bonuses are paid out to the states for each adoption that takes place in what amounts to legalized kidnapping. The funding for this ran out in 2016. Title IV Section 401 extends the funding through 2021. Moreover, Title I places more state discretion of adoptions... this sounds like more adoptions rather than less.
Will the Act help families to stay together at all? What I see coming from this is a two-tier system. Federal funded adoption bonuses will ensure that children with "desirable adoption" characteristics (children easily trafficked and marketed- blonde, blue eyes) will continue if not expand. In fact Title I Sec. 122 "Reduc[es] bureaucracy and unnecessary delays when placing children in homes across state lines." They might as well have entitled this the "trafficking enhancement clause."
However, most provisions of the Act do in fact allow children to either remain in the home or with relatives- so long as the relatives meet foster care requirements. This will mean more state intervention into the lives of families... especially if there is a history of drug use. A new infrastructure consisting of "experts" of every sort will become involved increasing both the size and scope of state intervention... Drug counselors, diagnosticians, etc.. Whenever governments speak of "partnerships" it inevitably means more government. Title I Sec. 123 speaks about "mandatory partnerships." (that can only mean disaster for families) Without belaboring the point and attempting to reiterate the entire law- this means continued kidnappings... "Kids For Cash" and even more government than I feared when reading @vickibarker's article.
In a previous post I cited a study that showed that 25 "experts" depended upon children being removed from their homes for their livelihood... I'm afraid with the new law that number will at least double when and if children considered "at risk" are allowed to stay.
Please support @familyprotection as much as possible- every little bit helps.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/253/text?format=txt
GIF by @papa-pepper
(you hear an engine rev and horn honk)
MEEP! MEEP!
(the window on the humvee rolls down to reveal a warm smiling face)
"Hello! I'm @shadow3scalpel and with the help of my protege, @chairborne, we are actively assisting veterans, retirees and active servicemen and women here on Steemit. We feel it is our 'duty' to support each other. Any questions or comments you may have, simply respond to this comment, thank you!"
(the window rolls up and the engine roars as it drives to the next person on the list)
Comment by @killerwhale. This is a opt-in bot.
If we give the state money for every adoption this will obviously give CPS an incentive to take more children even if maybe the situation is not that bad. @richq11 watching this Florida school shooting, I was appalled when when I heard a congressmen talking about violence in video games, tv, and online. He said thats what government should be talking about. As I was yelling at him through the tv, because anybody who understands freedom and privacy understands that the issue of children watching violence is a parents issue only! Not even that fact but watching violence does not make you kill, as I grew up playing call of duty and i'm sure 70 percent of kids are playing games like this. Its the teachings of the parents that matter, but we have taken this responsibility away from the parents and gave it to the government. So now we expect and trust that government will teach our kids what they need to know, this will and is turning out costly for true american values. Thanks for the post @richq11
This is just a continuation of the funding for the program they've had since 1999. You watch- the shooter in Fl will be someone on psychotropics or just quit them. Columbine, the Aurora theater shooter and almost if not all of the others were on these drugs!
and yet what does the media talk about.... gun control = Pathetic
If the security guard that got killed shielding those kids had been armed, it might have turned out differently!
See this!!!
https://steemit.com/discussion/@everittdmickey/aha-what-have-i-been-saying-the-meds
Hello @richq11
Although the subject of discourse here is irrelevant to me since I am a citizen of another country but I can relate to your point of argument, and I totally agree with you. Left to me, even in the part of the world where I come from, I am always of the opinion that we are better off without government intervention in some cases. In this clime where I live, there is always nepotic interest when government intervenes and this would eventually leave situation more worse at the end of such interventions. I only hope this won't be the end point in this case.
@eurogee of @euronation community
Here it just keeps getting more and more despotic. I hoped that the new president would rein things in and perhaps in time he will. He did sign off on this bill though.
Keeping fingers crossed while praying. I should say congratulations on the outcome of the bill. Hahaha
It could go either way if you read it. The problem is they write legislation in doublespeak... you have to understand the language of government!
Oh yeah. I totally agree.
So glad you are making the time to pick this Law apart even though I know you are a bit under-the-weather. It is important we follow this close. Good points on the added dollars for adoption. The adoption through CPS has always stumped me that the adoptive parents are financially awarded for taking a child into their family. Seems love of the child would be enough somehow. When people adopt a child outside of the CPS system they don't get payment rewards. Sad CPS creates the business.
I've sent a copy of the bill on to a work group I belong to. They have a couple of law folks on board that I'm hoping will also give us their take on it.
I'd be very interested on their take. I know from my research that in some states the CPS is double dipping. People that want kids pay them to take them and then they get federal funds for the incentives (bonuses). I don't know what they hoped to accomplish with this "plan." Incentives means reasons... If you give incentives (in dollars) to CPS to take kids from their homes, what do you think they're going to do??? But then it was done under Bill Clinton- you have to look at the history of it.
The CDF (Children's Defense Fund) who's behind the the "epidemic of abuse" narrative that got the whole thing going is one of the most powerful lobbying groups in Washington (along with the NEA). Hillary was the Pres of the CDF when Bill got elected. Donna Shalala took over for her when she became First Lady. Then Bill appointed Donna Sect. of HHS, the agency behind disbursing the funds. In fact if you read the new law, you'll see that the Sect. is charged with carrying out most of the provisions.
Whew! This flu won't let go! I've been waking up at 1 or 2 AM barely able to breathe laying down, so I get up and try to work. I'm going to try to get a chap of the Night Gods out today.
Double dipping is an ongoing "normal" process for them and all the other gov. agencies. Just look at the CAFR's that each community has. They are shrewd and their plan has worked up until now, I think we are heading in the right direction. EVERY thing they "give" to us needs to be challenged for integrity and they need to be held accountable. If we don't, it will be business as usual. Even with this administration shedding a bit of light and hope for the moment, is not something we can count on being long lived. We know how hard politics can hit good movement. Get well, you are needed on the front lines :)
Oh wow, thanks for dissecting it a little for us. I just heard about this and I'm just now looking into all of it. So if your child is taken from you and you want them with family members, those family members have to meet certain requirements that foster families must meet? Does that mean like having plug covers in every electric plug in the home - I had a friend who was told he had to have that to be able to foster to adopt. I wonder where the requirements are written to be a foster parent. Anyway, it doesn't sound good if they tell you which expert you have to use and which professional counselor will tell you if you're worthy enough to keep your child or not. Yikes. Thanks for sharing this info.
I'm sure it varies (the requirements) from state to state... but yes, in order for relatives to get temp custody of the children, they have to meet the same requirements as any other foster home. In fact they will probably have to be licensed, but I'm not sure. It would take the onus off the state should something happen to the kid.
Wow, so even if you make a list of other people you want your child to go to if something happens, more than likely they aren't going to be sent there because the people won't be deemed "qualified." That's nuts if that is the case. I've heard from a lot of people to make a list of where to send the kids if they are taken but I never really thought that CPS would actually send the kids there. Maybe this is confirmation of that.
CPS rarely if ever sends kids where you want them... there's no money for them in that. The whole system is rotten. They send kids to foster homes (most of whom aren't competent to take care of a canary). There the kids are abused, medicated (that means more $$$) and God knows what else. CPS has never been about children, except as sources of revenue.
Yeesh...after what I've read in this series, the very name of the bill creeps me out.
Fortunately, I know "Governmentspeak." The way they write these things it could go either way- in reality... it only goes one!
Curated for #informationwar (by @stevescoins)
Relevance: Institutional corruption/subversion
Our Purpose
Great post @richq11, well done for reading between the lines. There was a similar thing highlighted in a response to how we should move @familyprotection along. It mentioned using petitions and changing legislation but to me that is only getting rid of the attack-dog, not the attacker. For me any change will come from a change in mass consciousness caused by grass-roots campaigning(Don't like that word).
Government will always wrap a turd in a bow. I should have seen this myself. Great work mate.
Thank you my friend! Like the old saying goes- you can polish a turd, but it's still a turd!
I have a distrust to government as well, they speak one thing to the public and then all go to the free of change dinner and laugh at us.These people will solve either too little or nothing for us. It is NOT because they don't want to, but because it is no possible, so they do what is possible, and take care of their mule before others.
The thing they want to do with our future, with our own children, is to program them. They already stuff their fingers into all our businesses around children, it is hard to predict what a future will bring to us.
Cool @richq11...
Amazing ..