NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/misc/kids/30952

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-22 | 2.6 KB

Xref: sparky misc.kids:30952 alt.dads-rights:3058 alt.child-support:4023 soc.men:21595 soc.women:21767
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!torn!newsserver.cs.uwindsor.ca!bouche2
From: [e-mail] (BOUCHER DAVID            )
Newsgroups: misc.kids,alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Neglected or Abused Children, CPS, Foster Care and Prison
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 21 Dec 1992 20:05:04 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Followup-To: misc.kids
Organization: University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 32

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jerry Roe) writes:
> [....]  the "training" the protection workers get very clearly
> encourages the beliefs that 1) children don't lie about abuse, 2) denial
> is evidence of guilt, 3) the mother must confirm the father's abuse or else
> she is perpetuating the abuse - and therefore can not be trusted with the
> children - and so on.  There is NO room for "innocence" in this system;
> if anyone needs proof of it, go read the San Diego County Grand Jury's
> report of their investigation into SD's children's protective agency.
> It'll curl your mustache and give you nightmares.

You should modify (1).  They are taught that children who DENY abuse are
lying and must be coaxed or otherwise manipulated until they give the
"disclosure" that the interviewer wants.  In the case that provoked the
investigation to which you are referring, a little girl was raped by an
intruder who climbed in her bedroom wondow, and even though the little girl
repeated her story for two years, and the authorities in fact KNEW that a
man had been arrested in the vicinity for similar offenses, they went after
the father and REFUSED to "believe the child".  After two years of grilling
and coaxing by "therapists", the child finally did name her father as the
assailant, but shortly thereafter DNA testing of semen on the girl's
clothing proved conclusively that the father could not possibly have been
the assailant, and that there was a 98% probability that the assailant was
the man who had been arrested in the same neighborhood for similar offenses.
By this time adoption proceedings were underway for the little girl.  She was
raped, but instead of helping her the so called "Child Protectors" ripped her
away from her family and subjected her to psychological rape for more than
two years.  The subsequent investigation revealed that this was standard
operating procedure in the San Diego CPS.

- db