FB-RSS

Photo - Post 1 of 4: Reminder and flashback of the importantance of the Johnson case in the state of Arizona: CRITICAL ARIZONA NEWS: Case example # 2 When CPS took Karla Johnson's granson Isaiah in 2009 the following statute was on the books: ARS 8-822 No removal review was ever conducted by RHONDA CASH and given to KARA VANHISE. The obudsmans office, (whose job is to oversee and look into wrongdoings) was contacted in order to review this case specifically, confirmed that CPS did not conduct a removal review and simply dismissed it as an oversight on the agencies part. Lawmakers instead decided to rewrite the statute to cover themselves and the agency. This is how the statute used to read: "ARS 8-822(3) “Review each removal of a child, such reviews shall be conducted before the dependency petition is filed. If the child has a medical need or a chronic illness, the review team shall include the child's physician or registered nurse practitioner, if the child suffers from a chronic illness, at least one member of the team shall be a physician. A child shall not be removed unless a majority of the members of the review team agree that removal is necessary; if the child has already been removed, the child shall be returned to the home.” NOW IT HAS BEEN CHANGED TO READ: "8-822. Removal of child from home; rules and policies; approval; definition A. The department shall adopt rules and establish clear policies and procedures, where appropriate, to: 1. Determine the circumstances under which it is appropriate to remove a child from the custody of the child's parents, guardian or custodian. 2. Ensure the immediate notification of the child's parents, guardian or custodian regarding the removal of the child from home, school or child care and the timely interview of the child and the child's parent, guardian or custodian. B. Except as provided in subsection C of this section, the department may not remove a child from the custody of the child's parents, guardian or custodian unless both of the following occur before the removal: 1. The child safety worker who is recommending the removal submits the reasons for removal and supporting information to the worker's supervisor. 2. The worker's supervisor reviews the reasons and supporting information and approves the removal. C. If an emergency exists affecting the health or safety of a child, a child safety worker may remove the child before notifying the worker's supervisor. The child safety worker shall submit the reasons for removal and supporting information to the worker's supervisor for the supervisor's review and approval within two hours after the removal of the child or, if the removal occurs after regular working hours, by 8:30 a.m. the next day. D. For the purposes of this section, "supervisor" includes the permanent supervisor of a child safety worker and a temporary supervisor assigned to the child safety worker in the absence of the permanent supervisor." We call fraud upon the state of Arizona. You removed this child and others and then changed the laws to cover your agency all for federal funding. Shame on you!!! We are calling on the Department of Justice to get involved. #Johnson #MelissaDiegel #EspinozasAngels http://bit.ly/1OFBNLs *No warrant was used in the removal of this child.: Post 1 of 4: Reminder and flashback of the importantance of the Johnson case in the state of Arizona: CRITICAL ARIZONA NEWS: Case example # 2 When CPS took Karla Johnson's granson Isaiah in 2009 the following statute was on the books: ARS 8-822 No removal review was ever conducted by RHONDA CASH and given to KARA VANHISE. The obudsmans office, (whose job is to oversee and look into wrongdoings) was contacted in order to review this case specifically, confirmed that CPS did not conduct a removal review and simply dismissed it as an oversight on the agencies part. Lawmakers instead decided to rewrite the statute to cover themselves and the agency. This is how the statute used to read: "ARS 8-822(3) “Review each removal of a child, such reviews shall be conducted before the dependency petition is filed. If the child has a medical need or a chronic illness, the review team shall include the child's physician or registered nurse practitioner, if the child suffers from a chronic illness, at least one member of the team shall be a physician. A child shall not be removed unless a majority of the members of the review team agree that removal is necessary; if the child has already been removed, the child shall be returned to the home.” NOW IT HAS BEEN CHANGED TO READ: "8-822. Removal of child from home; rules and policies; approval; definition A. The department shall adopt rules and establish clear policies and procedures, where appropriate, to: 1. Determine the circumstances under which it is appropriate to remove a child from the custody of the child's parents, guardian or custodian. 2. Ensure the immediate notification of the child's parents, guardian or custodian regarding the removal of the child from home, school or child care and the timely interview of the child and the child's parent, guardian or custodian. B. Except as provided in subsection C of this section, the department may not remove a child from the custody of the child's parents, guardian or custodian unless both of the following occur before the removal: 1. The child safety worker who is recommending the removal submits the reasons for removal and supporting information to the worker's supervisor. 2. The worker's supervisor reviews the reasons and supporting information and approves the removal. C. If an emergency exists affecting the health or safety of a child, a child safety worker may remove the child before notifying the worker's supervisor. The child safety worker shall submit the reasons for removal and supporting information to the worker's supervisor for the supervisor's review and approval within two hours after the removal of the child or, if the removal occurs after regular working hours, by 8:30 a.m. the next day. D. For the purposes of this section, "supervisor" includes the permanent supervisor of a child safety worker and a temporary supervisor assigned to the child safety worker in the absence of the permanent supervisor." We call fraud upon the state of Arizona. You removed this child and others and then changed the laws to cover your agency all for federal funding. Shame on you!!! We are calling on the Department of Justice to get involved. #Johnson #MelissaDiegel #EspinozasAngels http://bit.ly/1OFBNLs *No warrant was used in the removal of this child.

from FB-RSS feed for Op Expose DCS Arizona #opexposecps http://bit.ly/2bZUDfS