On Nov 11, 2:41=A0pm, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Nov 11, 3:32=A0pm, Greegor <Greego...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 24, 8:08=A0am, "Dragon's Girl" <bettywir...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 23, 12:09=A0pm, Greegor <Greego...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > G > Betty, Do you really think that a kid
> > > > G > who is 10th percentile (5% of population)
> > > > G > would not set off huge alarm bells for
> > > > G > a doctor?
>
> > > > BW > My bad. =A0I thought he said four.
>
> > > > G > Betty, In another thread you
> > > > G > accused me a priori of MOCKING you!
> > > > G >
> > > > G > In this thread I asked a direct,
> > > > G > fair and reasonable question.
> > > > G >
> > > > G > Apparently you don't want to answer it
> > > > G > so you join in with Dan's juvenile crap.
> > > > G >
> > > > G > You MOCK yourself.
>
> > > > G > Betty, Do you really think that a kid
> > > > G > who is 10th percentile (5% of population)
> > > > G > would not set off huge alarm bells for
> > > > G > a doctor?
>
> > > > G > Can't just answer a simple question directly?
> > > > G > If you don't KNOW, just admit you don't.
>
> > > > BW > I know the answer very well Greg.
> > > > BW > I just can't figure out why you insist
> > > > BW > on asking irrelevant questions.
> > > > BW > The article said that the girl had
> > > > BW > not been to the doctor in years.
> > > > BW > It would be impossible for those
> > > > BW > 'alarms' to be set off by someone
> > > > BW > that a doctor hasn't seen.
>
> > > > G > When the child was to the doctor years
> > > > G > before, the doctor THEN should have
> > > > G > insisted on CLOSE SUPERVISION.
> > > > G >
> > > > G > It doesn't take a SERIES of low weight
> > > > G > or a trend, if the kid is THAT LOW!
>
> > > > BW > Do you think it was the doctor's job
> > > > BW > to make sure the parents brought
> > > > BW > the girl to subsequent check ups?
>
> > > > What do the guidelines of the AMA and
> > > > pediatric association say on this?
>
> > > > Doctors ADMIT kids to hospitals for far smaller
> > > > problems than this.
>
> > > > Doctors also re****t to CPS for smaller problems than this.
>
> > > > I don't like the NAZI like world we've made with the
> > > > relation****p between doctor and patient with
> > > > CPS quietly in the mix. =A0I'm just pointing it out.
>
> > > > We've got doctors calling CPS on their patients
> > > > all the time, there have even been stories of how
> > > > doctors have used re****ting to CPS in an attempt
> > > > to prevent parents from getting a second opinion.
> > > > In a few cases the second opinion proved that the
> > > > first (re****ting) doctor was horribly WRONG in their
> > > > determination.
>
> > > > Hell, One of the biggest Family Rights advocates
> > > > even experiencede an ER NURSE who used CPS
> > > > at the drop of a hat in an attempt to back up or
> > > > enlarge the nurses aggrandized authority. =A0The
> > > > nurse phoned in a rediculously false re****t. =A0The
> > > > re****t included completely fictional elements
> > > > borrowed from famous national CPS cases, like
> > > > that the mother was a preacher traveling in a
> > > > BUS with her kids. =A0(Not a preacher, no bus.)
> > > > CPS (Missouri DFS) sent a newbie caseworker.
> > > > =A0When the caseworke told her superiors who
> > > > the mother was, they asked the caseworker
> > > > to apologize and LEAVE. =A0The child involved
> > > > lives with lifelong cerebral injuries as the result
> > > > of a foster care experience. =A0The mother was
> > > > doing exactly as the doctor directed,
> > > > was told to go to the ER and have him paged
> > > > immediately, but the ER nurse saw this as some
> > > > sort of challenge to her AUTHORITY so she called
> > > > CPS before she paged the doctor.
>
> > > > Remember than in many states mandatory
> > > > re****ters have to re****t situations which MIGHT
> > > > possibly be abuse, or face legal liabilities.
> > > > There is a big difference between re****ting
> > > > every damned thing that MIGHT POSSIBLY
> > > > be abuse (almost everything!) as opposed
> > > > to re****ting only where they reasonably believe
> > > > there is actual child abuse.
>
> > > > Missouri law is a bit stricter about this than most
> > > > states (thanks to the Mom above) but you
> > > > know very well that the doctors MALPRACTICE
> > > > insurer would urge them to re****t such a case
> > > > unless there is some really good explanation!
>
> > > > I don't LIKE how it is, I'm just telling it.
>
> > > I'm not real sure what your desire is here, Greg?
> > > Do you want every parent who has a child with medical conditions to
b=
e
> > > the target of DFS interaction, or no?
> > > I must admit, I am no doctor, but I know that there are signs, and
> > > without those signs, how could you expect a physician to suspect
> > > abuse?
> > > A child who is born premature, low birth weight, ill after birth,
> > > suffering some medical conditions, multiple birth, etc would
> > > APPROPRIATELY be in the tenth percentile. =A0Why that would set off
> > > alarms to their physician is beyond me. =A0Why you think it should
is
> > > also beyond me.
> > > A child who is born healthy, has no medical conditions, etc being in
> > > the tenth percentile would raise HUGE red flags, and still, sans the
> > > tell tale conditions of abuse and neglect, would not be considered
> > > abuse or neglect.
> > > Not real sure, by your posts, what it is that you would like for the
> > > state, or doctors to do in this case, as there are many unknown
> > > factors.
>
> > > > BW > People move, lose their health care, find
> > > > BW > other doctors, etc...lots of stuff happens.
> > > > BW >=A0It's not the medical provider who is
> > > > BW > responsible for following up with the
> > > > BW > patient, it's the patient, or the patient's
> > > > BW > parents, who are responsible for follow up.
> > > > BW > So, now, you tell me...who's to blame?
> > > > BW >=A0The doctor who may very well have told
> > > > BW > the parents that the child was in need
> > > > BW > of medical care to boost her weight and
> > > > BW > monitor her progress, or the parents who
> > > > BW > did not provide that care to her, and
> > > > BW > abused her? =A0I don't understand why
> > > > BW > you insist on placing blame where it
> > > > BW > does not belong.
>
> > > I notice you didn't answer the above.
>
> > Betty, Dan just posted a story that shows that CPS
> > was involved 5 years ago (re****t by teacher) so
> > it looks like CPS were involved and may even
> > have prompted that doctor visit.
>
> CPS was involved three years ago.
>
> The doctor was involved five years ago.
>
> > There are hints that this family is well off.
>
> Who "hinted" that?
>
> > Dan started this off sarcastically blaming CPS
> > but as it turns out, CPS WAS involved 5 years
> > ago and apparently didn't do any follow up.
>
> That's why I blamed CPS.
>
> They closed a case on a 48 pound 11 year old girl in thirty days!
>
> > In essence, this kid starved almost to
> > death over the last 5 years right under
> > the watching eyes of CPS.
>
> Three years ago for CPS, and they closed the case in 30 days.
>
> > That's QUITE a fact they left out of the first
> > media story, wouldn't you say, Betty?
>
> Call the re****ter and complain, grag.
>
> > Why would they leave out that CPS has
> > been involved with this family for YEARS,
> > and was aware of the situation?
DS > Maybe that info wasn't available at the time.
G > What will we find out next?
G > Were they foster/adopters too?
G > Why do you suppose Dan didn't post the follow up
G > story in this thread, instead opting to create
G > a new one?
DS > It was new information.
New information on an old story.
Is there a reason not to attach it
to the original thread?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sup****t.child-protective-services/msg/c7=
3da405d532b483?hl=3Den
http://www.nwcn.com/statenews/wa****ngton/stories/ki_103008INV_starving_girl=
_cps_KC.1660e1609.html
Investigators: Starving girl left in home after call to police
02:51 PM PDT on Saturday, November 1, 2008
By SUSANNAH FRAME / KING 5 News
There are more disturbing facts about the teenager who nearly starved
to death in Carnation. KING 5 Investigator Susannah Frame has
information that the girl was left in the home even after police and
a
CPS worker visited the home.
The case of the starving girl struck quite a nerve in our community.
Earlier this month, a father and stepmother were arrested, charged
with deliberately starving their daughter as punishment.
Now we've found the child was left in the home even after police and
a
Child Protective Services worker responded to the home and found a
girl who looked malnourished and appeared half her age.
Police and social workers came to the home this summer after a
neighbor called to say she'd heard a child screaming and banging on
doors and windows in the middle of the night.
New Department of Social and Health Services do***ents obtained by
KING 5 show that police left the child in the home after responding
to
that call. A sheriff's deputy wrote that the 14-year-old looked so
malnourished that she appeared to be age 7 or 8, and weighed just 48
pounds.
On top of that, DSHS records say the girl told the deputy, "I don't
want to live here anymore." The re****t says she also told him she was
only allowed a small amount of water a day.
Sheriff's department spokesperson Sgt. John Urquhart on Friday said
the deputy made a judgement call to leave the girl there based on the
information he had at the time. Urquhart says the deputy did a good
job at the scene and wasn't given enough information to warrant
removing the girl from the home.
We also learned from the state records that a social worker came to
the home the day after police came in.
The worker wrote that the girl looked "extremely thin and
malnourished," "is restricted from drinking water" and that the
stepmother hits her with "her hand, a belt, and a clog-like shoe".
Despite all that, the social worker made the judgment call to not
pursue removing the child at that time.
Instead of taking her out, the worker developed a safety plan with
the
parents telling them they must make a doctor's appointment and stop
physically disciplining her while she's at this current weight.
So how did the girl finally get taken out of the home?
The next day the parents made good on their promise to CPS and took
the girl to the doctor. According to the do***ents, medical
professionals were horrified saying the girl was intentionally
starved
and despondent. She apparently told the doctor she'd rather have a
lethal injection than go back home.
They rushed her to the hospital and made yet another call to CPS that
finally led to police taking her into protective custody from
Children's Hospital in Seattle.
The parents have both pleaded not guilty to two counts each of
criminal mistreatment.
The DSHS records say there was a controversy over whether the girl
should have been taken from the home when law enforcement officials
and Child Protective Services were called with similar complaints
from
the daughter in 2005, when she was 11.
The records indicate the girl ran away from her home schooling center
on March 4, 2005 because she was "afraid to go home." She told
teachers she was locked in her room every day until 1:00 while her
mother slept, and only got a meal at 8 p.m. when her father came
home.
She also re****ted her mother "hits me a lot."
The teacher called CPS and the King County Sheriff=92s department
responded as well.
CPS closed the case after repeated, failed attempts at getting a hold
of the father. In addition, the daughter told the caseworker her
step-
mother had quit locking her up and that they were getting along
better.
That was the last time officials heard of any problems, until the
call
from the neighbor in August of this year.
The girl is currently in foster care. Her younger brother, who looked
healthy and well-fed, was eventually taken out of the home as well
and
placed with different foster parents.
|
