“I am sometimes a fox and sometimes a lion. The whole secret of government lies in knowing when to be the one or the other.” –Napoleon Bonaparte
“When everything is easy one quickly gets stupid.” -Maxim Gorky
Everything comes easy to DCFS. All I can say is avoid DCFS and make sure to avoid DCFS. COVID has shown that the indignity and intolerance of the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (“LA DCFS”) knows no-end. The revolution on the streets or whatever it is you call 2020 has done absolutely nothing to check the indignity and hypocrisy of the Los Angeles Foster Care System.
The county of Los Angeles has the largest foster care system in the country. There are over 35,000 minor children being supervised by the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (“LA DCFS”). Over 21,000 children are currently removed from their parents’ home in Los Angeles County. LA DCFS has an annual budget of over $2,200,000 US Dollars per year. That is billions of dollars of liability each year that parents cause the County of Los Angeles when child abuse is reported.
Each year, DCFS receives over 265,000 annual referrals for abuse and neglect. During COVID-19, the child abuse referrals were so low that DCFS and the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department teamed up to find a solution to create more child abuse referrals. Los Angeles County Sheriff planned to knock on random doors to see if children were being abused.
While some may argue that it is a noble deed to sniff out a child abuser and help innocent children, others on the front lines feel different. Like Friedrich Nietzsche, one must be suspicious of government altruism. When the local government has the idea to knock on random doors to investigate child abuse, one must question motives. In the end, DCFS backed out of the partnership citing the potential to target minorities. The entire $2.2 Billion Budget that DCFS has is carried on the back of impoverished minorities that do not possess information about DCFS.
For the last decade, I have been a Los Angeles Dependency Attorney that fights against Los Angeles DCFS. DCFS is not solely to blame for the largest foster care system in the country. On the front-lines, I am maneuvering against the Los Angeles Superior Court Dependency Court Judges at the Edmund D. Edelman Children’s Court, who are armed with low-standards of proof to take away children from their parents. The judges find true between 92-97% of all petitions filed in court alleging abuse and neglect. If you catch a case with DCFS you have about a 3% chance to beat the case.
Once DCFS commences a case, parents are guilty until they can prove their innocence because of the low standard of proof. Trust can only be gained over statutory time frames, compliance in court-ordered services, acknowledging the DCFS version of events, and that the parent genuinely takes responsibility for that version of events. Admitting something that is not true is a tough pill to swallow. Especially, when your children are taken away from you with a 3% chance of beating the case.
The parent fights a three-front war in dependency court. Corporately committed social workers, conservative and complacent judges, and the least unlikely foe, minor’s counsel for the Los Angeles Children’s Law Center (CLC). This three-headed monster is aligned against the parents to place children in foster care. CLC is appointed to represent each child that has a case. Parents have no say in what attorney represents their children. While I acknowledge many great minor’s counsel and I am certified to be a minor’s counsel in Family Law Court, the minors counsel fail to fulfill their obligation to independently present evidence about the child’s best interests. They simply just read off DCFS reports and submit them when it comes to taking children away from their parents.
The war for the soul of the family is not fought fair. If you do not know the rules of engagement, your kids can be adopted away from you forever. DCFS, the court, and the minor’s counsel often combine to create dangerous circumstances for children and their parents.
This blog will soar above the Los Angeles foster care system to assess its state and swoop down to document the grim reality of COVID-19 for parents and children caught up in the DCFS system. I mean no disrespect to the actual victims of abuse and neglect nor the attorneys that fulfill their oaths.
DCFS Investigations: What Do I Do if a Social Worker Knocks on My Door?
When DCFS investigates one of the 265,000 referrals for child abuse it receives from the child abuse hotline each year, it raises Constitutional protections for parents. Under the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, a mother and father have an unenumerated fundamental liberty right to parent their child as they see fit without government interference. A parents’ Constitutional right to parent collides with the governments “DUTY” to protect children, the odds tilt in favor of big government.
LA DCFS is the government and has a “DUTY” to protect children from abuse and neglect. The word “duty” is the same word and element in a negligence and wrongful death action. If DCFS does not fulfill their duty to protect children, they could be sued.
DCFS has a $2.2 billion per year annual budget. DCFS’ interest in not getting sued is what drives the foster care system. Look no further than DCFS corporate mission statement “With one voice we stand.” DCFS must always back up another social worker’s recommendations, even if unjust. A DCFS social worker will unknowingly bend and twist the truth to fit their own ends.
DCFS Investigation, What Are My Rights?
The only way to get rid of DCFS is during their investigation for child abuse.
If you have children it is only a matter of time before a social worker knocks at your door. Understand that the social worker has a duty to determine if abuse has occurred and if court intervention and removal of the child from the home is necessary.
DCFS investigations require the social worker to speak with both parents and the child about the allegations. The social worker must conduct a home inspection about the safety of the home. The social worker may speak with third parties about the abuse. Within 30 days, the social worker must close the referral, refer the case for court intervention, or have the parents agree to voluntary services.
If a social worker comes to my home unannounced and wants to speak with me and my children what are my rights?
- You have a right to have an attorney present when interviewed
- You have a right to deny social worker access to your home without a warrant
- You have a right to deny access to the social worker to your children without a warrant
- Beware, your failure to speak with the social worker or allow access to your children will result in a warrant being sought.
- You have to cooperate with the investigation and having a lawyer that specializes in DCFS’ cases to assist you in the investigation is a right you need to assert at first contact with DCFS
If a social worker knocks at my door, what should I say?
- I am exercising my right to have an attorney present when interviewed
- Please provide me with your card
- I am sorry you cannot come in until I have consulted with an attorney
As soon as DCFS shows up at your doorstep, assert your right to have an attorney present when interviewed. Immediately contact an attorney that specializes in dependency court and DCFS investigations. You do not have to speak with the social worker at first contact.
Hiring a dependency attorney to handle your DCFS investigation allows you to stall the social worker investigation, gather needed evidence, gain knowledge about DCFS, and prepare for the most important interview of your life. So many cases with DCFS could be avoided if handled properly up-front after initial government contact. Remember DCFS has 265,000 referrals for abuse and neglect each year, if you handle the investigation properly it is more likely that they will move on to someone who makes a common mistake.
If your child is young and unable to speak, it is best practice to allow the social worker to come into your home. See and inspect your child for marks or bruises and make sure that the home is safe. This allows them to check that off their investigation checklist.
How DCFS Will Remove Your Children: What To Do When DCFS Seeks a Warrant
The social worker that comes to your doorstep has no authority to decide what happens to your children. An Emergency Response Social Worker is the bottom of the food chain at DCFS. The Emergency Social Worker is required to consult with their supervisor to make any decision about your case. You will hardly ever meet your DCFS supervisor.
To quote Iggy Pop, your DCFS supervisor “is colder than a corporate lawsuit.” The DCFS supervisor will never meet you or your family, see your home, yet decides if your children are placed in foster care. The lowly social worker that comes to your front door must fall in line because at DCFS “with one voice they stand.” So it is important to know how the DCFS supervisor assesses cases. Everything that you say to the social worker that initially shows up at your door must be calculated to please their supervisor.
DCFS can only remove a child from a parent if they have a warrant, exigent (emergency) circumstances, or the consent of a parent. An emergency would be that a parent is arrested for serious abuse and the child is left with no place to go because the parent is in jail. A parent sometimes should consent to the removal if there truly is an issue. Another time to consent to the removal would when DCFS asks you to do it or they will open a case or place the child in foster care. Yes, DCFS uses coercion to obtain their objectives. Prior to consenting to your children’s removal, contact an experienced dependency/DCFS attorney.
DCFS will obtain a warrant to take your kids like clockwork and without any effort or basis. DCFS has the weapons, tools (literally), and resources to obtain a warrant to steal your child. Do not underestimate DCFS and make sure every move you make is calculated. DCFS has the advantage of the incompetence and fear of the Los Angeles Superior Court Dependency Court Judges. Not all judges in dependency court are terrible, but the good majority of them lack the temperament, intelligence, and courage to stand up to DCFS. The judges that stand-up to DCFS are chased out of the courthouse by politics.
The Judge Who Signs Every Single DCFS Warrant
Presently, there are around 27,000 pending cases assigned to the Edmund D. Edelman Children’s Court. The judges have caseloads averaging around 1,200 cases. Each judge on a daily basis is making decisions for 50-70 children per day.
All judges except The old man have the largest caseloads in the country. I have it on good authority that The old man only has 40 cases assigned to him, despite presiding over one of the most infamous departments in the history of the Los Angeles Superior Court.
The old man only has 40 cases because lawyers exercise their Code of Civil Procedure 170.6 Affidavit of Prejudice to fire him on any case that gets assigned to Department 419. The only lawyers that do not fire The old man are DCFS’ shield and sword, the Los Angeles County Counsel’s Office. County Counsel represent the social workers in court. County Counsel do not fire The old man because The old man does whatever DCFS wants him to do every single time.
All of the cases that The old man gets fired are assigned and dumped on the other 24 judges at the courthouse. I have witnessed the most professional judges grumble when one of The old man’s case gets dumped on them. The old man has no business being assigned to such an important post as determining warrants.
The most important job in the system is to screen when a child should be separated from their parents initially. For the Los Angeles Superior Court to assign The old man to the most important job in the system, demonstrates either incompetence on their part or that The old man is politically connected and his position vital to some interest.
When DCFS seeks a warrant to remove children from their parents, they are required to demonstrate in the warrant that “reasonable efforts were made to prevent the removal” and that other family members were assessed for placement. Neither is true in a staggering number of warrants filed by DCFS. I have reviewed at least 500 warrants signed by The old man removing children from their parents in the last 5 years. I have spoken with so many of my colleagues and everyone agrees that The old man signs every single warrant presented to him by DCFS.
The old man Signed This Warrant
One of my cases involved a Korean family who had a nanny. The nanny admitted that she ran the parent’s 9-month-old baby’s head into the corner of the wall. The parents noticed a bump on the child’s head and immediately took the child to Children’s Hospital Los Angeles. The x-ray revealed a fracture.
The Children’s Hospital doctor said that the nanny’s explanation of the injuries was not possible and that the parents could have abused the baby. The old man signed the warrant. A different judge reviewed the case and returned the baby to the parents from foster care right before COVID. Had that case been assigned to 20 other judges, the baby would have been in a foster home and maybe adopted.
The old man is that bad of a judge. The nanny later admitted that she dropped the baby on her head to the police. DCFS and their team of expert hack child abuse doctors do not care. They make real money calling it child abuse and the judges are too conservative to take a chance because of liability.
What Should I Do When DCFS Says They Are Seeking A Warrant To Remove My Children?
Trust me when I say that, when DCFS informs you that they are seeking a warrant to remove your child, The old man is going to sign the warrant 99.9% of the time. Once DCFS seeks a warrant, it is highly unlikely that they will place your children initially with relatives. DCFS only cares about their liability. DCFS will knowingly make efforts to place your children in foster care and assess relatives later. To get a child out of foster care, a relative must complete the RFA process. RFA takes like a month and requires the relative to basically become a certified foster parent.
It is better for DCFS that the relative be a certified foster parent that knows CPR and takes the RFA class for DCFS liability. So preventing your child from entering foster care and being with relatives can be the difference of 6 months in foster care or zero days.
I advise clients that once DCFS informs them that they are seeking a warrant, to take the children to a grandparent, aunt, or uncle that has a clean criminal and child welfare history in the Greater Los Angeles area. After the social worker informs you that a warrant is being sought, inform the social worker in writing via email and text where the child will be and it is your wish that the child remain there. This will force the social worker to actually have to assess the relative before placing the children in foster care. No requirement exists that relatives must be RFA approved for initial placement before disposition of the case.
Once my clients are informed that DCFS is seeking a warrant, I screen for proper relatives and advise them to take the child there and inform the social worker in writing. In each and every case, despite DCFS knowing where the child was, the social worker went to the parents’ home with the police, and threatened them with abduction charges if the child was not brought to DCFS immediately. After 30-60 days of investigation, DCFS did not once assess relatives for placement. DCFS will put your child in foster care and justify their actions because judges like The old man are happy to move onto the next case.
DCFS does not care about the trauma of initially separating your child from family. Once DCFS seeks a warrant, they will rarely try and work with the family to keep the kids out of foster care or they will seek relative’s hostile to the parents. DCFS gets more funding when kids are in foster care and can defer decisions to judges longer about your case.
Be aware that if DCFS seeks a warrant to remove your child that The old man is on autopilot and will be obliged to sign it. The odds are highly stacked against the parents when DCFS seeks a warrant. When I see an initial DCFS warrant denied, it is like finding a “golden ticket.”
DCFS and the Social Worker Are Not Completely to Blame
As Confucius wrote around 551 B.C., “because men forget that they cannot regulate their families if they do not regulate themselves because they have not rectified their hearts, they have not cleansed their own souls of disorderly desires, their hearts are not rectified because their thinking is insincere, doing scant justice to reality and concealing rather than revealing their own natures, their own thinking is insincere because they let their wishes discolor the facts and determine their own conclusion…”
DCFS is unable to get to the truth or the nature of anything due to liability. Their $2.2 billion-dollar budget will not allow justice to be served based on truth.
Parents lie about abuse, coach children to report abuse, or use the system in a way to obtain their objectives. Peoples selfish desires, lies, distortions, and actions need to be fleshed out by a better trained DCFS worker. Front line social workers need to be armed with discretion in performance of their duties.
Social workers are afraid of getting sued and recommend removal of children when services and solutions exist for maintaining the family together exists. Social workers and Supervisors are trained to identify cases that pose risk of liability to the county. Their ability to sniff out parent’s that distort the truth is amateur at best. DCFS is as predicable as your most annoying has-been-friend on social media.
According to DCFS data, once DCFS obtains a warrant and removes a child from the parents, it takes the parents on average 9.1 months to get the child back. If your child is removed by a warrant and removed from the Detention Hearing, DCFS will do nothing to help you get you have taken responsibility for your actions, completed their case plan, and enough time has passed for the threat of liability to pass them.
DCFS removes and separates children from their families based actual abuse of child as well as future risk of harm to the child. A great number of children in the foster care system have never actually been abused and are removed from their parents based on a finding of a juvenile law judge that the child(ren) are at risk of future abuse or neglect. In the law, crystal balls are avoided, but not in dependency court.
After the court takes away children from their parents, the law requires that a trial occur within 60 days unless exceptional cause exists to continue past that time frame. The reason is that is that once a child is removed from both parents, they only have 18 months to reunify. After 18 months the court shall set a permanent plan for adoption, legal guardianship, or planned permanent living arrangement in foster care.
Parents have a right to set a no-time waiver trial within 15 days of their children being removed or 30 days if the child is placed with a parent. Jumping to the front of the line with a no-time waiver trial is sometimes a fatal mistake. Remember that around 97% of all dependency petitions are sustained as true. That means that only 3% of the families in children’s court are ever vindicated of child abuse and neglect allegations. If I do not think that the client has a good chance to win the case, I will not set a no-time waiver because the client needs time to mitigate and recede the DCFS, CLC, and the court’s liability.
DCFS Does Not Pay For Services and Programs To Get Your Children Back
The court and DCFS calculate future risk to children based on parent(s) enrollment and participation in services. These services or classes include: anger management, domestic violence group therapy for victims, domestic violence preparators group therapy 52 weeks, drugs and alcohol program, random drug and alcohol testing, individual therapy with a license marriage and family therapist, parenting class, and sexual abuse awareness class.
Los Angeles County does not pay for any of the services except for drug and alcohol testing. When DCFS removes a child, the parents are forced to attend these services or risk adoption. If the parent does not do the classes or benefit in a way from the classes that the social deems appropriate, the child(ren) will most likely be adopted. If you want to fight DCFS and the court, you have to play their corporate game and complete their services. The sooner you get started in programs and say the right things about what you learned in the classes, the sooner your kids can come back.
By analogy, before law school, I worked at Enterprise Rental Car. I felt selling the rental car insurance was unethical. However, I needed to have my bosses like me so sold the car insurance against my ethics. I would say corporate things to my bosses to make them think that I believed in Enterprise. Deep down, I understood that people with insurance were covered with their rental car insurance. Once I was accepted into law school, I did not sell the insurance. To effectively deal with DCFS and the court you have to pretend you want to sell the rental car insurance by doing the classes and services. Otherwise, your risk creating liability and getting an adoption recommendation to DCFS.
The services and classes that DCFS and the courts require are like glorified traffic school courses. At one anger management class approved by DCFS, a Compton School Teacher wrongfully accused of abuse was forced to go to anger management to get her child back. The old senile German woman that ran the program showed Vin Diesel movies, while collecting everyone’s $50 per class. Anger Management for DCFS is a 12-56-week course, to quote Too Short, “get a calculator and do the math.”
Social workers rarely check in with service providers about a parent’s progress until the very last moment. It is important to be proactive and provide your social worker with frequent progress letters from your programs. When dealing with DCFS, you must do their job for them and make them think that they did it.
Social work in Los Angeles has been a thing of the past. The new age social worker will disparage you, lie about you, double down on you, and do everything to thwart you as you try and prove your innocence. Once you have an open court case, everything you say and do will be used against you. It is important to learn how to talk to DCFS. Everything you say to DCFS goes into a report that the judges read and basically take as gospel.
As an attorney that fights DCFS, I am in the trenches with my clients coaching them how to talk to DCFS. I advise clients that every time that they talk to DCFS it has to be like a star athlete speaking after the professional sporting match. At the end of the game, the star athlete thanks God (the services), compliments his teammates (the service providers), and takes responsibility for the win or loss (acknowledges that DCFS version of events happened and they learned from them). Not every case is the same, but this is standard practice. If you are losing your DCFS case it is time to re-think your strategy. Communication with DCFS determines their liability. So learn how to walk, talk, and think like a social worker.
Grim Realities for DCFS Cases During COVID-19
As we soared above DCFS and the Edmund D. Edelman Children’s Court we saw some grave injustices. Swooping down, we will now explore DCFS and the Courts responses to COVID-19.
The Edmund D. Edelman closed completely from March 16-March 19, 2020. The court house was closed to all non-emergency cases and is slated to open back up on June 22, 2020. Until June 22, 2020, the only cases being heard at the courthouse are Detention Hearings (first hearing in court) and restraining orders. Parents and children are not allowed to physically enter the courthouse or to meet their attorneys during COVID-19.
The court has transitioned to WEB-EX hearings. Parents sign in from computers if they have one and listen to an attorney they have never met tell the judge not to place their children in foster care. CLC is interviewing children electronically. Imagine being 5 years old and meeting your attorney on Facetime and that attorney asking the judge to place you in foster care.
Pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code Section 350, the dependency court is supposed to be an informal and collaborative process so that everyone can work together to find a solution. I sometimes negotiate cases back and forth for 8 hours in court. Online that is not possible. Hearings being online is going to mean more kids in foster care and families having less and less information.
To strip parents of their right to an in-person dependency court hearing is to put more and more power into DCFS’ hands. The judges, minor’s counsel, and court-appointed parents attorneys will be cutting even more corners and doing cases with less information.
Breaking News: May 29, 2020 Monterey Park, CA
The presiding judge of the juvenile dependency court of the Los Angeles Superior Court has announced until further notice all juvenile dependency hearings will be conducted via WEB-EX. Hearings will commence on June 22, 2020 will only be conducted remotely. This is an even greater loss to due process and access to justice to the thousands of children currently separated from their families in the foster care system.
Breaking News: July 09, 2020
I have conducted my first WEB-EX hearings. Everyone signs in randomly and can sign in and interrupt the judge at any moment. I would say there were 15-20 interruptions during my case today. The highlight was when my hearing was interrupted by someone that signed in under the call-in “thebigfuago.” I can still hear the judge, “Can “thebigfuago” please identify themselves.” The judge had to kick “thebigfuago” out of the cloud so we could conduct a hearing that had been postponed over 13-months.
The report from the front is grim. In one case, we were able to contact a father to come to court for the first-time. The case was assigned to a terrible judge. One that does whatever DCFS wants every time and plays on her phone in-between cases. Anyway, the father exercised his CCP 170.6 Affidavit of Prejudice rights and fired the judge. The case went to an even worse judge who has a temper.
The judge called the case and did the trial without reading any paperwork. I know this to be true because the case was assigned to the judge at 11:30 am. I was called in the middle of a bowl of Pho at 11:55 am. The judge insisted that we go forward right then and there. The case went until 1:30pm. Lunch at court is from 12-1:30pm and judges are prohibited working into the lunch hour. So a judge decided about a case over the internet without reading anything about it.
The next day, the same judge that kicked out “thebigfuago” did a trial without reading my trial brief. She admitted to having not read the brief or reviewing the exhibits. The courts are only agreeing with DCFS more because of COVID. When I mentioned that the father was upset and not seeing his child for 120 days and that DCFS did nothing to set-up visits, the judge could have cared less. The judges do not care that parents could not see their children during COVID.
Parents Not Allowed to Visit Children During COVID-19
The most fundamental right in dependency court is that all parents get to visit their children unless the court finds that it would be emotionally detrimental to the child. I have a case right now, where the father molested a child and still has a visitation order.
Due to COVID-19, DCFS closed all of their county offices. At the DCFS office, parents have court-ordered visits with their children, relatives are fingerprinted for background checks for placement and to act as monitors, and parents are interviewed in person about allegations. DCFS suspended all monitored visits for parents during COVID-19. Many of my clients have not seen their children since March of 2020 and there is nothing that I can legally do about it. A social worker recently set up a facetime for my client with his 6-month old baby.
The court is not accepting walk-on requests to setup visits. The judges are not in session and not processing requests to set up visits and change orders that restrict access of parents to children. It is as if they are just sitting on their hands waiting for June 22, 2020 to re-open. Nothing is being done to offer relief to parents unable to see their children.
A large majority of parents are ordered monitored visits. In every case, the judge gives DCFS discretion to approve a monitor. DCFS procedure is that they finger print the proposed monitor, go over a visitation rules sheet, and set up a visitation schedule. This requires the proposed monitor to go to the DCFS office. Even under non COVID-19 times, getting a monitor approved can take up to months due to social worker apathy. Since the DCFS offices are closed, monitors cannot be approved. As such visits that must occur at the DCFS office are not occurring. So parents with monitored visits have not seen their children since at least the first week of March.
The courts do not want to micro-manage DCFS approval of monitors. So for years, the issue of approving a monitor is always deferred by the court. During COVID-19, the court has deferred the approval of monitors to DCFS. The result being parents do not get to see their children. The court must approve monitors and take away the delay in visits caused by DCFS. That is not likely to happen.
I have a case where DCFS set up a Facetime with a 6-month old child. DCFS wrote a letter that due to COVID-19 that visits must be electronically until further notice. The court order for monitored visits still exist in my case and in all of the other 27,000 cases at the courthouse. So DCFS is defying a court order that they facilitate visits for parents.
If DCFS actually performed social work and approved monitors or the court acknowledged DCFS failure to facilitate visits and ordered monitors without background checks during the pandemic the problem could be mitigated. However, like all things in the foster care system, liability and a lack of compassion dictate what occurs.
Time Frames for Adoption is 18 Months
Children cannot be in the foster care system forever. The Welfare and Institutions Code Section 366.21(e), (f), and 366.22 provide the time frame by which a child has to be returned to his parents or be placed for adoption. When a child is removed from both parents, the clock starts to tick towards a permanent plan.
When a child is removed from a parent’s custody and control a review hearing must take place within six months.
Cases that are required to have review hearings within 6 months have been continued 13 months by the court. DCFS closed all of their offices. As a result, children in foster care have not been able to physically visit their parents since March of 2020. DCFS has done little to find solutions to facilitate visits and have thrown their hands up waiting for the judges to modify existing orders, that are now 13 months away. Parents are being denied basic due process.
The services and programs that required to play DCFS game to get your kids back are closed. During COVID-19 parents have been unable to see their children and unable to participate in classes to get them back.
DCFS has required parents to drug testing during COVID-19. One of my clients informed me that at the drugs test a man stood 6 inches from his penis and watched him urinate without a mask on. This is highly indecent.
Mothers that are victims of domestic violence cannot attend their group domestic violence course to start to get their children. DCFS does not accept or allow online classes.
What Can Actually Be Done to Stop DCFS?
COVID-19 has demonstrated that with less child abuse referrals less cases are being filed. I am very interested in obtaining the data of child abuse referrals during COVID-19 closures. More of an effort to prevent cases from being filed during the DCFS investigation phase must occur before it’s too late.
DCFS’ coercive and corporate tactics need to become known and addressed. I believe that if parents were given an attorney during the child abuse investigation and before making any statements that the foster care system in Los Angeles would evaporate over-time. So first and foremost, know your rights when the social worker knocks at your door.
The Los Angeles Superior Court needs to acknowledge The old man’s failures. The court must reassign The old man from warrant duty for the Los Angeles Superior Court permanently.
A task force to investigate The old man’s warrants must be set up immediately to uncover DCFS’ failure to prevent removal and find relatives to place children. As a front-line worker with DCFS, I can assure you that the numbers will be appalling. The Los Angeles Superior Court must assign the most talented judges to warrant duty to make-up for all of the children that The old man condemned to foster care.
The Los Angeles Superior Court needs to recruit only the most talented judges. Right now, DCFS gets whatever they want from the judges when it comes to removing children from their parents. The judges need to swing the pendulum back towards the rule of law and applying the rules of evidence strictly. The judges at the Edmund D. Edelman Children’s Court need better leadership.
Families under stress and turmoil need to be made aware of the pits of DCFS and the foster care system. When times get stressful and your family is breaking apart, contact a competent family law and dependency law attorney in Long Beach to help find a solution to your families’ problems without involving the government.
Families need to find cooperative solutions when dissolving and avoid mandated child abuse reporters that report them on a whim.
In the end, the corporate child abuse and neglect system is Los Angeles is only going to grow. All that one can do to fight DCFS is to learn about how DCFS operates and govern yourself accordingly.