Posted on

Renewal


“Renew a right spirit within me.”
– Psa_51:10
A backslider, if there be a spark of life left in him will groan after restoration. In this renewal the same exercise of grace is required as at our conversion. We needed repentance then; we certainly need it now. We wanted faith that we might come to Christ at first; only the like grace can bring us to Jesus now. We wanted a word from the Most High, a word from the lip of the loving One, to end our fears then; we shall soon discover, when under a sense of present sin, that we need it now. No man can be renewed without as real and true a manifestation of the Holy Spirit’s energy as he felt at first, because the work is as great, and flesh and blood are as much in the way now as ever they were. Let thy personal weakness, O Christian, be an argument to make thee pray earnestly to thy God for help. Remember, David when he felt himself to be powerless, did not fold his arms or close his lips, but he hastened to the mercy-seat with “renew a right spirit within me.” Let not the doctrine that you, unaided, can do nothing, make you sleep; but let it be a goad in your side to drive you with an awful earnestness to Israel’s strong Helper. O that you may have grace to plead with God, as though you pleaded for your very life-”Lord, renew a right spirit within me.” He who sincerely prays to God to do this, will prove his honesty by using the means through which God works. Be much in prayer; live much upon the Word of God; kill the lusts which have driven your Lord from you; be careful to watch over the future uprisings of sin. The Lord has his own appointed ways; sit by the wayside and you will be ready when he passes by. Continue in all those blessed ordinances which will foster and nourish your dying graces; and, knowing that all the power must proceed from him, cease not to cry, “Renew a right spirit within me.”

C.H. Spurgeon

Posted on

They are Our Children


– Medical Kidnap – http://medicalkidnap.com

U.S. Government Seeks to Become an “Equal Partner” in Raising Your Children

Elementary school students getting on school bus

by Orissa Mora-Kent
Health Impact News

Will the U.S. government soon mandate that they become “equal partners” with parents in raising children?

According to a DRAFT POLICY STATEMENT ON FAMILY ENGAGEMENT FROM THE EARLY YEARS TO THE EARLY GRADES [1] issued by the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services and Education, American families’ Constitutional autonomy could be under calculated attack.

The draft policy explicitly states,

The purpose of this policy statement is to provide recommendations from the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Education (ED) on systematically engaging families in their children’s development, learning, and wellness, across early childhood and elementary education settings.

It is the position of the Departments that all early childhood programs and schools recognize families as equal partners in improving children’s development, learning and wellness across all settings, and over the course of their children’s developmental and educational experiences. [1]

Equal partners? Do you want the government as your equal partner in raising your children?

If this policy is implemented, will you be able to choose alternative forms of healthcare for your child or will Big Pharma step in to “engage” you in “caring” for your child’s “wellness”?

Will you be able to homeschool, or will the Department of Education step in to “encourage” you to send your child to a state-approved institutional “education” center of their own choosing?

Will you be able to go to the place of worship of your own choosing and guide your child’s spiritual development as you see fit, or will the state have a say in that too?

What does history teach us about government’s overreaching involvement in the education of youth? Are we listening, or will we allow a repeat of abuses?

Consider the draft policy plans to track your families every movement,

“Track family engagement data, including family-reported data
Local schools and programs should track progress on family engagement goals, as detailed in family engagement plans. The specific data collected will be based on program’s goals, but may include assessments of the program’s family friendly environment or teacher and provider- family relationships using valid and reliable tools.” [1]

Their Plan to Ensure Parental Compliance

The draft policy goes on to explain,

“The first step in systemically embedding effective family engagement practices in educational settings is to establish a culture where families are seen as assets and partners in children’s development, learning and wellness.” [1] (emphasis added)

Gleaning from Merriam-Websters definition of the word “engage,” [2] one wonders which form of “engagement” these Washington bureaucrats intend:

  • “to entangle or entrap in or as if in a snare or bog”
  • “to arrange to obtain the use or services of :  hire <engage a lawyer>”
  • to induce to participate <engaged the shy boy in conversation>”
  • to enter into contest or battle with <engage the enemy>”
  • to deal with especially at length

(emphasis added) [3]

Alex Newman, of The New American [3] also wrote an article covering the draft policy statement [1].

Newman writes:

Virtually no area of family life, including the health and “mental health” of parents, as well as a family’s “attitudes” and even its “housing,” would be free from government intrusion under the government’s Orwellian vision. Even vague notions of “family wellness,” as defined by bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., would be put under a government microscope. “Parenting interventions [4]” will be used to ensure compliance. [2] (emphasis added)

What will happen to noncompliant families? Will the Feds send their CPS strong-arm into your home to remove all of your children altogether from your care if you are “noncompliant” towards their “equal partnership” aka “parenting interventions”?

Newman states:

Big Psychiatry [5] will also play a major role. “Ensure constant monitoring and communication regarding children’s social-emotional and behavioral health,” the document demands. “Ensure that children’s social-emotional and behavioral needs are met and that families and staff are connected with relevant community partners, such as early childhood mental health consultants and children’s medical homes.” In the policy statement’s “recommendations” for states — much of which will be imposed through federal bribes — state governments are told to “expand early childhood mental health consultation efforts.”

There are lots of “recommendations” — nudge nudge, wink wink — for local governments, too. If parent “partners” are not partnering in a way approved of by Big Brother, for example, local officials should “identify supports that will be offered to parents such as evidence-based parenting interventions.” By interventions, they mean exactly what you think they mean. Local arms of Big Brother should also seek out “community partners” that can “provide comprehensive services, such as health, mental health, or housing assistance to meet families’ basic needs,” the document explains. [2]

Newman also warns:

Thinking that Big Brother is going to align its “strategies” and “expectations” to those of parents — rather than the other way around — is naïve at best. [2]

Consider some of the documented, far reaching, implications of Big Brother “helping” you raise your children.

Just to name a few, consider some of these previously published stories on MedicalKidnap.com:

Educational interventions

Education Secretary Wants Government Boarding Schools: “Certain Kids We Should Have 24/7”  [6]The Ultimate Irony: The Decimation of Families to Protect the Children  [7]CPS & Police Taser, Handcuff Parents: Enter Home of Homeschool Family without Warrant  [8]CPS interventions

Texas CPS Kidnaps 19-month Old Child for “Failure to Thrive” [9]South Carolina Family Destroyed: Forced Vaccines, Sexual Abuse, Bruises Show Harm in State Care  [10]Does the State Ever Have a “Right” to Remove Children from a Home? [11]Big Pharma interventions

10 Year Old Amish Girl Taken Away from Parents for Refusing Chemotherapy by Ohio Hospital  [12]As a Parent, You Don’t have the Right to Choose Cancer Treatment for Your Child  [13]Medical Kidnapping in the U.S. – Kidnapping Children for Drug Trials  [14]Religious/Medical interventions

Children Taken Away from Christian Parents to Receive Forced Vaccinations  [15]Special Needs Sisters Kidnapped From Homeschooling Christian Family [16]Breastfed, Homebirthed Babies Taken Away From Parents For Not Using Hospital  [17]

Federal Government Wants to Come into Your Home

Newman says the Feds want to visit your house:

The Obama administration also wants to make sure that Big Brother’s “partners” are being regularly checked up on — even at their homes. The document calls for various government programs to visit your house. Seriously. “To support ongoing relationship building with families, programs and schools should conduct periodic home visits so that teachers and families can get to know each other and communicate about children’s goals, strengths, challenges, and progress,” the policy statement says, adding that if home visits are not possible for “all families,” other requirements should be imposed. [2]

How much erosion of their rights will American families tolerate?

Newman points out:

Admittedly, a major part of the problem is that many parents have bought into the notion that they can, or even should, hand over their children to government “professionals” and “experts” to be raised, monitored, tracked, manipulated, and “developed.” But Big Brother has certainly played a giant role in encouraging that dangerous idea, most recently illustrated in the policy statement referring to families as “equal partners” in child rearing. Even setting aside the fact that the federal government has zero constitutional authority to meddle in child rearing or education, history suggests the results could be tragic. [2] (emphasis added)

American Children Hang in the Balance: Parents vs Nanny-Government

Newman goes on to explain:

The Obama-backed community schools [18], dubbed parental-replacement centers by critics, are already in full swing, and set for a massive expansion, thanks to support by most Republicans in Congress. Indeed, as The New American reported recently, these “full-service community schools” are set to play a key role in the broader agenda [19], overseeing every aspect of children’s lives ranging from dentistry and nutrition to “wellbeing” and mental health. The recently passed “Every Student Succeeds Act”  [20]also contains provisions for deploying “mental health” programs against parents and even community members. Obama’s recently retired Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who boasts of turning your children into “green” and “global” citizens [21] with UNESCO using the “weapon” of education, even called for government to have “some kids” 24 hours a day, seven days per week. [22] [2]

Parents, the message laid out in the draft policy is clear,

Big Brother is in charge of raising children, and that parents may be called upon to help out as ‘partners.’  [2]

Critics of Draft Policy Express Outrage

Newman states:

So far, the joint policy statement by Obama’s HHS and Education Department has flown largely under the radar. But as word spreads, critics are expressing outrage about Big Brother’s accelerating intrusions into family life and child rearing. [2]

Constitutionally minded watchdog groups such as The People, LLC have “blasted” the policy draft. [2] The People, LLC “has dealt extensively with education and parental rights at the state and local level and has been successful in drafting laws recognizing and protecting parental rights in education,” according to Alex Newman of The New American.

A letter that has widely circulated among activists and education researchers via the Internet, in response to the draft policy, is the dissent of one “furious mother,” Sara Wood. Sara said,

“I am a Catholic and my rights and duties as a Catholic parent are to educate my children and that I am only a cooperator of that education with the love of God the Creator, NOT with the government, federal or state,” [2]

Will others speak up?

Newman urges:

The American people must resist Big Brother’s unwanted and unconstitutional advances at every level of government. [2]

Sources and References

[1] U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, DRAFT POLICY STATEMENT ON FAMILY ENGAGEMENT FROM THE EARLY YEARS TO THE EARLY GRADEShttps://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ecd/draft_hhs_ed_family_engagement.pdf [1]

[2] Feds Seek Home Visits, Calling Parents “Equal Partners,” Alex Newman, The New American. http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/family/item/22530-feds-seek-home-visits-calling-parents-equal-partners [3]

[3] “Engage,” Merriam-Webster. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/engage

Article printed from Medical Kidnap: http://medicalkidnap.com

URL to article: http://medicalkidnap.com/2016/02/18/u-s-government-seeks-to-become-an-equal-partner-in-raising-your-children/

URLs in this post:

[1] DRAFT POLICY STATEMENT ON FAMILY ENGAGEMENT FROM THE EARLY YEARS TO THE EARLY GRADES: https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ecd/draft_hhs_ed_family_engagement.pdf

[2] Merriam-Websters definition of the word “engage,”: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/engage

[3] The New American: http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/family/item/22530-feds-seek-home-visits-calling-parents-equal-partners

[4] Parenting interventions: http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/tta-system/family/docs/compendium-of-parenting.pdf

[5] Big Psychiatry: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/item/1774-psychiatry-s-brave-new-world

[6] Education Secretary Wants Government Boarding Schools: “Certain Kids We Should Have 24/7” : http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/07/20/education-secretary-wants-government-boarding-schools-certain-kids-we-should-have-247/

[7] The Ultimate Irony: The Decimation of Families to Protect the Children : http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/05/01/the-ultimate-irony-the-decimation-of-families-to-protect-the-children/

[8] CPS & Police Taser, Handcuff Parents: Enter Home of Homeschool Family without Warrant : http://medicalkidnap.com/2014/12/10/cps-police-taser-handcuff-parents-enter-home-of-homeschool-family-without-warrant/

[9] Texas CPS Kidnaps 19-month Old Child for “Failure to Thrive”: http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/05/06/texas-cps-kidnaps-19-month-old-child-for-failure-to-thrive/

[10] South Carolina Family Destroyed: Forced Vaccines, Sexual Abuse, Bruises Show Harm in State Care : http://medicalkidnap.com/2016/02/16/south-carolina-family-destroyed-forced-vaccines-sexual-abuse-bruises-show-harm-in-state-care/

[11] Does the State Ever Have a “Right” to Remove Children from a Home? : http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/01/26/does-the-state-ever-have-a-right-to-remove-children-from-a-home/

[12] 10 Year Old Amish Girl Taken Away from Parents for Refusing Chemotherapy by Ohio Hospital : http://medicalkidnap.com/2013/10/08/10-year-old-amish-girl-taken-away-from-parents-for-refusing-chemotherapy-by-ohio-hospital/

[13] As a Parent, You Don’t have the Right to Choose Cancer Treatment for Your Child : http://medicalkidnap.com/2011/09/24/as-a-parent-you-dont-have-the-right-to-choose-cancer-treatment-for-your-child/

[14] Medical Kidnapping in the U.S. – Kidnapping Children for Drug Trials : http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/05/16/medical-kidnapping-in-the-u-s-kidnapping-children-for-drug-trials/

[15] Children Taken Away from Christian Parents to Receive Forced Vaccinations : http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/02/12/children-taken-away-from-christian-parents-to-receive-forced-vaccinations/

[16] Special Needs Sisters Kidnapped From Homeschooling Christian Family: http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/05/02/daughters-removed-from-home-because-of-their-parents-christian-faith/

[17] Breastfed, Homebirthed Babies Taken Away From Parents For Not Using Hospital : http://medicalkidnap.com/2014/11/25/breastfed-homebirthed-babies-taken-away-from-parents-for-not-using-hospital/

[18]  Obama-backed community schools: http://thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/21395-obamas-community-schools-aim-to-replace-parents

[19]  these “full-service community schools” are set to play a key role in the broader agenda: http://thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/22354-obama-and-gop-unleash-community-schools-to-replace-parents

[20] recently passed “Every Student Succeeds Act” : http://thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/22258-white-house-and-gop-conspired-on-education-takeover

[21]  boasts of turning your children into “green” and “global” citizens: http://thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/17930-common-core-and-un-agenda-21-mass-producing-green-global-serfs

[22] called for government to have “some kids” 24 hours a day, seven days per week.: http://thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/21209-education-secretary-s-dangerous-public-boarding-schools-agenda

[23] Image: http://www.tropicaltraditions.com/medical-kidnapping.htm

[24] Image: http://www.amazon.com/Medical-Kidnapping-Threat-Family-America-ebook/dp/B01C9HRG2G/

[25] Image: http://network.sophiamedia.com/openx/www/delivery/ck.php?n=af3e0a62&cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_HERE

Posted on

Let’s Build a Prayer Chapel!


dom-1707634_640I know a lot of you pray.  It is a big part of your life to pray.  When you see the darkness we live in, you don’t panic, you pray.  You have learned that the most powerful form of warfare is prayer.  You have become Prayer Warriors.  I have a burden to build a Prayer Chapel on the internet.  It will be a special place for the saints to go to pray, be inspired and to learn.  It will be a place where young believers can go to learn to be Prayer Warriors.  What a prospect!  A School of Prayer Warriors!

In Elisha’s days the school of the prophets got too small.  Elisha led them in building a new structure(2 Kings 6:1-7).  Allow me to take just a few words for our purpose:  “Let us go, we pray thee, unto Jordan, and take thence every man a beam, and let us make us a place there, where we may dwell.”

How would you envision such a Chapel?  In Europe and even here in Hot Springs, I have visited some beautiful Chapels, built at great expense to express confidence in prayer and encouragement to the burdened heart to come alone in the Presence of Jesus Christ.  I have fond and blessed memories of those chapels.  But I have a greater vision.  It is a place where daily many thousands are gathering around the Throne of Grace in worshipful prayer, carrying out the business of King Jesus in His Kingdom.

Now back to “every man a beam”.  What is your beam?  What could you provide?  What kind of building materials do you have?  Let me probe your spirit.  What are your favorite passages of Scripture?  I mean the ones where you have often found the supernatural answers you needed, or the courage to keep on praying.  I would like to know the twelve passages which have encouraged you most.  You might be amazed how they could help others prevail in prayer!  Again,what about great quotes from the powerful prayer warriors of the past like George Mueller, Charles Spurgeon, E.M. Bounds or Edward Payson, just to name a few.  They had a way of moving heaven, and moving men’s hearts to trust heaven!  Again, what is the greatest sermon you ever heard on prayer?  It still inspires you today, and that is why you remember it.  It would probably inspire other.  Also there is so much written material which can inspire us to pray.  Personal testimonies can also be a great motivation to pray!  Well, I hope you get the message.  That is what I mean by your beam.

How do we do it?  First, the Holy Spirit is the only One who has the architectural skill and wisdo to do it.  This is the great part.  He lives in each of us, and He can show us our beam and show us where to put it.  In a practical way, you simply send to me your material and I will by His grace build an internet Prayer Room or Chapel  where people can go 24/7 to be blessed, inspired and become a blessing to many.

What do you think?  I will need help as the material grows.  Pray over this little appeal and contact me with a PM on Facebook, or by email at halstan@gmail.com.  We are building a new site on the internet for the Chapel!

Bro Hal

Posted on

LIVING, LOVING TRUTH


“For the truths sake, which dwelleth in us, and shall be with us for ever.”
– 2Jo_1:2

Once let the truth of God obtain an entrance into the human heart and subdue the whole man unto itself, no power human or infernal can dislodge it. We entertain it not as a guest but as the master of the house-this is a Christian necessity, he is no Christian who doth not thus believe. Those who feel the vital power of the gospel, and know the might of the Holy Ghost as he opens, applies, and seals the Lord’s Word, would sooner be torn to pieces than be rent away from the gospel of their salvation. What a thousand mercies are wrapped up in the assurance that the truth will be with us for ever; will be our living support, our dying comfort, our rising song, our eternal glory; this is Christian privilege, without it our faith were little worth. Some truths we outgrow and leave behind, for they are but rudiments and lessons for beginners, but we cannot thus deal with Divine truth, for though it is sweet food for babes, it is in the highest sense strong meat for men. The truth that we are sinners is painfully with us to humble and make us watchful; the more blessed truth that whosoever believeth on the Lord Jesus shall be saved, abides with us as our hope and joy. Experience, so far from loosening our hold of the doctrines of grace, has knit us to them more and more firmly; our grounds and motives for believing are now more strong, more numerous than ever, and we have reason to expect that it will be so till in death we clasp the Saviour in our arms.
Wherever this abiding love of truth can be discovered, we are bound to exercise our love. No narrow circle can contain our gracious sympathies, wide as the election of grace must be our communion of heart. Much of error may be mingled with truth received, let us war with the error but still love the brother for the measure of truth which we see in him; above all let us love and spread the truth ourselves.

C.H. Spurgeon

Posted on

Washing the Disciples’ Feet


“He began to wash the disciples’ feet.”
– Joh_13:5
The Lord Jesus loves his people so much, that every day he is still doing for them much that is analogous to washing their soiled feet. Their poorest actions he accepts; their deepest sorrow he feels; their slenderest wish he hears, and their every transgression he forgives. He is still their servant as well as their Friend and Master. He not only performs majestic deeds for them, as wearing the mitre on his brow, and the precious jewels glittering on his breastplate, and standing up to plead for them, but humbly, patiently, he yet goes about among his people with the basin and the towel. He does this when he puts away from us day by day our constant infirmities and sins. Last night, when you bowed the knee, you mournfully confessed that much of your conduct was not worthy of your profession; and even tonight, you must mourn afresh that you have fallen again into the selfsame folly and sin from which special grace delivered you long ago; and yet Jesus will have great patience with you; he will hear your confession of sin; he will say, “I will, be thou clean”; he will again apply the blood of sprinkling, and speak peace to your conscience, and remove every spot. It is a great act of eternal love when Christ once for all absolves the sinner, and puts him into the family of God; but what condescending patience there is when the Saviour with much long-suffering bears the oft recurring follies of his wayward disciple; day by day, and hour by hour, washing away the multiplied transgressions of his erring but yet beloved child! To dry up a flood of rebellion is something marvellous, but to endure the constant dropping of repeated offences-to bear with a perpetual trying of patience, this is divine indeed! While we find comfort and peace in our Lord’s daily cleansing, its legitimate influence upon us will be to increase our watchfulness, and quicken our desire for holiness. Is it so?

C.H. Spurgeon

Posted on

HOW DO WE DEFINE PARENTAL RIGHTS?


HOW DO WE DEFINE PARENTAL RIGHTS?
By Brian Shilhavy

 

So how do we define “parental rights”?

This seems to be a hotly debated question on the Internet these days, especially when we publish stories of medical kidnappings.

But are “parental rights” any less than “human rights,” as already defined by the Constitution of the United States of America, and specifically the Bill of Rights?

If an alleged murderer, rapist, terrorist and others are afforded due process of the law as protected under our Constitution, why not parents? Is it really lawful to allow such authority to social service workers, empowered by local law enforcement, to remove children from the custody of their parents, in cases where neither the children nor the parents agree to such separation and it must be accomplished by force against their will, with no arrest made or charges filed?

Sadly, the lawful rights of American citizens are almost never discussed in such situations in the conversations and debates we have seen in social media and the Internet when discussing these stories. Most people start with an assumption that the State has a right in some situations to forego the Constitution and due process of the law to “protect children.”
Two Recent Cases

Let’s give two recent examples from stories that appeared in the mainstream media recently, and have been highly publicized.

The first one involved a family from Maryland. Both parents are scientists, and they follow a parenting style called “free-range” parenting. They allow their two children, ages 10 and 6, to walk together without them to places in their neighborhood, such as the neighborhood park. Police picked them up walking home one day, due to a complaint, and CPS came in and threatened to take custody of the children, forcing the father to sign a “safety plan” they drafted. The father said he would like to consult an attorney first, and the CPS employees allegedly threatened to remove the children from the home if he did not comply. So he did. Story and video here.

When we published this story, almost everyone wanted to debate whether or not these parents were right in allowing young children to walk the streets around their home during daylight hours.

But is that the issue we should be debating here? Was any crime committed? Were there any complaints filed against the parents that could lead to an arrest and charges pressed? The children did not file a complaint. The parents did not file a complaint. In short, were their Constitutional rights violated or not?

Yes! If we want to start judging others, based on our own interpretation of what constitutes good parenting or not, as to when the Constitution and due process of law should be abandoned, we are advocating tyranny, not rule by democratic law.

The second case involves the Stanley family in Arkansas. Social services allegedly visited the home after an anonymous complaint. The initial visit allegedly found everything in good order, and the complaint unfounded.

However, they allegedly returned later with a search warrant for a mineral substance that the FDA has announced they think is dangerous (although not illegal). After searching the home for 5 hours and interviewing all 7 children, the children were removed from the home, against their will (or at least most of them) and the will of their parents.

right-to-remove-children-from-a-home/#sthash.mWqDYzH3.dpufat the children were being held under charges of “abuse,” and not due to the mineral supplement mentioned in the warrant. But no complaint was filed, and no arrest was made. It was later revealed that some of the older children, including one who does not live with the family any longer, do not apparently agree with the parents’ religious views or parenting style.

Again, almost all of the conversation or debating involving this story was around whether or not the children were in danger and should have been removed. Were the parents and younger children’s Constitutional rights violated?

Yes! Once again, due process of law was not followed, and the alleged victims, the younger children, were allegedly traumatized by being force ably removed from their parents against their will, and the will of their parents.

Whether or not the parents did “abuse” their children is not the main issue here, but whether or not there was reason to abandon due process of the law, and Constitutional rights. If we afford due process of law and civil rights to alleged murderers, rapists, terrorists, and others (who can also be a threat to children), then why not to parents? Why can’t the alleged “abuser” be removed from the home, arrested, and charged with a crime, instead of removing the alleged victims and traumatizing them? (We actually answer this question above.)

In both these cases, if the State acted outside the bounds of the law and the family’s Constitutional rights were violated, it is properly called “state-sponsored kidnapping.” Also, in both cases, the parents could have acted more wisely to try and prevent these state-sponsored kidnappings by understanding their Constitutional rights, and refusing to talk to the social workers and police the first time they showed up.

Of course with medical kidnappings, as can be seen above in the case with baby Sammy and the parents in Sacramento, it is almost impossible today to refuse the complaint of a medical authority if one takes their child to a medical facility, and disagrees with the “Holy Doctors” who are worshiped much like deities in our culture today.

If we are going to change this system of tyranny involving state-sponsored kidnappings, we must wise up and understand what due process of law means, and what our rights are under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. We must STOP debating the merits of each of these state-sponsored kidnappings, and understand that if due process of the law is violated, then they are ALL wrong.
Who Will Stand up for Parental Rights?

As we asked above, are “parental rights” really any less then all basic “human rights” afforded to citizens of the United States under the Constitution? Do parents have less rights than suspected murderers, rapists, terrorists, etc.? If the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States protect suspected criminals from abuse of government power, do not those same rights apply to parents who are accused of being “abusive”? Does the State ever have a right to remove children from their family without following the same due process of law applied to others suspected of criminal activity?

Sadly, one group that would like to be known as a national group standing for “Parental Rights” apparently feels the State has a right to take children away from their parents if those parents are seen as “unfit.” In a discussion about the Stanley Family story in Arkansas on their Facebook Page, they made the following statement after the sheriff department issued their statement to the press on alleged abuses by the parents, as a reason for why they removed the children from the family:

“While we stand by the right of fit parents to make decisions for their children, there are also times when the state must intervene where parents have been abusive or negligent.” (Popular National Parental Rights Organization)

Does this statement sound like it comes from a group that wants to defend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, protecting “parental rights”? As of the time of this writing, there still have been no formal charges made, nor arrests made, with either parent of the Stanley Family, and yet this “Parental Rights” group believes that the State’s actions are legitimate if the parents are “abusive or negligent” by someone’s standards of “fit” or “unfit” parents.

Unfortunately, that is called “tyranny” or “fascism,” and such abuse of civil rights is why our founding fathers wrote the Constitution and added the Bill of Rights.

It would appear to me, that most Americans have lost their way in understanding these important liberties that so many have sacrificed their lives to defend. Until we decide to stand up for these rights that are written into the Constitution of the United States of America, don’t expect much to change. Many brave men and women have given up their very lives to protect these rights, and we should not give them up so easily.

Posted on

State Never Has a Right to Remove Children From A Home


Does the State Ever Have a “Right” to Remove Children from a Home?

Taking-Stanley-Children2 [1]

Are authorities operating within the law when children are removed from a home when no charges have been filed, and no arrest has been made? Photo from Bringthestanleykidshome Facebook Page [2].

Brian Shilhavy
Health Impact News

When does the State have the right to remove children from a home where they are living with their parents?

We have been covering medical kidnapping stories now on MedicalKidnap.com for over a year. This website was started to document the many stories that were coming to our attention where families were losing their children to the State, and the foster care system, over medical disagreements. In many of these cases, their children were taken away simply because they disagreed with a doctor, or wanted to take their children to a different doctor to get a second opinion.

Does the State have a right to take children away from parents for what is now being called “medical abuse,” a term used by medical authorities when parents disagree with doctors, or want to seek a second opinion? Most of the people who follow MedicalKidnap would state “no.” And we have published many stories now showing that this is indeed happening all across the country, in every state, every single day.

But what about in other situations? Are there any situations where authorities should step in and remove children from their homes, taking them away from their parents?

Judging from comments made in social media from many commenting on some of our articles, I think it is safe to assume that the majority of people in the United States today feel that in certain situations, the State has a legitimate right to step in and take children away from their families, removing them from their homes.

However, I would like to suggest that the Constitution of the United States of America protects the rights of individuals and families, and that it is never lawful for social services to remove a child from their biological parents, taking them out of their home and making them a ward of the State, removing legal custody from their parents. This phenomena is a recent development in the history of our country, and if it is not lawful to take such actions, we are correct in calling such actions “state-sponsored kidnappings.”

The Bill of Rights

bill of rights next to Bible

One of the most important legal documents in our nation’s history is the first ten amendments to our nation’s Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights. These “rights” were adopted during the meeting of the first U.S. Congress in 1789, and ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures on December 15, 1791. They can be read here [3].

Here is part of the text of the Preamble, stating the purpose of these “rights”:

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

Clearly, the Bill of Rights, and other amendments to the U.S. Constitution that followed, were intended to protect citizens of the United States from abuses in government. Is the removal of children from their home by force, especially in situations where neither the parents nor the children themselves want to be removed, a clear violation of the Constitution of the United States?

Again, most people would probably answer that question: only sometimes. And then the reasons people would give as to which situations children should be removed, and which situations they should not, would be hotly debated.

However, I would suggest that under the laws of the U.S. Constitution, in all situations where children are removed from their parents against the will of the parents and the children, that this is unlawful. Let’s take a look at the basis of this premise.

Due Process of Law – Criminal Justice

Cornell University Law School states:

The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment says to the federal government that no one shall be “deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause, to describe a legal obligation of all states. These words have as their central promise an assurance that all levels of American government must operate within the law (“legality”) and provide fair procedures. (Source [4].)

The process of taking away a person’s liberty or freedom, such as removing them from their home and confining them (as in a jail or prison), is known as “the criminal justice system.”

Because the “due process of law” clause in the U.S. Constitution applies to all 50 states, the implementation of the criminal justice system operates very similarly in all 50 states. The criminal justice system includes law enforcement, the judicial system, and the “corrections” system.

The U.S. Constitution protects citizens from abuse of power within the criminal justice system. Here is a summary, in general, of how the system is supposed to operate within the bounds of the law set forth in the Constitution, and specifically the Bill of Rights:

Law Enforcement

1. A complaint is made against someone.

2. Law enforcement investigates the complaint to determine if there is enough evidence to support the claim. If they find evidence to support the complaint, they might make an arrest and incarcerate someone.

The Constitution sets limits to prevent abuses in power during the law enforcement process. Law enforcement cannot enter a home or private property without a warrant issued by a judge, for example. If an arrest is made, the defendant has the right to remain silent and not talk to the law enforcement officers, and the person has a right to consult with an attorney.

3. After someone is incarcerated, they must immediately be brought before a judge to press charges, and a judge must determine if there is enough evidence to hold the defendant until they can face their accusers in a trial in a court of law. If a judge determines there is enough evidence, the judge will determine if bail or bond is required to ensure the defendant appears at the trial.

Again, the Constitution was put in place to protect U.S. citizens’ rights during the judicial process. They are to be given a speedy trial, and they have a right to a jury trial among their peers, for example.

4. After a trial, a person is declared guilty or innocent. If guilty, punishment is implemented.

Now, given this admittedly over-simplified summary of the criminal justice system and the protections guaranteed under the Constitution, when children are forceably removed from their home against their will or the will of their parents, based on a complaint only (such as from a physician who did not like them seeking a second opinion), is the Constitution and due process of law being followed?

Absolutely not.

Is it Legal to Forceably Remove Children from Their Parents Against their Will?

When it comes to parents and their children, why is the public today so quick to abandon the Constitution and due process of the law? Most would argue, “because the children need to be protected.”

Are we so naive as to think the founders of the Constitution and legal scholars over the years did not consider cases where children were in danger within their home, so that in modern times we have to give great authority to social workers to take on this task?

Consider the case of alleged abuse in other cases where children are not involved.

For example, if there were a complaint by a woman against an alleged “abusive” husband or partner; who would be removed from the home by law enforcement if an investigation warranted it? Would the alleged victim, in this case the woman making the complaint, be the one removed from the home?

Of course not! The person the complaint was filed against would be removed, all the while having their Constitutional rights protected, by arresting them, reading their Miranda rights, and bringing them before a judge to face the charges. The alleged victim would remain in the home. That is the legal process.

But this due process of law is not followed with social services and local law enforcement when they remove children from their homes. In these cases, which we are reading increasingly in the news every day, the alleged victims are removed from the home (the children), while the alleged abusers (the parents) are left in the home, and in most cases with no criminal charges filed.

This is a clear violation of the Constitution and a family’s civil rights.

If you are learning about this issue for the first time, and find it hard to believe that this actually happens in the United States of America, watch this video captured by parents in a home in the Sacramento area of California, where police and CPS restrained the father outside, and then forced their way into the home (without a warrant issued by a judge) to remove an infant child from the mother’s own arms, simply because they had left a hospital without a doctor’s approval (who wanted to perform immediate heart surgery), and took him to a different hospital for a second opinion:

In the unedited video above, the entire incident of Child Protective Services and the Sacramento Police using force to take away Anna and Alex Nikolayev’s baby is recorded. Anna and Alex had received poor care for their baby at a local hospital, and when the hospital wanted to do heart surgery on their infant, they wanted a second opinion and took the baby to a different hospital.

The first hospital did not approve of this, and did not discharge the child. Therefore, they called Child Protection Services. The parents, meanwhile, had taken the baby to a second hospital, where the child was discharged that night by a physician, since there was no immediate danger, and the surgery was not imminent.

But, the next day, Child Protection Services and the Sacramento Police showed up at the parents home to take away their baby. The husband was outside at the time, and he was forced to the ground so that the police could enter the home by force. The mother, seeing what was happening outside, set up the camera to record the whole incident (see video above.)

The social workers would not even tell the mother where they were taking the baby. The police took the baby out of the mother’s arms by force, and only after the social workers had already left with the baby did they allow the mother to show the police the hospital documents showing that their baby was properly discharged by a physician from the second hospital. The police did not seem to care what the facts were at all, and gave full authority to CPS to remove the child. (Full story here [5].)

Why is Due Process of Law Not Followed by Child Protection Services?

The fact that the due process of law is not being followed, and that the Constitutional rights of families are clearly being violated in situations where social services removes children from the custody of their parents against their will, and against the will of the parents, is a fact that cannot be denied.

So why is it happening?

There are multiple reasons why this is happening, but they are very easy to understand.

First, when the due process of the law is followed to arrest someone, hold them in confinement, bring them before a judge to press charges, and then follow the judicial process of bringing about a “speedy trial,” all of these actions are a burden to the state. In other words, it costs money.

When someone is arrested on suspicion of murder, rape, assault, robbery, and other serious crimes that are a threat to the public, those arrested enter into the criminal justice system, and have rights that are protected under our Constitution to ensure they are not victimized by the over-reach of government abuse.

Unfortunately, these alleged criminals are afforded more rights than parents are today, who have their children removed from their home or custody with no arrest and no trial.

One of the reasons why this is happening so frequently in the United States today is because once the children are taken into State custody, they become an asset to the State. What this means is that all the child’s expenses are now paid via federal funds, including medical costs via Medicaid. There are also federal funds in place for foster care. The longer a child remains in State custody, the more funds that state can collect.

To understand more about the potential financial motives and incentives to remove children from families, see:

The Medical Kidnapping Business: Bilking Medicaid [6]

Medical Kidnapping Business: Judges Skirting the Law for Federal Funds [7]

Medical Kidnapping: Billion Dollar Adoption Business [8]

Secondly, when children become a ward of the State, and all of their medical bills are paid for via Medicaid, doctors are free to legally experiment on these children and include them in drug trials, without having to obtain the parents’ permission. This situation is becoming so widespread, that several states are looking at adopting legislation [9] to prevent this medical experimentation from happening, including one national bill [10]. For more information about using children in the custody of the State for drug trials, see:

Medical Kidnapping in the U.S. – Kidnapping Children for Drug Trials [11]

Attorneys are Fighting Back

shawn-mcmillan

There are attorneys all across the United States who are true family advocates, and are fighting back. Unfortunately, they are in the minority. The entire family court and juvenile court system throughout the United States employs so many judges and attorneys, attorneys who are appointed by the court to represent parents and children who cannot afford private attorneys, that there just are not enough private attorneys available to fight the current social services system taking away family rights.

Attorney Shawn McMillan of California is one such attorney, and recently he made headline news in California for filing a class action lawsuit against Riverside County in Southern California. (See: “Street Fighter” Attorney Takes On Riverside California CPS with Class Action Lawsuit [12].)

Attorney McMillan is representing a federal class action lawsuit against “Riverside County, Juvenile Dependency Investigator Karla Torres, Torres’s supervisor Felicia M. Butler, and all similarly situated county social workers and investigators” for taking “a newborn baby from her mother without a reason or a warrant,” and for making “a habit of it.” The suit claims that the Southern California County takes “thousands of babies” without cause. (Story here [12].)

Attorney McMillan was successful in prosecuting the city of San Diego last year (2014) and won a $225,000.00 lawsuit on behalf of a teenage mother who had her baby taken away illegally.

The City of San Diego will pay $225,000 to settle a civil suit filed by a teen mom who lost parental rights to her daughter just days after the child’s birth. Johnneisha Kemper says San Diego Police officers took her baby away in 2008, just days after she gave birth at the age of 16, claiming she was unfit to raise the newborn. Now, the city of San Diego has approved a settlement in the civil rights lawsuit filed alleging the SDPD took the child without threat or warrant. (Story here [13].)

When Attorney McMillan approached the San Diego Police department to let them know that their actions were not legal, they allegedly responded that it did not matter, and that they would continue to seize children away from their parents under the direction of social services, and just pay the fines in court settlements like the one Mr. McMillan had just won. (See: San Diego Police: “We’re Not Changing Anything” – Seizure of Children to Continue [13].)

Advice to Parents and Families: Know Your Constitutional Rights!

So what can parents and families do to protect themselves from unlawful seizure of their children??

The first step is to know your Constitutional rights, particularly your rights under the 5th Amendment.

One of the typical mistakes parents and family members make is to talk to social services representatives or even police if they come to your home to ask questions. Under the 5th Amendment, you do NOT have to talk to them or answer any questions, even if they come to your home with a warrant for your arrest or to search your home. Typically, an initial visit to “investigate” will not have any warrants, and in such cases you are not obligated to talk to them or let them enter your home.

In the video below, which has been viewed on YouTube in a couple of places many millions of times, Mr. James Duane, a professor at Regent Law School and a former defense attorney, tells you why you should never talk to the police under any circumstances, and that this right is protected under the 5th Amendment. Some quotes:

I really want to do something that’s been on my mind for a while, to stand up and proudly say: “God bless America, God bless the Bill of Rights, and thank God for the 5th Amendment.”

I’m not ashamed to say I’m proud of the 5th Amendment, and I’m proud to admit on camera and on the Internet that I will never talk to any police officer under any circumstances.

[Let’s] go to a real expert, Justice Robert Jackson, a prosecutor’s prosecutor, who like me  began his private practice in Buffalo New York years before I did, and after that he served as general counsel for the Bureau of Internal Revenue, the US Department Treasury the Securities Exchange Commission assistant, the US Attorney General, and later the solicitor general and the Attorney General of the United States, and then the chief US prosecutor for the Nuremberg trials.

That’s an impressive resume!

Years later, when he was a justice on the Supreme Court, just as Jackson stated:  “quote any lawyer worth his salt, [he] will tell the suspect, his client, in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances.”

There’s the title of my talk I’m here to explain to you, the surprising and somewhat counter-intuitive and admittedly unlikely reasons why Justice Jackson was right.

Do Not Talk to Police Under Any Circumstances:

Since we have started publishing these medical kidnapping stories, we have received many emails and comments from people who have been affected by this issue. One of them was the wife of a CPS employee who wanted us to share what she tells as many people as she can who have experienced losing their children to CPS:

I would highly recommend that you include the following information on your pages that talk about the abuse that CPS does to families by taking children away needlessly. It will help the parents tremendously if they will hire a private lawyer. Not the court-appointed lawyer, but a private lawyer, one who knows CPS.

My husband, who works for CPS, and also recently got his master’s in Social Work, said that there are virtually no children from middle and upper class families in CPS, and that the workers tremble and make sure they are careful what they do when they see a family has a private lawyer. Also, the judge is more likely to view the family favorably if he sees a private lawyer.

Many families would say or do (or neglect to say or do) things that would hurt (or help) them in their case, because they don’t know the law. They will believe what they are told, even if the information is not correct, because they don’t know better.

It is absolutely crucial that parents get a lawyer to help them with their case, and that they sue the agencies involved (including policemen and hospitals, if necessary) if any unlawful actions were taken against them. If the parents don’t have the money, they should start a fund for friends and family and community to help them out.

searchwarrantreqd

A sign that can be reproduced and posted at one’s home. Courtesy of Home School Legal Defense Association.

know-your-rights [14]

These are the Constitutional rights all suspected criminals have. Do parents have fewer rights than these??

Source: Online-Paralegal-Programs.com [15]

How Do We Define Parental Rights?

So how do we define “parental rights”?

This seems to be a hotly debated question on the Internet these days, especially when we publish stories of medical kidnappings.

But are “parental rights” any less than “human rights,” as already defined by the Constitution of the United States of America, and specifically the Bill of Rights?

If an alleged murderer, rapist, terrorist and others are afforded due process of the law as protected under our Constitution, why not parents? Is it really lawful to allow such authority to social service workers, empowered by local law enforcement, to remove children from the custody of their parents, in cases where neither the children nor the parents agree to such separation and it must be accomplished by force against their will, with no arrest made or charges filed?

Sadly, the lawful rights of American citizens are almost never discussed in such situations in the conversations and debates we have seen in social media and the Internet when discussing these stories. Most people start with an assumption that the State has a right in some situations to forego the Constitution and due process of the law to “protect children.”

Two Recent Cases

Let’s give two recent examples from stories that appeared in the mainstream media recently, and have been highly publicized.

Meitiv [16]

The first one involved a family from Maryland. Both parents are scientists, and they follow a parenting style called “free-range” parenting. They allow their two children, ages 10 and 6, to walk together without them to places in their neighborhood, such as the neighborhood park. Police picked them up walking home one day, due to a complaint, and CPS came in and threatened to take custody of the children, forcing the father to sign a “safety plan” they drafted. The father said he would like to consult an attorney first, and the CPS employees allegedly threatened to remove the children from the home if he did not comply. So he did. Story and video here [16].

When we published this story, almost everyone wanted to debate whether or not these parents were right in allowing young children to walk the streets around their home during daylight hours.

But is that the issue we should be debating here? Was any crime committed? Were there any complaints filed against the parents that could lead to an arrest and charges pressed? The children did not file a complaint. The parents did not file a complaint. In short, were their Constitutional rights violated or not?

Yes! If we want to start judging others, based on our own interpretation of what constitutes good parenting or not, as to when the Constitution and due process of law should be abandoned, we are advocating tyranny, not rule by democratic law.

stanley-family-photo [17]

The second case involves the Stanley family in Arkansas [17]. Social services allegedly visited the home after an anonymous complaint. The initial visit allegedly found everything in good order, and the complaint unfounded.

However, they allegedly returned later with a search warrant for a mineral substance [18] that the FDA has announced they think is dangerous (although not illegal). After searching the home for 5 hours and interviewing all 7 children, the children were removed from the home, against their will (or at least most of them) and the will of their parents.

After the children had been taken into custody, with no charges filed against the parents, the sheriff issued a press release stating that the children were being held under charges of “abuse,” and not due to the mineral supplement [18] mentioned in the warrant. But no complaint was filed, and no arrest was made. It was later revealed that some of the older children, including one who does not live with the family any longer, do not apparently agree with the parents’ religious views or parenting style.

Again, almost all of the conversation or debating involving this story was around whether or not the children were in danger and should have been removed. Were the parents and younger children’s Constitutional rights violated?

Yes! Once again, due process of law was not followed, and the alleged victims, the younger children, were allegedly traumatized by being forceably removed from their parents against their will, and the will of their parents.

Whether or not the parents did “abuse” their children is not the main issue here, but whether or not there was reason to abandon due process of the law, and Constitutional rights. If we afford due process of law and civil rights to alleged murderers, rapists, terrorists, and others (who can also be a threat to children), then why not to parents? Why can’t the alleged “abuser” be removed from the home, arrested, and charged with a crime, instead of removing the alleged victims and traumatizing them? (We actually answer this question above.)

In both these cases, if the State acted outside the bounds of the law and the family’s Constitutional rights were violated, it is properly called “state-sponsored kidnapping.” Also, in both cases, the parents could have acted more wisely to try and prevent these state-sponsored kidnappings by understanding their Constitutional rights, and refusing to talk to the social workers and police the first time they showed up.

Of course with medical kidnappings, as can be seen above in the case with baby Sammy and the parents in Sacramento, it is almost impossible today to refuse the complaint of a medical authority if one takes their child to a medical facility, and disagrees with the “Holy Doctors” who are worshiped much like deities in our culture today.

If we are going to change this system of tyranny involving state-sponsored kidnappings, we must wise up and understand what due process of law means, and what our rights are under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. We must STOP debating the merits of each of these state-sponsored kidnappings, and understand that if due process of the law is violated, then they are ALL wrong.

Who Will Stand up for Parental Rights?

As we asked above, are “parental rights” really any less then all basic “human rights” afforded to citizens of the United States under the Constitution? Do parents have less rights than suspected murderers, rapists, terrorists, etc.? If the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States protect suspected criminals from abuse of government power, do not those same rights apply to parents who are accused of being “abusive”? Does the State ever have a right to remove children from their family without following the same due process of law applied to others suspected of criminal activity?

Sadly, one group that would like to be known as a national group standing for “Parental Rights” apparently feels the State has a right to take children away from their parents if those parents are seen as “unfit.” In a discussion about the Stanley Family story in Arkansas [17] on their Facebook Page, they made the following statement after the sheriff department issued their statement to the press on alleged abuses by the parents, as a reason for why they removed the children from the family:

“While we stand by the right of fit parents to make decisions for their children, there are also times when the state must intervene where parents have been abusive or negligent.” (Popular National Parental Rights Organization)

Does this statement sound like it comes from a group that wants to defend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, protecting “parental rights”? As of the time of this writing, there still have been no formal charges made, nor arrests made, with either parent of the Stanley Family, and yet this “Parental Rights” group believes that the State’s actions are legitimate if the parents are “abusive or negligent” by someone’s standards of “fit” or “unfit” parents.

Unfortunately, that is called “tyranny” or “fascism,” and such abuse of civil rights is why our founding fathers wrote the Constitution and added the Bill of Rights.

It would appear to me, that most Americans have lost their way in understanding these important liberties that so many have sacrificed their lives to defend. Until we decide to stand up for these rights that are written into the Constitution of the United States of America, don’t expect much to change. Many brave men and women have given up their very lives to protect these rights, and we should not give them up so easily.

 

 

 

Posted on

Open Letter To Legislture nd Governor Asa Hutchinson


Open Letter to Members of the
Legislature and Governor Asa Hutchinson

On the evening of January 12th, 2015 the Stanley family’s lives would be instantly and drastically changed forever. Based upon extreme and fantastic allegations of abuse and neglect (including intentional poisoning) a doctor equipped with diagnostics had accompanied the State Police, Garland County Sheriff’s Dept., DHS, Garland County Coroner, and a SWAT team to the Stanley’s home to examine the Stanley children for signs of neglect or abuse. This was the first doctor to have ever touched the Stanley children. No child of the Stanleys had ever stepped foot in a doctor’s office or hospital in their lives, yet he concluded that they were all healthy and lacked nothing in the way of medical care. Moreover, there was absolutely no evidence of neglect or abuse.

Despite this the children were removed from their home and separated from their parents by the Garland County Sheriff’s Department. A Dependent Neglect case was opened, “services” ordered, hoops and hurdles and obstacles were placed between the parents and children. After being forcefully removed from their home and separated from their parents, the children were interrogated, showered, deloused, intrusively inspected, and placed in a strange place by strange people with no idea why or for how long. This was the very first night of many of these young children’s lives that they were not to be placed in their own beds by their parents after giving thanks for the blessings bestowed upon them by their Creator. The State held these children as captive as criminals while the parents jumped through the hoops, over the hurdles, and navigated the unnecessary and belittling obstacles placed before them (although these parents had at that time home-birthed, home schooled, and provided for nine children single-handedly, they were ordered to attend parenting classes among other “services”).

In time, the parents were allowed occasional, brief periods of supervised visitation with the children. After a few months the four youngest were returned home, and within approximately 6 months all of the Stanley children were given back to the parents that had burned, beaten, poisoned, and neglected them (according to the findings of Kathy Finnegan of the Arkansas State Police), but not before they were enrolled in public schools and indoctrinated by the State. During this time the children were forced into a way of life and a philosophy that was contrary to this family’s values and principles. In short, their innocence was lost and their way of life discredited while the Authorities showed them that there was no security in family and that they and their parents were worthless and powerless.

Ms. Finnegan substantiated the abuse and neglect citing 21 offenses against Hal and Michelle Stanley. 12 for educational neglect, 1 for bruising, 6 for poisoning, 1 for burning, and 1 for striking a child in the face or head; none of which are legitimate or supported by the evidence. To elaborate:

If the Arkansas State Police (ASP) Crimes Against Children Division (CACD) had followed protocol (in other words, obeyed the law they are sworn to uphold) none of these findings could have been supported by the evidence; not even when one takes the report prepared by the investigator as factual, credible, and reads it in a light most favorable to the state, or in a light least favorable to the Stanleys.

In my experience I have come to believe that there are two ways that erroneous true findings of abuse and neglect are determined by a child maltreatment investigator. They are either produced intentionally or incompetently. Intentionally produced true findings are a vehicle for punishment if the accused is perceived as being uncooperative, non-forthcoming, defiant or rude. In Hal and Michelle Stanley’s case, Finnegan implies in her Administrative Summary that she had no choice but to substantiate the allegations as a result of the Stanley’s refusal to submit to her interrogation. The truth is, nobody refused, and the Stanleys testified at great length under both direct and cross examination during the dependent neglect probable cause hearing, wherein the State was given an unlimited opportunity to question the Stanleys. Both were perfectly candid and forthcoming in their testimony.

A colleague of mine, James Murray, calls this sort of behavior “Contempt of Cop”.

The erroneous true findings of abuse and neglect that are produced by incompetence are easy enough to identify. There is a clear and concise manual (Publication 357) that defines the offenses of abuse and neglect contained within the Child Maltreatment Act. It does so for each offense separately and in great detail, and then it lists the elements of the offense; or the required evidence and acts or omissions of the parent/guardian or unrelated offender that must be present for an investigator to make a true finding. PUB-357 was promulgated long ago by DHS and is quite easy to follow and understand; provided that one can read and comprehend at a 3rd or 4th grade level. Because Investigators are required to have a baccalaureate degree, one may logically deduce that the protocol is either being ignored intentionally or the training and supervision within these agencies is grossly inadequate. The regulations and agreement between DHS and the ASP mandates that ASP investigators follow the same protocol as the DHS investigators.

Kathy Finnegan of the ASP testified before the Joint Performance Review Committee on July 30th, 2015, that she follows PUB-357’s guidelines in every case when determining if an allegation is true or false. Her commander, Major Ron Stayton was also present and testified that Finnegan’s supervisor, Michelle Gatlin and he were both involved with, and approved the true findings in the Stanley case.

There are only three possible explanations for Maj. Stayton and Ms. Finnegan’s testimony regarding the use of PUB-357 in substantiating the Stanley investigation.

1. Major Stayton and Ms. Finnegan perjured themselves before the Joint Performance Review Committee;
2. Major Stayton and Ms. Finnegan are unable to read and comprehend the information contained within an investigative file and apply those facts to very simple and clear elements contained within PUB-357; or
3. Major Stayton and Ms. Finnegan used a completely different Stanley family investigative file than was provided to their counsel by the Central Registry.

All players involved in Child Welfare, especially the investigators, know that a true finding (even if successfully appealed and overturned) can be disastrous to a family. The statewide average in Arkansas for true findings of abuse and neglect that were overturned on appeal in fiscal year 2015 is 45%. In Area 9, (Ms. Finnegan’s Area) 70% of true findings that were appealed during that same period were overturned.

During the afore-mentioned JPRC hearing, Sen. Alan Clark asked Maj. Stayton what his thoughts were about the fact that nearly one-half of all appealed true findings during the fiscal year 2015 were overturned on appeal. His initial response to a 45% reversal of true findings appealed was that the “system is working”. For whom the system works, he did not say. A follow up response by Major Stayton was that he did not feel that all of those reversed cases were decided correctly by the Administrative Law Judges. Both statements were direct and bold and made with no remorse or concern whatsoever for the enormous costs to those 45% falsely convicted of abuse and or neglect. I have yet to hear one person within DHS or ASP admit that when a parent, guardian, or other provider suffers harm as a result of an erroneous true finding, this damage and harm is also injuring those very children that the agency congratulates themselves for “protecting”.

A true finding on a provider also injures children that are not even the subject of the abuse or neglect (whether actual or not). Relationships between siblings and 1/2 siblings suffer when custody is changed or visitation is suspended.

The monetary costs can run into tens of thousands of dollars before you can blink an eye. There are court costs and attorney’s fees, loss of time at work to jump through the Agencies’ hoops. It costs time and money to attend hearings, and to exercise supervised visitation under the suspicious eye of the Department. The accused parent must be “in compliance” with Agency plans and participate in what are often unnecessary “services” such as counseling, psych evals, anger management, parenting classes etc. Add to that the enormous emotional toll from the stress, diminished relationships with children, and tarnished reputation to name only a few repercussions. Any person with a job or career that requires licensure, works near children, impaired adults, or any state employee is practically guaranteed to lose his or her livelihood. Children do without when providers lose jobs, whether the children are in that provider’s custody or their custodian’s child support ceases as a result of losing his or her job. If the provider isn’t terminated, Christmases, birthdays, camps, vacations, recreation and other non-essentials often disappear as the families’ discretionary income disappears, and their quality of life is diminished. I have been speaking of working middle class America. The poor and unsophisticated have absolutely no chance at all, and the working middle class can be bankrupted and dismantled by a spiteful ex-spouse, or any other person or entity with an axe to grind, by a single phone call to the State Police Child Abuse Hotline.

This is all true even when children are not taken away from their families of origin by force, and subsequently isolated from their extended families. I cannot even begin to comprehend the trauma that victims of removal and isolation must experience. The children that are victims of neglect or abuse at home are doubly victimized by the very intervention meant to protect them. Often times the intervention is more damaging than the abuse or neglect.

The damage is swift, sure and quickly becomes permanent.

Now this next bit of information you may not believe: the investigative protocol of the Agencies allow a single investigator to gather evidence, interview witnesses, judge the witnesses’ credibility, decide relevance of and weigh the remaining evidence and then ultimately decide innocence or guilt. The child abuse investigator is the detective, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner. The investigator is given absolute power, and well….. you know the rest.

When true findings are made in anger or retribution (contempt of cop) the actions of the agency are corrupt and criminal in nature. Even the most disciplined and principled investigator that genuinely does his or her dead level best to make a reasoned, objective determination, cannot possibly do so consistently. Human nature and the responsibility of a single person performing all of the functions mentioned above, precludes objectivity when working within the confines of an entirely subjective process.

Now please consider this: All of these government employees operate within a completely secret administration, in closed proceedings, with sealed files and have no checks or balances other than legislative oversight. Can you name the members, or ex-officio panel members or even the committee or subcommittee that these agencies answer to?

Whether erroneous true findings by investigators are made intentionally or incompetently is immaterial, as either is absolutely unacceptable when the stakes are as high as the loss of the fundamental family unit and its right to exist free from governmental intrusion. But alas, and notwithstanding how the erroneous true findings against the Stanley’s materialized, the corruption extends beyond the investigative outcome. ASP and DHS authorities are painfully aware that the true findings are inappropriate in the Stanley case and are not supported by the evidence. Still, the powers that be refuse to admit this, and are forcing the Stanleys to appeal the findings.

I personally believe that the Garland County Sheriff’s Dept. and the State Police CACD are primarily responsible for the Stanley tragedy; however, DHS is responsible for providing legal representation on behalf of the ASP at the administrative appeal hearing October 9th. DHS can and should refuse to defend these baseless findings, and force the ASP to evaluate the personnel and protocol and begin meaningful reform. They have thus far refused to do so, therefore, DHS is aiding and abetting, and is as culpable as the ASP.

Hal Stanley, Alex White, Dr. Claire Kelly, Kanoe Fendley and Bridgette Brantley have agreed to share with the JPRC on Oct. 1st, at 1:00 p.m., their experiences as victims of false reports, erroneous true findings, and being subjects of a child maltreatment investigation. Dr. William R. Viser will discuss the trauma caused by the primary intervention of removing children from their homes and isolating them from their families.

I honestly cannot recall the number of men and women involved with DHS and ASP that I have consulted with and or represented in my career. I do however recall the word most often used to describe their feelings, and that word is terrified. No word better describes the tactics of an entity that’s primary intervention is to enter one’s home, remove one’s children, and place them in an undisclosed location with unidentified adults and children for as long as it wishes. Combine that with the authority to place those children for adoption should it choose to do so, while acting in complete secrecy. Perhaps the most egregious part of all is that this action may be set into motion by an anonymous phone call requiring no more evidence than the reporter’s statement. if one considers the totality of the circumstances, terrorism is no longer an adequate descriptor for the actions taken in the name of “protecting the children”.

Please join us and help us reestablish the rights of the American Family.

Joe Churchwell

Posted on

Will Ye Also Go Away


“Will ye also go away?”
– Joh_6:67

Many have forsaken Christ, and have walked no more with him; but what reason have YOU to make a change? Has there been any reason for it in the past? Has not Jesus proved himself all-sufficient? He appeals to you this morning-”Have I been a wilderness unto you?” When your soul has simply trusted Jesus, have you ever been confounded? Have you not up till now found your Lord to be a compassionate and generous friend to you, and has not simple faith in him given you all the peace your spirit could desire? Can you so much as dream of a better friend than he has been to you? Then change not the old and tried for new and false. As for the present, can that compel you to leave Christ? When we are hard beset with this world, or with the severer trials within the Church, we find it a most blessed thing to pillow our head upon the bosom of our Saviour. This is the joy we have to-day that we are saved in him; and if this joy be satisfying, wherefore should we think of changing? Who barters gold for dross? We will not forswear the sun till we find a better light, nor leave our Lord until a brighter lover shall appear; and, since this can never be, we will hold him with a grasp immortal, and bind his name as a seal upon our arm. As for the future, can you suggest anything which can arise that shall render it necessary for you to mutiny, or desert the old flag to serve under another captain? We think not. If life be long-he changes not. If we are poor, what better than to have Christ who can make us rich? When we are sick, what more do we want than Jesus to make our bed in our sickness? When we die, is it not written that “neither death, nor life, nor things present, nor things to come, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord!” We say with Peter, “Lord, to whom shall we go?”

C.H. Spurgeon

Posted on

I Will Love Them Freely


“I WILL LOVE THEM FREELY.”
– Hos_14:4

This sentence is a body of divinity in miniature. He who understands its meaning is a theologian, and he who can dive into its fulness is a true master in Israel. It is a condensation of the glorious message of salvation which was delivered to us in Christ Jesus our Redeemer. The sense hinges upon the word “freely.” This is the glorious, the suitable, the divine way by which love streams from heaven to earth, a spontaneous love flowing forth to those who neither deserved it, purchased it, nor sought after it. It is, indeed, the only way in which God can love such as we are. The text is a death-blow to all sorts of fitness: “I will love them freely.” Now, if there were any fitness necessary in us, then he would not love us freely, at least, this would be a mitigation and a drawback to the freeness of it. But it stands, “I will love you freely.” We complain, “Lord, my heart is so hard.” “I will love you freely.” “But I do not feel my need of Christ as I could wish.” “I will not love you because you feel your need; I will love you freely.” “But I do not feel that softening of spirit which I could desire.” Remember, the softening of spirit is not a condition, for there are no conditions; the covenant of grace has no conditionality whatever; so that we without any fitness may venture upon the promise of God which was made to us in Christ Jesus, when he said, “He that believeth on him is not condemned.” It is blessed to know that the grace of God is free to us at all times, without preparation, without fitness, without money, and without price! “I will love them freely.” These words invite backsliders to return: indeed, the text was specially written for such-”I will heal their backsliding; I will love them freely.” Backslider! surely the generosity of the promise will at once break your heart, and you will return, and seek your injured Father’s face.  C.H. Spurgeon