THE EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY IN THE UNITED STATES:

"If the judges interpret the laws themselves, and suffer none else to interpret, they may easily make, of the laws, [a shredded] shipman's hose!" - King James I of England, around 1616.

“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

“This case illustrates to me the serious consequences to the Bar itself of not affording the full protections of the First Amendment to its applicants for admission. For this record shows that [the rejected attorney candidate] has many of the qualities that are needed in the American Bar. It shows not only that [the rejected attorney candidate] has followed a high moral, ethical and patriotic course in all of the activities of his life, but also that he combines these more common virtues with the uncommon virtue of courage to stand by his principles at any cost.

It is such men as these who have most greatly honored the profession of the law. The legal profession will lose much of its nobility and its glory if it is not constantly replenished with lawyers like these. To force the Bar to become a group of thoroughly orthodox, time-serving, government-fearing individuals is to humiliate and degrade it.” In Re Anastaplo, 18 Ill. 2d 182, 163 N.E.2d 429 (1959), cert. granted, 362 U.S. 968 (1960), affirmed over strong dissent, 366 U.S. 82 (1961), Justice Black, Chief Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan, dissenting.

" I do not believe that the practice of law is a "privilege" which empowers Government to deny lawyers their constitutional rights. The mere fact that a lawyer has important responsibilities in society does not require or even permit the State to deprive him of those protections of freedom set out in the Bill of Rights for the precise purpose of insuring the independence of the individual against the Government and those acting for the Government”. Lathrop v Donohue, 367 US 820 (1961), Justice Black, dissenting.

"The legal profession must take great care not to emulate the many occupational groups that have managed to convert licensure from a sharp weapon of public defense into blunt instrument of self-enrichment". Walter Gellhorn, "The Abuse of Occupational Licensing", University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 44 Issue 1, September of 1976.

“Because the law requires that judges no matter how corrupt, who do not act in the clear absence of jurisdiction while performing a judicial act, are immune from suit, former Judge Ciavarella will escape liability for the vast majority of his conduct in this action. This is, to be sure, against the popular will, but it is the very oath which he is alleged to have so indecently, cavalierly, baselessly and willfully violated for personal gain that requires this Court to find him immune from suit”, District Judge A. Richard Caputo in H.T., et al, v. Ciavarella, Jr, et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-00286-ARC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Document 336, page 18, November 20, 2009. This is about judges who were sentencing kids to juvenile detention for kickbacks.

Monday, June 6, 2016

Parents of children held in foster care in Delaware County, NY, be aware of reimbursement rates for foster parents in Delaware County, NY

I posted this information in my other blog, and am re-posting it here.

 For some reason, links are not working on this site today, so I am reposting the full text from my other blog.
*  *   *
Recently, I received a response to my FOIL request from Delaware County (NY) on a number of issues.

As part of the response I received rates of reimbursement established by Delaware County (NY) for foster care parents, which I am publishing here:

Based on the daily "regular service and maintenance" rates, the following calculations as to monthly and yearly reimbursements can be made:
 per day  per month   per year 
Normal0-5 years $      15.89 $       476.70  $   5,799.85 
Normal6-11 years $      19.14 $       574.20  $   6,986.10 
Normal12+ years $      22.13 $       663.90  $   8,077.45 
SpecialAny age $      38.22 $    1,146.60  $13,950.30
ExceptionalAny age $      62.43 $    1,872.90  $22,786.95

 Parents whose children are in foster care have a right to verify at which level their children are labeled, and how their foster parents are reimbursed for their care - and whether the monies provided for the "care and maintenance" are actually used for the purpose of "care and maintenance", or simply goes into the foster parents' pockets.

Apparently, it is very lucrative for a foster parent in Delaware County (and many foster parents in Delaware County, NY get such positions because they are officers or employees of local governments) to get a child into foster care who is still young (and does not eat much), but who is labeled "special" (behaviorally difficult) or "exceptional" (whichever the Commissioner deems "exceptional") - because keeping such a child pays more.

Please, remember that when a child is grabbed by social services and put into foster care, it often happens to poor parents whose children are on Medicaid and monthly SSI payments from the federal government.

And, that social services always bring child support proceedings against parents for children in foster care.

So, parents whose children are in foster care have a chance to verify whether the monies from the feds (SSI), from Delaware County as per reimbursement schedules I publish here, and monies squeezed from parents in child support, are actually used for the child, or simply soaked by the County into its "general account" and used for purposes unrelated to the child's care, which is fraud.

Here are also money allowances or "stipends" that must be provided to foster care children - so parents can verify whether that is done by foster parents or not.

There is also clothing allowance:


0-5 years $        1.10 $         33.00  $      401.50 
6-11 years $        1.54 $         46.20  $      562.10 
12-15 years $        2.39 $         71.70  $      872.35 
15 + years $        2.92 $         87.60  $   1,065.80 

So, if your child is in foster care in Delaware County for a year, and he is, let's say, 12 years old, and he has "behavioral problems", the rate of reimbursement for him will be:

$13,950.30 - care and maintenance
$240.00 - allowance
$872.35 - clothing allowance
---

TOTAL: $15,062.65

That is what the County provides out of its budget to take care of that child in foster care. 

First, the County then cannot get more than that from the parent per year - and should take into account the monies it receives from Social Security for the child on a monthly basis.

Moreover, the County must report to Social Security as to how the monies received from Social Security is used for the child's benefit.

As to children 0 to 3, there is also a diaper allowance.



When a child is put into foster care, there are, as shown above, powerful financial incentives involved to keep the child there, not reunite the child with his parents, as Social Services are required to do by law.

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)