Child Protective Services, Lawsuits have Skyrocketed nation wide as children Age Out and Sue CPS for Trafficking Crimes.


The Courts in the county’s of the United States are promoting children to be taken from parents without committing any crime and many times the opposite is true they are looked at by the family as being great parents. We have found that over and over again CPS is targeting good parents because of the adaptability of children raised by good parents. This is a change compared to CPS in the 90 when CPS was caught in almost county in the US targeting low income families.  This trend is so alarming as to cause investigations by many private companies do to the lack of accountability and oversight by the federal government. When we pulled records of funding paid to counties for taking children out of parental and family homes, we calculated CPS to be receiving as much as five to six hundred thousand dollars for one child. Although this is not the normal or…

View original post 636 more words





The censors took this post down, too, but I won’t let them forget this adorable little child who was tortured and abused, at least, to death by a corrupt government and psychopath adoptive parents not even from this country who were given two beautiful twin children after being wrongfully removed from a mother in need of help, not “kidnapping” (false arrest statute in Texas Penal Code).  Where do they find these sick degenerate sub-human cockroaches?  Oh, yes…Florida and Texas, and child protective services!



Producer: Joe Sorge

Emily Joy Lake: Interstate Child Protective Services Fraud and Abuse Case

The Freedom of Knowledge, The Power of Thought ©

Emily Joy Lake:
Interstate Child Protective Services Fraud and Abuse CaseBy Susan Detlefsen <>
August 20, 2005 Wednesday, August 17, Portland Judge Nan G. Waller ( ordered Emily Lake to be sent to Michigan citing the uniform commercial code (UCC) which proves, does it not, that Emily is an item for income?Someone pointed out UCC refers rather to the uniform child protection act, but I’m not sure of that yet. Anyway, the point is, Emily was ordered sent back to Michigan. However, I just spoke with Roger Weidner who says Judge Waller has not yet signed the order, and that Lynnae Lake stayed down in Salem last night to keep fighting for her daughter through the Oregon Supreme Court.In spite of irrefutable evidence of fraud, collusion and outright lies, Portland Judge Nan Waller, without ever hearing from Emily Lake, ordered her to be turned over to Michigan authorities.Emily’s mother, Lynnae Lake <>, had a visit with Emily on Monday, and stated, for the record, that her daughter told her she had been asked to withhold information about the CPS strategy from her mother, that she had been offered various gifts for her cooperation. In spite of this, Emily told her mother that she had been crying for her and asked when she could come home to her mother.

Emily told her mother during the Monday visit that her eyes were hurting her, but that DHS refused to take her to the hospital or to see a doctor.

Emily’s so-called attorney Lynn Haxton declined to speak on Emily’s behalf, and since Emily was not there, I asked Judge Waller if I could read a letter from Emily. “I object” was the only thing I heard Paxton say during the hearing. She objected to anyone communicating anything from Emily to the court. Why? Because she is involved in criminal racketeering, fraud and child exploitation.

One of the court watchers present today agreed to be the principal plaintiff in a lawsuit against Ms. Paxton for failure to represent Emily Lake, and for violating her right to safety and to a permanent home, with the mother she has lived with since birth, except for the period when Emily was 4 years old and she had been snatched and put in foster care by Michigan CPS–which is the reason Emily and her mom left Michigan in the first place.

“Dear Susan, My name is MJ (Emily apparently became aware of the underground nature of her existence here in Oregon and made up a name for herself, as her mother had done). I am a child between the age of 7 and 10. CPS is chasing us. We had to leave our home. I heard you are trying to stop CPS. Please help us too by telling people we want to go home. I want this to end. Love, MJ” This was the letter I received from Emily back in February when I started getting to know her and her mom, whom I knew as “Anne”. The letter, as well as some of Emily’s artwork, were left with Judge Waller to go into Emily Lake’s Oregon file.

Lisa Kaufman, Ms. Lake’s court-appointed attorney, did a pretty good job arguing her case, and fighting to have Emily released. She pointed out the community Emily had developed around her since moving to Oregon, as evidenced by the number of Emily’s supporters present in the courtroom. She cited various statutes pointing to the court’s obligation to look at Emily’s current situation and needs, and that the Michigan petition was not valid, since at the time it was served in Oregon, it was outdated.

In spite of all this, and overwhelming evidence, that no one in charge of Emily’s custody here, neither the attorney general (or district attorney) Springer, nor Emily’s caseworker, JD Devros, nor the girl’s own attorney, Lynn Haxton, have done anything to protect this child from abuse by Portland Police or medical neglect, in failing to have Emily seen by a doctor since she has been complaining about the pepper mace sprayed in her eyes.

Lynnae Lake left the Portland Juvenile Courthouse today for the federal building to try to get an injunction on Emily’s extradition back to Michigan.

August 17, 2005

Dear Emily,

I wanted you to know that [my daughter} and I came to try to say goodbye to you tonight. You were a bright light in my life while you were in Portland. I will never forget our trip to Mt. Hood, the Oregon Coast and the hike up to Multnomah Falls, and the evening I did all those different hairdos on you. I think I have photos of that somewhere.

I have your paintings, which are so precious to me. Thank you for leaving them with me.

Emily, if you don’t want me to have photos or paintings by you on my MotherInterrupted Web site, just tell me, and I will take them down. I want to hear that from you though, because many times I have received emails from CPS workers claiming to be “child x” wanting me to take down their Web page, then later I find out that the kid did not even know about the Web site until the state worker coerced them into agreeing to cooperate with scolding me about exposing their story. I am telling you this because you are old enough and smart enough to figure out what CPS is really all about, right?

I put this Web site up to let the world know what CPS is doing to all you kids, but your privacy is very important, so just let me know. I would need to hear directly from you before I take anything down, ok?

So many people are talking about you and your mom. I just got off the phone with Roger Brown, a renowned sociologist who has taken great interest in your case. He has proof that CPS is hurting kids like you by taking them from their parents.

You will be so proud of your mother someday. I wish you could have heard her today, and last Monday, taking on DHS, CPS, the district attorney and even the judge, in her fight to get them to let go of you. Your mother is still working on paperwork, right now. She is down in Salem, filing motions with the Oregon Supreme Court to try to get you back. She reminded me of a mama lion–and a very smart lion–going after a predator.

Alas, CPS is a very powerful institution, and it will take a good hard fight to get them to lay off the kids. My dream is to free the children someday of CPS.

I tried to leave a special teddy bear from Oregon for you to take back to Michigan, and one of your paintings I thought you might want to take with you as a souvenir of your time here in Portland. Of course, your captors would have nothing to do with me and ordered me to leave the building immediately. They don’t like me because I am telling the truth about what they are doing to kids and families.

Emily, I will miss you, little angel. Send me an email sometime.

Your friend forever,
Emily in Oregon, February 2005, with “Sgt Pepper”.

See how “endangered” she was while in the custody of her mother in Oregon?

Emily is an artist. When she came to our house, Emily loved to use my water colors. I eventually gave her some water colors of her own. Here is my favorite painting by Emily.

One of my other favorites is the “pear people” painting, which is hanging across from my own giant pear painting, which I painted myself with a friend a couple years ago.

In February of 2005, Emily Lake and her mother “Anne” moved to Oregon to avoid being destroyed by Michigan CPS. I did not know the full details of their story until they were apprehended last Wednesday, August 10, 2005.

Monday, August 15, 2005: Emily finally gets a visit with her mom. Details of the visit are being kept confidential for now, so as not to compromise Emily and her mother’s case.

Monday, August 15, 2005: Lynae Lake challenges Michigan jurisdiction and makes a record of abuses against her and her daughter in Portland, Oregon

Today, at 1 p.m., after much confusion about whether or not there was going to be a hearing, Judge Nan Waller was put on speaker phone in Multnomah County Juvenile Court. Lynae Lake, aka Anne White, gave the most outstanding courtroom performance I have witnessed to date. I hope to put a full transcript of the hearing on my Web site.

Laying out the fraud behind the Michigan petition to take 9 year old Emily, and the pattern of retaliation against her for being an outspoken advocate for children’s rights in Michigan, Lynae Lake convinced those present that she is a loving, protective mother, and that she and her daughter were brutalized, on groundless charges and a groundless pick-up order for Emily, by Portland Police on August 10, 2005.

“You are violating my right to due process and you’re violating my daughter’s rights. Where is Emily? Why is she not here to speak for herself?”

95 year old Frances Weidner, mother of former prosecutor Roger Weidner, who had to be in Bend today and missed Emily’s hearing, spoke on behalf of Emily. “Where’s my Emily, where’s my princess?” Mrs. Weidner has been asking since Emily was violently kidnapped last Wednesday from the Weidner residence by Portland Police Sgt Charlie Brown. When she got up to the speaker phone, Mrs. Weidner addressed Judge Waller and all of us in the courtroom: “I told Emily, you’re going to be the Rose Festival Princess someday if you stay in Portland”.

When Emily’s mom pointed out that, until last Wednesday, Emily, who has been a resident of Oregon for over 6 months now, was leading a happy healthy life here in Portland and that she has many friends here, those of us there supporting the family spontaneously broke out in applause and cheers for Emily. We were clearly in contempt of court, though Judge Waller did nothing but listen. The court clerk, however, a nasty-tempered bureaucrat, apparently felt it necessary at that point to bring the guards in.

When it became clear that Judge Waller had apparently already made a decision about Emily prior to the hearing, Lynae protested: “this is just a play isn’t it? The script has already been written. This no hearing”. Judge Waller hesitated, then asked to have one of the attorneys look at the pick-up order for Emily. She asked for the expiration date, which stated “June 2005”. So, the only documentation that anyone had justifying anything that had happened to Emily and her mom since August 10, was expired.

Judge Waller set another hearing, for this Wednesday, August 17, at 11:00 a.m. to find out whether or not Michigan can renew their petition (which was based on fraud in the first place, as Lynae has already shown). Only Emily’s testimony can corroborate what the mother is saying.

For anyone reading this, please urge Judge Waller ( to bring Emily into court Wednesday to speak on her own behalf.

When I questioned Emily’s attorney, Haxton, about this, she refused to answer any questions, and quickly stole out of the courtroom.

Dave Nyhoff is making calls to Michigan authorities to urge them not to renew any pick up order on this child

Before leaving the courtroom, Lynae Lake insisted Judge Waller set up a visit for her and her daughter. The visit was to take place this afternoon in Portland. This was a relief as some had been told Emily might have already been sent back to Michigan.

Please attend Emily’s next hearing this Wednesday:

Emily Joy Lake Hearing
August 17, 11 a.m.
Juvenile Court
1401 NE 68th
Portland, Oregon

August 15: Calls from Portland Police Complaint Department

I received several calls today from Officer Hess regarding reports of police brutality against 9 year old Emily Lake. He said so many people have called to complain, that a special investigator has been assigned. Please address your complaints regarding the August 10 brutalization of Emily Joy Lake to:

Judy Taylor, Portland Police, 503-823-0905

If you don’t feel that pepper spraying and threatening with attack dogs is a good way to “protect” children and keep them “safe” as DHS says they are doing when they have the police go take kids like Emily away from the parents who love and protect them naturally, let Ms. Taylor know about it.

Please read synopsis by Nancy Luckhurst, President of Children’s Rights Foundation from Michigan, and personal friend to Emily Lake and her mother:

“Right now I am in such shock and mental anguish over this I am going to have to get my barings a bit. This one is very personal to me. I know the story and it is not pretty and it was all started several years ago by the oldest daughter who wanted to live move in with a boyfriend. She got a case started and the children were put in the care of the father who never had any interest in them. He dumped them on an aunt. The abuses in that home were horrendous. The little one was only 5 at the time. The children in that home were allowed to torture that child. She loved to pretend she was a dog or cat as so many children of that age do. The family allowed the other children to put a dog collar and leash on her and force her to eat dog food out of a dish on the floor. That was only part of it. The mother won the children back. In the process she made worker Dan Rogalny of Midland Co look like the ass he is on the stand as I understand it. He has had it in for her ever since. When she left there was no order in place to pick up the children there was no warrant. CPS in Midland Co had made no contact with this mother what so ever prior to her leaving. I am getting information coming in I am going to be making contact with the people she was living with and make arrangements to get her computer. I know there is tons of information that is needed there to show these turkeys for what they are. Will Gaston has agreed to help with this endeavor. If you do not know who he is get Randy’s survivor Flyer and see his picture. Go on the net and read his story. It was is late wife who wrote the book so many in this advocacy work swear by, Sui Juris. Oh and as a note. I had an occasion to talk with little Emmy. She had met Will. She told me she had just met the “real Santa Claus”. When you see the picture you will understand.”
August 16 Letter from C Myrick of Vermont

Reading of how Emily Lake and her mother were treated is very distressing. It unsettles me to know that there are so many actors out there just “doing their job” for the corrupt who seem to run the show. How is this allowed to happen? There aren’t many actors in our government with any decency, morality and sense of justice–and where are they who “protect and serve”? They have their priorities mixed up, it is US they are to protect and serve, not corruption.

Do the right thing, protect this little girl and her mom. No matter what instigated this event, there is no excuse whatsoever to treat fellow human beings in this manner. Disgusting! Evil. Bring charges against all who played a part in this travesty. Reunite Lynnae and Emily at once.

For the future, we need to unite and agree to never, NEVER, elect members of the bar to legislative or executive branches of government (boycott lawyers from public office); don’t keep reelecting anyone but put new blood in offices, and most important–hold accountable the judiciary, visit for further information.

C. Myrick
Vermont JIC


August 14 Message from Will Gaston, A Voice for Children:

Takeback mailing list
Larger HomePage:
Please Contribute to our Web-Log at:


August 15: Letter to Portland Mayor Tom Potter from Charles Stewart

Mr Potter;

You seem possibly an honorable man. I do not say this to many public servants in our area. I read about you in the news-paper. You do seem to have a rare functional conscience.

My un-orthodox legal skills might be of assistance in your battles with the un-thinking robots. If his is of interest to you; please contact me. There is getting less middle-ground for the fence-sitters. Those who truly seek the betterment of the common people must learn to work together against those who subvert our fundamental state & national system of constitutional government. Otherwise all will be lost. The enemy is simply to powerful.

This is a copy of a complain I lodged to your Portland police bureau. I believe it is with-in your power to do something about these abuses.


Charles Bruce, Stewart


On behalf of: Emily Joy,Lake; Leanne Lake; Roger Weidner; & the People of the State of Oregon; State-Ex-Rel/Quo-Warranto Felony Kinaping & Assault Criminal-Complaint.

I do not know these officers names. I believe you-all know the case I am speaking of. My complaint is for criminal assault & kidnapping by these officers & all attorney bar-members who conspired to proceeded with lawless force against this mother & child.

From the testimony before me of these honorable people, I believe that these officers acted beyond their constitutionally-lawful authority to abuse this child & her mother.

I used to run the “Multnomah County Common-Law Court”; as Elected “Chief Justice” there-in.

Our court was shut down in large part by lawless cointelpro-style abuses from the rico/babylonian-whore bar-monopoly attorneys & judges & the seeming mk-ultra mind-controlled police-officers robotically enforcing constitutionally-lawless malum-prohibitum based codes & regulations. Your officers physically beat one of our juror/judges, one James Bleakley; & harassed us in many other ways; all under the conspiratorial direction of these private criminally syndicated bar monopoly members.

We were no threat to you. We need good constitutionally-recognizable “Law Enforcement” Officers; if you still have any.

But we were a threat tho that constitutionally-lawless rico lawyers bar monopoly. If the common people can break that monopoly on the administration of justice, those social parasites will have to go out & find honest work. There will be very little use for their statutory-schooled law-school education. Like vampires in the daylight, they will dry up and wither away.

From the testimony of trusted friends, I believe this complaint is well-founded, & i am trying to add extra weight to already registered complaints similar to this. I do this because i know there is much corruption on your offices; & I fear if I & others do not speak, it will get shuffled away & this will just be another abuse similar to Kesandra James Murder by the satanically-lawless criminal syndicate members whom I believe infest & terrorize your ranks.

Also; I live in fear that these abuses can happen to me or anyone. This is Not a Nazi Police-State where Goons with Guns & Badges can lawlessly abuse the rights of common peaceable people.

Roger Weidner or Wilbur Gaston can provide more details. I am assisting all of these people in trying to being Conscionable Justice & Constitutional Law (same thing) to this matter.

We all proceed in the name of & on behalf of the common -people of this state; as is our recognized right under Oregon’s Constitution at Article 1 Section 10 & in ORS 30.510; State-Ex-Rel/Quo-Warranto. A crime against one, is a crime against all. We are an organic body-politic. We fell the pain of our fellow patriotic constitutionalists; in every abuse you hurl against us.

Since you-all terrorized us into shutting down our common-law court; please ask the Multnomah County Court Administrator for a Courtroom where “We the People” can assemble a Jury with Functional Consciences & the brains to follow the fundamental principles under-lying constitutional “Due-Process of Law”; to lawfully adjudicate this Kidnapping & Assault complaint against your nazi goons; & to Lawfully resolve any lingering entanglements concerning this mother & daughter.

Surprise the common people of Oregon. Show some respect for Constitutionally-Recognizable “Law” for a crying change.

Your form demanded a zip code. We know the nazi judges take star-chamber style “silent judicial notice” that zip-code use means we have consented to be slaves. Take notice, we do Not “consent to be slaves”.

Call or email if you desire more details. Email is very good.

Charles Bruce; Stewart


August 13: Letter from Nancy Luckhurst to Judge Waller

Dear Judge Waller.

I am writing this in support for Emily Lake and her mother Lynnae Lake. This mom is a one of the most dedicated Mom’s I have ever seen. Emily is such a delightful little girl, so bright and loving. The devotion they have for each other is so apparent to any one who spends any time with them at all. This story is long and all you are going to get here is a short synopsis but it should tell you there is something that does not meet the eye. Every I have seen the documentation and I know that as a former Real Estate agent I am personally taking the documentation of wrong doing by this ag toain the Michigan licensing board on Monday morning. This woman is scum. I know this story is going to look and sound really bizarre but don’t ever forget that old saying truth can be stranger than fiction. And this is definitely one of those cases. There is going to be a complete legislative investigation into the actions of people in the Midland Co DHS office and the adult daughters who conspired with a DHS worker just to mention a couple.

Lynnae’s only concern is her daughters well being and safety. She would literally give up her own life to keep this child safe. That little girls is so close to her mother it would be a horrible travesty of justice to separate them. There are children out here in this world who are being abused in so many on Godly ways. Emily Lake is not one of them by any stretch of the imagination.

As President of the Foundation for Children’s Rights our advocates work everyday with families who have been falsely accused of child abuse. The one thing we demand before an consideration to advocate for anyone is we must be given absolute documentation by the client to show they are not guilty of what they have been accused of. I know Ms. Lake has been protrayed as some kind of vicious child beating lunatic. Nothing could be farther from the truth in this case. I ask you as not only as an advocate but as the mother of 8 and the grandmother of 18 search your heart and look into the eyes of this little girl and please don’t run to judgment in this case. Please do not send Emily back to the State of Michigan where we know she was abused while in the care of the state in the prior case. I am sure you know how manipulative a teenager can be when they decide they want to do something not in their best interest. It is a parent’s duty to guide and prevent them from doing something harmful to themselves. If this is a crime then that is the crime for which this mother is guilty certainly not of abusing this angel child you have in the custody in Oregon.

Please read the synopsis that follows and search your heart and mind on this case.

Thank you so much for your time and concern in this very delicate matter.

Nancy Luckhurst
(989) 261-1200

Lynnae Lake, the mom, called me today from the Multnomah Co jail in OR. She informed me they did not resist when the police came. She was beaten unmercifully and chunks of hair were yanked out of her head. This happened after arriving at the Jail. The officer said if she didn’t like that he could rip her head off. She thinks her foot is broken. Both she and the child were pepper sprayed twice and the little girl Emily got the worst of it. The Portland city police took attack dogs with them. She has not to this moment been given her rights. She has not been arraigned. She has not been officially arrested. She has requested a prisoners handbook and a complaint form and has been refused both. She has not had any medical treatment for her wounds. Are they waiting for the bruises to go away first.

She was told they were not going to hold her she was going to be let go no charges. Oh but wait then the Judge in Midland Co Michigan decided he wanted her held on a fugitive warrant.

This woman left this state one year ago with her daughter had not been contacted by DHS/CPS prior to leaving. There was not a case open that she knew of, there was no warrant. The worker entered a private school without a warrant, without a court order and interview her older daughter against orders left with the school office and placed in the school records. This has already been tested in the Federal courts it is a big NO NO. The mother arrived to pick her children up on the last day of school and was warned by a school employee that CPS was interviewing her teen age daughter. It falls under the 4th ammendment of our little used U.S. Constitution. Also there is a another amendment not often used by our the various states DHS offices it is called the 14th ammendment which covers due process. Oh but there is so much more.

There is so much more to this mother’s story. Her oldest daughter now married made a CPS complaint 4 years ago. The children were removed and were place with the father who left them with an aunt. The children there in that house tortured poor little Emily. They were allowed to put a dog collar on her and force her to eat dog food out of a dish on the floor. When Mom was again awarded custody of her family she was one child short. You see the oldest had been placed in Independent living in an apartment with her boyfriend. That is exactly what the Mom had been arguing about with this kid. Ok the kid got her way paid for by the state of Michigan with Federal Title IV funds. In other words the State of Michigan sanctioned a minor living with a member of the opposite sex against the mother’s wishes. Isn’t that special. Fast forward 3 years to 2004 and the exact same thing happened. This was the second in line a 17 year old who had met some guy online she has never met and is going to move in with him and live happily ever after. We have the e-mails to prove this folks. So over a 3-5 month period the oldest daughter who is by now married and the middle sister have decided to cook up a story and don’t forget they now know how to play the system. So after planning this, oh and did I forget to mention in these e-mails back and forth between the sisters there is mentioned a Dan R who is the worker who works for Midland Co CPS who is coaching them in how to put the story together so it will fly so he can take the the middle girl and the youngest girl, our little angel Emily.

Folks there is so much more to this story that you would not believe. There is the mysterious circumstances surrounding the sequestering of this woman’s terminally ill mother by a half sister and not letting other family members know where she was. Right after this happened the Will which covered a Million dollar estate was amended. Then the mother was placed on hospice with the half sister who just happens to be a nurse being the care taker. Upon the mother’s death the mother’s body is taken to a funeral home in South Haven MI with strict orders to the Director that no one is allowed to see the body. Anne was not supposed to be notified of her mother’s death. She did find out and called the funeral home and the Director told her he would let her and her sister and brother see the body if they would like to. The went to be with their mother.

After Anne left with her little girl Emily. She had asked her fiancee to please stay and care for her house. But all of a sudden he is served with eviction papers from a real estate woman Dana K. Maier, who had by the way bought several of the mother’s pieces of property in the past. She listed herself as Agent for the landlord and listed as reasons for the eviction he owed $10800 in back rent. And the house was inhabitable, but she was not the agent for anyone. In fact the statements were all lies. Anne had nothing to do with this woman. But her half sister Eileen Pearson of 1422 Homecrest in Kalamazoo did lots of business with this woman as administrator of her mothers affairs.

On December 7th 2004 Eileen Pearson the half sister contacted the Midland city assessors office and some how got them to change the address on the tax statement for Anne’s house to come to her address in Kalamazoo. When someone checked on this fact with the assessor’s office just recently it was found the address had been changed back (again by Eileen Pearson) but the website did not reflect that. How ever when Anne checked the website in April the address for the tax statement was hers. So that is a real puzzle. HMMM did the Midland City assessor back date that for some reason? oh yes that’s right this would nulify anne’s homestead property tax exemption wouldn’t it causing her taxes to be much higher and she would lose her house to the state of Michigan if she can’t pay the taxes. Gee is the loving half sister planning a little hostile take over of her home. Let’s see it has been reported by people looking after the house that a window in the front door has been broken out and now boarded up. the window next to that was then broken out and lights left on. But mysteriously now in the last few weeks it is discovered there is not electricity on but Consumers didn’t turn it off. And all the fuses are fine. This has just happened. Three lawnmowers have been stolen out of a shed one is a rider and the little girls trampoline is no longer there. Someone is still dumping junk and other materials on the land across the street in the flood plain and wetlands with no permit that has been an ongoing problem for years. This has been turned in by the way to DEQ in Lansing. This property is prime bottom land of the Tittibawassee River. The City of Midland has wanted it for years. The City along with Pomranky Construction has tried to get her off that land for about 20 years. She has been told she should give it to the City and she just needs to go away. It is all the poor woman got out of a Million dollar estate for God’s sake. The house is worth nothing but the land is worth a ton to the City or Pomranky who want to excavate the topsoil from it to sell to the City. That is valuable land. Not done yet folks. Some time in March or April of 2003 Anne who was working for a non profit as a bookeeper discovered there was something wrong with some of the accounts. She discovered there was money missing from some of the accounts controlled by the Director of the organization. She had not yet determined how much but it was in the 1000s. She finally collared the Director and after a bit the woman admitted she had made “some private loans to some people” Anne turned this in to the Board of Directors and the Michgan AGs office. For her efforts she was fired just one week before the whole CPS mess came down. She says the AGs office was starting an investigation but they would probably not be able to finish it without her being able to give them pertinent information after she left. The Director is still the Director of this organization and Anne was warned by other people within the organization this woman would not be above turning her in to CPS with false allegations.

So now as Paul Harvey would say you have the rest of the story. OH one last thing Anne’s name is really Lynnae Lake. Loving mother of Emily Joy Lake a beautiful angel child, who has never ever been abused by her mother but she has been abused by the State of Michigan DHS/CPS.

Dear God in heaven wil someone please help this woman and that beautiful baby. The mother had taught her that our organization would always help if something ever happened to her and to call us. Yesterday she called. That tiny little frightened voice was pleading with me to please help them. Then the mother came on the line. She was petrified. She knew there were there for her and little Emmy. I could hear the child in the background as the police were banging on windows screaming for them to come out. They were cowering in the basement. Then the phone went dead. A little later the phone rang and a man asked if I was Nancy. I said yes. He said he had a rather plucky little girl there who was demanding that he take my number and call me. The man is J.D. Devros Supervisor for CPS in Multnomah County. He asked if I would talk to her. What a silly question. He set the phone on speaker. And there was that tiny frightened little voice again begging for my help. Well folks now I am begging for your help. Don’t allow this outrageous sham to go on any longer. Hold the people who are responsible for their actions now. Go to the following link and scroll down until you come upon the face of that little angel. Look at her and tell her NO you will not help right now to expose the corruption of what has happened in Midland County Michigan. She is alone in a foster home in Portland Oregon. Wondering if her mom is Ok and wondering if anyone is ever going to help her?

Permanent termination of parental rights has been described as “the family law equivalent of the death penalty in a criminal case.” In re Smith (1991), 77 Ohio App.3d 1, 16, 601 N.E.2d 45, 54. Therefore, parents “must be afforded every procedural and substantive protection the law allows.” Id.

Advocates for those falsely accused of child abuse and neglect. Statistics show children are 10 times more likely to be abused and and neglected in foster care and 6 times more likely to die than in the general population. National Clearing House for Child Abuse and Neglect. Reform Child Protective Services NOW.

URGENT:UPDATE they have changed the hearing as of Friday 5 pm PST to Monday at 1 pm whether the attorneys can come or not


August 13: Open Letter from Leonard Henderson on Emily and Lynae Lake:

August 12, 2005: Letter from Lynae Lake <>

To all of you that know me as Anne I first want to thank each and everyone of you for your prayers. For those that came out to the hearing and especially ***************** as I know this must have been extremely painful for her to go into court once again. Please keep praying as Emily is still in custody and I have not been able to find a way to communicate with her.

The horror and trauma that poor girl went through while the police threatened us to get bit by the attack dogs and tasered. They never called out one name nor identified who they were after. They tried to snatch her while she was outside on her bike and I was inside making lunch.

There were 12 police officers here and I had at least 5 on me for most of the time that I was in their custody. Emily had a couple on her too. As you know Emily was sprayed not once but twice by the pepper spray which literally burns your skin off and can blind you. I turned a shower on immediately for her to rinse and the police kept turning it off. I cried out she was a child for God’s sake and then they sprayed us again.

However I was not ever placed under arrest nor given in any way shape or form my rights (Miranda) they had no charge until late yesterday and that was custodial interference. Once I arrived at jail they beat and threatened me numerous times one screaming obscenities at me while he was ripping out my hair. (I told them they were all under arrest – lot of good that did me but I did)

I can’t tell you any more about Emily except she was throwing up from the pepper spray. Screaming for them not to hurt me. Crying and crying for her mama. (the cops were mad because she told them they were police and she didn’t trust them) and of course made her watch as they dragged me to the car and drove off.

The 95 year old lady I take care of also had to witness all this. She has dementia but this has so traumatized her. She goes around saying “this is a nightmare I am living – why would the police take Emily” “something has to be done how do we get Emily back?”and calling out for Emily her princess. This is 3 days later so you tell me. She also is concerned that the police are coming for her next.

What I did find out Thursday was that Emily had been allowed to call Nancy Luckhurst President of Foundation for Children’s Rights. She is also supposed to be at the new shelter hearing on Wed.

I am covered with bruises. I was beaten severely in jail both men and women. Just on walking into the jail very peacefully the one officer said “oh she got pepper sprayed – we got lots more here”

Another officer thought it was cute to watch me go to the bathroom and even commented on he liked the show and didn’t take much to entertain him.

I was for almost 24 hours moved from isolation cell to isolation cell. I repeatedly asked for the inmate manual which is the rules that prisoners and officers must abide by. I requested medical treatment for the injuries but was only asked if I was on any current medication (I was asked that repeatedly like they were sure I was supposed to be on something!).

At about 1 pm Thursday 11, all of a sudden they got really nice saying I had only a $500 bond to post – but lied when I asked about it being paid by credit card. They said no cash or money order only. Then said the judge my bond me out on my own. Arrainment was set for sometime after 2PM – surprisngly the same time as the shelter hearing I was not noticed for.

My guess is they did not count on the people showing up for my arrainment or the 20 people that went to the shelter hearing and testified on behalf of Emily and I. I thank God for each and everyone of them.

While I was waiting I was suddenly told I was released there was no charges pending but it would take a couple of hours. Now understand they had just started the arrainments and the men go first. At 1:30 the officer said I am being released on a no-complaint. That means no charges – period. She told that to Nancy Luckhurst who I had just gotten on the phone.

It would take a couple of hours to process me out.

Well I asked about the shelter hearing – how could I have possibly have known about that I said there were people waiting upstairs for me and there were people waiting over for a hearing that I was not noticed for and that was illegal.

Then 2 hours goes by and I am called off to one side to be told there was good news and bad news I was not going to be charged but I was not going to be released, a fugitive warrant was NOW out for me. I think this was also done to see how I would react I said oh o k .

ALL bogus and after the fact. So there were not ever any charges, I was just being kidnapped which is what I told them.

Now I’m taken (after strip search – my how fun) to a real jail cell this one is covered in food and I am not allowed to clean it up.

This morning I got told there was no warrant and I would be out in a few hours. However prior to being let out I now need to talk to a psychiatrist. I think I have b been hoaxed again and am now going to be stuffed in the looney bin. Oh yes and now I am finally given complaint forms and the inmates manual that I have been asking for from the instant I got there.

So now I sit and stew for a few more hours wondering at what cruel joke is going to happen now. So I begin to read the manual. Of which a bunch of things were violated and I found out I had been lied to about the bail a credit card would have done it..

But I did get released.

I got home to find that there were some people in the house and they took everything of value that I had including the $75 that belonged to Emily because she earned it. Over the summer she had earned over $130 of which she was so proud.

Some of what is gone is all the computer equipment that had all my legal docs on and all of a particular website I had been working on.

The attorney I have been assigned is out until Monday. Now the hearing is Monday instead of Wednesday so guess who will not be able to speak with the attorney? Also the attorney assistant says Emily WILL be going back to MI – does this sound PRE-DETERMINED???


Lynae Lake <>


August 12, 2005

Mom is out she is at the home she was taken from. She is not in very good shape and tonight they are taking videos of the injuries. She was never allowed medical treatment and in 48 hours they did not feed her. they did ask her this morning if she wanted anything. The conditions were so bad where she was at she said she would no have eaten anything in there.. This is just outrageous. The kept moving her from one islolation cell to another and each got worse. She was never advised of her rights she was never charged. Michigan says they are not going to pay to extradite her.


August 12, 2005 Letter to Oregon Judge Nan Waller from Lynae Lake <>

The hearing held on Thursday was held improperly. I have not been noticed as required by law. And continue to not be noticed as required by law.

The underhanded changing of a hearing set for Weds Aug 17 to Mon Aug 15 with NO NOTICE and no oportunity to meet with the child’s attorney or the attorney appointed to me.

Also I question the legality of any attorney representing me in my absence when it would be perfectly possible to have me present. My whereabouts were certainly known.

I was contacted 5:05PM on Friday Aug 12 after all offices and agency office would be closed to be told about the case after making repeated calls to an office of my supposed attorney.

The court is fully aware that this attorney can not be met with prior to the court hearing. The Court knows that there is no possible way that this case can be prepared for thereby denying Emily and I our due process rights.

Because the police refused to present any warrant of valid court order I question the legality of the home invasion and molestation of Emily and I where Emily was PEPPER SPRAYED 2x ,threatened by attack dogs and a taser. The show of force went so over and and above reason to execute a supposed pickup order on a 9 year old child that my child was placed in real danger of her life from the Portland City police. The mental anguish and pure terror was clearly exhibited by my child is inconsistent with the safety and best interest of the child.

Once the adrenalin rush of the attack got started it was mob rule and not the actions of a professional police force.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said it best, “The government’s interest in the welfare of children embraces not only protecting children from physical abuse, but also protecting children’s interest in the privacy and dignity of their homes and in the lawfully exercised authority of their parents.”

Calabretta v. Floyd, 189 F.3d 808 (9th Cir. 1999).

“There is something bad happening to our children in family courts today that is causing them more harm than drugs, more harm than crime and even more harm than child molestation.” Judge Watson L. White, Superior Court Judge, Cobb County , Georgia

The mere possibility or risk of danger does not constitute an emergency or exigent circumstance that would justify a forced warrantless entry and a warrantless seizure of a child. Hurlman v. Rice, (2nd Cir. 1991)

The decision of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found that this practice, i.e. the “no prior consent” interview of a child, will ordinarily constitute a “clear violation” of the constitutional rights of parents under the 4th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. According to the Court, the investigative interview of a child constitutes a “search and seizure” and, when conducted on private property without “consent, a warrant, probable cause, or exigent circumstances,” such an interview is an unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the rights of the parent, child, and, possibly the owner of the private property

“Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subject to the rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, omnipresent teacher. For good or ill, it teaches the whole people by example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for the law. It invites every man to become a law unto himself. It invites anarchy. U.S. v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438 (1928), Justice Brandeis.

The forced separation of parent from child, even for a short time, represents a serious infringement upon the rights of both. J.B. v. Washington county, 10th Cir. (1997) Parent’s interest is of “the highest order.” And the court recognizes “the vital importance of curbing overzealous suspicion and intervention on the part of health care professionals and government officials.” Thomason v. Scan Volunteer Services, Inc., 8th Cir. (1996)

Children have standing to sue for their removal after they reach the age of majority. Parents also have legal standing to sue if CPS violated their 4th and 14th Amendment rights. Children have a Constitutional right to live with their parents without government interference. Brokaw v. Mercer County, 7th Cir. (2000) A child has a constitutionally protected interest in the companionship and society of his or her parents. Ward v. San Jose, 9th Cir. (1992) State employees who withhold a child from her family infringe on the family’s liberty of familial association. K.H. through Murphy v. Morgan, 7th Cir. (1990)

The 95 year old woman that I care for has been so traumatized by the event and the loss of a 2 critical members of her home. She alternately looks for Emily who is her “princess” and talks about the police removing her. She can’t not stop talking about it and falling to her knees to pray. Her mental anguish is acute. As her caregiver this situation has caused severe mental abuse to a fragile and ill elderly woman.

Lynae Lake <>


Susan Detlefsen’s August 12, 2005 Letter to Judge Waller, et al

Judge Waller, Judge Allen, attorneys general, others concerned regarding
Emily Joy Lake, DOB 8/31/95:

Emily has been residing in Oregon 6 months, as of August 11, 2005. She is now a resident. Do not send Emily Lake to Michigan without a full hearing on the matter of residency, jurisdiction and parental fitness. Emily also has the right to have a voice in what is going to happen to her.

I understand the hearing which was set for next Wednesday has not been moved up to Monday, which does not give the mom enough time to prepare her case. The court is closed and so it is impossible to file any motions or paperwork.

I saw the recent photo of Emily sent by her mother. There are lots of photos, some videos, and artwork by Emily, which all demonstrate Emily’s well-being while in her mother’s care here. Do not run this little girl roughshod through your court. Give her a fair chance. She is very attached to her mother and, according to everything I ever heard Emily say, has no wish to live anywhere except with her mother. She is afraid of the police and CPS and of going back to foster care where she was abused.

I am the mother of *************, who, as Emily’s mom pointed out, was at Emily’s hearing Thursday. She also left a card for Emily with Mr. Devros, which I hope DHS will not be allowed to confiscate, as they often do with things that belong to children, but which might contradict their agenda of severing the child’s ties with those who care about him/her. I also left a card for Emily, letting her know that I, and others, are thinking of her and doing what we can to help her and her mother through this traumatic time.

Please protect Emily Lake by keeping her here in Oregon long enough for an investigation into what is truly in her best interest.

Susan Detlefsen
Amicus curiae for Emily Lake and Lynae Lake


August 13, 2005 Letters to DHS Caseworker Jeremy Devros

Mr. Devros,

It is not like Emily not to contact her mother, or those she knows care about her and her mom. Have you given her the cards from myself and my daughter as you said you would, or are you keeping little Emily isolated from the outside world? We are watching, and I am forwarding this to the judge.

Susan Detlefsen 503-239-9901

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: RE: Emily Lake
From: “Anne White” <>
Date: Sat, August 13, 2005 2:36 am

I accidently hit send without including the contact information again 503-232-6691

I want to repeat that I am gravely concerned for Emily’s well being. Also that she know how many people love her and are invovled for her. Tell her Mimi sends her love and misses her terribly. She has been unconsolable without her princess.

Of course it goes without saying that I want her to be given my love and that I am praying for her safety and her safe return to her mother where she belongs.

I will update this page as often as I can, hopefully once daily at least until Oregon case is settled. Email MotherInterrupted for more information on how to help this family.

The Adoption R.I.C.O. Court Con

Posted: 02 Oct 2014 03:53 PM PDT
Source: Jim Black of social media site Angel Eyes over Texas, the highly credible and well-respected Department of Family and Protective Services of state of Texas, child protective services(“CPS”) former survivor along with his family, respected and honest business owner in Texas, and humbly proud grandfather, law-abiding activist who still shows respect and civility toward the same government that egregiously deprived he and his family, although Black later got his children or grandchildren–property–back.

There once was a time when adoptions were a good thing. Such a great thing that the month of November is “National Adoption Month.” All across the US there will be organizations and agencies that celebrate children finding a forever home. Unfortunately there will be thousands of parents filling great sorrow because adoptions has become a profitable business.

Some years back, the federal government started offering adoption incentives to attract more adoptive parents. These incentives for each state are based on an ever increase in adoptions. As a result more children had to be brought into the system. In doing so more children had to be brought in and more parental rights terminated. This presented a situation for more court appointed attorneys to collect more fees. Now many businesses make money off of these children. A practice that needs to be stopped.

So we are asking that people help us turn it into National (Expose) Adoption month. We are asking people to start posting pictures of their children to whom rights were terminated on the social media. If not pictures, post your stories. We must build awareness across this nation that adoption is not what it used to be. That now it borders on legalized human trafficking. Please expose (at the bare min) the County and State where your rights were terminated. Any addition information is up to you. All we ask is that you include the hash-tag #natexposeadoption in your post or tweet allowing all the posts to be drawn together.

For those accessible to social networking, or, in the alternative, to those individuals who have the good fortune to not be stalked, legally and otherwise, though unlawfully, and for those not still subjected to legal, unlawful abuse where security and privacy with regard to social networking is not a material issue in their case(s) and/or lives and/or those of their property or “children” and families, effectiveness for Mr. Jim Black and Angel Eyes Over Texas reform/activist efforts (in good taste and in good faith) require certain “hash-tags” to be used.  Please see above and also other posts when you hopefully check out Angel Eyes Over Texas!  Many thanks to Mr. Jim Black.  Your diplomacy and temperament are admirable.  This author sure hopes your civility is reciprocated by those charged with maintaining civil, ordered society and liberty.

P.S.  The “SS” (social workers) actually tried to use Saloom’s  words, intentionally taken out-of-context or otherwise evidencing “SS” …intelligence, “lil’ angel” and “Jesus” with regard to Author’s then five year-old son, Julian Jacob Worrell of Genealogy Saloom (abducted under the color of law, or, “kidjacked,”  on May 08, 2012, just before he was to start kindergarten, by social worker and police officer individual defendants at the Pearland CPS Office in Brazoria County, Texas), to erroneously portray Julian’s Real Mummy and Property Owner–Author was traditional and gave her son the gift of a father through his name, hoping that one day he would want to be a part of his life, for genuine reasons)–as “unstable,” though she failed to accuse or notify Saloom of this…well, ever.  If she had, she would certainly have an actionable discrimination for perceived disability lawsuit as New England mothers have asserted, along with others.

Cheryl Harvick (Brazoria County CPS Program Supervisor, on knowledge, belief, and alleged “title” in writing), Paul Elton (Pearland Police officer), William Lilly (Harris County Sheriff’s Office Crimes Against Children, and Sex Crimes Unit, failed to be properly supervised by Ruben Diaz, as reported as the basis for his twenty day suspension without pay in July 2014 in a two-liner online news site), Lesly Damian-Murray (Brazoria County CPS caseworker), and Karen Coblentz (Brazoria County CPS Program Director) deprived both Salooms (Joni and Julian Jacob Worrell of Genealogy Saloom, rights reciprocal, claims as to “Plaintiff” individuals and as to individual claims against all defendants sued in individual and official capacities) of their well-established as a matter of law and fact rights, privileges, and fundamental liberties to include “liberty, life, and pursuit of happiness” (Declaration of Independence) with foreseeable and intentional harm and injury to their natural, sovereign, elect bond and relationship with the expressly stated goal of permanent “removal” and “parental rights” as of 1:30PM on May 08, 2012, a Gift from Creator that no man may properly sever, as acknowledged in Founding documents and articles of this Republic US, for Harvick’s and Elton’s (and for Lesly Damian-Murray and her superior, Karen Coblentz) expressly stated retaliation for Saloom calling Office of Consumer Affairs and making an “appearance” at the Pearland Police substation located at 2555 Cullen, Pearland, Texas  77581 real property/only “child,” her son who she raised alone without incident or injury, to engineer Harvick’s defense for wrongful “removal,” absent court order, absent exigent circumstances, absent warrant issued on probable cause or reliability for Julian remaining with his primary caretaker for 5 1/2 years, and absent any voluntary “consent” or signatures or “agreements.”

On knowledge, belief, and certain evidence, individual defendants (none of whom are properly listed on the federal docket (See 4:13-cv-1002, US District Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, (Hon.) Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt presiding), and as First Amended Complaint, before reverse and remand from the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of subject matter “jurisdiction,” and other pertinent legal instruments filed sui juris, de jure by Saloom, conspired with “J.J.W.” of Genealogy Saloom’s “father,” Matthew James Worrell and his admitted on court record as adultering wife he stole with three small children by another man in whose marital house they reside(though not of any record or proof–no birth certificate, social security card, no Acknowledgement of Paternity, and no name on Julian’s valid, authentic, unnoticed, insufficiently birth certificate on file with the 310th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas (elected Judge Lisa A. Millard, Associate Judge appointed by Governor Ricky Perry, Conrad Moren) or the court that had no “jurisdiction” in the 300th Judicial District Court of Brazoria County, Texas–(Hon.) Judge K. Randall/”Randy” Hufstetler who issued “Orders in Aid of Child Abuse and Neglect” without any notice, hearing, or continuing “exclusive” jurisdiction even alleged, thus, null and void on its face as a matter of law and fact), and with Donna Everson, court-appointed Guardian Ad-Litem and Attorney Ad-Litem for Julian who refused to even speak to Author, Julian’s mother, who was unrepresented though she timely requested a court-appointed lawyer before full adversary hearing/show-cause hearing, to make an easy, cool $30,000-$100,000 for the “state” of Texas, kickbacks, referrals, Responsible Fatherhood grants, quota attainment, admiration and possible career promotion, inter alia, on knowledge and belief and testimony of those similarly situated, to “execute” the ever ubiquitous “RICO Court Con” and adoption scam (not what it used to be as Author concurs with Mr. Black that “adoption” used to sometimes be a good thing, and maybe sometimes still is where necessitated, not manufactured for “Titles” IV-A, IV-D, and IV-E Social SecurityAct and Medicaid and “TANF” fraud on the Federal government, and on others), although there were not any grounds for “termination of parental rights” at the time.

That “SAFE” supervised “visitation” (check out the bags of unreported and unrecorded cash only payments that Cypresswood Drive”SAFE” (free stalking for fathers and private investigators and process servers) supervisor Tamisha Laster tips out multiple volunteers, “recorders” and “observers” who write everything parents and children say and sell the notes, or “observations,” on little Orange (“Red”) sheets of paper that Laster claims she doesn’t know where she takes them on these CPS trainee extortion sub-standard 2-hour “visitation” per month (if the father even shows with child property) extortion and maternal alienation or less wealthy than alienating mother with more elite… South Texas College of Law…attorney who is best friends with the judges and ad-litem who knows which CPS-licensed “therapist” (a.k.a. Kimberly A. Abernethy in North Houston) father days (when no bank or “SAFE” main office in Houston is open to deposit “cash only” fees) only to the highest bidder who can compel testimony for $100 or $150/hr. in the same court in which the judge and all clerks and sundry employees and associate judge and court “recorder” who will deny even a quote as to transcripts so as to block appeal, even though indigent by proxy respondent should have received them, on timely motion for “in forma pauperis,” complementary so that justice might be carried out and for good cause shown, on knowledge and belief, took a $20,000 bribe (known by old-school FBI and Federal officials as the “Damon 10,000 Screw, ” or, “The Fix Is In”) through  Executive Director Marinelle Timmons (Prairie Street, Corporate HQ, Houston, Texas  77002, located in the old courthouse downtown, a joint private-public venture along with Children’s Assessment Center, sexual-cover-up front), who refuses to answer certified return request receipt mail with attached exhibits, including the Sex Crimes individual defendant William Lilly’s (HCSO) recent termination (July 11, 2014) for failure to investigate from Saloom immediately pursuant to Timmons’ fraudulent letter that falsely alleged that Saloom “requested” “termination” of “visitation,” in July of 2014 when the defendant’s’ Attorney General for state of Texas Counsel, on knowledge and belief, tipped her off that Saloom’s case would be reversed and remanded to the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, possibly to aid and abet a fraudulent defense

Julian is now 7 1/2 years-old and has been deprived of any and all  meaningful contact with his loving and devoted mother absent any showing of  parental “unfitness” or child abuse or neglect (See Cheryl Harvick, defendant individual Brazoria County CPS supervisor in article entitled Fostering Abuse…, byline by Margaret Downing, The Houston Press, March 27, 2003 and her mass round-ups of foster children for retaliation…and money, on knowledge and belief and first-hand, non-perjured, non-hearsay, non third-party hearsay direct testimony absent fraud and deceit under color of law, actual legal and lawful knowledge and circumstantial and demonstrative evidence).

Posted: 02 Aug 2014 07:17 PM PDT

Child Un-Protective Services, your worst nightmare . What they don’t tell you.

Child Un-Protective Services, your worst nightmare . What they don’t tell you..

42 U.S. Code § 672 – Foster care maintenance payments program

42 U.S. Code § 672 – Foster care maintenance payments program

(a) Requisite features of State plan

In order for a State to be eligible for payments under this part, it shall have a plan approved by the Secretary which—
(1) provides for foster care maintenance payments in accordance with section 672 of this title and for adoption assistance in accordance with section 673 of this title;
(2) provides that the State agency responsible for administering the program authorized by subpart 1 of part B of this subchapter shall administer, or supervise the administration of, the program authorized by this part;
(3) provides that the plan shall be in effect in all political subdivisions of the State, and, if administered by them, be mandatory upon them;
(4) provides that the State shall assure that the programs at the local level assisted under this part will be coordinated with the programs at the State or local level assisted under parts A and B of this subchapter, under division A  [1] of subchapter XX of this chapter, and under any other appropriate provision of Federal law;
(5) provides that the State will, in the administration of its programs under this part, use such methods relating to the establishment and maintenance of personnel standards on a merit basis as are found by the Secretary to be necessary for the proper and efficient operation of the programs, except that the Secretary shall exercise no authority with respect to the selection, tenure of office, or compensation of any individual employed in accordance with such methods;
(6) provides that the State agency referred to in paragraph (2) (hereinafter in this part referred to as the “State agency”) will make such reports, in such form and containing such information as the Secretary may from time to time require, and comply with such provisions as the Secretary may from time to time find necessary to assure the correctness and verification of such reports;
(7) provides that the State agency will monitor and conduct periodic evaluations of activities carried out under this part;
(8) subject to subsection (c), provides safeguards which restrict the use of or disclosure of information concerning individuals assisted under the State plan to purposes directly connected with

(A) the administration of the plan of the State approved under this part, the plan or program of the State under part A, B, or D of this subchapter or under subchapter I, V, X, XIV, XVI (as in effect in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands), XIX, or XX of this chapter, or the supplemental security income program established by subchapter XVI of this chapter,
(B) any investigation, prosecution, or criminal or civil proceeding, conducted in connection with the administration of any such plan or program,
(C) the administration of any other Federal or federally assisted program which provides assistance, in cash or in kind, or services, directly to individuals on the basis of need,
(D) any audit or similar activity conducted in connection with the administration of any such plan or program by any governmental agency which is authorized by law to conduct such audit or activity, and
(E) reporting and providing information pursuant to paragraph (9) to appropriate authorities with respect to known or suspected child abuse or neglect; and the safeguards so provided shall prohibit disclosure, to any committee or legislative body (other than an agency referred to in clause (D) with respect to an activity referred to in such clause), of any information which identifies by name or address any such applicant or recipient; except that nothing contained herein shall preclude a State from providing standards which restrict disclosures to purposes more limited than those specified herein, or which, in the case of adoptions, prevent disclosure entirely;
(9) provides that the State agency will—

(A) report to an appropriate agency or official, known or suspected instances of physical or mental injury, sexual abuse or exploitation, or negligent treatment or maltreatment of a child receiving aid under part B of this subchapter or this part under circumstances which indicate that the child’s health or welfare is threatened thereby; and
(B) provide such information with respect to a situation described in subparagraph (A) as the State agency may have;
(10) provides for the establishment or designation of a State authority or authorities which shall be responsible for establishing and maintaining standards for foster family homes and child care institutions which are reasonably in accord with recommended standards of national organizations concerned with standards for such institutions or homes, including standards related to admission policies, safety, sanitation, and protection of civil rights, provides that the standards so established shall be applied by the State to any foster family home or child care institution receiving funds under this part or part B of this subchapter, and provides that a waiver of any such standard may be made only on a case-by-case basis for non-safety standards (as determined by the State) in relative foster family homes for specific children in care;
(11) provides for periodic review of the standards referred to in the preceding paragraph and amounts paid as foster care maintenance payments and adoption assistance to assure their continuing appropriateness;
(12) provides for granting an opportunity for a fair hearing before the State agency to any individual whose claim for benefits available pursuant to this part is denied or is not acted upon with reasonable promptness;
(13) provides that the State shall arrange for a periodic and independently conducted audit of the programs assisted under this part and part B of this subchapter, which shall be conducted no less frequently than once every three years;
(14) provides

(A) specific goals (which shall be established by State law on or before October 1, 1982) for each fiscal year (commencing with the fiscal year which begins on October 1, 1983) as to the maximum number of children (in absolute numbers or as a percentage of all children in foster care with respect to whom assistance under the plan is provided during such year) who, at any time during such year, will remain in foster care after having been in such care for a period in excess of twenty-four months, and
(B) a description of the steps which will be taken by the State to achieve such goals;
(15) provides that—

(A) in determining reasonable efforts to be made with respect to a child, as described in this paragraph, and in making such reasonable efforts, the child’s health and safety shall be the paramount concern;
(B) except as provided in subparagraph (D), reasonable efforts shall be made to preserve and reunify families—

(i) prior to the placement of a child in foster care, to prevent or eliminate the need for removing the child from the child’s home; and
(ii) to make it possible for a child to safely return to the child’s home;
(C) if continuation of reasonable efforts of the type described in subparagraph (B) is determined to be inconsistent with the permanency plan for the child, reasonable efforts shall be made to place the child in a timely manner in accordance with the permanency plan (including, if appropriate, through an interstate placement), and to complete whatever steps are necessary to finalize the permanent placement of the child;
(D) reasonable efforts of the type described in subparagraph (B) shall not be required to be made with respect to a parent of a child if a court of competent jurisdiction has determined that—

(i) the parent has subjected the child to aggravated circumstances (as defined in State law, which definition may include but need not be limited to abandonment, torture, chronic abuse, and sexual abuse);
(ii) the parent has—

(I) committed murder (which would have been an offense under section 1111 (a) of title 18, if the offense had occurred in the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States) of another child of the parent;
(II) committed voluntary manslaughter (which would have been an offense under section 1112 (a) of title 18, if the offense had occurred in the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States) of another child of the parent;
(III) aided or abetted, attempted, conspired, or solicited to commit such a murder or such a voluntary manslaughter; or
(IV) committed a felony assault that results in serious bodily injury to the child or another child of the parent; or
(iii) the parental rights of the parent to a sibling have been terminated involuntarily;
(E) if reasonable efforts of the type described in subparagraph (B) are not made with respect to a child as a result of a determination made by a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with subparagraph (D)—

(i) a permanency hearing (as described in section 675 (5)(C) of this title), which considers in-State and out-of-State permanent placement options for the child, shall be held for the child within 30 days after the determination; and
(ii) reasonable efforts shall be made to place the child in a timely manner in accordance with the permanency plan, and to complete whatever steps are necessary to finalize the permanent placement of the child; and
(F) reasonable efforts to place a child for adoption or with a legal guardian, including identifying appropriate in-State and out-of-State placements  [2] may be made concurrently with reasonable efforts of the type described in subparagraph (B);
(16) provides for the development of a case plan (as defined in section 675 (1) of this title) for each child receiving foster care maintenance payments under the State plan and provides for a case review system which meets the requirements described in section 675 (5)(B) of this title with respect to each such child;
(17) provides that, where appropriate, all steps will be taken, including cooperative efforts with the State agencies administering the program funded under part A of this subchapter and plan approved under part D of this subchapter, to secure an assignment to the State of any rights to support on behalf of each child receiving foster care maintenance payments under this part;
(18) not later than January 1, 1997, provides that neither the State nor any other entity in the State that receives funds from the Federal Government and is involved in adoption or foster care placements may—

(A) deny to any person the opportunity to become an adoptive or a foster parent, on the basis of the race, color, or national origin of the person, or of the child, involved; or
(B) delay or deny the placement of a child for adoption or into foster care, on the basis of the race, color, or national origin of the adoptive or foster parent, or the child, involved;
(19) provides that the State shall consider giving preference to an adult relative over a non-related caregiver when determining a placement for a child, provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant State child protection standards;

(A) provides procedures for criminal records checks, including fingerprint-based checks of national crime information databases (as defined in section 534 (e)(3)(A)  [1] of title 28), for any prospective foster or adoptive parent before the foster or adoptive parent may be finally approved for placement of a child regardless of whether foster care maintenance payments or adoption assistance payments are to be made on behalf of the child under the State plan under this part, including procedures requiring that—

(i) in any case involving a child on whose behalf such payments are to be so made in which a record check reveals a felony conviction for child abuse or neglect, for spousal abuse, for a crime against children (including child pornography), or for a crime involving violence, including rape, sexual assault, or homicide, but not including other physical assault or battery, if a State finds that a court of competent jurisdiction has determined that the felony was committed at any time, such final approval shall not be granted; and
(ii) in any case involving a child on whose behalf such payments are to be so made in which a record check reveals a felony conviction for physical assault, battery, or a drug-related offense, if a State finds that a court of competent jurisdiction has determined that the felony was committed within the past 5 years, such final approval shall not be granted; and  [3]
(B) provides that the State shall—

(i) check any child abuse and neglect registry maintained by the State for information on any prospective foster or adoptive parent and on any other adult living in the home of such a prospective parent, and request any other State in which any such prospective parent or other adult has resided in the preceding 5 years, to enable the State to check any child abuse and neglect registry maintained by such other State for such information, before the prospective foster or adoptive parent may be finally approved for placement of a child, regardless of whether foster care maintenance payments or adoption assistance payments are to be made on behalf of the child under the State plan under this part;
(ii) comply with any request described in clause (i) that is received from another State; and
(iii) have in place safeguards to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of information in any child abuse and neglect registry maintained by the State, and to prevent any such information obtained pursuant to this sub-paragraph from being used for a purpose other than the conducting of background checks in foster or adoptive placement cases; and
(C) provides procedures for criminal records checks, including fingerprint-based checks of national crime information databases (as defined in section 534 (e)(3)(A)  [ of title 28), on any relative guardian, and for checks described in sub-paragraph (B) of this paragraph on any relative guardian and any other adult living in the home of any relative guardian, before the relative guardian may receive kinship guardianship assistance payments on behalf of the child under the State plan under this part;
(21) provides for health insurance coverage (including, at State option, through the program under the State plan approved under subchapter XIX of this chapter) for any child who has been determined to be a child with special needs, for whom there is in effect an adoption assistance agreement (other than an agreement under this part) between the State and an adoptive parent or parents, and who the State has determined cannot be placed with an adoptive parent or parents without medical assistance because such child has special needs for medical, mental health, or rehabilitative care, and that with respect to the provision of such health insurance coverage—

(A) such coverage may be provided through 1 or more State medical assistance programs;
(B) the State, in providing such coverage, shall ensure that the medical benefits, including mental health benefits, provided are of the same type and kind as those that would be provided for children by the State under subchapter XIX of this chapter;
(C) in the event that the State provides such coverage through a State medical assistance program other than the program under subchapter XIX of this chapter, and the State exceeds its funding for services under such other program, any such child shall be deemed to be receiving aid or assistance under the State plan under this part for purposes of section 1396a (a)(10)(A)(i)(I) of this title; and
(D) in determining cost-sharing requirements, the State shall take into consideration the circumstances of the adopting parent or parents and the needs of the child being adopted consistent, to the extent coverage is provided through a State medical assistance program, with the rules under such program;
(22) provides that, not later than January 1, 1999, the State shall develop and implement standards to ensure that children in foster care placements in public or private agencies are provided quality services that protect the safety and health of the children;
(23) provides that the State shall not—

(A) deny or delay the placement of a child for adoption when an approved family is available outside of the jurisdiction with responsibility for handling the case of the child; or
(B) fail to grant an opportunity for a fair hearing, as described in paragraph (12), to an individual whose allegation of a violation of sub-paragraph (A) of this paragraph is denied by the State or not acted upon by the State with reasonable promptness;
(24) include   a certification that, before a child in foster care under the responsibility of the State is placed with prospective foster parents, the prospective foster parents will be prepared adequately with the appropriate knowledge and skills to provide for the needs of the child, and that such preparation will be continued, as necessary, after the placement of the child;
(25) provide  [5] that the State shall have in effect procedures for the orderly and timely interstate placement of children; and procedures implemented in accordance with an interstate compact, if incorporating with the procedures prescribed by paragraph (26), shall be considered to satisfy the requirement of this paragraph;
(26) provides that—


(i) within 60 days after the State receives from another State a request to conduct a study of a home environment for purposes of assessing the safety and suitability of placing a child in the home, the State shall, directly or by contract—

(I) conduct and complete the study; and
(II) return to the other State a report on the results of the study, which shall address the extent to which placement in the home would meet the needs of the child; and
(ii) in the case of a home study begun on or before September 30, 2008, if the State fails to comply with clause (i) within the 60-day period as a result of circumstances beyond the control of the State (such as a failure by a Federal agency to provide the results of a background check, or the failure by any entity to provide completed medical forms, requested by the State at least 45 days before the end of the 60-day period), the State shall have 75 days to comply with clause (i) if the State documents the circumstances involved and certifies that completing the home study is in the best interests of the child; except that
(iii) this subparagraph shall not be construed to require the State to have completed, within the applicable period, the parts of the home study involving the education and training of the prospective foster or adoptive parents;
(B) the State shall treat any report described in subparagraph (A) that is received from another State or an Indian tribe (or from a private agency under contract with another State) as meeting any requirements imposed by the State for the completion of a home study before placing a child in the home, unless, within 14 days after receipt of the report, the State determines, based on grounds that are specific to the content of the report, that making a decision in reliance on the report would be contrary to the welfare of the child; and
(C) the State shall not impose any restriction on the ability of a State agency administering, or supervising the administration of, a State program operated under a State plan approved under this part to contract with a private agency for the conduct of a home study described in subparagraph (A);
(27) provides that, with respect to any child in foster care under the responsibility of the State under this part or part B and without regard to whether foster care maintenance payments are made under section 672 of this title on behalf of the child, the State has in effect procedures for verifying the citizenship or immigration status of the child;
(28) at the option of the State, provides for the State to enter into kinship guardianship assistance agreements to provide kinship guardianship assistance payments on behalf of children to grandparents and other relatives who have assumed legal guardianship of the children for whom they have cared as foster parents and for whom they have committed to care on a permanent basis, as provided in section 673 (d) of this title;
(29) provides that, within 30 days after the removal of a child from the custody of the parent or parents of the child, the State shall exercise due diligence to identify and provide notice to all adult grandparents and other adult relatives of the child (including any other adult relatives suggested by the parents), subject to exceptions due to family or domestic violence, that—

(A) specifies that the child has been or is being removed from the custody of the parent or parents of the child;
(B) explains the options the relative has under Federal, State, and local law to participate in the care and placement of the child, including any options that may be lost by failing to respond to the notice;
(C) describes the requirements under paragraph (10) of this subsection to become a foster family home and the additional services and supports that are available for children placed in such a home; and
(D) if the State has elected the option to make kinship guardianship assistance payments under paragraph (28) of this subsection, describes how the relative guardian of the child may subsequently enter into an agreement with the State under section 673 (d) of this title to receive the payments;
(30) provides assurances that each child who has attained the minimum age for compulsory school attendance under State law and with respect to whom there is eligibility for a payment under the State plan is a full-time elementary or secondary school student or has completed secondary school, and for purposes of this paragraph, the term “elementary or secondary school student” means, with respect to a child, that the child is—

(A) enrolled (or in the process of enrolling) in an institution which provides elementary or secondary education, as determined under the law of the State or other jurisdiction in which the institution is located;
(B) instructed in elementary or secondary education at home in accordance with a home school law of the State or other jurisdiction in which the home is located;
(C) in an independent study elementary or secondary education program in accordance with the law of the State or other jurisdiction in which the program is located, which is administered by the local school or school district; or
(D) incapable of attending school on a full-time basis due to the medical condition of the child, which incapability is supported by regularly updated information in the case plan of the child;
(31) provides that reasonable efforts shall be made—

(A) to place siblings removed from their home in the same foster care, kinship guardianship, or adoptive placement, unless the State documents that such a joint placement would be contrary to the safety or well-being of any of the siblings; and
(B) in the case of siblings removed from their home who are not so jointly placed, to provide for frequent visitation or other ongoing interaction between the siblings, unless that State documents that frequent visitation or other ongoing interaction would be contrary to the safety or well-being of any of the siblings;
(32) provides that the State will negotiate in good faith with any Indian tribe, tribal organization or tribal consortium in the State that requests to develop an agreement with the State to administer all or part of the program under this part on behalf of Indian children who are under the authority of the tribe, organization, or consortium, including foster care maintenance payments on behalf of children who are placed in State or tribally licensed foster family homes, adoption assistance payments, and, if the State has elected to provide such payments, kinship guardianship assistance payments under section 673 (d) of this title, and tribal access to resources for administration, training, and data collection under this part; and
(33) provides that the State will inform any individual who is adopting, or whom the State is made aware is considering adopting, a child who is in foster care under the responsibility of the State of the potential eligibility of the individual for a Federal tax credit under section 23 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(b) Approval of plan by Secretary

The Secretary shall approve any plan which complies with the provisions of subsection (a) of this section.
(c) Use of child welfare records in State court proceedings

Subsection (a)(8) shall not be construed to limit the flexibility of a State in determining State policies relating to public access to court proceedings to determine child abuse and neglect or other court hearings held pursuant to part B or this part, except that such policies shall, at a minimum, ensure the safety and well-being of the child, parents, and family.

[1]  See References in Text note below.

[2]  So in original. Probably should be followed by a comma.

[3]  So in original. The word “and” probably should not appear.

[4]  So in original. Probably should be “includes”.

[5]  So in original. Probably should be “provides”.


Source: Title 42 U.S.C. Section 672 Foster Care Maintenance Payments Program,Cornell School of Law Legal Information Institute,