As posted on CYFSWATCH NZ
11 more stories for the CYFSWATCH Hall of Shame.
Sunday, 11.03.2007, 06:40pm (GMT12)
Summary One:
Mum had her toddler uplifted on hearsay and unsubstantiated ’statement.
Cyfs convinced mum to sign a respite order for 10-14 days, at the end of that time cyfs refused to hand the girl child back. Child was a ’special needs’ child, diagnosed by Starship as having radical attachment disorder, which cyfs refused to believe. Mum, adored child, child was ‘difficult and obviously two caregivers realized. Child was abused in two out of the three foster homes in the eight-month period in question. Mum suffered humiliation, degradation, contempt in the hands if the two social workers involved. Mum finally committed suicide. Mum left very detailed Diary. Friend of mum went to the Holmes program-over four hours of film was shot. Ten minutes before going to air, a media ban was put on the subject. The result was Holmes dropped it as the cost of $60,000 to fight it was too much. Friend still tried to get the issue aired -cyfs placed a harassment order on friend. Rumor has it that father who took custody was paid a handsome sum by cyfs to keep quiet.
Comment: The child was never in any danger by the mother. This is a case that should have been worked on from within the home as the Act states. A mother is now dead and a child has no mother.
Summary Two:
Two young children uplifted from a young mother-not a perfect mother-but then there is no perfect mother. One child did tend to be difficult. Two different fathers, both rather unsavory. No intensive investigation was done, cyfs alienated mother with their attitude. Three years down the track-children are of course separated-one with elderly grandparents and one with father-of whom the mother had a protection order against. There was no effort to rebuild the family, no real help given to mother with regard parenting-access every two weeks for one day. Time for the family to drift apart and therefore the judge awarded custody to the caregivers. Mother refused Legal Aid for this very basic right that of custody of her children.
Comment: There was never any real effort to build this family by cyfs, alienating the mother in the first instance with arrogance. Social worker in this case-over three years met the mother only twice and that was in the end of this three-year period and they met in court!! Working with families.
Summary Three:
Mum, came from Europe ten years ago, had a child by a father who has not been involved with child. Mother reported abuse of child by her landlord to police, who in turn notified cyfs. A meeting was held and cyfs said the child should have counselling. Six months later cyfs appeared and said time for counseling. Mum said, too late-no. Child was uplifted. Mum still cannot understand that she must do as cyfs demands to get her child back…she gives gifts at access, queries why cyfs treat her like rubbish and cyfs get annoyed at make the process harder.
Comment: Again the concerns over mother and child could have been monitored within the home-instead another broken family.
Summary Four:
Parents receive a phone call to pick up papers from the courthouse. The papers were an exparte order to have their teenage daughter made a ward of the state. The teenage dtr had accused mum of abuse (false)., because of the accusations mum took dtr to a foster home she herself had arranged. A phone call from a social worker to tell mum there would be a meeting to discuss the daughter- in two years mum has had no other communication from the social worker. There was no investigation or verification of reports; no one who knew the family was talked to. The word of the child was accepted and decisions made by departments who had never met mother or child. No information was ever sought about child from the mother. Child has been in six to eight homes. She took a knife to her caregiver in one home and the cyfs report to the court was that the placement broke down this is what cyfs feed the judges.
Comment; this child has severe developmental problems, which still have not been addressed. Mum has written affidavits to courts in this regard-does this child have to kill before help is given
Summary Five:
A Christchurch baby was left in the care of the mother’s brother in law (Father of four children) while the mother and her sister went out. The father visited the baby’s bedroom while the baby was asleep. The father thought that the baby had stopped breathing and in a state of panic picked the baby up and shook the baby and in the process of doing so dropped the baby. Realizing his state of panic and inability to deal with the situation he called an ambulance. The hospital calmed the man, asked him questions about the baby and reassured him that the baby was breathing and that the ambulance was on its way.
Bruising was noticed on the back of the baby’s head at hospital and CYFS was informed despite the father’s explanation that it was an accident.
The baby remains with its mother but CYFS have visited the father and his wife and told them that the father is a risk to their four children and he must leave their residence.
CYFS have threatened that if they do not comply with CYFS instructions then they will obtain a court order to uplift the children.
Comment: Despite the fact that the father is supported by his wife, sister in-law and has been the father of four children without any previous attention being bought to himself CYFS are blatant in their attempt to destroy a family.
Summary Six:
A family who had a three-day-old baby at breast had their baby uplifted, using the orders that four other children had been uplifted on. The parents had addressed their issues, met the criteria that CYFS set, then the criteria was changed and so it goes on…. The baby is now three years old; the parents are permitted one-hour access every three weeks!!! Is this working with the families? Is this strengthening families? Is this reuniting families? Is this reuniting families? Is this in the best interests of the children?
Comment: THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED CASE.
Summary seven:
A woman who is an ex kindy teacher, mother of five children approached CYFS for advice on assistance available for her youngest child who was experiencing learning difficulties. These difficulties had not been successfully addressed at school.
Some weeks later a woman visited the mother at her home saying that she was there to provide the requested advise. The woman discussed the problems with the mother while looking around the home. At the end of her visit the woman handed her card to the mother and said that if she needed any more assistance then to give her a call. The card identified the woman as a CYFS worker. The mother became very angry and said that she didn’t need help from CYFS but from someone who could help with her Childs learning. The CYFS worker took exception to the mother’s attitude and said that she knew what she was doing because she had a degree from university and made the threat that “ I will get you”
Comment; The CYFS worker was about 23 years old and not long out of university.
Although the alleged threat cannot be co-oberated I have heard many other allegations of threats from CYFS if the parents did not co-operate.
Summary eight:
13 years ago he committed a crime-and the authorities are not letting him forget it. After quite a horrendous life he found Mrs…………….., who has herself had a horrendous life and these two unlikely people found happiness together and have now two happy well-loved toddlers. Because of notifications with regard his past, cyfs turned up on his doorstep with police and said to Mrs ……………..-unless you go into a refuge we will uplift your children! They immediately sought our help and legal help. We now find a meeting has been called with cyfs and lawyers, and Mrs …………….and he has not been invited. Going on cyfs standard procedure, we feel they will try and railroad Mrs …………….into leaving him. The …………..’s want to fight this as a family and have suffered untold discrimination because of his past. He has not re-offended and I personally have doubts as to his conviction being just anyway. My co-worker and I have probably spent =between us, well over 100 hours heavy-duty time with this couple.
What a good and loving family.
“It is no wonder that so many people see no other option but suicide” says A mother of two young children who were removed from her care following allegations of neglect by a disgruntled former partner. The allegations were subsequently found to have no basis of truth whatsoever yet the children were exposed to enormous trauma nonetheless. It took seven months of half hearted investigation by CYFS before it was decided that there was no substance to the allegations and the children were returned to her. These two children have had to undergo extensive counselling and rehabilitation.
Comment It is this sort of “gung-Ho” and heartless approach by CYFS that have so many parents enraged.
Summary Nine:
My case has a long history. I had my 5 children removed in nov 1998 and I was 3 months pregnant at the time. When they removed the children they accused me of munhausen syndrome by proxy and later when it looked like they weren’t able to substancate with enought evidence they accused me of the most horrific child abuse allegations. I have a IHC child and then my 5 child had lost alot of weight, then had an apnoea attack one night while my partner was away so that was their evidence to get an exparte order from the court. The the FUN began, I lost my child at birth as the case hadn;t been to a declaration hearing and things just went down hill from there.
The court could not determine MSBP but CYFS couldn’t let go and so I have still been treated poorly by CYFS. But resently I have won my eldest child, we have started the transition home.
I have done all that is required and more but CYFS social workers still won’t back down from their allegations and start working with me and my husband. I am hoping that a meeting that is arranged in January may bring some resolution to the communication problems, and CYF breaking court orders, and just generally breaking their own ACT
One thing that I can tell you is that my Grandmother was never allowed the children addresses to send them birthday cards etc, the explaintion that the s/w gave to her in a letter was that it breeched the childrens privacy rights. She was a 82 year old women . CYF knew I had all the childrens addresses what threat was my Grandmother (the childrens GREAT Grandmother to the children or CYFS) another way of destroying the rights and best interests of the children.
Summary Ten:
A mother of two young children who were removed from her care following allegations of neglect by a disgruntled former partner. The allegations were subsequently found to have no basis of truth whatsoever yet the children were exposed to enormous trauma nonetheless. It took seven months of half hearted investigation by CYFS before it was decided that there was no substance to the allegations and the children were returned to her. These two children have had to undergo extensive counselling and rehabilitation.
Comment It is this sort of “gung-Ho” and heartless approach by CYFS that have so many parents enraged.
Summary Eleven:
I made a complaint to CYP’s regarding the beating by my ex of my niece and adopted son, my niece had a large bruise on her butt and she complained that my ex had beaten my adopted son with a large black belt around his head butt and legs repeatedly over the weekend she stayed with my ex!! I telephoned CYP’s as soon as I knew of the event and that was the following weekend.
I gave CYP’s the names (full names) and addresses phone numbers and deatails of what I knew about that weekend.
Now CYP’s went to one address and interviewed the ex and found no marks on the adopted son but they didn’t bother to check my niece but instead they decided to help the ex relocate to another city 100 miles plus from where the incident happend!!
My sister telephoned CYP’s on a number of occasions over a period of 3 weeks to be told leave a message and we will get back to you!! Well I told her to call and speak with a supervisor which she did, and her details we logged. So the weeks go by and nothing happens so the mother of my niece arrives from Australia to visit my niece and we all have a chat about what has happened so then the mother of my niece decides she has to do something and goes to CYP’s and arranges a meeting.
Well my sister was disgusted with what happened at the meeting but they were told that they had no details about my niece!! (cover up) but the did admit to recieving numerous phone calls from my sister. I can’t remember all the details of the interview but will make the trip there to document it all asap and we will make an official complaint.
The ex gets away with yet more violence to children and even gets help from CYP’s and she isn’t the victim!! she’s just a bloody good liar.
