TS Radio Network: #2 on What are “Courts of Record”..What courts are NOT!

Join us this evening September 25, 2018 at 7:00 pm CST!

TS Radio: Abolishing Probate and also The Natalia Dalton Story

Join us this evening June 11, 2018 at 7:00 CST!

5:00 PST …6:00 MST…7:00 CST…8:00 EST

Listen Live HERE!

Call in # 917-388-4520

Hosted by Marti Oakley

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From 7:00 CST until 7:30 we will be discussing the the nature of probate tribunals and how they are prohibited from receiving judicial powers.  We will also talk about any attempt to act as though they are an actual judge of law, and what their actual capacity is comprised of.

From 7:30 – 8:30  Natalia Dalton is our guest.

Natalia Dalton is fighting for her son.  Her son is living with his father, a man who has pulled him out of two schools and now claims to be home-schooling him.  The court has been notified that her son’s behavioral and health needs are not being attended to.  The boy reports little schooling and says he and the father play violent video games most of the day.

On numerous occasions Natalia has attempted to report the abuse and neglect to the court.   So what do you do when the judge refuses to hear evidence or to acknowledge the whole issue and all of the facts in a custody dispute?  And what could possibly be the reason for failing to act to protect his young boy?

How about later when the plaintiff realizes that her ex-attorney and the judge are buddies, and that the Guardian Ad Litem is friends with both the ex-attorney and the judge?  Its a recipe for disaster.  And the person paying the highest price is the child.

Also: Listen to Natalia in her interview with LuLu and Robin on HIDDEN TRUTH REVEALED

Courts Again Affirm Parental Rights

MEDICAL KIDNAP NEWS

In a ruling issued this week by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California, the rights of families to be together was reaffirmed.

See:

9th Circuit Court Upholds Parents’ Constitutional Rights: Rules Against Arizona Social Workers Removing Children without a Warrant

The ruling of the court was made by a 3-judge panel at the 9th Circuit. Judge Marsha S. Berzon was the leading concurring judge.

The court stated:

As this court has stated repeatedly, families have a “well-elaborated constitutional right to live together without governmental interference.”

Wallis v. Spencer, 202 F.3d 1126, 1136 (9th Cir. 2000); accord Kirkpatrick v. Cty. of Washoe, 843 F.3d 784, 789 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc); Burke v. Cty. of Alameda, 586 F.3d 725, 731 (9th Cir. 2009); Rogers v. Cty. of San Joaquin, 487 F.3d 1288, 1294 (9th Cir. 2007); Mabe v. San Bernardino Cty., 237 F.3d 1101, 1107 (9th Cir. 2001); Ram v. Rubin, 118 F.3d 1306, 1310 (9th Cir. 1997).

Judge Marsha S. Berzon in her concurring opinion addressed the issue of traumatizing children by removing them from their home:

I concur in the per curiam opinion in full. I write separately to emphasize why it is essential that the courts scrupulously guard a child’s constitutional right to remain at home absent a court order or true exigency.

Taking a child from his or her home, family, and community constitutes a separate trauma, in and of itself. Our cases so recognize, and so ordinarily permit that trauma to occur only after a court determination that the alternative is worse.

 

In a ruling issued this week by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California, the rights of families to be together was reaffirmed.

See:

9th Circuit Court Upholds Parents’ Constitutional Rights: Rules Against Arizona Social Workers Removing Children without a Warrant

The ruling of the court was made by a 3-judge panel at the 9th Circuit. Judge Marsha S. Berzon was the leading concurring judge.

The court stated:

As this court has stated repeatedly, families have a “well-elaborated constitutional right to live together without governmental interference.”

Wallis v. Spencer, 202 F.3d 1126, 1136 (9th Cir. 2000); accord Kirkpatrick v. Cty. of Washoe, 843 F.3d 784, 789 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc); Burke v. Cty. of Alameda, 586 F.3d 725, 731 (9th Cir. 2009); Rogers v. Cty. of San Joaquin, 487 F.3d 1288, 1294 (9th Cir. 2007); Mabe v. San Bernardino Cty., 237 F.3d 1101, 1107 (9th Cir. 2001); Ram v. Rubin, 118 F.3d 1306, 1310 (9th Cir. 1997).

Judge Marsha S. Berzon in her concurring opinion addressed the issue of traumatizing children by removing them from their home:

I concur in the per curiam opinion in full. I write separately to emphasize why it is essential that the courts scrupulously guard a child’s constitutional right to remain at home absent a court order or true exigency.

Taking a child from his or her home, family, and community constitutes a separate trauma, in and of itself. Our cases so recognize, and so ordinarily permit that trauma to occur only after a court determination that the alternative is worse.

CPS Using “Predictive Analytics” Software to Label Parents as Unfit, Even Before Baby is Born

Medical Kidnap

November 2, 2017 12:22 pm

Parents whose children have been taken from them by Child Protective Services often tell us that the system is backwards. Instead of being presumed innocent until proven guilty, everyone involved with CPS assumes guilt, even in the face of no evidence of guilt. Some jurisdictions are taking this presumption of guilt without evidence a frightening step further: they are using “predictive analytics” to see which parents MIGHT abuse or neglect their children in the future. In several cases reported to Health Impact News, we have already seen such allegations used against parents. Social workers have literally written in their reports to the courts that a parent has characteristics that might indicate that they may abuse or neglect their child in the future, even though there is no evidence that they have harmed their child in the past. This is reminiscent of George Orwell’s “thought police” in the dystopian novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four. It is inconsistent with one of the foundational principles underlying the U.S. Constitution, that of the presumption of innocence. Some have equated the predictive analysis model with racial profiling, because the algorithms tend to disproportionately target people who are poor or part of a minority group. The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform recently addressed this alarming trend.

Read More…

 

Adoption Bonuses: The Money Behind the Madness

 

By Nev Moore
Massachusetts News

This article appears to have been written in 2002, but is timely and relevant today as the efforts by CPS and others to fracture the family for profit has escalated.  Your children are prime commodities in a system that buys and sells them for profit.

______________________________________________________________________

DSS and affiliates rewarded for breaking up families

Child “protection” is one of the biggest businesses in the country. We spend $12 billion a year on it.

The money goes to tens of thousands of a) state employees, b) collateral professionals, such as lawyers, court personnel, court investigators, evaluators and guardians, judges, and c) DSS contracted vendors such as counselors, therapists, more “evaluators”, junk psychologists, residential facilities, foster parents, adoptive parents, MSPCC, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, YMCA, etc. This newspaper is not big enough to list all of the people in this state who have a job, draw a paycheck, or make their profits off the kids in DSS custody.

In this article I explain the financial infrastructure that provides the motivation for DSS to take people’s children – and not give them back.

In 1974 Walter Mondale promoted the Child Abuse and Prevention Act which began feeding massive amounts of federal funding to states to set up programs to combat child abuse and neglect. From that came Child “Protective” Services, as we know it today. After the bill passed, Mondale himself expressed concerns that it could be misused. He worried that it could lead states to create a “business” in dealing with children.

Then in 1997 President Clinton passed the “Adoption and Safe Families Act.” The public relations campaign promoted it as a way to help abused and neglected children who languished in foster care for years, often being shuffled among dozens of foster homes, never having a real home and family. In a press release from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services dated November 24, 1999, it refers to “President Clinton’s initiative to double by 2002 the number of children in foster care who are adopted or otherwise permanently placed.”

It all sounded so heartwarming. We, the American public, are so easily led. We love to buy stereotypes; we just eat them up, no questions asked. But, my mother, bless her heart, taught me from the time I was young to “consider the source.” In the stereotype that we’ve been sold about kids in foster care, we picture a forlorn, hollow-eyed child, thin and pale, looking up at us beseechingly through a dirt streaked face. Unconsciously, we pull up old pictures from Life magazine of children in Appalachia in the 1930s. We think of orphans and children abandoned by parents who look like Manson family members. We play a nostalgic movie in our heads of the little fellow shyly walking across an emerald green, manicured lawn to meet Ward and June Cleaver, his new adoptive parents, who lead him into their lovely suburban home. We imagine the little tyke’s eyes growing as big as saucers as the Cleavers show him his very own room, full of toys and sports gear. And we just feel so gosh darn good about ourselves.

Now it’s time to wake up to the reality of the adoption business.

Very few children who are being used to supply the adoption market are hollow-eyed tykes from Appalachia. Very few are crack babies from the projects. [Oh… you thought those were the children they were saving? Think again]. When you are marketing a product you have to provide a desirable product that sells. In the adoption business that would be nice kids with reasonably good genetics who clean up good. An interesting point is that the Cape Cod & Islands office leads the state in terms of processing kids into the system and having them adopted out. More than the inner city areas, the projects, Mission Hill, Brockton, Lynn, etc. Interesting…

TS Radio: Attorney Allison Folmar…Refusing deadly drugs is not medical neglect

Join us Monday evening December 1st, 2014 at 7:00 pm CST!