It is me again - Sandy from NJ

After 11 months of hastling with DYFS (Division of Youth & Family Services) - they are filing a "complaint" with the Court tomorrow to try to remove the kids from my home.

Why are they doing that?

1) Because I have been continuing to "update then" how my son is regressing neurologically, behaviorially and medically. (My son is regressing and getting sicker because I "abided by their request" and never gave my son any more medicine to treat his condition. I was instead only gathering Doctor reports on my son's condition and giving it to them hoping they would come to the right decision)

2) Because the head of all DYFS for NJ, Jim Davy, just received a letter from a NJ Congressman asking them "why they are doing what they are doing" and pretty much "telling them to put my son back on antibiotics". (This frazzled the local agency so they are going full force against me)

So, they are going to pull both kids, not just my son, and send them to their father's house to see if my son "really does" have these things happening to him caused by his Lyme disease (leg pain, neuropsychiatric fits, headaches, nausea, obsessive compulsive disorders. But of course my exhusband will say my son is "not" having these problems, because he started this all.

I have 6 Doctors on my side, and all the government people above, and a "video" showing my sons problems. And now they want to resolve this by sending the kids to their "Dad's" who thinks an autistic child should live on a diet of chicken nuggets, and sit in a room alone playing nintendo, and get beat for having poop and pee accidents, now a result of his neurologic lyme.

And exactly "who" is my ex-husband. He is an attorney. He has a record in Highland Park (police department) of domestic abuse, he almost physically assaulted a Dr. in PA, who was treating our son for Lyme, because of the "extended wait" in the Doctors office, I have a letter from that Dr. that my husband is dangerous to himself and to me and my kids - and without treatment for his depression, rage, and neuropsychiatric Lyme and Babesiosis - he will probably hurt us. And the list goes on and on.

I have two Congressman, one senator, my son's school, the mayor in my town and "others" all trying to help. But it is not helping.

IF ANYONE HAS ANY CONNECTIONS - I NEED HELP. I NEED A CONNECTION LIKE A JUDGE. I NEED SOMETHING.

I cannot hire an attorney. I have just lost over $80,000 fighting this over last year - so I can't afford to hire one.

DYFS said there is no problem with my home or parenting - at least they "tried to" find one - but couldn't pin one on. I have complied fully with them. I haven't given my son any medications or antibiotics. I have continually requested that they come to my home and see what is happening to my son - but they have refused.

- So any contacts in high places would be appreciated

- If any of you know any attorneys in NJ who want to "help" with this "pro bono" or on a "deferred agreement" - I will certainly sign it to pay the money back.

- If anyone of you with families like mine with children who are loaded with Lyme, autistic and/or neuropsychiatric problems from Lyme, etc - want to help, perhaps you can call: 1) Jim Davy, head of DYFS for all of State of NJ - tell him about this atrocity - tell him you will be there to fight with me in Court and appearing on the Oprah Show, Montel Williams etc. Jim Davy (DYFS hotline for NJ) is 800-331-3937. Governor McGreevey's office might be good also.

I am trying to figure out where I could move though - in a neighboring state still close enough for him to pick up his kids.

If I have time to get my affairs in order, I could get someone to move into my house - and rent a small apartment in Staten Island NY, only 20 minutes from where I live now - just over the border.

I am seriously trying to figure out where I could move in to - in a hurry , believe me.

Not a good idea.

Sandy, I emailed you. Im in PA.. paralegal, know judges, etc.. buttt... thats in PA.

How can I help?

Are you able to present information to the court in defence as DYFUS files their complaint?

I mean, what is the process..is it a one sided presentation?

Still seems to me an impartial judge would have a tough time taking your children away when you have so much documentation, and with your ex's record.

You may even be able to get a restraining order out if the deal, as his move with DYFUS is quite obviously malicious with intent to harm you and the kids.

You've just got to get an attorney.

Whatever it takes. It seems that is your only hope..but you also have a very good case, as far as medical documentation, and pain and suffering as a result of your ex and DYFUS' actions.

This depends on how much "power" DYFUS has, and what are your rights in order to defend yourself during court proceedings?

There is a LL attirney I thought was with info somewhere on this site..does anyone know his name? A Les, or Len something..

Maybe he could help or refer.

Also, I will look to see (siea anyone else have any ideas on this?) If there is a state or federal agancy that protects families like yours in this kind of abuse.

There are a couple of attorneys names, plus the last part of the article refers to things you can persue against DYFUS..but calling those attorneys would be my first best guess.

I am linking you to the page as well.

There is a link near the bottom to get advise.

http://echo.forensicpanel.com/1997/9/1/caseworkermay.html

*******************************************

Caseworker May Leap Before Looking
No Liability After Child's Removal
Volume 1, Issue 10 -- Published: Monday, Sep 1, 1997 -- Last Updated: Monday, Mar 11, 2002

Issues: Parental Rights
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Featuring Expert Commentary by:

Robert Kinscherff, M.D.
Children's Law Center

Jump to expert commentary below.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


When eight-year-old Jose M. complained to his teacher about his parents, he triggered a chain of events that changed a New Jersey legal precedent and focused scrutiny on the practices of the child welfare system. It began with Jose's revelation that his mother caused his bruises.
The school reported his complaint to the Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) and a social worker came to Jose's home that same night. Theodore Sliwinski of East Brunswick New Jersey, attorney for Jose's mother told The Forensic Echo that his client felt the social worker would not listen to her. She became offended at the persistent questioning and the exchange became personal. Jose's parents refused to answer the social worker's questions, and the standoff escalated. The DYES would later tell the court that the social worker was concerned about the rising level of anger in the house and feared it was directed at young Jose.
The social worker telephoned her supervisor for advice, and the police were called. Jose was forcibly removed from his home and spent the next year at a group home for foster children while his mother and step father engaged in mortal combat with the DYFS. The agency claimed Jose's mother and stepfather abused and neglected him. A ten day trial ensued at which sixteen witnesses testified.
According to Attorney Sliwinski, the social worker that made the controversial home visit did not testify. At the trial's conclusion, the judge vindicated Jose's parents and commented that if anyone was abused and neglected during the ordeal caused by the DYFS, it was Jose's mother.
The vindication of Jose's parents came at a high price. The family exhausted their financial resources in the protracted litigation over what they believed were non-meritorious and careless charges. They demanded reimbursement for their attorney's fees, arguing that the agency was subject to the sanctions available through the frivolous litigation statute. The parents relied upon previous case law which held that the state and its subdivisions were subject to the statute (see Matter of K.L.F., 646 A.2d (Ch. Div 1993)).

**The Superior Court of New Jersey addressed the narrow question of whether the DYFS had a duty to "stop, think, investigate and research" before removing a child from the home.
Holding: The agency was exempt from the frivolous litigation statute. The legislature intended for the DYFS to have an unfettered ability to protect children. Efforts to deter that power would result in hesitancy on the part of a caseworker to act swiftly and protect a child in ambiguous circumstances. The prior case law relied upon by Jose's parents contained unfounded assumptions of the legislature's intent.

Jose's parents were undeterred by the decision of the New Jersey state court. ****Nancy Alvarez, an associate with Lansner and Kubitschek in New York City, has filed a civil rights claim in federal court against the DYFS on behalf of Jose's parents.
(As for Jose, his mother claimed he was sexually abused while hospitalized during the month following his removal from the home. The child has a separate action pending against the DYFS and the hospital.)

Editor's Note: The state of New York has recently passed legislation preventing social service case workers from testifying against the decision of the child protective agency to remove a child from the home.

**Robert Kinscherff, M.D.
Children's Law Center
[biographical notes]

Dr. Kinscherff comments: It may not have been an error to remove Jose on an emergency basis. Allegations of physical punishment, an alleged refusal by the parents to discuss the allegations, a concern that parental anger was being directed at the child, and a highly volatile situation involving the police may have created the kind of ambiguous situation referred to by the appeals court. It would be unwise and often unsafe to vulnerable youngsters if child protection workers were unduly constrained when making judgments regarding emergency removal under such circumstances. However, errors of judgment may have been made in the subsequent investigation and case management that kept Jose out of the home for a protracted period of time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be unsafe to vulnerable youngsters if child protection workers were unduly constrained when making judgments regarding emergency removal.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***Are there other legal options left for parents? It may be possible to file a professional licensure action. Errors of judgment by licensed mental health professionals that fall below the relevant standard of care should be the subject of a complaint by the licensing agency. The action would not result in monetary compensation to the parents, but could subject the licensed professional to possible sanctions, conditions upon practice, or revocation of license. Or, depending upon the applicable jurisdictional statute, it may be feasible to file a professional malpractice action against the professional in his or her individual capacity.

**The search for the key to the courthouse begins with a thorough examination of the professional standard of care to which mental health professionals are held.

Feedback: What do you have to say? | Help: Get expert assistance for your own case

Return to the front page of The Forensic Echo now!




Terms of Use | Privacy Statement
All Rights Reserved. Copyright � 1996-2003 The Forensic Panel

********************************************

NJ Father: It's As If The State Kidnapped My Son

(New York-WABC, July 31, 2002) -- A distraught father is fighting to be reunited with his son after the state took the boy without warning and, the father says, without a good reason. It is a daily nightmare for Cannan Johnson, whose son was taken away by the state of New Jersey, and kept away, for what he says is no apparent reason. He says it's as if the state kidnapped his son. The Investigators' Jim Hoffer brings us the disturbing story.
Watch the Story

New Jersey law is clear: "No parent should lose custody of his or her child without just cause." But Cannan Johnson says the state had no justifiable reason to take his son. Court documents and files we reviewed seem to support his claim that the Division of Youth and Family Services is holding his son illegally.

For six months now, Cannan Johnson has been fighting to get his son back. Each day he feels his bond with two-year-old Marcus slipping.

Cannan Johnson, Father: "They just took him. I love my son. I've been there for my son from day one."

It all began last January, when Marcus was visiting his mother. When Cannan went to pick up the boy, the toddler was gone.

Johnson: "When I got back to retrieve my son, to take him back home, he weren't there. She stated that the division of family youth services came and took my son. Without contacting me or anything."

The Division of Youth And Family Services, known as DYFS, took Marcus, claiming in its complaint that the mother had recently given birth to a crack baby who died days later at a local hospital.

While the state had ample evidence that the mother was using drugs, Cannan Johnson had no complaints against him, no evidence that he was a negligent father. Still DYFS took Marcus, without warning, even though he lived with his father who had residential custody. Then Cannan Johnson says he was pressured to sign a document that would voluntarily place his son with the state for 15 days.

Johnson: "I feel that I was manipulated and coerced."
Jim Hoffer, Eyewitness News: "How?"
Johnson: "Because when they brought the paper to me, the only thing that I wanted to do was get my son back, and I was willing to do just about anything to get my son back, and they knew this. So I signed it."

When the 15 day voluntary placement agreement ended, DYFS didn't returned Marcus. Instead, the agency charged both parents with neglect, even though DYFS' own records fail to show any substantiated evidence that Cannan Johnson is an unfit father.

********Richard Wexler, National Coalition For Child Protection Reform Director: "This is not an isolated case."

***The director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform says the Johnson case proves again that family court judges wield rubber stamps instead of gavels.

Wexler: "The judge knows if he makes even a common sense ruling, returns a child home and something terrible happens, that judge's career probably is over. That judge can keep hundreds maybe thousands of children needlessly away from families, the children will suffer terribly, but the judge is safe."

And just last month, in a case similar to Johnson's, a New Jersey appellate court criticized a family court judge and DYFS for "disregarding its responsibilities." The ruling blamed them for failing to protect innocent parents from government intrusion, and to spare children from the emotional trauma of an "unwarranted separation."

But Wexler, a child advocate, says the Johnson case is proof DYFS isn't listening.

Wexler: "A little two-year old boy who can not possibly understand why he can't be with his daddy anymore. For that child, he has suffered an experience akin to kidnapping."

With no court date scheduled until October, and with only two, one-hour visits a month, Cannan Johnson fears he's losing precious time.

Johnson: "Give me an opportunity to be a father to my son. That's it. Just give me a chance. I'm a good father."

We made several attempts to get a comment from the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services, but a DYFS spokesman said state confidentiality laws prohibited the agency from commenting on the Johnson case. Johnson's next chance at getting his son back is at his next court hearing in October.

I did have a thought, and maybe I am just paranoid, but are you using your own computer in your own home, I just don't know how far they could go and possibly confiscate it to use information against you.

Does any one else feel a little uneasy about this also, should she get rid of her computer and use a friends until this is settled, I know it certainly would not be as convenient, but you would not want to add anymore fuel to the fire, if it were something they are capable of. It certainly sounds as if they are playing dirty and you would not put anything past them.

I want to update you on this situation. Thanks so much for your ideas. MO - GREAT STUFF ON DYFS.

DYFS is in fact filing a complaint to remove the kids from me on Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. Guess what the grounds are - you won't believe it: THEY WANT TO DO A "PROCESS OF ELIMINATION TEST" to see if my son will do better at his Dad's house then mine. In other words, after three months, they will ask my "ex" (the lawyer who filed this thing in the first place) - if my son is doing better, he will of course say "yes" (he could care less how my son "is" - he will just pay enough for a sitter to watch him) - and then that is it. THEY ADMIT I DO NOT HAVE MUNCHAUSEN, I PASSED MY NEUROPSYCHIATRIC EXAMS, I AM A COMPETENT MOTHER. They plain old think it is the best thing to do - to take my kids and give them to their Dad. (who has a record of abuse against me with HIghland Park police department - but DYFS refused to get the records, who wakes my daughter up at 6 in the morning and at 10 pm at night to "shower" together with her, who beats my son for the "bathroom" accidents. Incidentally, DYFS did ask Mr.Mishky not to shower naked with his daughter and to not beat my son anymore. that was it....

I have borrowed enough money (DYFS investigation toll of last 12 months now at $87,000). My lawyer is not a LL lawyer - worries me a tad - but he is extremely, extremely smart, agressive and caring. He looked at the Dr. reports I have from Dr. J in CT, Dr. F in NY and other names like these Docs, and he says "DYFS" has been really abusing you. So when we get the pleadings against "me" - he is going after them. Obviously nothing can "happen" to them except someone writes a bad article about them. WE/I don't get money for our pain or suffering.

Me going to Court doesn't mean I get to "treat" my kids - hopefully it will mean I won't lose them.

By the way - once this goes to Court, and then I get the pleadings against me, THEN AND ONLY THEN will all the media I went after (newspapers, local channel 12 news, etc - be interested. I think us Lyme Mom's have a chance to get some exposure - from my situation - after next week.

LASTLY, IF THERE IS ANYONE AT ALL WHO READS THIS AND LIVES WITHIN A CLOSE ENOUGH RANGE OF CENTRAL NEW JERSEY (I live 45 minutes my train or car from NYC) or 60 minutes from Philadelphia ) - I know it is a lot to ask - BUT WHAT COULD HELP ME THE MOST IS ONE OR A COUPLE OF MOTHERS OR REGULAR INDIVIDUALS WITH CHRONIC LYME TO COME. Because DYFS and my ex-husband are going to say they really don't believe in these "symptoms" and "neuropsychiatric symptoms" I describe. I BELIEVE THEIR GROUNDS TO REMOVE KIDS FROM ME WILL BE "I HAVE PUT IN WRITING THAT MY SON IS DIFFICULT TO HANDLE/ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE NOW FROM LYME - THE DAD DOESN'T THINK HE IS DIFFICULT - SO GIVE KIDS TO DAD).

One more thing, non-lyme related - I am about to lose my house because I have done nothing but fight this DYFS thing full-time/around the clock for the last 7 months now (part time for 5 months before that). If anyone of you ever has a need, or know a friend who has a need, for: 1) a mortgage refinance quote, 2) medical insurance (I sell group medical insurance to groups of 2 or more) 3) disability insurance/group disability 4) life insurance 5) all kinds of retirement plans/IRA's/401K's 6) Collegs savings plans. 7) Free personal planning analysis - I would be so happy to have the opportunity to talk with you about it.

PLEASE DON'T THINK THINK OF ME AS RUDE POSTING THE ABOVE. I work 100% on commission, and I stopped working completely(using my retirment savings to live on) for the last 6 months - to fight DYFS.

One more thing. Check out this list of who has been helping me fight DYFS: Two different Congressman from NJ,the Mayor from my town, the Senator, a law firm in Philadelphia who you all know from their success with some lyme issues, and their must be others.

If I had relatives in Staten Island NY or someplace close "over the border" - I may have done that.

The problem is though, Court is next Tuesday.

I wish I could move, believe me. I have had it.

Have you contacted your local woman's abuse agency? You might of mentioned it here, but I haven't been able to read your whole post. They may have some attorneys that may help you. Ginney's House in Sussex County, New Jersey is supposed to be there to help the children, so maybe they can refer you to someone that can help. I'm from Northwestern New Jersey, so if there is anything I can help you with let me know. Feel free to email me directly.

Good Luck!

Do you or another family member have chronic Lyme? If so - what would help most I think is a letter to the head of DYFs in NJ (Jim Davy) - but also - if it worked into your schedule (depending on your particular Lyme situation/ailments - perhaps showing up in Court in case this will help my attorney.

I think that lots of letters about this outrage going to Jim Davy will help.

I just don't know.

Do you know any judges?

Thanks for your offer to help - I am desperate and frightened. I have "done" exactly what they have said.

Bye for now, and thanks

Best wishes to you and your child!

Did these 3 women all lose their kids for treating them for Lyme? Did they get them back? How long go?

I have an attorney to go to Court with me next week. I guess if I "lose" my kids - then I will have to hire a "Lyme literate" one.

Because I have a Dr. report from a highly qualifed Dr. in NYC, I don't think they will take them away because I "treated" my kids for Lyme and followed Doctor orders, I think DYFS is going to Court to say "She can't seem to take proper care of her son - but the Dad thinks he can". You see - my son needs antibiotics bad. So as he has regressed and gotten sicker, of course I have let DYFS know and documented it - hoping to convince them. Instead, as I was warned from everyone, I think they will use it against me to say "The dad apparently 'can' deal with the child - she can't".

Any info on these three women would be appreciated. Please send to my email address if you wish.

Get more. See what the lawyer thinks. Though, scratch it if there is no time. Maybe you have enough.

The more documentation you have, the harder it is for even a blundering, slimeball agency like DYFUS to do this.

That would also protect a judge who may be in your side, but afraid of being "caught" making the "wrong" decision.

Doctor G in NJ may also help. There is also a pediatrician, Doc C in NJ or PA (Doc J knows her name)

If you cannot get in to see them in time, maybe Doc J can send records, and ask for a consult report.

The other thing, is this deal with the Dad.

Do you have all documentation of his past crap? Everything you can get your hands on, plus the fact that HE reported you to DYFUS immediately following your rejection.

Your lawyer could show conflict of interest.
God..it SOUNDS like HE has been communicating with them on this idea. If he HAS, there must be wrongdoing in that, too.

Have him fight that you keep your son, and allow him to be TREATED medically, and then they can check in on results, Emery's improvement.

Then, I think a civil suit against DYFUS is totally in order.

I don't know if you can even think about that now, ask the lawyer. Right now all focus needs to be in keeping the kids.

But, at the right time, and not a minute later..a suit against them for what they have put your family through would turn the tables quick.

DYFUS has quite a record of harming children in the name of protecting them.

I would focus on one more report, with Doc J's help. Calling in a favor from another LL..and getting records on the father.

If they doubt that this is "all you", fight that they place the child with another relative..is there anyone you trust within the family..a mother, your sister..on your side of the fanily, or even a friend...who will report your son's condition objectively?

Then you would be fulfilling their "requirements"..but it should be arguable that it NOT be with the Dad because he has CLEAR colflict of interest..he initiated this whole thing!!!!!

Keep your head on, sister..you have managed remarkably well, and I think you can make arguements here.

Everybody..can we find an LL lawyer for quick phone consult with Sandy's attorney?

Mo