Please let the CT Legislature know that the citizens can not tolerate willful violations of our rights or our laws by the employees and contractors of the Judicial Branch. Public corruption is so rife that the US Department of Justice has opened a widespread investigation:
New Haven Register reported, "The Task Force will also focus on the hundreds of millions of dollars that are distributed annually by federal and state agencies to ensure that taxpayer funds reach their intended recipients without corrupt interference."
Tell the legislature to pass Raised Bill 5505 to start protecting children and parents from illegal and unethical practices!
Raised Bill 5505 includes some excellent provisions:
*Solidifies in statute that guardians ad litem do not have immunity.
*Removes the possibility of judges ordering supervised visitation without substantiation of abuse or neglect.
*Allows litigants to choose any licensed, qualified mental health provider, including those covered by their insurance.
*Disallows unskilled guardians ad litem from testifying on behalf of mental health professionals.
Connecticut residents who need access to courts for divorce or custody matters are not told that the Judicial Branch is running an illegal corporation through their offices and courthouses, Association of Family and Concillation Courts (AFCC). We are not told that their business model is to profit by fixing cases to maximize funding mandates over justice. But they are signatories to this agreement to do exactly that:
Safe, happy children do not generate billing for unethical professionals, as they do not need services. Children placed in dangerous homes, however, generate endless billing for many professionals, all AFCC affiliates, and all appointed onto cases by AFCC judges.
Judges almost always appoint a guardian ad litem (GAL), on the premise of representing the best interests of the children of divorcing parents, even though there has never been authority in statute for these appointments in family court; only for orphaned or abandoned children in their dependency cases. Informed consent is never disclosed or solicited in this constitutional violation of rights to parent our children where GAL appointment entirely usurps parental rights.
AFCC judges appoint AFCC members who have gone through thirty-six (36) hours of AFCC-formulated and sponsored training to become GALs. As a comparison, 36 hours of training at a major fast food chain qualifies a person to take orders at the front counter or work at the front counter. Hospital volunteers who only deliver reading material to patients and cheer them up spend months in training. At a major coffeehouse franchise, 36 hours of training doesn't qualify an employee to do anything at all.
Unskilled GALs are automatically considered expert witnesses by the courts who appoint them. Judge Solomon testified last year that judges cannot function in family cases without the help of GALs, because without them they have two sides who present different views. A judge's only job is to find facts in an adversarial process. If they cannot perform their own role without these entirely unskilled witnesses, why would they be considered qualified to be a judge? The service that GALs do provide the Judges, is to outsource their fact-finding responsibility and thereby circumvent due process rules. This removes it off the record, without any transparency, and without any chance of a parent defending against the perjury of the unskilled GAL.
If you think a judge would never knowingly place a child in a dangerous home, read about the tragic Joshua Komisarjevsky custody case here:
Courts routinely solicit and hear testimony from GALs in lieu of treaters and evaluators, regarding their findings. GALs are in no way whatsoever qualified by 36 hours of training to interpret or represent medical or psychological findings of professionals in those fields. In case after case, GALs have perjured themselves even about simple facts of a child's life. They also routinely lied to courts about violent parents, safety hazards, sexual abuse disclosures, injuries to children. Children in safe homes do not pad bills. Children in danger are a cash-cow. Children are removed from fit, loving, safe parents under the guise of their "best interests". Case outcomes consistently show that judges' and GALs' interpretation of "best interests" is whatever brings most profit to AFCC members.
In almost all cases labeled with the misnomer "high-conflict", where the AFCC is able to maximize their cash-flow, judges appoint supervised visitation for one or both parents. Judges in family court, a court of equity, regularly make quasi-criminal findings that isolate children from good parents - usually the primary attachment figure - without due process, and without any findings of unfitness. They do this on the recommendation of the unskilled GALs. These supervised visitation providers are likewise unskilled, untrained, unqualified, and unregulated. Some are centers run by the same evaluators appointed by the court who recommend the supervision they will profit from. Others are random unqualified individuals, several of whom have been known by the state to have committed crimes.
The supreme court has ruled the supervised visitation providers have a fiduciary responsibility. But judges who appoint supervised visitation repeatedly fail to state the reasons for the order, the duties of the supervisor, or specify the terms of the contract for service. Hourly rates can be over $100, with cases costing parents more than $150,000 per year. These orders last for years, effectively severing parent-child relationship, as the perfectly fit parent runs out of money to afford to see their child. Entire families are bankrupted by this racket, without any findings of unfitness at all.
With GAL bills often totaling $50,000 to $100,000 and even more, for each case, GALs have consistently failed to produce tax identification to comply with federal reporting laws. Some GALs have been found to be billing more than ten cases for the same hours. In fact the judges, Office of Chief Public Defender, and Comptroller have also stated they do not issue 1099 forms for privately paid GALs. They refuse to disclose publicly funded GAL bills, even to the parents:
Supervision providers also routinely fail to disclose their tax reporting information, and do not comply with federal tax reporting laws. There is no office that keeps records of supervised visitation transactions, contracts, or tracks orders for them. Supervision providers are entirely unregulated.
GALs are entirely unregulated. All of the many complaints filed about their unethical actions are dismissed by fellow AFCC members who sit on grievance panels. They refer complaints back to the same judges who order these unskilled, unqualified, unethical GALs in the first place, in many cases the judges who conducted their specious training. Currently, GALs believe that they are immune from any legal consequences of their unethical and illegal actions. However, Gross v Rell states that GALs are not immune for actions outside statutory authority, which family GALs have none, and never for malfeasance. GALs operate without oversight. Why would any profession demand complete immunity from all liability for their actions, even illegal, unethical, or illicit? Even doctors, who are literally responsible for people's lives, no not have, expect, or demand immunity from harm they might cause.
*With all the current debate about raising taxes and cutting spending, tell the legislature that we demand state-appointed workers to be held to the same reporting laws as everyone else. Tell them to include a provision in 5505 that all GAL payments must include tax reporting information and the issuance of a 1099.
*Tell your representatives to add a provision that all GALs must charge no more than state rates, which has already been determined to be the best interest of the child. $55 per hour for 36 hours of training is a large salary for unskilled work. Charging $300 or $400 per hour for unskilled work is obscene.
*GALs are not immune from destroying children's entire lives. They are not immune from federal tax reporting laws. They are not immune from perjury laws. They are not immune from racketeering laws. Tell your legislature to codify this truth clearly in statute.
*Tell your representatives to add a provision that eliminates the automatic expert status of entirely unqualified people who have only 36 hours of AFCC profit training.
*Ask your lawmakers to add a provision to disqualify GALs from testifying about any professional findings or giving an opinion. They are fact witnesses only.
*Tell you legislators to specify penalties for perjury by GALs, visitation supervisors, and all other state-appointed witnesses.
*Tell you representative to include in this bill a requirement for judges to state on the record the reason for ordering supervision of a fit parent. They must specify the scope of services, duties and liabilities of the supervisor and the company they are ordering, and provide a terms of contract and background check on the record.
*For the safety of all CT children, tell your representatives to include a requirement for background checks of all visitation supervisors and an insurance requirement for all supervised visitation providers, exactly like licensed day care providers. This includes liability, disappearance, injury to a child, anti-molestation insurance, and death of a child in their care.
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION (LINK BELOW) ON CHANGE.ORG
https://www.change.org/p/eric-coleman-william-tong-members-of-the-judiciary-committee-please-support-the-children-of-ct-by-supporting-hb-5505?recruiter=37854873&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=share_email_responsive
No comments:
Post a Comment