At which time then tax payers can become outraged and start trimming the PORK of the legal court child trafficking ring.
Lets connect some more dots---- this article was pulled from Cjonline 2001
Topeka Capital-Journal, The, Jul 23, 2001 by Capital-Journal
K A N S A S' F O S T E R C A R E S Y S T E M
Some say privatized foster care is broken --- or never worked. The governor and Legislature had better deal with it.
Rene Netherton once filed a class action lawsuit against the state because she believed the state Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services wasn't doing its job to care for abused and neglected kids. [[[actually she had her OWN interests in mind but we will get to that]]]]
Now, after yet another private foster-care contractor has had financial problems, [[[ EEEK oh no more money for Rene M Netherton oh my, oh my!!! ]]] she wishes more than anything that SRS would get back its old responsibility for kids.
Privatization of the state's foster care system, says the Topeka attorney, "has never worked" since its inception in 1997. All it did, she says, was add another layer of bureaucracy, [[ didn't work out quite the way you thought it would did it Rene? ]] in the private sector, that is sopping up money [[[ and Rene and her ilk got left out of the pig feeding frenzy ]]] that could have trickled down to services for children.
"It doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell you've got to get rid of the middleman," she says.
[[[ hahahaha--only a destitute court whore who is running out of her money pits time to set up a new legal child trafficking ring ]]]]
[[[ MIDDLEMAN? you mean court whores like yourself? GAL’s, Guardian ad litems-- like Rene M Netherton—who now PRIVATELY screw parents out of their children—for this blog--- battered mommies to give to abusers--- after all-- ‘all [her] my rich male clients’ ]]] See her facebook ( Rene M Netherton GAL Everyone's favorite Court—opps actually JUST WHORE)
Netherton's strong stance is a statement about the lack of effectiveness of privatization: Here's a woman [[[ ha a court whore by all accounts looking out ONLY for HER best interest—not the child ]]]] who, as a child advocate, [[[ SELF ADVOCATE—it’s monetary—it ALL about the money always has been always will be ]]] once went to court against SRS. Now she's saying SRS is the agency for the job.
[[[[ hmmmm sounds like she goes where ever SHE is best positioned to make a profit ]]]]]]
Why? [[[ SEE ABOVE STATEMENT ]]]] Well, besides the added layer of bureaucracy [[[ this is what FOC’s, MHP’s, GAL’s do—THEY add another layer of PAID bureaucracy for PROFIT ]]] that privatization has brought, she says she never had a problem with the SRS workers in the trenches in the first place.
[[[[ because she got paid for manipulating the children the parents the MHP’s—ex-parte—and setting up falsify case's fraudulently for her and others own personal gain ]]]]]
In addition, she says SRS has "changed immensely" [[[[ Now its NOT so profitable as the private contractors are having FINANCIAL problems of their own--- NO MONEY for Rene M Netherton and her ilk ]]]] since she brought suit against it in 1989. "SRS has their stuff together for children now." [[[ YES, NOW they have the PROFIT MARGIN—right Rene? ]]]
Shawnee County District Judge Daniel Mitchell [[[[ the ONLY Juvenile Judge in Shawnee County—has a working relationship with his court whore’s, eerrr…..GAL’s, like Rene M Netherton—every thing THEY say—JUDGE DOES—this is true with ALL Judges— ]]]
[[[[[ the GAL is the judge no court room needed—no due process is allowed—without evidence—only one-sided opinion of one—GAL--(that btw-- the parent of said child that is being hammered for the profit of their children DOES NOT HAVE TRHE RIGHT under supreme court Rule 100 to even see what the report of the GAL is.—They are also IMMUNE from accountability and prosecution—which they flaunt openly ]]]] won't stump for either SRS or privatization. But he agrees with Netherton that SRS has improved --- "I think SRS is better now than it's been for some time," he says --- and that the state has only sown the seeds of another bureaucracy with privatization: "You've added another level of people in the case." [[ see he cant even come up with his quotes isnt that what the above child trafficker stated ]]
=================================
http://www.youthlaw.org/publications/fc_docket/alpha/sheilaavwhiteman/
KS Foster care was privatized after this.. SEE below--- it never went to court it was settled-- I notice they have Judge Buchle-- the same judge that did the Dombrowski divorce from hell to begin with and his order to force Claudine back or loose custody of my child—which Rene M Netherton was a part of. DOCUMENTS HERE
it was upheld on two appeals and two petition for reviews to state supreme court denied.
when the 2nd appeal was remanded year 2000 (due to more falsifying of records)--- judge Buchle then left the bench (as he DOMBROWSKI CASE had been holding him up from) and took his seat on the appeals court.
any ways this is what she (Rene M Netherton) is known for-- since then she has become a big foster care profiteer working with orgs to 'adopt' out foster children.
The move in the past decade has been to make it non-privatized as to many contractors have been making money by keeping these kids in foster care. Even the Joint committee on children's issues has at least acknowledged this-- a year ago-- but have yet to change it-- as to many of the legislatures who chair and are on the committee are a part of some of these 'orgs' that are privatized.
Its not illegal-- its not about a money trail. It may be at best immoral but being that it is legal they can do this.
This is what they 'fear', exposure. WE expose Rene as she relates to the DOMBROWSKI case here. She [ Rene Netherton] 'fears' this. As do all in positions that make profit-- shady as it may be-- its not illegal- so the money they are paid with are tax $ take it to we the people-- the tax payers for exposure...
at which time then tax payers can become outraged and start trimming the pork of the legal court child trafficking ring.
http://www.youthlaw.org/publications/fc_docket/alpha/sheilaavwhiteman/
Sheila A. v. Whiteman
(also known as Sheila A. v. Finney, Sheila A. v. Haden, and J.D.B. v. Barton)
FILE NO., COURT AND DATE FILED
No. 89-CV-33 (Dist. Ct. of Shawnee, Kansas, Division 4, Sept. 1, 1990)
CITATIONS
253 Kan. 793, 861 P.2d 120 (Kan. 1993); 259 Kan. 549, 913 P.2d 181 (Kan. 1996)
CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW NO.
None
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
Marcia Robinson Lowry
Children's Rights, Inc. (well known for FATHERS RIGHTS as is CPS)
330 Seventh Avenue, Fourth Floor
New York, NY 10001
(212) 683-2210
Fax: (212) 683-4015
Rene Netherton
1603 SW 37th Street
Topeka, KS 66611
(785) 267-6767
Fax: (785) 267-6768
Shook, Hardy & Bacon
84 Corporate Woods
10801 Mastin, Suite 1000
Overland Park, KS 66210
(913) 451-6060
Fax: (913) 451-8879
Jerry Palmer
Palmer, Leatherman & White LLP
627 SW Topeka Boulevard
Topeka, KS 66603
(785) 233-1836
Fax: (785) 233-3703
ISSUES
Plaintiffs alleged that the Kansas child welfare system violated Title IV-E, the federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), the Federal Due Process Clause, the Kansas Code for Care of Children, and the Kansas Constitution. The Kansas system had a number of serious deficiencies and had the highest recidivism in the country, with children who had been in foster care and were returned to their parents often returning to the system.
HISTORY AND STATUS
In January 1989, a Topeka child guardian filed a class action suit (J.D.B. v. Barton) against the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services (SRS) that focused on lack of adequate placements for children entering foster care. The ACLU Children's Rights Project entered the lawsuit in September 1989 by filing a motion to amend, which added the governor as a defendant and additional named plaintiffs from throughout the state.
Plaintiffs' motion for class certification was granted, and SRS's motion to dismiss was denied. The lower court held that Kansas children can (1) enforce provisions of Title IV-E in Kansas state court; (2) seek judicial relief under CAPTA, which requires states to respond to reports of suspected abuse or neglect in a timely and adequate manner; and (3) seek relief for violations of the provisions of the Kansas Code for Children.
In June 1992, defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs' Title IV-E claims, based on Suter v. Artist M. The motion was granted in October 1992. Defendant Governor Finney filed a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment on June 15, 1992, which was granted on August 20, 1992. Plaintiffs appealed.
While the appeal was pending, the parties reached a settlement agreement in June 1993. The settlement agreement mandated wholesale changes in the Kansas child welfare system. Implementation of reforms under the settlement began on January 1, 1994. Pursuant to the agreement, an internal departmental quality assurance unit was established to assess compliance and an independent state auditing agency, the Legislative Division of Post Audit, also was charged with conducting ongoing performance audits assessing the Department's compliance with the agreement.
On April 24, 1997, a motion to change the judge was filed. On April 29, 1997, Judge Buchele removed himself from the case. The new judge, Judge Yeoman, appointed a Special Task Force "to facilitate resolution of foster care issues in Kansas."
Because of the State's success in implementing the settlement agreement, the state exited from the agreement on June 30, 2002. SRS and plaintiffs agreed to replace the settlement agreement with internal monitoring from SRS's Quality Assurance Unit. The Unit is responsible for overseeing the quality of SRS's supervision of children.
=================================
Posts
