$5M in damages for abuse adopted daughter suffered under N.J. DYFS's care

[chanel]

The state will pay a Pennsylvania family $5 million in damages for the physical and sexual abuse their adopted daughter suffered as a baby while under the care of New Jersey’s Division of Youth and Family Services.

The child in this case, identified only as S.A., was placed in her biological father’s home by DYFS in 2000 after her biological mother abandoned her.

During a five-month period in the Asbury Park apartment, the baby was brought to the emergency room twice, was burned and was later found to have been sexually abused.

Pa. family receives $5M in damages for abuse adopted daughter suffered under N.J. DYFS's care | NJ.com

The child was abandoned by her mother and abused by her father. Hence, the TAXPAYERS OF NJ have to pay for this?

Enough already. Child protection services are imperfect. They exist to assist families and minimize abuse. They cannot save every child. There are lots of bad people having children, and we cannot stop them from procreating. But we also cannot afford to give each of them $5 million.

These judges hand out these settelements like they are Santa Claus. They don't give a damn about whose money it is.

Comments?

 

[strollingbones]

The family’s lawyer, David Mazie, said the baby should have never been placed with her biological father. He argued in a trial that began Dec. 5 in Trenton that three DYFS caseworkers who handled S.A.’s case could have stopped the abuse by checking on her once a month, as they were supposed to, or removing her when a neighbor reported the baby was being abused to DYFS. There were also court-ordered requirements, like daycare, that DYFS didn’t follow through with, he said.

They finally removed her from the home, Mazie said, when she was found beaten, with her hands tied, hanging from a hook.


from your article.....revealing more than the headline......dyfs did not follow up.....they were indifferent to their responsibilities and careless in handling the case....

and your complaint again is?

 

[editec]

It's the money that mostly troubles you, Chanel?

Seriously, that's the thing that interests you about this case?

The money?

 

[strollingbones]

well ed it wasnt the abuse...since she really neglected to mention that but in passing

 

[chanel]

It's the money that mostly troubles you, Chanel?

Seriously, that's the thing that interests you about this case?

The money?

Yes editec. $5 million will not make this child whole. It is a random number meant to send a message. And the message was already received years ago when DYFS hired more case workers.

Do you know how many children are abused every day? Should we give each of them $5 million or try something different?

The $5 million would be better spent sterilizing abusive parents.

 

[strollingbones]

the money is not to make the child whole but to provide for medical care etc.....plus punitive damages that were well deserved

 

[chanel]

We need to bring back orphanages. The state cannot monitor 24/7 when children are in the HOME OF THEIR BIOLOGICAL PARENTS.

The philosophy of child protection agencies is to keep families intact. But that's just propaganda justifying the sad reality that they have no place to put these kids.

Insitutiions may not be perfect, but neither are many of these homes.

I would have no issue with the sterilization of child abusers.

 

[whitehall]

NJ would be liable if the services constitantly ignored evidence that the child was being abused. If NJ was unaware of the abuse they shouldn't be liable. The award should go to the child until she is of age.

 

[chanel]

Well according to the article, it wasn't that they ignored evidence that she was abused, but that they "should have known". or "would have known" if they had visited more regularly. The judge also felt they dropped the ball AFTER she was removed from the home.

A child is abused by her own biological parent and somehow the taxpayers are responsible for that.

The people in this state are getting pretty sick of cleaning up other people's messes. Read the comments at the link.

BTW - I have worked with abused and neglected children my entire life. Too bad they all can't get $5 mil a piece. But that would be ludicrous, right?

There has got to be a better way. We have to start punishing the perpetrators instead of "counseling" them. I'd love to know where her parents are now.

The girl, now 13, was in DYFS’ care from 1999 to 2006, when she was adopted. During this period, DYFS began a massive overhaul that has cost the state more than $1 billion in reforms.

 

[Truthmatters]

We need to bring back orphanages. The state cannot monitor 24/7 when children are in the HOME OF THEIR BIOLOGICAL PARENTS.

The philosophy of child protection agencies is to keep families intact. But that's just propaganda justifying the sad reality that they have no place to put these kids.

Insitutiions may not be perfect, but neither are many of these homes.

I would have no issue with the sterilization of child abusers.

do you have any idea of the cost you are suggesting we add to caring for children by calling for orphanages?

IT COSTS WAY MORE!

 

[George Costanza]

The state will pay a Pennsylvania family $5 million in damages for the physical and sexual abuse their adopted daughter suffered as a baby while under the care of New Jersey’s Division of Youth and Family Services.

The child in this case, identified only as S.A., was placed in her biological father’s home by DYFS in 2000 after her biological mother abandoned her.

During a five-month period in the Asbury Park apartment, the baby was brought to the emergency room twice, was burned and was later found to have been sexually abused.

Pa. family receives $5M in damages for abuse adopted daughter suffered under N.J. DYFS's care | NJ.com

The child was abandoned by her mother and abused by her father. Hence, the TAXPAYERS OF NJ have to pay for this?

Enough already. Child protection services are imperfect. They exist to assist families and minimize abuse. They cannot save every child. There are lots of bad people having children, and we cannot stop them from procreating. But we also cannot afford to give each of them $5 million.

These judges hand out these settelements like they are Santa Claus. They don't give a damn about whose money it is.

Comments?

Your point would be well taken up to the point where DYFS got into the act. Once they took over, and made a decision as to where the child should go, the State becomes potentially liable if they blow it and put the child in a situation that could be (or is) dangerous to her. Once that happens, and once damages accrue as a result of it, the State is on the line.

And as to the amount ($5M) - I don't know the basis for that award. If punitive damages figured into it, then $5M is really nothing when one considers that the State is the defendant. Punitive damages are designed to get the attention of the defendant and really have little to do with actual damages. $5M to a State is petty change. I would suspect there are some pretty good actual damages here in addition to anything that might have been punitive. It all adds up. If the State doesn't like it, they can appeal the amount and possibly get it reduced on appeal.

 

[chanel]

We need to bring back orphanages. The state cannot monitor 24/7 when children are in the HOME OF THEIR BIOLOGICAL PARENTS.

The philosophy of child protection agencies is to keep families intact. But that's just propaganda justifying the sad reality that they have no place to put these kids.

Insitutiions may not be perfect, but neither are many of these homes.

I would have no issue with the sterilization of child abusers.

do you have any idea of the cost you are suggesting we add to caring for children by calling for orphanages?

IT COSTS WAY MORE!

Now TM is more concerned about money than abused children? My, my. Hypocrisy alert.

Foster parents can get up to $1000 a month per child. That does not include medicaid, clothing allowances, education (inc. free college), and other entitlements. The system is ripe for abuse and fraud, but the agency is so desperate for foster homes, there is no reason to stop it - unless there is abuse of the child. And in that case - the taxpayers can pay the settlement.

It's not just about money TM. We are talking about disgusting people doing disgusting things to children.

The system ain't working and the good people who do take care of their children shouldn't have to keep cleaning up other people's messes.

 

[jillian]

It's the money that mostly troubles you, Chanel?

Seriously, that's the thing that interests you about this case?

The money?

Yes editec. $5 million will not make this child whole. It is a random number meant to send a message. And the message was already received years ago when DYFS hired more case workers.

Do you know how many children are abused every day? Should we give each of them $5 million or try something different?

The $5 million would be better spent sterilizing abusive parents.

it won't make her whole. but it will help. that's what money does.

what it WILL do... and what it's INTENDED to do... is make sure DYFS does their jobs. they're not paying because the girl was abandoned by her mother or abused by her father. they're paying because THEY were negligent.

 

[Douger]

It's the money that mostly troubles you, Chanel?

Seriously, that's the thing that interests you about this case?

The money?

Yes editec. $5 million will not make this child whole. It is a random number meant to send a message. And the message was already received years ago when DYFS hired more case workers.

Do you know how many children are abused every day? Should we give each of them $5 million or try something different?

The $5 million would be better spent sterilizing abusive parents.

Chanel, it'll all be fine when the Nazi party wins in 2012.
They'll give the building to Monsanto and put a big sign up that reads " Social servies gone D.eal with it Y.our F.uckin S.elf

 

[chanel]

If DYFS knew of the abuse and failed to remove the child, they would be negligent. But when social workers (and taxpayers) are punished for what they "should have known" is a very slippery slope.

If someone's child is being abused outside of the home, should the parent be blamed? After all, they should have known, right? It is their job after all.