Elderly Gay Couple Forcibly Separated, Abused, Robbed By County Officials in CA

[eagleseven]

Sickening.

 

[JenyEliza]

Yeah, here that 1997 Clinton law is.

The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA, Public Law 105-89) was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 19, 1997 after having been approved by the United States Congress earlier in the month.[1]

ASFA was enacted in an attempt to correct problems that were inherent in the foster care system that deterred the adoption of children with special needs. Many of these problems had stemmed from an earlier bill, the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980,[1] although they had not been anticipated when that law was passed in as states decided to interpret that law as requiring biological families be kept together no matter what.[1] The biggest change to the law was how ASFA amended Title IV-E of the Social Security Act regarding funding.

Moreover, ASFA marked a fundamental change to child welfare thinking, shifting the emphasis towards children's health and safety concerns and away from a policy of reuniting children with their birth parents without regard to prior abusiveness.[1] As such, ASFA was considered the most sweeping change to the U.S. adoption and foster care system in some two decades.[1] One of ASFA's lead sponsors, Republican Senator John H. Chafee of Rhode Island, said, "We will not continue the current system of always putting the needs and rights of the biological parents first. ... It's time we recognize that some families simply cannot and should not be kept together."[1]

Ideas for the bill originated with both Democrats and Republicans.[2] First Lady of the United States Hillary Rodham Clinton originally voiced interest in the issue of orphaned children in an article she wrote in 1995.[3] She then held public events to give the issue exposure,[2][3] and met with U.S. Department of Health and Human Services officials and private foundation executives over policy questions and recommendations.[3] The bill began in Congress with bipartisan support, then became contentious over issues of terminating birth parents' rights to children and funding levels for programs to keep children out of foster care.[2] Hillary Clinton played a key role in finding a compromise between Republicans and Democrats on the latter issue after negotiations first broke down.[2]

In greeting the final measure, Bill Clinton stated that the bill "makes clear that children's health and safety are the paramount concerns."[1]

The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA, Public Law 105-89) was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 19, 1997 after having been approved by the United States Congress earlier in the month.[1]

ASFA was enacted in an attempt to correct problems that were inherent in the foster care system that deterred the adoption of children with special needs. Many of these problems had stemmed from an earlier bill, the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980,[1] although they had not been anticipated when that law was passed in as states decided to interpret that law as requiring biological families be kept together no matter what.[1] The biggest change to the law was how ASFA amended Title IV-E of the Social Security Act regarding funding.

Moreover, ASFA marked a fundamental change to child welfare thinking, shifting the emphasis towards children's health and safety concerns and away from a policy of reuniting children with their birth parents without regard to prior abusiveness.[1] As such, ASFA was considered the most sweeping change to the U.S. adoption and foster care system in some two decades.[1] One of ASFA's lead sponsors, Republican Senator John H. Chafee of Rhode Island, said, "We will not continue the current system of always putting the needs and rights of the biological parents first. ... It's time we recognize that some families simply cannot and should not be kept together."[1]

Ideas for the bill originated with both Democrats and Republicans.[2] First Lady of the United States Hillary Rodham Clinton originally voiced interest in the issue of orphaned children in an article she wrote in 1995.[3] She then held public events to give the issue exposure,[2][3] and met with U.S. Department of Health and Human Services officials and private foundation executives over policy questions and recommendations.[3] The bill began in Congress with bipartisan support, then became contentious over issues of terminating birth parents' rights to children and funding levels for programs to keep children out of foster care.[2] Hillary Clinton played a key role in finding a compromise between Republicans and Democrats on the latter issue after negotiations first broke down.[2]

In greeting the final measure, Bill Clinton stated that the bill "makes clear that children's health and safety are the paramount concerns."[1]

What ended up happening to our children (in reality) and what is so cheerfully describe above (in theory) are two entirely different and separate things.

Read the law....it's disgusting. It should be repealed. It's BAD law....

 

[goldcatt]

This isn't my county, but one close by. And here's a list from the Federal Prosecutor's Office of the County and Local officials indicted so far (The one removed Friday isn't on here yet). Click on each name to see the charges:

United States Attorney's Office - Middle District Of Pennsylvania - Luzerne County Corruption Prosecutions

It goes far beyond one law, although the ramifications of just one law being abused can be bad enough.

In this area at least, there's nobody really watching the local level of government. Most of even the local rags are now owned by national conglomerates who print 98% State and National wire stories, same with a lot of the local radio stations and all of the tv outlets. They don't seem to be interested in reporting on local issues until they become a sensation, and they certainly don't invest the time and money into old fashioned investigative reporting to uncover what's going on before it breaks. Somebody needs to be watching the henhouse, and few if any seem to be doing it.

But to go back to the thread topic, when this kind of blatant abuse happens especially at the local level I'll bet there's some kind of corruption behind it.

ETA: Looking at this list, there are at least three people removed recently who aren't on it. Even without them, it's a disgusting list for one medium sized County. And that's just who's been caught so far.

 

[California Girl]

Really don't care what the State does to them.

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

That is why you should care. But if you're too stupid, fear not... there are plenty of others who, by standing up and fighting for each other, will (unfortunately) cover your ass as well.

 

[bodecea]

Really don't care what the State does to them.

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

That is why you should care. But if you're too stupid, fear not... there are plenty of others who, by standing up and fighting for each other, will (unfortunately) cover your ass as well.

Funny how being MOSTLY on the opposite sides on political arguments, you and I think alike. While I didn't bother to post it, that quote came to my mind when I read nraforlife's post.


BTW, I am a member of the NRA and that idiot does NOT represent me in any way.

 

[California Girl]

Really don't care what the State does to them.

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

That is why you should care. But if you're too stupid, fear not... there are plenty of others who, by standing up and fighting for each other, will (unfortunately) cover your ass as well.

Funny how being MOSTLY on the opposite sides on political arguments, you and I think alike. While I didn't bother to post it, that quote came to my mind when I read nraforlife's post.


BTW, I am a member of the NRA and that idiot does NOT represent me in any way.

To be honest, I think most genuine liberals and genuine conservatives would find that we agree on a lot of things.... we happen to have different ways of achieving those ends. Liberals tend to view government as the solution, conservatives see individual responsibility as the solution. Therein lies our problem.

 

[JenyEliza]

Really don't care what the State does to them.

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

That is why you should care. But if you're too stupid, fear not... there are plenty of others who, by standing up and fighting for each other, will (unfortunately) cover your ass as well.

Good post! Thanks ...

 

[JenyEliza]

This isn't my county, but one close by. And here's a list from the Federal Prosecutor's Office of the County and Local officials indicted so far (The one removed Friday isn't on here yet). Click on each name to see the charges:

United States Attorney's Office - Middle District Of Pennsylvania - Luzerne County Corruption Prosecutions

It goes far beyond one law, although the ramifications of just one law being abused can be bad enough.

In this area at least, there's nobody really watching the local level of government. Most of even the local rags are now owned by national conglomerates who print 98% State and National wire stories, same with a lot of the local radio stations and all of the tv outlets. They don't seem to be interested in reporting on local issues until they become a sensation, and they certainly don't invest the time and money into old fashioned investigative reporting to uncover what's going on before it breaks. Somebody needs to be watching the henhouse, and few if any seem to be doing it.

But to go back to the thread topic, when this kind of blatant abuse happens especially at the local level I'll bet there's some kind of corruption behind it.

ETA: Looking at this list, there are at least three people removed recently who aren't on it. Even without them, it's a disgusting list for one medium sized County. And that's just who's been caught so far.

Good post and very informative! Thanks for sharing the DISGUSTING list of "government servants" who were only there to enrich themselves at the expense of innocents and the US taxpayer.

Makes me sick.

 

[bodecea]

I can understand this going to Law and Justice System...but Conspiracy Theories?????

 

[tigerbob]

I can understand this going to Law and Justice System...but Conspiracy Theories?????

Odd choice.

 

[goldcatt]

This isn't my county, but one close by. And here's a list from the Federal Prosecutor's Office of the County and Local officials indicted so far (The one removed Friday isn't on here yet). Click on each name to see the charges:

United States Attorney's Office - Middle District Of Pennsylvania - Luzerne County Corruption Prosecutions

It goes far beyond one law, although the ramifications of just one law being abused can be bad enough.

In this area at least, there's nobody really watching the local level of government. Most of even the local rags are now owned by national conglomerates who print 98% State and National wire stories, same with a lot of the local radio stations and all of the tv outlets. They don't seem to be interested in reporting on local issues until they become a sensation, and they certainly don't invest the time and money into old fashioned investigative reporting to uncover what's going on before it breaks. Somebody needs to be watching the henhouse, and few if any seem to be doing it.

But to go back to the thread topic, when this kind of blatant abuse happens especially at the local level I'll bet there's some kind of corruption behind it.

ETA: Looking at this list, there are at least three people removed recently who aren't on it. Even without them, it's a disgusting list for one medium sized County. And that's just who's been caught so far.

Good post and very informative! Thanks for sharing the DISGUSTING list of "government servants" who were only there to enrich themselves at the expense of innocents and the US taxpayer.

Makes me sick.

Disgusting, isn't it? And not a word from the press about any of this until the initial two judges were arrested a little over a year ago. Bribery, nepotism, selling jobs, all kinds of disgusting stuff going on and this is just one middle of the road county.

Not everyone in local office is crooked of course, but it seems there are a lot of opportunities for those who are. I'll say it again, the local level has a cookie jar too and nobody's watching them.

I might be wrong and just have this stuff on my mind because NOW that they can just read a police blotter and not have to dig for it, it's in our news. In my job I also get the courthouse gossip. But it's a real possibility to consider as far as the OP is concerned. Wouldn't be the first time.

 

[goldcatt]

I can understand this going to Law and Justice System...but Conspiracy Theories?????

Odd choice.

Probably my fault for speculating on the corruption angle, sorry.

 

[Modbert]

NCLR: issues & cases > case docket > greene v. county of sonoma et al.

Tarkington, O'Neill, Barrack & Chong - a San Francisco, California (CA) Civil Practice Law Firm

Agenda for November 3, 2009 - Board of Supervisors, County of Sonoma

 

[RationalAltruis]

Clay and his partner of 20 years, Harold, lived in California. Clay and Harold made diligent efforts to protect their legal rights, and had their legal paperwork in place—wills, powers of attorney, and medical directives, all naming each other. Harold was 88 years old and in frail medical condition, but still living at home with Clay, 77, who was in good health.
One evening, Harold fell down the front steps of their home and was taken to the hospital. Based on their medical directives alone, Clay should have been consulted in Harold’s care from the first moment. Tragically, county and health care workers instead refused to allow Clay to see Harold in the hospital. The county then ultimately went one step further by isolating the couple from each other, placing the men in separate nursing homes. Ignoring Clay’s significant role in Harold’s life, the county continued to treat Harold like he had no family and went to court seeking the power to make financial decisions on his behalf. Outrageously, the county represented to the judge that Clay was merely Harold’s “roommate.” The court denied their efforts, but did grant the county limited access to one of Harold’s bank accounts to pay for his care.

What happened next is even more chilling: without authority, without determining the value of Clay and Harold’s possessions accumulated over the course of their 20 years together or making any effort to determine which items belonged to whom, the county took everything Harold and Clay owned and auctioned off all of their belongings. Adding further insult to grave injury, the county removed Clay from his home and confined him to a nursing home against his will. The county workers then terminated Clay and Harold's lease and surrendered the home they had shared for many years to the landlord.

Three months after he was hospitalized, Harold died in the nursing home. Because of the county’s actions, Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 20 years. Compounding this tragedy, Clay has literally nothing left of the home he had shared with Harold or the life he was living up until the day that Harold fell, because he has been unable to recover any of his property.

Again, remember that they "had their legal paperwork in place—wills, powers of attorney, and medical directives, all naming each other."

Elderly Gay Couple Forcibly Separated, Abused, Robbed By County Officials in California | Slog | The Stranger, Seattle's Only Newspaper

This is outrageous. Thanks, conservatives, for lobbying against equal protection under the law. Prop. 8 (California) made it impossible for them to be considered family.

With the help of a dedicated and persistent court-appointed attorney, Anne Dennis of Santa Rosa, Clay was finally released from the nursing home. Ms. Dennis, along with Stephen O'Neill and Margaret Flynn of Tarkington, O'Neill, Barrack & Chong, now represent Clay in a lawsuit against the county, the auction company, and the nursing home, with technical assistance from NCLR.

Still, I doubt that even a settlement in the millions would placate Clay, seeing as the state denied him from even seeing his partner during the last few months of his life.

 

[AllieBaba]

What the hell is "The Slog"?

What a joke.

 

[bodecea]

What the hell is "The Slog"?

What a joke.

What is the joke part?

 

[boedicca]

I don't care what the blog is called.

If this story is true - it is tragic. And not just for Gays and Lesbians. If a state can violate the legally contracted shared property, mutual support, and custodial relationships of two elderly people, that abuse of power can easily extend to married and unmarried heterosexual couples.

Our government at all levels is verging on insolvency. What happens when aging demographics makes the fiscal problem worse and elderly people with ASSETS are under the control of government handlers? Denial or mismanagement of care that ends life and enables the state to sell off the assets "reimbursement" is going to become a quite common occurrence.

 

[AllieBaba]

The local news hasn't touched the story, and nobody can find any back up information on it. Read the comments.

 

[JenyEliza]

NCLR: issues & cases > case docket > greene v. county of sonoma et al.

Tarkington, O'Neill, Barrack & Chong - a San Francisco, California (CA) Civil Practice Law Firm

Agenda for November 3, 2009 - Board of Supervisors, County of Sonoma

Thanks for those links.

Ya'll read 'em. This is pretty scary shit...cuz it can be done to ANYONE, not just an elderly gay couple.

Our "government servants" are not servants at all. They're power hungry, out of control, corrupt tools who are out to enrich themselves personally at our expense.

Kick 'em to the curb!

 

[elvis]

threads merged. ~elvis.