North Carolina Abuse of Power in Foster Placements UPDATED

By on 10-08-2012 in CPS Incompetence, North Carolina, Placement Practices, Unethical behavior

North Carolina Abuse of Power in Foster Placements UPDATED

This case involves the Gaston DSS Adoption Committee. The committee is made up “largely of DSS officials.”

A newborn was placed with David and Michelle Buchanan  in November 2010. On August 31, 2012, DSS inexplicably removed the child yet the foster parents’ license was renewed.

Only through making the story public and having an attorney review the files have the reasons come to light: “During ensuing discussions, it was revealed that the child had been removed from the Buchanans’ home in part because they are white, and the child is biracial. After Aug. 31, the child was moved to the home of a biracial foster couple, according to the Gaston County official.

“People with DSS thought the child would be raised better in that environment,” the official said.

At least one social worker involved in the case had also accused the Buchanans of Munchausen by proxy syndrome.Roll eyes [Social workers should NEVER be allowed to diagnose a medical problem. They should only note concerns and refer MEDICAL issues to people TRAINED in the medical field.]The term pertains to a form of child abuse that involves the exaggeration or fabrication of illnesses or symptoms by a primary caretaker.

But within the last two weeks, two physicians who had cared for the toddler stood up for the Buchanans. Both wrote letters testifying that the child’s medical issues were valid, and in no way due to the Buchanans’ actions.

The idea that social workers could make such claims in an Adoptions Committee meeting, without medical justification, points to larger problems in the system, according to The Gazette’s source.

“They thought that, but had no medical proof of that,” said the official. “If you’re another committee member and that’s what you’re hearing, what are you supposed to believe?”[Well I wouldn’t believe a medical diagnosis from anyone other than a medical professional!]

More Unethical Behavior

“More than one DSS employee who was involved in the Buchanans’ case was also found to have posted threatening comments on Facebook as the story gained publicity in the last two weeks. Those included postings that suggested the Buchanans should “watch what you do, or things will come back to bite you,” according to several Gazette sources.”

Resolution

The Director of DSS has now reversed the Adoptions Committee ruling and the child will be returned to the Buchanans and the adoption process will proceed.

County: Foster child returned; case points to DSS problems

[Gaston Gazette 10/6/12 by Michael Barrett]

REFORM Puzzle Piece

 Are ANY of these DSS employees going to be disciplined?Do they get away with posting threats?  Will ANY changes be made in future reviews?

Update: “By most accounts, the Buchanans are highly regarded foster parents. They said they grew to love the newborn boy they began fostering in November 2010 and were on what they believed was a path to adoption. But the 22-month-old was suddenly taken from them and placed in the Smiths’ home Aug. 31, and the Buchanans were offered no explanation why.

The Adoptions Committee that made that decision was largely made up of DSS officials. Despite the child’s relocation, DSS had only recently renewed the Buchanans’ foster care license.

After the Buchanans’ story was documented in a Gazette article Sept. 27, they pleaded for help during a Gaston County commissioners meeting. A number of their friends and fellow foster parents also spoke on their behalf and testified to their character.

Behind the scenes, county commissioners and state legislators began to question the decision to take the child from the couple.

The public pressure prompted Moon to call in an outside attorney to review the Adoptions Committee’s decision. That attorney cited legal concerns  about the committee’s rationale and suggested it needed to reconvene, according to a Gazette source with knowledge of the discussions.

Revisiting the decision

It was soon revealed that the child had been removed from the Buchanans’ home for permanent placement elsewhere in part because they are white, and the child is biracial, according to the Gazette’s source. At least one social worker involved in the case had also accused the Buchanans of Munchausen by proxy syndrome. The term pertains to a form of child abuse that involves the exaggeration or fabrication of illnesses or symptoms by a primary caretaker.

But two physicians who had cared for the toddler stood up for the Buchanans. Both wrote letters testifying that the child’s medical issues were valid, and in no way due to the Buchanans’ actions.

The idea that social workers could make such claims in an Adoptions Committee meeting, without medical justification, prompted concerns about the procedures in place.

More than one DSS employee who was involved in the Buchanans’ case was also found to have made threatening comments on Facebook as the story gained publicity. Those included postings that the Buchanans should “watch what you do, or things will come back to bite you,” according to several Gazette sources.

Moon has since reassigned at least one social worker with ties to that case to a new job.

Decision overturned

In early October, Moon convened the Adoptions Committee again to review the case of the foster child in question. Several committee members still refuted the idea of returning the child to the Buchanans, but Moon overrode them.

“After consultation with legal counsel, I have decided to overrule the decision of the Adoptions Committee,” Moon wrote in an Oct. 5 email to county leaders. “The child will be placed in foster care with the Buchanan family and we will move quickly to review our adoption process and reconstitute the committee.”

Since then, Moon has changed the committee’s makeup, condensed its size and given the DSS attorney more oversight in guiding each meeting. In the future, he said foster parents will be allowed to offer their perspective to the Adoptions Committee before placement decisions are made.

After the child was returned to the Buchanans, they were asked to no longer speak with the media about their case.

When the child was taken back from the Smiths on Oct. 5, they were also advised not to speak about the case. But after a meeting with Moon and other DSS officials in late October, they decided to go public with their complaints.”

Possible Lawsuit

“Custody battle possible

Cheryl Harris, the DSS program administrator for Family and Children’s Services, was also in attendance during the meeting with the Smiths. Like Moon, she declined to speak about the case specifically. But she alluded to the events that have transpired.

“I can tell you I did not get into this role to cause people pain,” said Harris. “I don’t think anyone in this agency would intentionally make decisions that would cause someone pain. It’s very, very difficult, I think, for everybody.”

But the apologies have given the Smiths no comfort. They believe Moon made his decision because of pressure from county commissioners, who were under fire from the public, and that Moon feared he would lose his job if he didn’t act.

“I don’t think DSS wants this to go to court,” said Chrissy Smith. “But honestly, I would like it to all come to light, because this man played with my life.”

The adoptive parent’s side

They were definitely strung along by DSS, but their arguments do not hold up as being in the best interest of a child that was already in a loving home.

“Leon and Chrissy Smith thought they had finally completed their two-year-long journey to parenthood when they adopted a 22-month-old boy in late August.

Yet five weeks after the toddler was brought to the Smiths and stole their hearts, the Gaston County Department of Social Services took him back. He was returned to a Gaston County couple that had fostered him from birth, after a public and political outcry here about why the child had been removed from that home in the first place.

Since the Smiths had registered directly with an adoption agency, instead of first serving as foster parents, they had no reason to believe the placement wouldn’t be final. But because the adoption process technically takes 90 days to become official, they had no legal recourse.

Still bitter about their treatment by Gaston County DSS, however, the couple is not letting the matter rest. They are talking with an attorney about filing a civil lawsuit against that agency, as well as a custody suit to get the child back.

“I want people to know there’s another side to this story,” said Chrissy Smith. “Our world got turned upside down for no reason.

“I didn’t ask for this. I didn’t get involved in this to be a baby sitter for five weeks.”

The decision to return the child to original foster parents David and Michelle Buchanan, who are now proceeding with plans to adopt him, was made by Gaston County DSS Director Keith Moon. It is believed to be the first time a director here has made such a unilateral move, overruling the Adoptions Committee that typically decides where to place children in foster care.

Moon has declined to comment specifically about the case, citing Social Services confidentiality laws. But he said he is sorry for the angst that recent events have caused.

“Your heart always goes out to the people in these situations,” he said.

A child of their own

Leon Smith has a 7-year-old son from a previous relationship. He and Chrissy hoped to have a child together once they were married, but after she suffered seven miscarriages in the last few years, they realized adoption was their only option.

Because they are a biracial couple, they sought to adopt a black or biracial child of any age. The Smiths went through the Children’s Home Society of North Carolina because they wanted to adopt immediately, rather than foster.

“I was not going to put a child in my home to give us more heartache,” Chrissy Smith said.

In August, after months of reviewing profiles of children, the Smiths were told about a biracial, 22-month-old toddler who was being moved out of a foster home in Gaston County, where he had been raised from birth by the Buchanans. They said they would be interested in adopting, as long as there were no unresolved issues with the boy.

After an extended meeting Aug. 29 with the DSS Adoptions Committee, the Smiths were approved to become the child’s adoptive parents. Two days later, two social workers arrived with the toddler.

“We were so excited,” Chrissy Smith said.”

“Taken back

Chrissy Smith said she bonded with her adopted son from their first day together. [I doubt that and this is not about your needs.]

She said she had been told – and read in his medical records – that he had numerous issues, such as trouble talking, urinating, swallowing and eating certain foods. But she said she noticed no such problems in the five weeks she had him. He also became more expressive and talkative in that time, she said.

The Smiths had been reading Gazette articles about the uproar regarding their adopted child for a week, when they received a phone call on Oct. 5. They were told that new evidence had been presented in the case, and that DSS would be coming to take the child back that day.

“I fell completely to the floor,” said Chrissy Smith. “I was crying.”

Late last month, the Smiths were finally allowed to meet with Moon and other DSS officials. They were immediately asked to sign papers agreeing to never again discuss the case publicly, but they declined.

The Smiths secretly recorded the meeting, and they pressed Moon about his decision to remove the child from their home, despite never having met them before.

“I told him, ‘You’re not a social worker and you had never even met this child before making this decision, but you’ve ripped my life apart,” Chrissy Smith said.”

 

Couple accuses county of playing politics with baby

[Gaston Gazette 11/15/12 by Michael Barrett]

Update 2: “Two couples hoping to adopt the same baby: It’s a case that guarantees an unhappy ending for somebody.

The quandary started earlier this year when the Gaston County Department of Social Services removed a toddler from its foster family and placed the child with another couple. DSS gave no reason for its actions.
Five weeks later, the DSS director overturned the Adoption Committee’s decision and the child was returned to the original couple.
Now, as a legal fight brews over custody of the child, Gaston officials say they’re taking steps to reduce the chance of something like this happening again.
But Chrissy Smith of Concord is still attached to the little boy she held onto briefly. She thinks the DSS director’s action misguided and grounds for a management overhaul.
“This was a huge decision,” said Smith, 34. “He (DSS director) had never met the child. You should know a case inside and out before you make a decision like this. My husband and I were treated very unfairly. We’d done nothing wrong.”
The Smiths had been trying to have children for years with no success. After she’d suffered seven miscarriages they decided to adopt a child through the Children’s Home Society of North Carolina. Going through an adoption agency would be a faster process than becoming foster parents.
Since they were an interracial couple, the Smiths asked for a biracial boy.
In late August, they were told that a 22-month-old biracial toddler was being removed from the Gastonia foster home where he’d been since birth.
The Smiths met with the Gaston DSS Adoption Committee on Aug. 29, spending more than an hour answering questions.
About 45 minutes later, on their way back to Concord, they got a call saying they’d been chosen as the child’s adoptive parents.
“We were very excited,” Smith said. “They told us they’d bring him on Friday.”
When the toddler arrived “there was an instant bond,” she said. “It was as though he’d always known me.”
The Smiths learned the adoption would be finalized by Dec. 1.
‘I was in shock’
Meanwhile, they also learned through medical records that the child had several issues while in foster care. These included possible eating disorders, allergies and a condition called Munchausen by proxy syndrome, a form of child abuse involving exaggerated illness or symptoms.
Smith said that when they had the child examined by doctors “everything was normal.”
“He was well adjusted and so attached to me,” she said. “He was normal and healthy.”
In early October, the Smiths got a call from Gaston DSS that new evidence had been presented in the case and in two hours they’d be there to take the child back to the foster parents.
“I fell to the floor,” Smith said. “I was in shock.”
It was a painful farewell. Smith tried to keep her emotions in check in front of the little boy. She put him in the car seat and kissed his forehead. When she gave him a Teddy bear something clicked.
“He started screaming,” Smith said. “He was so upset.”
As the car drove away trailing the boy’s screams, Smith was overcome with emptiness and depression.
The Smiths met with Gaston DSS officials who said if the couple would sign a confidentiality agreement they’d be told the reason for the decision.
The Smiths refused and hired a lawyer.
In the meantime, they’d read about earlier developments in the case as reported by the Gaston Gazette.
According to the newspaper, the DSS Adoption Committee took the child away from foster parents David and Michelle Buchanan without explanation. Under state law, the meetings are private and the information confidential.
In North Carolina, foster parents are considered service providers and have no legal rights regarding children in their care.
Along with a group of supporters, including other foster parents, the Buchanans went to a Gaston County commissioners meeting and complained about the decision.
DSS director Keith Moon was at the meeting. Later, he reviewed the Adoption Committee’s decision with the help of a consultant, former assistant attorney general for child welfare Kirk Randleman.
Caught in the middle
In an interview last week with The Observer, Moon said he overruled the committee’s decision and allowed the child to be returned to the original foster parents.
Although he wouldn’t discuss specifics of the case, citing confidentiality laws, Moon said “people raised concerns which we responded to.”
“When a problem is brought to you, you deal with the problem,” he said.
Like DSS directors statewide, Moon has authority to overrule the committee’s decision. He said county commissioners didn’t pressure him. It’s the first time he’s overruled the Adoptions Committee in his 12 years as director.
“The board of commissioners never directed me to take action,” he said. “Not in this case or any other case.”
Moon said the Adoption Committee had “taken on too informal a character.”
He’s already reorganized the committee, trimming the dozen or so members down to five. Non-voting members include the DSS lawyer Tereasa Osborne; Cheryl Harris, administrator of the DSS Children & Family Services Division; and a guardian ad litem to represent the interest of children.
“We want (the committee) to be a more businesslike and structured activity,” Moon said. “We want to make sure it makes well-grounded decisions. You can never prevent anything absolutely from happening. But you can take a hard look at the system to see what you can do to minimize problems.”
The revamping included reassigning four social workers who served on the Adoptions Committee.
Moon said was it wasn’t a disciplinary action, but a chance to “get a fresh start.”
As for the Smiths, he called them “good people caught in the middle.”
“It’s tragic,” Moon said. “A sad situation.”
New legislation
Gaston DSS Board Chairman Tom Keigher, who is also a county commissioner, said he “wasn’t ashamed” of the way Moon handled the case.
Neither the DSS board nor the county commissioners were involved in Moon’s action, he said.
“It was an executive decision the director has the right to do,” he said.
After the foster parents spoke at the commissioners meeting, the board passed a resolution asking legislators to consider providing an ombudsman to get involved with foster parents in the adoption process when there are complications or disagreements.
N.C. Rep. John Torbett, R-Gaston, said he’ll introduce a bill in the 2013 legislative session to start a pilot program in Gaston “to see if it will work.”
He said issues like the one in Gaston County occur across the state and the current makeup of DSS boards doesn’t include “anyone speaking on behalf of foster parents.”
The Buchanans, who have signed a confidentiality agreement and been advised by DSS not to talk about the case, couldn’t be reached for comment.
For Smith, the steps being taken by Gaston aren’t good enough because they don’t address her problem. In her eyes, the episode is political and has nothing to do with social workers. The experience that has left her “emotionally damaged.”
“I’m not going away,” Smith said. “The only thing I want is my baby back.””

Concord couple fighting Gaston DSS decision

[WCNC 11/25/12 by Joe Depriest]

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *