“I think we need to appreciate what we have and protect it.”
Nature vs. Greed, What Legacy Are You Teaching Your Children? from: Abe21.net 6/22/08

“A world without children will be a poorer world — grayer, lonelier, less creative, less confident. Children have always been a great blessing, but it may take their disappearance for the world to remember why.”
A World Without Children - Jeff Jacoby in the Boston Globe

The tension is between those who don’t have kids yet who are, ostensibly, trying to save the world for the kids of tomorrow, and those who are trying to figure out a way to live with their kids in the world of today. But those most active in preserving nature don’t appear too interested in having messy little kids muck around in their pristine wilderness.

So who really are the greedy ones in this paradigm? The folks who want to lock up vast tracks of mostly other people’s land because they like the way it looks, or the folks who want to mortgage their lives away for a small piece of property on the fringe of the metro area in the hope of securing a small piece of the American dream to raise a family?

The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing

Consider that the sheriff’s department knew ahead of time of the potential perpetrator and the potential threat to Legacy Academy, knew enough to make sure that the student was not admitted to the school, and only after trashing out the school day for Legacy Academy, interviewed the boy to determine that he was not a threat.

Also consider that the sheriff’s department did not notify Elizabeth PD of any of this. Elizabeth PD found out about the sheriff’s activities at Legacy from 3rd parties.

Did the sheriff exploit a situation for media attention? Again?

—————————————————————————————————————-

Poor Enough to be Eligible? Child Abuse, Neglect, and the Poverty Requirement

Susan Vivian Mangold
University at Buffalo Law School
The State University of New York

DSS & Law Enforcement Joint Investigation Protocols 

We are a nation and culture of laws. Laws provide the means that protect us from each other and from the state. When it comes to protection from other people, when our personal safety is threatened, we can act in self defense. For lesser degrees of protection not rising to the level of personal safety, we have civil legal remedies available to us through the courts. Any citizen can freely use these mechanisms for protection when necessary.

The state, however, is not a citizen with the same rights as everyone else. Citizens cannot protect themselves from the state in the same way they protect themselves from other citizens. To be clear, when I say the “state,” I mean all government entities – law enforcement agencies, ministerial and executive bodies, legislative bodies, regulatory agencies, public health, public schools, etc., i.e. any group funded directly or indirectly through taxation or public assessments.

American citizens protect themselves from the state with the set of laws that originate in the Constitution. Short of revolution, respect for the Constitution is all we citizens have to protect us from excessive state intervention in our lives. That is why our public servants swear an oath to defend and protect the Constitution when they take office. That is why all of our legislation and regulation is tested to see if it’s “constitutional.” We don’t care about official promises to protect us directly. We want a promise to protect the law that protects us. Law is far less fickle than personal promises. (more…)

Weld County Child Abuse Protocol

(4 megs)

http://www.futureofchildren.org/information2827/information_show.htm?doc_id=74221

“Given the evolving research about children’s suggestibility, caution is in order. Exaggerated claims that children, including preschool children, can never accurately report or always accurately report are not supported by the literature. In addition, because there is growing knowledge about factors contributing to suggestibility, as well as practical ways to lower it, it is important that those who do interview children are properly trained and that professional groups develop model protocols or guidelines for interviewing children. Some efforts in this regard are under way. For example, in a recent three-year study of multidisciplinary interview centers in Sacramento and Orange counties in California, child interview specialists received a specialized 40-hour course on interviewing children. The research and evaluation panel for this project concluded that trained child interview specialists were critical to the success of the centers and recommended that such specialists receive extensive start-up and ongoing training in child development, forensically defensible interviewing, and the informational needs of investigative agencies. The panel further recommended that California certify professionals who complete requirements established by the state for child interview specialists.³⁶ We believe that this is a promising approach and that all states should explore the merits of certifying specially trained child interviewers.”

Reporting, Investigation and Adjudication

CPT Training by Tom Westfall

Colorado Safety Assessment Algorithm and Definitions

RE: Right time for review  9/28/07 RMN

—–Original Message—–
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 2:27 PM
To: letters@RockyMountainNews.com
Subject: RE: “Right time for review,” pg. 42, RMN 9/28/07