Tag Archives: ADA

Widely Anticipated Article Confirms Court Mistreatment of Protective Mothers, Pt. 1, by Barry Goldstein

Part 1

For decades, protective mothers have been complaining that family courts are tilted to favor abusive fathers and that they face corruption. Court officials have tended to respond defensively and dismissed the domestic violence victims as disgruntled litigants. Over the years an ever growing collection of research, media investigations and preventable tragedies have supported the mothers’ position, but in a form of confirmation bias, court officials have ignored inconvenient findings.

In my first book with Mo Hannah, Sharon K. Araji and Rebecca L. Bosek wrote an interesting chapter in which they looked at surveys of protective mothers in five states which showed consistent court failures to protect children. It might be easy to dismiss the research because mothers with bad outcomes might be biased, but the authors compared the mother’s complaints with credible research and found the findings supported the mothers. The courts were routinely treating the mothers as if they were not credible but the scientific findings supported other research that found protective mothers rarely make deliberate false complaints.

The ACE (Adverse Childhood Experiences) Studies from the CDC demonstrated that domestic violence and child abuse are far more harmful than previously understood and that physical abuse is not required to ruin children’s lives. In other words the courts have been minimizing the seriousness of DV and child abuse and basically ignoring non-physical tactics. Despite the research, courts are still not focused on reducing the fear and stress from abuser tactics that cause children so much harm. And most of the standard court practices undermine the needed healing.

The Saunders’ Study was designed to consider the knowledge and training about domestic violence possessed by evaluators, judges and lawyers. The Study found many of these professionals do not have the specific knowledge necessary to respond to domestic violence. Those without the needed training tend to focus on the myth that mothers frequently make deliberate false reports and unscientific alienation theories. These mistakes lead to outcomes that harm children. Five years after the release of the Saunders’ Study these mistaken assumptions continue to predominate. Saunders also looked at harmful outcome cases in which alleged abusers win custody and safe, protective mothers are limited to supervised visitation. These decisions are always wrong and based on flawed practices but remain common in the family courts.

Widely Anticipated Article Confirms Court Mistreatment of Protective Mothers

Mom Files Civil Rights Lawsuit to Restore Parental Rights, Press Conference

Easter Blessings To Those Separated From One Another Due to Family Court Corruption

Stay Strong.  Love Wins.  Truth always eventually comes out.  Karma works, and selfish, evil people will face their Maker one day.  In the end, though they made their pile of cash, they cannot sever your Bond.

Dishonorable Ronald Grensky, A Poor Example Of A Judge

By Joseph Snook
Investigative Reporter

Medford, OR – Out of the twenty-seven judicial districts for the State of Oregon, Judge Grensky ranks in the bottom 2% of all judges according to The Robing Room, an online website that publicly reviews Oregon Judges. Out of the 173 Circuit Court Judges in Oregon, there are only three Judges with worse ratings than Grensky. Notably, almost half of Judge Gresky’s poor reviews are from attorney’s. The Oregon Court of Appeals is currently looking into how many cases Grensky has had overturned. And now, Grensky’s judicial authority has come into question yet again.

Grensky’s most recent miscarriage of justice took place in an ongoing child custody case between Christi MacLaren and her ex, Sean Lenzo, over their six-year-old daughter.

Christi with her daughter

Judge Grensky removed custody from Christi on Oct. 13, 2015 (Judge Grensky formally granted status quo custody on May 19, 2016, although daugther has been with Lenzo since Oct. 13, 2015) when Department of Human Services (DHS) Child Caseworker, Cori McGovern, testified that Chirsti had mentally abused her own daughter. Christi had previously reported that Sean Lenzo (biological father) had rubbed, “magic cream” on her daughter’s vagina in a really fast motion until bleeding/severe burning occurred – this according to her daughter. Next, the young girl reportedly claimed Lenzo took a picture of her vagina while it was bleeding, eventually showing her the photo as he laughed. This allegation, while cruel in nature, might not be “sexual” as originally reported.


Dishonorable Joudge Ronald Grensky, A Poor Example of a Judge

Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

August 10, 2015
Contact: HHS Office of Civil Rights
HHS and DOJ issue technical assistance for child welfare systems under the Americans with Disabilities Act and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) today issued joint technical assistance to state and local child welfare agencies and courts on the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The technical assistance released today is part of a new partnership between HHS and DOJ to help child welfare agencies protect the welfare of children and ensure compliance with nondiscrimination laws.
The technical assistance addresses disability discrimination complaints that HHS and DOJ have been receiving from parents who have had their children taken away from them as well as individuals who have not been given equal opportunities to become foster or adoptive parents. Noting that the goals of child welfare and disability non-discrimination are complementary, the technical assistance provides an overview of Title II of the ADA and Section 504 and examples about how to apply them in the child welfare system, including child welfare investigations, assessments, guardianship, removal of children from their homes, case planning, adoption, foster care, and family court hearings, including termination of parental rights proceedings. It also underscores that Title II and Section 504 prohibit child welfare agencies from acting based on unfounded assumptions, generalizations, or stereotypes regarding persons with disabilities.
“Ensuring nondiscrimination in the child welfare system is an Office for Civil Rights (OCR) priority and we’re very pleased to join with the HHS Administration on Children and Families and the Department of Justice in this important initiative,” said Jocelyn Samuels, director, HHS Office for Civil Rights. “It’s particularly fitting that we are beginning this initiative with guidance on the rights of parents and prospective parents with disabilities given our recent investigation with the Department of Justice in this area and as we commemorate the 25th Anniversary of the ADA. This guidance will help ensure that parents and prospective parents are not discriminatorily deprived of custody of their children, or denied the opportunity to adopt or serve as foster parents, because of stereotypes and unfounded assumptions about persons with disabilities, which we have seen in our complaints.”
“This technical assistance reflects an important milestone in the ongoing effort to realize equality for individuals with disabilities in all aspects of our society,” said Vanita Gupta, principal deputy assistant attorney general for civil rights. “The ADA and Section 504 ensure that all government providers of programs, activities, and services treat people with disabilities in a fair and equal manner. State and local agencies and courts are our partners in defending the rights of people with disabilities, and this guidance gives them an improved understanding of how to uphold those rights more effectively.”
“Providing this technical assistance to state and local agencies and courts will help ensure that families who have a member with a disability get equal access to vital child welfare services,” said Mark Greenberg, HHS’ administration for children and families’ acting assistant secretary.
The Children’s Bureau in the Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (ACF) administers funding for child welfare agencies and courts. ACF also provides guidance and technical assistance to child welfare agencies regarding child welfare law. The HHS Office for Civil Rights and the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ are responsible for protecting the rights of individuals with disabilities by enforcing Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. These laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability, and require providers of government programs, services, and activities to make reasonable modifications to their policies and practices when necessary to avoid discrimination on the basis of disability, unless such modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of the program or the services.
Additional information about the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau is available at www.acf.hhs.gov/cb. Additional information about the Department of Health and Human Service’s Office for Civil Rights is available atwww.hhs.gov/ocr/. Additional information about the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department is available at www.justice.gov/crt.


Note: All HHS press releases, fact sheets and other news materials are available at http://www.hhs.gov/news.
Like HHS on Facebook , follow HHS on Twitter @HHSgov , and sign up for HHS Email Updates.
Last revised: August 10, 2015

State Justice Institute

The State Justice Institute (SJI) was established by federal law in 1984 to award grants to improve the quality of justice in state courts, facilitate better coordination between state and federal courts, and foster innovative, efficient solutions to common issues faced by all courts
Manual referenced in press release