--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5200000Date: 04/30/96 From: RICK THOMA Time: 03:31pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Tougher laws proposed X-posted: VFALSAC, Child_Abuse_Issues Copyright 1996 The New York Times Company March 20, 1996 N.Y. Panel Urges Tougher Child Abuse Laws By JOE SEXTON NEW YORK -- Gov. George Pataki's Commission on Child Abuse called for changes in the state's child welfare system Tuesday, including easing the removal of children from abusive households and making endangering the welfare of a child a felony. The commission, headed by Attorney General Dennis Vacco, recommended laws that would give child welfare officials and judges greater power to act "in the best interests of the child." The commission concluded that current laws and regulations placed too great an emphasis on preserving families. The commission called for doing away with the requirement that child welfare authorities strive to return children to households in which the children have been repeatedly abused or neglected. The commission's recommendation would make it easier for the courts to terminate the rights of parents in such households and permanently place a child in foster or adoptive homes. "In the past, from our perspective, family preservation has resulted in children being placed in continued harm's way," Vacco said. The panel's 16-page report also called for toughening the state penal code, raising many instances of endangering the welfare of a child to a Class D felony, which carries a maximum penalty of seven years in prison. Endangering the welfare of a child is now a misdemeanor, penalized by up to a year in jail. If the change is adopted, prosecutors would be able to seek longer prison sentences against parents who abuse or neglect their children. Vacco said he could envision prosecuting parents whose children failed to attend school for long periods of time. "I wouldn't mind making that argument to a jury," said Vacco. Prosecutors across the state, who often find it difficult to prosecute abusive parents for assault, have complained that defining all instances of endangering the welfare of a child as misdemeanors only further handicapped them in punishing extremely abusive parents. "Things as they are now are totally inadequate," said Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, whose office has proposed legislation that lists instances when child abuse could be prosecuted as a felony. The commission's recommendation on giving greater emphasis to "the best interests of the child" reopens what has become a cyclical national debate over how best to deal with seriously troubled families. But many experts have argued that family preservation and the best interests of the child are deeply entwined, and that current law does not allow for a judge or caseworker to keep a child in a household known to be a real threat. They say the problem is with the inability of child welfare agencies to make accurate and timely assessments of households. "Shifting the focus, in legislation, to the best interests of the child could have real and positive consequences," said Karen S. Burstein, a former Family Court judge in Brooklyn. --- FMail/386 1.0g * Origin: Parens patriae Resource Center for Parents 540-896-4356 (1:2629/124) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5300000Date: 04/30/96 From: JULI GORDON Time: 09:40pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Searching I am with a not for profit organization in Denver called Survivors Of Violence. I am looking for individuals in the cities listed below to obtain some information on organizations in your area. I am in the process of putting together a wheelchair ride from Las Vegas to Nevada to Denver Colorado to benefit Survivors/Victims of Violence and will be trying to gain support from the cities below as we roll through. If there is anyone interested in talking with me I would be greatful. Cities: Las Vegas, NV Flagstaff, AZ Gallup, NM Albuquerque, NM Santa Fe, NM Las Vegas, NM Trinidad, CO Pueblo, CO Colorado Springs, CO Castle Rock, CO Smaller Cities: Boulder City, NV Dolan Springs, NV Kingman, AZ Seligman, AZ Williams, AZ Two Guns, AZ Winslow, AZ Holbrook, AZ Chambers, AZ Gallup, NM Milan, NM Laguna, NM Wagonmound, NM Springer, NM Raton, NM Walsenberg, CO Juli Gordon ... Shame...the cancer of survivors everywhere. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ... Shame...the cancer of survivors everywhere. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 --- EzyQwk V1.10 00000000 * Origin: The Bureau BBS, Westminster, CO, USA (303)425-4956 (1:104/255) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5300001Date: 05/01/96 From: JAMES HALLBERG Time: 07:42pm \/To: VALERY FROST (Read 1 times) Subj: Hello Valery... Hello Dear One; I called your phone numbers the other day, and they were disconnected. I almost freaked. It really scared me, but then I Remembered, that you had told me you would be going back to Michigan in the early New Year. I hope you will keep in touch, and that you would write me at my home address, or send NetMail to me at either Fido - 1:221/1001 - 1:221/1002 These are both my BBS's now, and I really do wish to hear from you, and the sooner the better. I case you have lost or misplaced my address it is: Communicate Now! BBS C/O James Hallberg 1-70 Wellington St. Stratford, Ontario N5A 2L2 CANADA I Love You and Your Family Val, and I am with you guys always. Please do get in touch as soon as you are able. If you could for me please include in a letter your address, and your personal phone number, and Fido Address, where I will be able to contact you, I would be mighty behold'en to ya' Ma'am... I am your friend forever, and ever Val. I hope to hear from you, very soon. James Hallberg --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: Communicate Now! (1:221/1002) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5K00000Date: 05/12/96 From: RICK THOMA Time: 05:57pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: FMS Fraud * Cross-posted "FMS" "VFALSAC" St. Louis Post-Dispatch April 26, 1996 Psychologist, Hypnotist are charged with Fraud A psychologist and a hypnotherapist have been charged with insurance fraud and unlawful business practices. Thomas S. Lipsitz, the psychologist, and Geraldine A. Lamb, a hypnotherapist who works with him, were indicted by a St. Louis County Grand Jury Wednesday. Lipsitz has an office at 443 North Ballas Road. State Attorney General Jay Nixon said that Lamb was performing psychotherapy and counseling on patients without being licensed to do so. Lipsitz, who has a license to perform such service, claimed that he had done the work when he billed insurance companies, Nixon said. Lipsitz, 44, lives in the 100 block of Saylorville Drive in Chesterfield; Lamb, 56, in the 1700 block of Lynkirk Road in Kirkwood. The two are charged with 14 class D felonies, each punishable by up to five years in prison. Nixon said that with at least four patients, Lamb either said she was a licensed counselor or psychologist, or led the patient to believe she was. In two cases, the charges state that Lamb used "undue influence to induce false memory syndrome to convince (the patient) that she was ritually and satanically abused, that she must cease all contact with her family, that she must quit her job, and that she must go on disability to get well." END --- FMail/386 1.0g * Origin: Parens patriae Resource Center for Parents 540-896-4356 (1:2629/124) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5K00001Date: 05/13/96 From: RICK THOMA Time: 10:58pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Stroudsburg Allentown Morning Call Saturday, March 23, 1996 PHYSICALS UPSET SIXTH-GRADE STUDENTS SOME PARENTS COMPLAIN ABOUT SCHOOL EXAMINATIONS PERFORMED ON DAUGHTERS Kathleen Parrish, The Morning Call Some East Stroudsburg parents are upset over a physical examination performed on their sixth-grade daughters at J.T. Lambert Intermediate School. During the exam, which is required by the state, the school doctor examined the girls' genitalia for signs of sexual abuse, lesions and other problems. Assistant Superintendent Rachael Heath said the doctor, Ramiah Vahanvaty, a woman, examined the girls with gloved hands. "There were some concerns from parents that the students felt that they were penetrated," Heath said. "This did not happen." Parents are angry that school officials did not let them know what the exam would include before they consented to it. Furthermore, the girls were scared by the procedure, parents say. "They had them get on the table and spread their legs like a frog," said parent Katie Tucker, whose daughter underwent the exam. Heath said the examination adhered to state Board of Health guidelines, and Vahanvaty did nothing wrong. "We feel very strongly that everything was above board," she said. Under state law, students must undergo a physical examination in the sixth and 11th grades. The exams can be conducted by a family doctor if parents don't want the school's physician to do it, Heath said. Parents can also be present during the exam if they choose to have it done in school, Heath said, adding that a notice had gone home advising parents that the exams would be taking place. Tucker said she was never notified that she could sit in on her daughter's exam. During the exams, Heath said, a female nurse was in the room at all times, and the checkup followed state guidelines. The state form asks physicians if a student's genitalia are normal or abnormal. Heath said it is up to the doctors to decide how they want to conduct that part of the test. "In this particular situation, the doctor that we had this year did an external visual exam," Heath said. Vahanvaty said she examined sixth-grade boys and conducted physicals on 59 girls. During each examination, a female nurse was present. "The examination form calls for a complete physical examination which, of course, is consisent with the goal of maintaining the health of the students and avoiding communicable diseases in the schools," Vahanvaty said. A physical is not complete without an examination of the patient's genitalia, she said. "The examinations which I performed were external and did not involve the use of any examination instruments." Bruce Reimer, spokesman for the state Board of Health, said boys are checked for hernias. "With girls, it's the option of the school," he said, "but the bottom line is that the procedure they performed at the middle school was in the parameters of the Board of Health." Tucker said the exam was unnecessary and should not have been done without her consent. Some of the girls feel violated, she said. "They had the girls in this room and they had them taking their clothes off," she said. "They were scared. The girls were crying. My daughter asked if she could call home, and they said, 'No.' It almost sounded like a concentration camp." Heath said girls who asked to call their mothers were given permission, and the procedure was explained to them before the exam. Vahanvaty said every sixth-grader should have had a similar examination by his or her family physician. "My examinations of these students were strictly professional and totally in line with medical standards for public health," she said. A meeting will be held at 6 p.m. Monday at the school to discuss the matter. --- FMail/386 1.0g * Origin: Parens patriae Resource Center for Parents 540-896-4356 (1:2629/124) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5K00002Date: 05/13/96 From: RICK THOMA Time: 10:58pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Stroudsburg: 2 Allentown Morning Call Tuesday, March 26, 1996 PARENTS ANGRY OVER PHYSICALS CROWD BLASTS EAST STROUDSBURG SCHOOL OFFICIALS FOR ALLOWING DETAILED EXAMS OF SIXTH-GRADE GIRLS AT J.T. LAMBERT. Kathleen Parrish, The Morning Call About 100 angry parents lambasted East Stroudsburg school officials last night, saying a school physical that included examination of genitalia should never have been done on their sixth-grade daughters. "There was no reason for this," said parent Audrey Bailey Hocker, who teaches health education in the New York City public school system. "Just to examine a child's ears, we send out three notices. No child is ever touched without a permission slip. How dare they do this." About 60 girls at J.T. Lambert Intermediate School underwent a physical exam last week that was administered by East Stroudsburg pediatrician Ramiah Vahanvaty with help from school nurse Cynthia Dougherty. Neither Dr. Vahanvaty nor Dougherty attended last night's meeting. As part of the physical, Vahanvaty used gloved hands to examine the girls' genitalia for herpes, warts and other problems. Under state law, students in sixth and 11th grades must have a physical to stay in school and an examination of the genitalia can be part of the physical. This is the first year Vahanvaty has done the exams. Many of the girls who were at the meeting complained that Vahanvaty and Dougherty refused to let them call their parents and told them to "stop acting like babies" when some of them began to cry. "They didn't tell us what they were doing. They just told us to take off our clothes," said one girl. "We tried to get out the windows, but they pulled us back." School officials say the examination adhered to state guidelines but admitted it may have been handled poorly. "There was no sensitivity on the part of the doctor or the nurse," said school board President Pat Forney. "A bedside manner is important whether you're a teacher or a bus driver." Superintendent Rachael Heath said parents were notified by mail and had the option of taking their children to their family physician if they didn't want the school doctor to do the examination. Furthermore, she said, parents could have been present during the exam. But many parents said they never received notification of the exam and would have gone to a family doctor if they had known what the school physical entailed. Heath said she called the state Board of Health after parents complained and was told Vahanvaty had done nothing wrong. The state form asks whether a student's genitalia are normal or abnormal, and it is up to school doctors to decide how they want to conduct that part of the test, she said. In this case, Vahanvaty did an external visual exam, Heath said. "If we had known that this was the approach, we would have gotten this information out to you," she said. But parents were outraged the test was conducted at all, saying the girls had been traumatized by the exam. They called for the suspension of the nurse, asking for a full investigation. The suspension action was supported by the students, who said they were afraid to go to school. "We felt like we were dirty. We wanted to go home and take a shower," said a pony-tailed sixth-grader. Hocker, who recently moved to the district, said she never received notification of the exam until after it was conducted. Furthermore, she said, her daughter had been examined by a family physician and the form had been sent to school. Since the exam, she said, her daughter, usually an exuberant child, has become listless. Parent Kristin Border asked why no one stopped the physicals after they saw the girls crying. But the school principal said she did not notice anyone crying in the halls. She promised to put together a support group for the girls and said she would be available to parents and children if anyone wanted to discuss the incident. Forney and Heath repeatedly apologized for the exams, but the emotional crowd could not be placated. They asked Forney to call an emergency board meeting to suspend the nurse, but the solicitor said it couldn't be done until an investigation is completed. By doing that, one parent said, the district is putting the rights of the nurse above the rights of the children. "There's no doubt this went on," said one mother. "Too many kids are saying it happened." Heath said parents could call state police to report allegations of abuse. --- FMail/386 1.0g * Origin: Parens patriae Resource Center for Parents 540-896-4356 (1:2629/124) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5K00003Date: 05/13/96 From: RICK THOMA Time: 10:59pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Stroudsburg: 3 Allentown Morning Call Sunday, March 31, 1996 DOCTORS SUPPORT PEDIATRICIAN'S STUDENT EXAM Kathleen Parrish, The Morning Call Area doctors are supporting a Monroe County pediatrician whose genital exams of sixth-grade East Stroudsburg girls have created an uproar, but other school districts say they don't conduct such exams. "We do not do anything with the genitals," said Southern Lehigh School District Superintendent Paula Fantaski. "It's not appropriate." Of the 17 area public school districts that responded to inquiries by The Morning Call, not one conducts genital exams on girls. Twenty-one school districts were contacted. Eight pediatricians and the president of the Monroe County Medical Society are sending a letter to the East Stroudsburg Area School Board in support of Dr. Ramlah Vahanvaty, the female pediatrician who had been hired by the district to do the physicals. The doctors say genital exams are an important part of any physical for that age group. This is the first year genital exams of girls have been conducted at the school, and the procedure has created a furor in the community. Parents complained that the exams were inappropriate and had upset their children. Some parents complained about the lack of notice that their children would receive genital exams. The school district notified parents of the exams, but said nothing about genital exams because it did not know the doctor would be giving them. State law requires physicals be given to students in sixth and 11th grades. Parents have the option of going to a family physician if they don't want the school doctor to do the exam. Physicals of 11th-grade girls in East Stroudsburg were conducted by a different doctor and did not include a genital exam. State Department of Health spokesman Bruce Reimer said an examination of the genitalia can be part of a school physical, but added it is up to the doctor to decide how or if they want to conduct that part of the exam. Vahanvaty said she did an external visual exam of the girls' genitalia for lesions, warts, signs of sexual abuse and abnormalities. The school nurse was present during the exams. Vahanvaty said the sixth-grade boys were checked for hernias. Dr. Peter Casale, president of the Monroe County Medical Society, said Vahanvaty's decision to do genital exams during a school physical is "highly ethical" and conforms with state Department of Health guidelines. "It's good medical care," he said. "We need to note the normal development as one goes through life. We cannot examine people with their clothes on." Pocono Medical Hospital Center and East Stroudsburg's teachers union have come out in defense of Vahanvaty, saying they stand by the procedure and her professionalism. Dr. Yoon-Taek Chun, an East Stroudsburg pediatrician, said he conducts similar exams in his office. He said parents "reacted before they got all the facts," adding genitalia is just another part of the body that has to be assessed to ensure a child is developing properly. The controversy began in East Stroudsburg when some sixth-grade girls complained to their parents after a school physical that the doctor had touched their genitals. They said they were uncomfortable about the procedure and felt dirty. One girl said she wanted to go home and take a shower after the exam. Vahanvaty said she did not use any medical instruments and there was no penetration. Parents complained to school officials, calling for the suspension of the school nurse and charging that the matter was handled poorly. State police were called to investigate but concluded the exam met with state and professional guidelines. The biggest problem, according to some parents, was not that genital exams were conducted, but that they were not notified the exams were going to be part of the physical. The genital exams were also a surprise to school officials, who said they did not know Vahanvaty planned to do them. This is the first year Vahanvaty has done the exams. Assistant Superintendent Rachael Heath told parents she would have notified them of the genital exams had she known they were going to be conducted. Heath said parents were notified by mail that the physicals were going to take place and were told they could be present during their child's exam. But as one parent pointed out, no one said a thing about a genital exam. "If I would have known that, I would have taken my daughter to our family doctor," one woman said. The students, perhaps, were the most unprepared. "They didn't tell us what they were doing. They just told us to take off our clothes," one girl said at a public information meeting Monday at the school. "We tried to get out the windows, but they pulled us back." Vahanvaty said she did explain to the girls prior to the exam what she was going to do. Vahanvaty said she backed off on doing a genital exam on one girl who began to cry. About 60 girls underwent the exam. Principal Patricia Baughman said she did not see any girls crying in the hallway and no teacher reported upset students to her or the guidance counselor. Baughman said she is putting together a support group for the girls, and so far two have signed up. "The district is willing to do anything to help the students," she said. Baughman said the school nurse, Cynthia Dougherty, was advised by her attorney not to comment. Vahanvaty said a genital exam should be part of any complete physical. She said she does genital exams on this age group in her office and didn't think there would be a different expectation for schools. "This is the stage of life when children are becoming adolescents, and discovering abnormalities in them is important," she said. "A physical performed for public health and communicable disease avoidance would not be complete without an examination of the patient's genitalia." In 1992 (the most recent statistics available), 96 out of 100,000 girls in the United States between the ages of 10 and 14 contracted gonorrhea. In the 15- to 19-year-old age group, 936 women per 100,000 contract a sexually transmitted disease, according to the state Department of Health. Gonorrhea is the most commonly reported sexually transmitted disease, said Ed Powers, state Department of Health sexually transmitted disease program director. In Monroe County last year, four girls under the age of 15 reported having gonorrhea and chlamydia, he said. "There were a couple of kids who were exposed to sexually transmitted diseases" in Monroe County, he said. "It's not that it doesn't exist." There are no statistics available on the occurrence of genital warts. During a meeting last week with upset parents, Heath was sympathetic but maintained the district had done nothing wrong by conducting genital exams. State Department of Health spokesman Reimer said there are other school districts in Pennsylvania that give genital exams to girls, but he could not name any. School districts are not required to report that type of information to the state, he said. "This district does not stand alone," he said. In this part of the state, it might. Genital exams are not wrong, but as a matter of preference, they're usually not done in a school setting, explained Darrell Jackson, director of network development in the Philadelphia School District. "There's no prohibition against it, but it may not be good practice because of the sensitivity issues," he said. "Accusations can be made." In Easton, Bernadette Meck, director of pupil services, said boys are examined visually for hernias and other abnormalities. "As far as girls are concerned," she said, "there is nothing that would warrant checking the genital area." In Allentown, Ralph Daubert, director of community and student services, said, "We do not do any kind of gynecological examination." Dr. John VanBrakle, chairman of pediatrics at Lehigh Valley Hospital, agreed that abnormalities can be picked up during a genital exam, but said "it's extremely unusual." "Most of us would say that unless someone comes in with a problem, we wouldn't push the issue with a child who is uncomfortable," he said.VanBrakle said, however, that genitalia should be examined as part of a complete physical to confirm a child is developing properly. Vahanvaty said she is dismayed by the controversy caused, she believes, by a few parents who "became too emotional." "Many physicians are afraid to do the exam because they're afraid to be in the situation I'm in," she said. "It's not mandatory by the state, but that's how I've always done exams. It's my idea of a good exam." --- FMail/386 1.0g * Origin: Parens patriae Resource Center for Parents 540-896-4356 (1:2629/124) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5K00004Date: 05/13/96 From: RICK THOMA Time: 10:59pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Stroudsburg: 4 The Washington Times Saturday, April 27, 1996 GENITAL EXAMS AT SCHOOL IRK PARENTS Cheryl Wetzstein, The Washington Times A middle school in eastern Pennsylvania has come under parental fire and media scrutiny for conducting genital examinations of sixth-grade girls -several without their parents' consent. About 50 girls at J.T. Lambert Intermediate School in East Stroudsburg last month were marched to the school nurse's office, ordered to take off their clothes and then examined one-by-one by a female pediatrician. "They said they were looking for genital warts, but on a sixth- grader?" said Katie Tucker, the mother of an 11-year-old girl who was examined, despite her pleas to notify her parents. On Monday, the East Stroudsburg School District issued a summary of its investigation into parents' complaints: The genital examinations were part of a planned exam of girls who had not been seen by a family physician and were "within the parameters" of state health rules. "No improprieties" occurred, the summary concluded. What's more, Trooper Shannon Yates, spokeswoman for the Pennsylvania State Police, said yesterday, "An investigation was done and no criminal conduct was found to have been done. So basically the investigation is closed." But some parents, believing their parental rights have been trampled, have turned to talk radio, such as "The Michael Reagan Talk Show," based in Sherman Oaks, Calif., to bring attention to the incident and their anger at it. "They've all said, 'It's over.' But it's not," said Mrs. Tucker, who with her husband, Paul, is considering legal action against the school district in East Stroudsburg, about 70 miles north of Philadelphia. The case "sounds like a flagrant violation of parental rights," said Greg Erken, spokesman for Of the People, a parents' rights advocacy group in Arlington. In a telephone interview yesterday, the Tuckers, who live in Bushkill, Pa., said their daughter and 20 other sixth-graders were called to the nurse's office March 19 and told they had to take a physical exam. "They were told they needed to take off their clothes and just leave their underwear on. They were standing in line, perfectly embarrassed, and then they found out the doctor was doing genital exams," Mrs. Tucker said. "The girls were scared. They were crying and trying to run out of the door, but one of the nurses was blocking the door so they couldn't leave. "My daughter told the other nurse that 'My mother wouldn't like this. I want to call her.' And they said, 'No.' And my daughter said, 'I don't want this test done.' And the nurse said, 'Too bad,' " Mrs. Tucker said. The female physician "put the girls in a room and had them lie down on a table, spread-eagled, with nothing covering them," and conducted an examination for genital warts and lesions, she said. "The girls had no idea what they were doing. The doctor didn't talk to them. She just did the genital exam and didn't say one word," Mrs. Tucker said. "All my daughter could do was stare up at the ceiling. And it hurt. And it still hurts." When the Tuckers heard from their daughter what happened, they began calling school officials and other parents. They learned that about 50 girls in all were examined, and that, while notification papers were sent home, many parents said they had not received them or didn't realize it included a genital exam, Mrs. Tucker said. The Tuckers said they were told they were overreacting and that the exam was legal. School officials could not be reached for comment yesterday. "I'm sorry. I have no comment," an office worker at J.T. Lambert said before hanging up the phone. State health officials did not return phone calls yesterday. According to state health guidelines obtained by The Washington Times, public schools are required to obtain a "medical examination and comprehensive appraisal of the health" of children at certain grades. The guidelines, which do not specifically call for genital exams, say parents are to be notified and are urged to attend the exams. An exam may be waived if the child is seen by a family physician and the school is so notified. Doctors have defended the pediatrician who performed the exams. The genital exam is a "very important part of the physical," eight area doctors wrote in a letter, according to the March 28 edition of the Pocono Record newspaper. --- FMail/386 1.0g * Origin: Parens patriae Resource Center for Parents 540-896-4356 (1:2629/124) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5K00005Date: 05/13/96 From: RICK THOMA Time: 11:03pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Stroudsburg: Finale The Rutherford Institute P.O. Box 7482 Charlottesville, Virginia Phone: 804-978-3888, Facsimile: 804-978-1789 E-Mail: rutherford@fni.com John W. Whitehead Founder and President *** PRESS RELEASE *** For Immediate Release May 13, 1996 Press Contact: Dave Melton 804-978-3888 THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE SUES SCHOOL DISTRICT ON BEHALF OF VIOLATED JUNIOR HIGH GIRLS East Stroudsburg, Pa. - The Rutherford Institute today filed suit on behalf of a family against a Pennsylvania school district which forced more than 50 sixth-grade girls to undergo physical examinations, many of which included gynecological exams, without informed parental consent and against the girls' wishes. Additional families are expected to joint the suit later this month. When the girls learned of the school's intention to have them undergo the exams, many of them asked to be excused - the school district denied these requests. Before the incident, the district had sent notices home asking the parent's permission to perform "physical examinations" on their children. The form did not explain the "physical examinations" included gynecological exams. "The school's actions were outrageous," said David Melton, a Rutherford Institute staff attorney who is co-counsel in the case. "The school acted with total disregard for either the students' or parents' rights." One of the girl's parents event sent the permission slip back to the school, denying it permission to examine the child - but the school examined her anyway. The district claims it lost her form. The Rutherford Institute is arguing that the school's actions violated the student's Fourth Amendment right to privacy, parents' rights, and was an intentional infliction of emotional distress. Rutherford Institute affiliate attorneys Mike Sebastian and Tom Ratchford are handling the case. "This case is a classic example of "child abuse" programs run amok," said Melton. "These children were abused by the school in order to determine whether they could have been abused by their parents. This more akin to child abuse than education." The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization specializing in the defense of religious liberty. --- FMail/386 1.0g * Origin: Parens patriae Resource Center for Parents 540-896-4356 (1:2629/124) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: D5K00006Date: 05/14/96 From: RICK THOMA Time: 11:28am \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: From: Carol Hopkins Subject: Family Preservation Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 10:49 From: "Carol L. Hopkins" To: Multiple recipients of list WITCHHNT While this op-ed piece is not on the witchhunt topic, I thought it might be of interest to some on the board. San Diego County, like elsewhere, is dealing with increased criticism of its family preservation and voluntary intervention program. I wrote this in response to that criticism. Editors, San Diego Union-Tribune When a child is removed from its family for alleged or actual child abuse and placed in foster care there is a tacit assumption that the child will be safe. The advocates for foster care and those critical of family preservation or voluntary intervention would like us to believe that the removal of a child is a benign act, always in the child's best interest. In fact, removal from the family and placement in foster care is a sad necessity for some children, a disaster for others, but always a traumatic event in the life of every affected child and family. Everyday I listen to families across the country tell me tragic stories of invasive intervention by CPS. I hear from children and young adults about physical violence in foster care, sexual exploitation in foster care, and emancipation from foster care into a world with no family and no safety net. Today I listened to the laments and rage of a mother who had fought for three years to reunify her family. This week her fourteen year old child was finally returned home from placement, four months pregnant. Recently, I accepted collect calls from a foster care runaway desperately asking me for help to get home to his family. As Deputy Foreman of the 1991-92 County Grand Jury, which issued a number of reports critical of San Diego County s Child Protection System, I have spent the past four years in the thick of a raging national controversy over child protection reform. A pernicious myth permeates the debate, voiced by supporters of current practice as well as critics demanding reform -- that there is a constant pendulum swing between the one extreme -- an over emphasis on preserving families alleged to lead to unnecessary deaths of children, to at the other extreme -- over zealous removal of children from their families without sufficient evidence of abuse. In San Diego County, as elsewhere, this pendulum paradigm is trotted out every time there is a child death or a sensationalized case of a falsely accused family. It informs the supposedly contradictory findings of those criticizing the Department of Social Services Children s Bureau. In reality, all reputable reports, including, the 1989 Grand Jury report, Children in Crisis, the 1992 Grand Jury report, Families in Crisis, the 1992 Juvenile Justice Case Review Report, and the 1992 Little Hoover Commission report, Mending our Broken Children, made similar findings and similar recommendations. These recommendations dispel the notion of a wide pendulum arc and call simply for a fine tuning of practices by the investigators and providers of child protection service. [cont] --- FMail/386 1.0g * Origin: Parens patriae Resource Center for Parents 540-896-4356 (1:2629/124)