Michael, your comments are right-on-the-money. Confidentiality mandates are not devices which were designed by legislators to enable bureaucrats to evade responsibility for their actions- and INACTIONS.
Do closed juvenile court hearings protect children -- or the adults who are supposed to take care of them?
We think it's quite often the latter -- that it's the adults who benefit, undeservedly, from the secrecy of juvenile court hearings.
We don't think people accused of abuse or neglect deserve that blanket of protection. Nor do we think the child welfare system works better in the dark that it would in the light.
Let's have some accountability. For kids' sake.
Why, for instance, was the Burke County Department of Family and Children's Services so eager to return four children to a woman who, with her husband, are accused of keeping them and seven others out of school and in the worst running-water-and-electricity-free squalor you can imagine?
Christine Long and her husband Jeremy Long had 10 underage children and one 18-year-old removed from their home last July 31.
"According to the prosecutor's motion," said a news story last week, "there was no food in the house. There were no beds for the children, and they didn't have proper clothing or shoes -- two had never worn shoes. None had been vaccinated or given dental care. The younger children suffered from malnutrition. The children range in age from 1 to 17."
And yet, DFCS not only wanted to return the four oldest children to the mother (while charges are pending), but was indignant that Superior Court Judge David Roper would intervene in the case and block the plan after the district attorney's office asked him to.
Then came the request to kick the public out.
You know what? Folks are pretty tired of this claptrap. We're tired of self-righteous attorneys and social workers trying to hide behind the kids' privacy and tell us it's none of our business.
You're doggone right it's our business. When kids are found in squalid conditions like that, it becomes the public's business.
We applaud Judge Roper for having the courage to get involved and for refusing to close the hearing to the public.
And we condemn child "welfare" officials for ignoring the recommendations of the children's advocates, as they did in this case -- and for trying to shut out society.
At least 59 Georgia children died from abuse or neglect in 2007 -- some of them after being returned to their families from foster care, according to Better Courts for Kids, a group advocating juvenile court reform.
One Georgia toddler who survived was beaten within inches of her life, advocates say, after DFCS and a juvenile judge ignored the warnings of a guardian ad litem, a citizens review panel and a Court Appointed Special Advocate.
The state then refused to open the child's file for public inspection, despite clear legal obligations to do so.
The system isn't protecting kids' privacy; it's protecting itself from scrutiny and accountability.
Senate Bill 207, approved by the Senate and now in the House, would change that, by making juvenile hearings open unless closed by a judge.
Do it. Let the light in.
Comments
Michael, your comments are right-on-the-money. Confidentiality mandates are not devices which were designed by legislators to enable bureaucrats to evade responsibility for their actions- and INACTIONS.
A bit of an agenda here AC? One editorial, one LTE, and one column all on the same subject. If you read the bill there are outs for them to still close the hearings. Maybe that's for people who are buddies with the judge or for the good old boys to keep their dirty laundry private. The bill needs to be rewritten before passing.
Children don't vote. There's no reason for legislators to protect them, except for p.r. purposes.
Children would seem to have a difficult time talking in court with so many people in the courtroom. Explaining phsical abuse, sexual abuse, and neglect would seem almost impossible to discuss in a packed courtroom. The purpose of the law is to protect children. There are always the Hate America cynics that see evil around every corner.
retarmy:www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2009_10/pdf/sb207.pdf Text of bill.
retarded armie, puhleeze, read a few thousand years of history. It's okay to be knowledgeable.
Finally a LTE that I fully agree with. I have often wondered why we protect "kids" that would rob, hurt or kill another person in a second if given the chance. This needs to happen and the age old policy of releasing "kids" at the age of 18 needs to stop too. Whether we like it or not, most kids just aren't kids anymore.
Keep them private. Kids that are involved in abuse and neglect cases have already suffered enough, don't make them suffer more by having to testify in public.
retired army - you said if someone's a bad parent, we all need to know it. Why would everyone need to know it unless you are going to help the situation in some way? I agree with protecting kids but opening up hearings doesn't necessarily protect kids. It allows the information to come out but that could also harm the kids when other kids at school learn about it and use the information to tease and harrass. Let's look at the bill closely and make sure we are doing the right thing, whatever that ends up being.
The bill passed today, so it has become law... yet the language in the bill allowed for the judge to close court proceedings, and any party... ie, attorneys can make motions to close the prodeedings... So, we will see. Children's names and likenesses are prohibited from being pulicized. And there is very limited access to the actual transcripts or records by the media and public. I don't think this will provide the check and balance that the people writing in this thread are seeking.
Let's have some accountability for the average decent citizens sake. Generational welfare people coach the children in their culture to commit crimes because they know that the children nor they will be prosecuted: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/memphis-crime
First of all, children usually don't face abusers in court, it's rare. They can be video taped if old enough, faces never shown nor are their names used; they are discussed via initials or by case #. The way out of it, due to the fact that the judges would never allow u to figure out that children who are truly abused are hard to place, therefore returned to squaller 1. That it goes by the quality of the child, got quality kids, parents have a fight on their hands, even if case is unsubstanciated 2. Then you would hear them say they cannot return the children or risk loosing federal dollars 3. Social workers would be caught doing horrendous things to so many families, lookup Senator Nancy Shaeffer's blog, GA. This is not a criminal court. Everyone who enters is guilty, even if your neighbor, husband or anyone calls, even for revenge. Families are hardly allowed to intervene to help take your kids in. They will stop you and use everything in the book to stop u from getting your loved ones. They don't want u to see the fact that the foster parent is given fed dollars, that maybe could have helped you, are given to foster families to take in 7 to live the same way. modelfamily.org
Spank your child, that's it, they are gonners, anything can be deemed abuse and neglect, the terms are too broad. And laws are never discused in family court, you should try sitting in on a session if u can, but they won't let you. Results, kids beat up and kills parents, are disrespectful, problems at school and about vaccines, visit drcarley.com. What parents are ending up with are juvenile delinquents and by the way, those kids were never yours the day you signed that birth certificate but belong to the state. You will learn this soon. You are not even allowed to protest what is taught in public school that should be the first hint that you have no rights to your kids.
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012. All Rights Reserved.
