Neglect by CYS and the Courts

[leolar]

My question involves child abuse or neglect in the State of: pa mother deceased father in prison children given by courts to her parents we had been given right to intervene and we were allowed to have visists with the children and call them we reported as did neighbors that they were being physcally and mentaly abused but all the guardian ad lidem and psycologist said was we know it is happening but we dont know how to stop it for 8 yrs wepleaded with cys to visit the home but they would not the neighbors reported abuse but nothing was done until the school got involved and the childrenwere takenfrom the home which was unfit for them to live in dog fecus bugs filth clutter they were put infoster care and our rights were taken also as we told the children that the father loved them seems tame compared to what the courts allowed the other grandparents to do to them..... we have had no contact for over 2 yrs cys at first cked out our family and was going to leave the children live with them but the court would not allow it so who suffers when cys does not do its job cAN YOU imagine being 4 yrs old and being told over and over your worthless just like your father and being hit and made to live in fear this is what happened to our grandchildren and we fought constantly with the courts but nothing was done why

[NdK1009]

We do not have access to the case record or investigation notes, so we are unable to give you the type of answer you are seeking. Presumabley, there are details that excluded you from consideration as a home for your grandkids. I cannot tell you what they are.

If you want a detailed, specific answer, your best bet is to meet with a local attorney.

[aardvarc]

Ultimately, "the system" doesn't GET involved until problems escalate to a high degree. Once the situation merits the system having to place a child somewhere, rather than the family itself handling the issue internally, then social services often finds itself with the mission of trying to keep children with family (a primary goal), but with bad choices on BOTH sides of the family. Apparantly the courts found SOME reason why one set of grandparents was preferable to the other, even if in the end they proved to be a poor choice. Ultimately, the children were removed from them too, and placed in foster care. That means you were passed over TWICE as being found suitable - why, we can't possibly tell you, as we're not privy to the information that either the court or social services possessed. It doesn't HELP any arguement to turn the children over to you when the child you've already raised is in prison, as it brings into question not only your own parenting proficiency/success, but also tends to make the court wary that the children will be exposed to that parent. That's all broad speculation of course, but experience suggests that those are likely two important factors that the courts considered in making their decision. The bottom line is that once a family situation degrades to the point where the children have to be removed, not only from their parents, but from other family caregivers, courts tend to then want to keep the children AWAY from the dysfunction of the family and go with the lesser preferred foster care, rather than keep rotating children to the NEXT family member(s).

At the end of the day, families need to self-intervene BEFORE things get to the point where social services is involved. Once they are, the matter can get mired down in bureaucracy, and social services is highly constrained in ways that family isn't when attempting to choose placement possibilities. Those choices won't always be right, but they ARE choices that are approved by an outside third party in the form of a judge who tries to look at a situation in its entirety. How and why the particular judge in this case found the way they did can only be answered by that judge.