I hope there is no one in the reading audience who is prepared to believe all that hogwash. But it is a somewhat derogatory representation of the kind of groveling self abuse apparently necessary to appease CSD's egotistical view of themselves. The idea seems to be easy enough to grasp. It only took me a relatively short time to understand the premise under which they work.
Paraphrased it must go something like this:
If a parent really cares for a child, and wishes to regain physical, if not legal custody back, they must without complaint comply with each and every request we make in as an direct and speedy a manner as possible.
I've no doubt that the narrative of my supposed requirements could go on for fully two chapters without approaching the tortuous length of the official manual, but I somehow doubt I can begin to sound the depth of it nearly so soon. If the CSD's manual were compared to any other government agencies handbook for complexity, I doubt CSD is nearly as complex or detailed as the reports generated just for a bird. What I mean is this. The spotted owl, a reportedly endangered species, of notable survival adaptability, can bring the biggest economic generator in this state to its knees, while at the same time a ten year old child is swept under the carpet.
Right or wrong logging came to a halt while many thousands of people logged thousands of hours on the problem. And the courts devoted months of its time to the adjudication of an owls rights. That was justice for an owl. The evidence was checked and rechecked, then inspected for falsehoods, some of which slipped through.
Right or wrong, during the last four years barely twenty hours of litigation have taken place to decide the case of a human being. At no time has a second study been ordered. At no time has the court asked for more information than CSD provided in session. And at no time has the work of the CSD investigation undergone even the slightest inspection for accuracy.
I won't pretend the spotted owl controversy was exactly honest because it wasn't, but at least there was some sort of attempt by both sides to be truthful in-so-far as they saw the truth to be. Even that degree of truth in Tylor's case on the part of CSD would be more than ample to appease my injured sense of Justice, and no doubt have some small impact on the decisions made by the Court.
I should have known what to expect, but I didn't. I have to admit, up front and honestly, I have done my son Tylor much disservice by my ignorance. Not of the language, but of the attitude of the Court towards what the truth is. Until it was far too late, I believed the Judge of a Court was there not only to weigh the shear mass of evidence, but was also required to be skilled in judging the worth of that same evidence. That has proven to be false.
Another misconception was the idea of state paid attorneys. It looks good on paper, and it sounds good when they say it, but as it is for every other service one may require, the only way to have any kind of loyal and conscientious service is to pay for it oneself. While my paying the attorney may not guarantee the best service, it at least assures an attempt to be honorable and an honest effort from my counsel.
Perhaps the greatest error of all was in thinking the CSD themselves would soon begin to question why all the problems with accuracy in their information and suspect a rat somewhere. That was wrong too. They will never examine themselves. They will never correct an error willingly. To do that would be to admit some sort of error in judgment or collection of facts, and that is something that can never happen. Even when they each, as individuals, know they are wrong it can never be acknowledged. To do so puts the agency at risk. The prime directive of government agencies is always protect the reputation of the agency at all costs.
In the case of the CSD the cost is a society littered with broken homes, broken lives, broken hopes and broken dreams. But the most criminal part of all are the thousands of broken children the CSD leaves in its wake. Heedlessly and needlessly the CSD wrecks the lives of young and old alike because there is no requirement that they act responsibly and make a reasonable effort to assure the correctness of their acts.
The Courts themselves are as guilty of blame as CSD. The Courts could, or should, at least insist on the unblemished truth, or as close to it as possible, and not allow the surgical dissection then grafting together of the evidence by anyone. Especially a state employee In other words insist that a document, or any information provided to the court be presented in context, then consider it in that context, not just look at one part and ignore the rest as if it didn't exist.
Just those small steps would be a vast improvement on a system that is a travesty and the cause of much tragedy. The CSD is the monster under your kids bed. The CSD is the monster under my kids bed. The CSD is my worst nightmare. Created by the law makers without regard for the need of control. Set loose by the Courts who never wanted or asked for the job of controlling CSD and who have let loose the leash and removed its collar.
I doubt if Satan himself could have come up with a more cruel punishment for the children of the damned than the abuse laid on our children by the uncontrolled actions and blunders of the Childrens Services Division.