Child Welfare & Civil Suits


[ Replies to this Post ] [ Post a Reply ] [ Academic/Research Board ]

Posted by Carol on August 10, 2004 at 20:51:07

In Reply to: Re: Life in the Family: Thoughts on Systemic Change posted by someone on August 08, 2004 at 19:11:11:

I've been thinking about the era of Home raids, and how that particular strategy had mixed results. On the one hand, the raids probably led to creation of the Charter, which can be revoked or completely changed any time the dictatorial leadership see fit. Nevertheless, hitting Homes in France & Argentina probably had some positive outcomes inasmuch as The Family now tows the line on paper (at least) with regard to the basics of child welfare policy in developed, westernized countries.

However, the raids also had negative consequences, not the least of which was the reinforcement of The Family's persecution complex and better training of Family kids as to how to handle investigations & interviews with protective workers.

People who really understand child protective service (CPS) work are usually extremely hesitant to take kids away from their parents, even if the parents are really piss-poor. Whenever we disrupt families, we are basically exchanging one set of problems for another set of problems. Kids always get traumatized by these things, even when they're done as well as one could hope, i.e., in communities where the child welfare system operates with capable, well-trained law enforcement and CPS workers, honest & well-informed judges, high quality placement options, and capable, well-trianed trained clinical practitioners. The best of all possible worlds for child welfare & protection exists in very few places.

Besides the limitations of the System, The Family has a long history of letting the rank and file take the heat while the leadership gets off scott free. Imagine Zerbs & Company going through a raid! What I like about a civil suit (as opposed to criminal investigation & prosecution) is that one can target top level management with a measure of precision. Cut off the head of the beast, I say, or at least poke it in the eye and take a pound of flesh.

An attack to the head may not trigger as much lockdown in the group. The group would spring to the defense of its leaders, but that would simultaneously require a lot more public exposure of the leadership. A civil suit for damages would have the potential for a public disclosure of the group's assets. Just to file for damages, the litigants need to know WHERE the money is kept and under whose name(s).

In the long history of The Family, there have always been insiders at the top who turned on Zerbs & Company. What's different now than in the past is that there is an identifiable and reasonably well organized group of exers and other outsiders to whom the insiders can turn for help when the corruption at the top becomes apparent to someone in close quarters who decides it's time to make a change in course.

Problem is, when people on the inside start to wake up and move on, the process is hardly simple and clean. Nevertheless, I believe there are SGs on the inside in sensitive positions who will turn eventualy on their masters. This latest lockdown/renewal/reorganization may very well shake some fruit loose from a corrupt tree.












Replies to this Post:



Post a Reply



[ Replies to this Post ] [ Post a Reply ] [ Academic/Research Board ]