Parental rights vs. child safety (Was there any reason Josh was awarded visits?)

[concentric]

Yep, 400 images!!!!!!! Many of parents having sex with their children. waawaa

lease::what:

Anyone else wonder if Susan found out what ***** was downloading? Was she killed when she approached him about it?

---------------
JMO: Yes. There are other posters on here who agree.

And BTW, I think that the "parental alienation" bs is used by attorneys most often representing abusive husbands.

Actually the moms are trying desperately to protect their children and themselves from the violence/perversions of the fathers/husbands.

 

[KatieLeigh]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53514692-78/powell-images-hearing-child.html.csp
If JP was not doing as they asked TO THE LETTER, I can't imagine that they would send him a letter like this. Nor can I imagine that he would blatantly lie about such a letter and not have provided it to the court.

I did try the link you provided but it came back and said "oops" link is not available. Maybe because of the ...'s that I see in it? Not sure.

And you are correct. When people want to jump on the sensational band wagon and skew facts (after the fact)it's simply impossible to expect actual facts (or lack thereof) to be considered. Such as the house that the media is reporting now that he set up as a sham to deceive authorities? Sensationalism. It's PERFECTLY reasonable that he wouldn't want to spend time at that house without his kids, and if this were something that he did (refused to spend time at the house and keep the boys in a place they weren't allowed or considered safe) had the kids been returned to him, it would be REASONABLE to state that was what he was doing (trying to deceive authorities). But let's sensationalize it and turn it into something that fits what we want people to "think". And, as evidenced here, people jump on that instead of a reasonable conclusion. And that's what's been done with this entire case. And yes, I believe because of THAT, in part, 2 boys are no longer here. There's a huge difference between what a "good" parent and an "abusive" parent is. Clearly, it's useless to point out the law regarding that.
I won't post on this thread anymore but if you can find the link that you recommended I am interested in reading it. Please repost it if possible and I'll check back.

 

[KatieLeigh]

Everyone can look at the Elizabeth Smart case and learn something. How many investigators, media, GENERAL PUBLIC gave up on ever finding her because the man who had supposedly "done the deed" was sitting in jail, with very little evidence that he'd done anything. Nancy Grace made it very clear (as has been done in this case)that the person responsible for her disappearance was behind bars and thank goodness for that!
I don't care how slight the possibility is...unless there is solid evidence that JP was the cause for the disappearance of his wife, for the media, public, LE and her own family to REFUSE to consider any other possibility is certainly an injustice to her.

 

[octobermoon]

KatieLeigh, please read the psych report on Josh.

Here is the link.

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/293327-powellpsycheval.html#document/p1

 

[jmarple]

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/293327-powellpsycheval.html#document/p1[/QUOTE]

After reading the "powellpsycheval", I noticed there were many discrepancies in his statements to Dr. Manley from what has been widely reported in the news and by Susan's friends. I wonder if the good doctor took all he said as the "truth"? I also noted Josh said he had graduated in 2002 from the University of Washington with a BA in business admin. I recall that we here on WS looked into that and couldn't verify that he had graduated. I'll have to go back to the old threads and re-read. I also wonder if Alina cooked or prepared the meals for the children ahead of their visits and Josh only pretended to cook them. Recalling from earlier posts that he wasn't much of a cook, taking hours to make pancakes for Susan and her friend. I also noticed that he took credit for her garden among other things. Not that any of these little items mean much, but there was a deliberate pattern of lying throughout those 22 pages. IMHO

 

[gwenabob]

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/293327-powellpsycheval.html#document/p1

After reading the "powellpsycheval", I noticed there were many discrepancies in his statements to Dr. Manley from what has been widely reported in the news and by Susan's friends. I wonder if the good doctor took all he said as the "truth"? I also noted Josh said he had graduated in 2002 from the University of Washington with a BA in business admin. I recall that we here on WS looked into that and couldn't verify that he had graduated. I'll have to go back to the old threads and re-read. I also wonder if Alina cooked or prepared the meals for the children ahead of their visits and Josh only pretended to cook them. Recalling from earlier posts that he wasn't much of a cook, taking hours to make pancakes for Susan and her friend. I also noticed that he took credit for her garden among other things. Not that any of these little items mean much, but there was a deliberate pattern of lying throughout those 22 pages. IMHO

Indeed. Narcissists are very good at lying and the psychologist should have known that. Josh lied about all kinds of things including whether or not they had financial troubles. He said they did not, but it was well established that they had very stressed finances to the point Susan HAD to grow food in the backyard to feed the boys. (After all, Josh wasn't about to waste his "table food" feeding the children!)

 

[GrainneDhu]

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/293327-powellpsycheval.html#document/p1

After reading the "powellpsycheval", I noticed there were many discrepancies in his statements to Dr. Manley from what has been widely reported in the news and by Susan's friends. I wonder if the good doctor took all he said as the "truth"? I also noted Josh said he had graduated in 2002 from the University of Washington with a BA in business admin. I recall that we here on WS looked into that and couldn't verify that he had graduated. I'll have to go back to the old threads and re-read. I also wonder if Alina cooked or prepared the meals for the children ahead of their visits and Josh only pretended to cook them. Recalling from earlier posts that he wasn't much of a cook, taking hours to make pancakes for Susan and her friend. I also noticed that he took credit for her garden among other things. Not that any of these little items mean much, but there was a deliberate pattern of lying throughout those 22 pages. IMHO

I may well be wrong but I believe that psych evals are generally required to be based on the research that the evaluator themselves carries out. Taking evidence from msm sources would be akin to hearsay.

It is up to the lawyer for the other side in a custody dispute and/or the guardian ad litem to point out any discrepancies and anything that might cast doubt on the accuracy of the report.

 

[wenwe4]

I am wondering if the one therapy session that Josh is being credited with is the one visit to the child therapist who was working with Charlie and Braden? I do not believe this would count as following the recommendations in the psych eval but I am not sure what was court ordered just prior to the last hearing. Usually CPS puts language into the court order to undergo a psych eval and follow recommendations. I do not know if the court had previously ordered Josh attend therapy with a qualified Psychologist with a Doctorate who was well versed in working with Personality Disordered clients. This last addendum with the line of no additional visits but no change in the structure of the visits should be made, is concerning to me. I would agree that this Psychologist recommended Josh work through his own stuff in an effort to help his children. Same Dr. made it very clear that people working with Josh have a significant amount of education and expertise, that I do not believe CPS followed through with. I am not sure it was clear that Josh had been having visits supervised by a "case worker" who is only required to have a high school diploma and a clear background check. DCFS chose to keep the visits supervised in the "sham" home by Mrs. G-H instead. Financial budget cuts to Washington State DCFS over the past 3 years has been drastic and devastating. I highly doubt the Dept. wanted to pay for the professional level (ie: $95 per hour vs. $17 per hour) to supervise the children. Furthermore, Utah knew of these 400 images for 2 years and didn't make efforts to protect the children by sharing with Washington CPS. By the time Washington got it - it was 2 years old info. The psych eval addendum clearly stated Josh lied, attempted to manipulate, and had selective memory about the risks to the children. That should have been enough for the Dept and the Judge to move toward following all recommendations in both evals. Was Josh ever court ordered to attend therapy on his own? Was this new information included made privy to the boys therapist ? So very sad!!!

 

[Tugela]

Should the boys have been visiting Josh Powell?

Joy Silberg, a psychologist who specializes in child protection and abuse cases, says courts often place more value on parental rights than a child’s safety – or see them as equal concerns, when in her view, the parental rights should be secondary.

“I have situations where the child has disclosed very clear disclosures about a parent, or terror at being near a parent … and the judge still orders a child to go [to visitation] because the parental right is seen as having so much more power,” says Dr. Silberg.

While she doesn’t know all the facts of the Powell case, she adds, “it’s hard for me to believe that this was completely out of the blue and that no one knew he was this destructive. People usually leave clues.”http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0...ty-Should-boys-have-been-visiting-Josh-Powell

I'm not a Christian Scientist, but I think this article is bringing up a lot of the same issues that we've been questioning in the threads.

Where do we draw the line?

The reason would be that the psychologist who reported to the court noted that Powell had excellent parenting skills, but the reservation was with the values he had. The obvious conclusion for the court then would be to allow visits but keep the children in the custody of someone with more conventional views for the bulk of the time.

 

[GrainneDhu]

I do hope you will read this article http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53...state.html.csp and re-think whether Josh was a fit parent for these two boys. Teaching bigotry and hate toward others is not my idea of a good parent.

However, it is not enough to take someone's parental rights away, either.

Parents still have First Amendment rights and they are free to teach their children some really distasteful things. I keep going to the example of Lynx and Lamb Gaede, who formed the band Prussian Blue in the early 2000s. They were singing about white supremacy and Holocaust denial! But that's not enough for CPS to take away parental rights.

 

[wenwe4]

I have also heard it argued that the "children" have the "right" to see their parents. Clearly these children fell through cracks but their Father purposefully and dastardly created "cravasses" out of cracks. I want to know what the GAL/CASA had to say about the children having visits with their Dad - given the new info of child cartoon *advertiser censored* on Daddy's computer (in addition to everything they found @ G'pa Steve's house). Were the children present when Uncle Johnny answered the door naked? Even Josh blamed his brother Steve for the inappropriate cartoon drawing. Yet the Cox's were "mean" and would send the "Mormon Police" to Washington to take the children away. Was Josh was more afraid of the Mormon Police than he was of CPS in Washington?

 

[BritsKate]

From every news source I have read these poor kids were not abused. If you want to read about horribly abused kids read: http://pysih.com/ Yes, Susan's husband killed them, but it does not seem that they lived through horrible abuse.

Some would argue murder is the ultimate form of abuse. I have no doubt these boys, as collateral damage to JP's mental state, endured at the absolute least emotional abuse.

Abuse doesn't have to leave marks or be especially brutal to be abuse. It is all about control and subjugation.

http://www.counselingcenter.illinois.edu/?page_id=168

 

[BritsKate]

Everyone can look at the Elizabeth Smart case and learn something. How many investigators, media, GENERAL PUBLIC gave up on ever finding her because the man who had supposedly "done the deed" was sitting in jail, with very little evidence that he'd done anything. Nancy Grace made it very clear (as has been done in this case)that the person responsible for her disappearance was behind bars and thank goodness for that!
I don't care how slight the possibility is...unless there is solid evidence that JP was the cause for the disappearance of his wife, for the media, public, LE and her own family to REFUSE to consider any other possibility is certainly an injustice to her.

Why, exactly, is believing her husband complicit in her disappearance an "injustice" to her?

This is just my opinion but I would consider believing the lies the Powells have spewed about Susan and her family far more an injustice. I also consider 'victimizing' a man who did nothing but denigrate, demean, and devalue her very existence after her disappearance an injustice to her. The fact that the same man murdered two innocent children is the ultimate of injustices.

I see many injustices...just not considering her husband guilty of 'disappearing' her being one to be outraged about. :waitasec:

Susan deserves to be found. She deserves to be laid to rest with her boys. She deserves to have her story, and that of her sons, told for her.

Anything less really will be an injustice.

 

[SuziQ]

Child Protective Services has 'serious' problems, Wash. senator says
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=193...ious-problems-wash-senator-says&s_cid=queue-1

After Josh Powell killed his two sons and himself, a Washington State senator says Child Protective Services needs to be fixed.
Chuck and Judy Cox, the maternal grandparents of the Powell children, will join Sen. Pam Roach at a news conference and hearing on Thursday to discuss the issue. Attorneys for the Cox family will attend as well.

More at link.

 

[SuziQ]

http://www.senaterepublicans.wa.gov/news/2012/roach/021712Powell.htm

Press release from Senator Roach:

Sen. Pam Roach to hold news conference and hearing regarding Powell case
February 17, 2012
OLYMPIA…Chuck and Judy Cox will join Sen. Pam Roach for a news conference and hearing on Thursday, Feb. 23; attorneys for the Cox family, Anne Bremner and Steve Downing, will also be in attendance The purpose of the meeting will be to explore the serious problems within Child Protective Services and offer solutions to actions that may cause children harm. A public comment period will be held after the press conference.
“CPS needs to directly hear from the public,” said Roach. "At the end of the meeting the department will be presented with ideas for change."
"Everyone in the room will have a story to tell. We are going to ask them, in short comments, what changes should be made in the way the department does business,” said Roach.
When: Thursday, Feb. 23, 2012
Time: 12:00 noon to 1:25 p.m.
Where: Senate Hearing Room 4, Cherberg Building, Olympia
​

 

[hollyblue]

The Cox family now is considering a lawsuit against social service agencies in Washington for allowing Josh visitation with the boys when there were signs he had serious psychological issues.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=14...ious-problems-wash-senator-says&s_cid=queue-1

 

[MsFacetious]

Everyone can look at the Elizabeth Smart case and learn something. How many investigators, media, GENERAL PUBLIC gave up on ever finding her because the man who had supposedly "done the deed" was sitting in jail, with very little evidence that he'd done anything. Nancy Grace made it very clear (as has been done in this case)that the person responsible for her disappearance was behind bars and thank goodness for that!
I don't care how slight the possibility is...unless there is solid evidence that JP was the cause for the disappearance of his wife, for the media, public, LE and her own family to REFUSE to consider any other possibility is certainly an injustice to her.

I am one who has never given up hope Susan might be alive.
I was one who was still putting up posters of Elizabeth when she was found alive.

I was one that NEVER believed Richard was guilty.
I am one who defended Richard before and after his death.

I am actually offended that Richard is being used to defend Josh Powell.

There was no proof that Richard had ever committed such a serious crime or had any motive to do so.
Richard did not live with the victim, make up a crazy alibi, immediately move out of state and then start bashing the victim.

More importantly, despite being accused publicly Richard cooperated with the investigation.
26 hours of questioning, a blood sample, gave up his vehicles and took polygraphs. Whatever they asked of him, he did.

Richard admitted what he HAD done wrong and did everything he could to prove his innocence in Elizabeth's case.
The one witness to Elizabeth's abduction said Richard was NOT the man who abducted her sister.

If anyone can show me proof that Josh Powell had submitted to hours of questioning, DNA testing and polygraphs... I will rethink my position.
Until then... (and even there is proof of that) he is a narcissistic, sadistic serial killer in my not so humble opinion.

Josh killed two precious little boys by hitting them with a hatchet and then setting the house on fire.

Richard Ricci? He had a little boy too.
Richard's little boy was killed by a drunk driver.

I personally think it is an injustice to Richard Ricci to compare him to this sadistic monster who killed his own sons. :twocents:

 

[wenwe4]

I just wanted to point out some inconsistencies in this MSM report.

1) EG-H was not a CPS Social Worker but a Visitation Supervisor working for an agency contracted by CPS. The requirements for this position are a high school diploma and able to pass a background check, along with auto insurance and good driving record for transporting the children.
2) The psychologist recommended a Doctorate level therapist with extensive knowledge and experience working with Personality Disorders, observe and intervene in the parent/child interaction. **where the translation might have gotten lost because it didn't specifically say instead of the current visitation regime.
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=193...ious-problems-wash-senator-says&s_cid=queue-1

Other contributing factors (IMO):
3) The child therapist felt "set up for failure" by DCFS for the first visit with Dad and kiddos.
4) The referral to the visitation agency said call 911 if Dad attempts to flee with the children.
5) No wrap-around services for this family? Just piece-meal services (ie: child therapy for the kids and Dad be involved & supervised visits) and Josh manipulated those to his content.
6) Who spoke for the children? Where was the CASA/GAL? Where were LE and CPS from Utah working in conjunction with Washington authorities to protect the kids?
7) There are no Grandparent rights in Washington State . . . this would be a perfect example to bring this before a court to re-evaluate. The Coxes stepped up to the plate, although SP could argue the same thing (just not as effectively).

 

[gwenabob]

The Cox family now is considering a lawsuit against social service agencies in Washington for allowing Josh visitation with the boys when there were signs he had serious psychological issues.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=14...ious-problems-wash-senator-says&s_cid=queue-1

Good. I believe it is warranted in this case. If nothing else, it will give them an opportunity to finally be heard without having to temper their comments for fear of Josh. It should be very healing. It should also force changes in the way government agencies and the courts so nonchalantly allow very sick and disturbed individuals visitation with the most vulnerable in our society. We need to change the way the courts view children. They are individual human beings, not property of their parents.

 

[cocomod]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53514692-78/powell-images-hearing-child.html.csp
If JP was not doing as they asked TO THE LETTER, I can't imagine that they would send him a letter like this. Nor can I imagine that he would blatantly lie about such a letter and not have provided it to the court.

I did try the link you provided but it came back and said "oops" link is not available. Maybe because of the ...'s that I see in it? Not sure.

And you are correct. When people want to jump on the sensational band wagon and skew facts (after the fact)it's simply impossible to expect actual facts (or lack thereof) to be considered. Such as the house that the media is reporting now that he set up as a sham to deceive authorities? Sensationalism. It's PERFECTLY reasonable that he wouldn't want to spend time at that house without his kids, and if this were something that he did (refused to spend time at the house and keep the boys in a place they weren't allowed or considered safe) had the kids been returned to him, it would be REASONABLE to state that was what he was doing (trying to deceive authorities). But let's sensationalize it and turn it into something that fits what we want people to "think". And, as evidenced here, people jump on that instead of a reasonable conclusion. And that's what's been done with this entire case. And yes, I believe because of THAT, in part, 2 boys are no longer here. There's a huge difference between what a "good" parent and an "abusive" parent is. Clearly, it's useless to point out the law regarding that.
I won't post on this thread anymore but if you can find the link that you recommended I am interested in reading it. Please repost it if possible and I'll check back.

I do not believe that anyone needs to sensationalize this case. It has been sensational for quite some time without adding any additional non-factual aspects to it. Does the media exploit the worst aspects. Absolutely, they are looking for ratings. However, this case just continues to get worse and worse.

The question posed on this thread is whether Josh's rights should have been greater than the rights of the child to be granted safety.

These children were in danger with Josh. The CPS determined that he needed therapy. I will reiterate that the kids were taken out of the home and away from Josh because he lived with a sexual pervert. He had these two innocent, young children in a home that was considered a danger to him. Add to that, LE were trying to determine if Josh was involved in any of the *advertiser censored* found in the home. He was now part of another criminal investigation. CPS had EVERY right to take those children and look after their welfare. Where I think they failed, is they should have made the therapy happen BEFORE he had any visitation rights.

Josh did not comply with what was asked of him. If you read the reports, he was asked to help CPS talk to the children in a comforting, yet straight forward way about SP being arrested. Instead, when the children get into the room, he goes off on a rant about the "Mormon" police making up things about SP and taking him away. The CPS worker was unable to get him to stop. From this ONE instance alone, I think that CPS should have considered stopping his visitation until he had therapy and evaluations from a mental health professional. They had already determined that his decisions were not always in the best interest of the children.

It sounds to me like many people, including some in power, are asking for a full investigation into the CPS handling of Josh's case. http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=19308982 "the Washington state senator is again calling for changes."

One change that I think should be made is also in the training of 911 personnel. I think that when a CPS worker calls in (while on the job), it should automatically be considered an emergency. A CPS worker with the care of small children should not have to explain why she considers the situation an emergency when a "supervised" visit has gone wrong.