As part of their "investigation," CPS will frequently send a
child for evaluation to an outside mental health professional selected
from a court-approved list.  While a skilled therapist should be able
to weed out obviously false charges, by and large the therapists to
whom CPS refers children are all too willing to confirm what may
actually be false reports.
     In some cases, they are simply afraid to rule out abuse.  To be
eligible for federal funding under the Mondale Act, every state has
passed laws requiring certain people (doctors, therapist, teachers,
etc.) to report suspected abuse to the proper authority.  To back up
this requirement, these "mandated reporters" are subject to fines or
imprisonment for not reporting.
     "As a result, everyone's on the defensive - they're afraid that
if they don't make a report, they'll be deemed criminals if they
inadvertently put a child back in the hands of a real abuser," says
Gardner.
     But by far the most powerful incentive to rubber-stamp an abuse
charge is financial.  Therapists appearing before the San Diego Grand
Jury, for example, testified that they fear removal from the approved
list (and, of course, a corresponding drop in income) if they "oppose
the recommendations" of the CPS worker's opinion risk "never getting
to see their patient again."
     Private "validators" have additional ways to turn abuse charges
into money.  In California, for example, the Victim/Witness program
will pay directly to a licensed therapist up to $10,000 per child for
counseling - as long as the child was alleged to have been abused.  An
additional $10,000 is available to counsel the child's mother.  The
only catch: to get their therapy paid for, the child victim and her
mother must see a therapist from an approved list.
     A typical CPS investigation frequently involves referring the
alleged child victim for a medical exam.  Some doctors, too, seem
inclined to support the "findings" of the CPS workers.  Like
therapists, doctors may confirm abuse because they're afraid not to.
And like therapists, they have financial incentives - if they don't
back CPS up, they will no longer be called upon to perform
evaluations.
     But unlike therapists and CPS workers, who may substantiate an
abuse claim based only on their opinions, doctors must generally
document their reasons. However, "in medicine, statements made by
patients or family are generally taken at face value," says Coleman.
"So when a mother or a CPS worker sends a child to the doctor and
says, 'I think she's been abused by her father,' the doctor will
frequently make a diagnosis of abuse based on this 'history.'"
     Because sexual abuse rarely leaves any physical signs, a physical
exam is not likely to give a doctor much to go on.  However, a typical
doctor's report will say that although no indication of abuse was
found, the examination was "consistent with abuse."
     "Technically, there's a kernel of truth there," says Coleman.
"But what gets ignored is that a normal physical exam is also
consistent with no abuse. Saying 'consistent with abuse' is simply a
fraud - it's language designed to help the prosecution without adding
anything to the investigation."
     Given the obvious corruption and even malicious nature of some
CPS investigations, one might expect that they'd be sued quite often.
They're not. To be eligible for federal funding under the Mondale Act,
states must pass laws protecting mandated reporters from prosecution.
     "This was a pretty well-meaning provision, and it gave many
people the confidence to come forward," says Gardner.  "But the same
immunity protects people who are making fabricated accusations."
     Child abuse is a terrible crime, and those who abuse children
should be severely punished.  But in the our zeal to purse offenders,
we have inadvertently created a system that itself abuses the very
children we're trying so hard to protect.
[end article]
--- FMail/386 1.0g
(1:2629/124)
---------------