Re: closing the valve on the openly running faucet of children pouring into pizzagate as "missing" foster "care" children.
The history of LE losing their potential funding to protect a sizable portion of their publics dates back to 1974 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Abuse_Prevention_and_Treatment_Act)), and possibly earlier. Some LE agencies have taken back some of the funding, as have six agencies of Florida, for example: http://www.centerforchildwelfare.org/kb/LegislativeMandatedRpts/AnnualSheriffPerfRptFY15-16.pdf
However, such reports as linked above may be flawed in showing a "greater expense" when they "experimentally" "give authority" (i.e., funding) to LE agencies to do LE's job of protecting its citizenry. Just as one example for starters, they do not seem to consider the initial crime identification factor cost in that DCF, by its own statistics, absorbs a high number of identified false positives, and innocent children suffer the consequences of such socially biased investigations, if not suffering the lifetime harm of being destructively torn from families based on flawed "investigations" by those poorly trained at identifying and documenting evidence.
Of course, the very impressively presented evaluations of LEAs taking back this protective societal function (as linked above) are "conducted jointly" with SOs... and, powerfully, directly invested DCF. LEs are generally not as trained as administrative-level social workers in compiling compelling research (i.e., academically using statistics to show alleged facts, followed up with producing supporting narratives).
Here are a couple of examples of such arrangements where LEAs (SOs) have been able to successfully take back a portion of their funding—but they are under the radar to lose this funding if it can be successfully shown that they allegedly "cost the taxpayer more money": http://www.hcso.tampa.fl.us/Departments/Department-of-Investigative-Services/Child-Protective-Investigations-Division.aspx & http://www.pcsoweb.com/child-protection-investigations
I am sure better and more complete sources exist than linked as follows here, but there is A LOT of increasing money on the table: http://www.flgov.com/2015/10/27/gov-scott-proposes-an-additional-22-9-million-in-funding-for-the-safety-of-florida-children
Just to possibly open the conversation, are there any LEs here interested in taking back their ability (i.e., funding) to protect children in their communities? I have talked with local officers, and they agree, of course(!) that children are in need of protection from all harms.
view the rest of the comments →
IPleadThe2nd ago
Based on how government agencies and large corporations operate as hierarchies to compartmentalize everyone, I don't think that your low level and mid level employees (officers, etc) are often even aware of funding issues except what their higher ups want them to know about. These systems are set up exactly for that reason- keep people in the dark unless they absolutely need to know. It's easier to manipulate and control them and they aren't as likely to connect the dots so to speak.
QuietJustice ago
Thank you; I agree, especially at first; everyone is just very excited to be selected through a competitive process (with exception to the social worker, in general, who is often told that job-related benefits make the job desirable and thus "competitive"). They mostly just want to get started on the mission for which they thought they were employed.
Empathy and undeniable experience relation is where I have understanding for the newest social "services" personnel, but after a while, one works up the ranks. This can happen pretty quickly as qualified individuals quickly move on and out after finishing degrees... or maybe sometimes that's an excuse when the truth just becomes as bright as pure daylight.
Such described funding is firmly in place; verifiable so. I realize that if the problem were so easy to solve, we would have already. This can bring us back in full circle to cutting off the flow at its source: the children, and the strong funding incentives of unalterably damaging (or is that ""saving"" for the interventionist?) children's lives.
IPleadThe2nd ago
Very insightful. Thanks for the link I will check that out!