The history of the present Government is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations against the inherent sovereignty of the American family, designed to undermine the authority and control of parents over their children and to deprive their children of their inherent birthright.

Our nation's parents and children labor under burdensome state-sanctioned violations of their inalienable rights, and of their enumerated rights which are guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America:

The right to the free exercise of their religion. Children are removed for various religious practices including reading the Bible, disciplining with spanking and home-schooling.

The right to free speech. Many parents are ordered by the courts not to speak publicly about the violations of rights that they and their children suffer at the hands of the State or in court-ordered custody arrangements. Others have their children held hostage to the demands of CPS workers that they silence their public outcry against the injustices perpetrated against them and their children, with visitations being denied until they comply.

The right to freedom of the press. Parents and children have been ordered by the Court to remove all Internet web sites that publicize the injustices perpetrated against them by CPS (Child Protection Services and all other child welfare agencies by whatever name they are known)  agencies and the Family Court. Flyers published at the parents' own expense have been ordered removed from local businesses by CPS agents. Parents have been denied the right to purchase and publish advertising in local papers requesting other abused families to contact them.

The right to peaceably assemble. Parents have been penalized by CPS agencies when they gather with other falsely accused parents and become pro-active. There are documented cases where, in open court, CPS representatives have questioned parents about membership in these groups and used that information against other member parents.

The right to petition the Government for redress of grievances. Parents' petitions to elected representatives at the local, state, and federal levels go unanswered and unresolved while their and their children's rights are casually trampled by CPS agencies. Our representatives tell us the CPS agents are protected by immunity and there is nothing anyone can do. Our pleas are ignored by the courts. Our funds are drained and we lack the resources or the availability of competent legal representation to take our petitions to higher courts. Our cries and the cries of our children fall on deaf ears.

The right to keep and bear arms. Thousands of parents daily are being denied the right to keep and bear arms under the domestic violence laws. They are threatened, intimidated, and coerced into accepting false plea bargains of child abuse, which then costs them their right to own firearms, even though they are not convicted felons. This is unconscionable.

The right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. While nobody can enter someone's home and simply confiscate their television, CPS agencies routinely enter a family's home without probable cause, without warrants, without court orders and many times with force and casually remove the children to places unknown without any evidence of abuse or neglect. This happens three thousand times a day and the parents have no recourse. With the children in the custody of the state, and with possession being nine-tenths of the law, it can take years to get their children back despite the fact that, in the absence of evidence, probable cause, or a warrant, these children have been taken illegally.

The right to be free from Warrants issued, but on probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmations and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. CPS agents and police officers, as a matter of routine, steal children without warrants, and search homes for evidence without warrants or evidence of any crime. This is all done in the name of protecting the children.

These warrantless searches are used by CPS agencies to obtain access to the children and interview them on the spot in a separate room, completely disregarding the trauma they inflict on the children and with complete disregard for the right of parents to oversee and protect their children. These children are often strip searched and their naked bodies photographed. If the parents object to such intrusions and interviews, they are accused of hiding something and this assertion of their rights is presumed to be proof of guilt.

They conduct their warranted searches for children illegally, by looking in places where children could not possibly be hidden in their illegal endeavors to obtain more evidence to manipulate against innocent parents.

The right to not be compelled to be a witness against himself. Parents are routinely ordered by the court to cooperate with CPS agencies, which means to disclose information that is often twisted and manipulated into lies and is presented as fact to the court. They are never informed by any CPS agent that what they say will be used against them. They are court-ordered to sign releases of private medical and psychiatric information which once again is a violation of their right not to be a witness against themselves. Failure to sign these releases results in either contempt charges or the court ordering the information released against the parent's will.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are ‘held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right not to be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Parental rights are effectively terminated when the CPS agent leaves the home with the children. This does not protect the right to due process. Parents are automatically denied the right to be present at interviews and examinations or to even speak with their children. If they have visitation, they are forbidden to speak about the case, or to initiate a hug lest the visitation be immediately terminated. They have no say in any aspect of their children's life, who will care for them and how, or in the treatments the children will receive.

The children's right to due process is also violated by these actions. To all appearances, they are being punished because they are being denied access to their beloved parents, to their family, their home, their friends. They are patted on the head and told this is for their own good. When they act out their anger and fear due to the State's ill-advised action, they are drugged into compliance against their wishes and the wishes of their parents, all at the unilateral whim of a case worker.

Parents have been ordered out of the courtroom during hearings where the decisions about their children are being made, leaving them without a voice in their defense or in the disposition of the children, or even the means to cross examine witnesses and impeach testimony. Parents are denied the admission of evidence in their favor - many times under the guise of protecting the child's confidentiality - and are subjected to hearsay evidence against them which is accorded the unjustified status of truth. Their children are removed from their homes and placed with strangers where they are at far greater risk of abuse than they were at home. Parental rights are terminated and the child is never seen or heard from again, all without due process.

Parents are often not notified of hearings pertaining to their case or their child. When they don't show up, they have no say in the process, can present no defense and cannot answer any accusations. Many times when parents are notified of hearings, they are told ‘it is only a formality, you don't have to be there.' Once again they have been lied to,  to their own and their child's detriment. If they are notified, it can be as short as one hour before the scheduled hearing.

Parents are denied access to their children without having been found guilty of any crime against them. This is often denied arbitrarily, and often as punishment for the parents' refusing to admit guilt or accept a plea bargain. Not only is this a denial of due process, it is cruel and unusual punishment for both the parents and the child.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are ‘held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The process of intervention is fundamentally unfair and a gross violation of both the child's and the parents' rights.

The right to a trial by jury. In all cases of Dependency & Neglect, where a child can be ordered removed from the home, where the parent can be ordered to comply with expensive and dubious treatment plans, a parent is denied the right to a trial by jury. This is unconscionable as the very heart and soul of the parent, his progeny, is at risk and left to the whims of a Family Court judge, who is, in far too many cases, predisposed against the parent. It may be allowed during termination hearings, but this is too rare. A trial by jury must be allowed for all Family court proceedings to protect the rights of both the parents and the children. Many times, children are removed from their parents to the detriment of the child. Juries could provide a process of checks and balances against this.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are ‘held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to be confronted with the witnesses against him and the inherent right to have free and unfettered access to all evidence and witnesses against them. Accused parents are denied the right to know and face their accusers, be they anonymous reporters, mandated reporters, or the child himself. Parents are denied access to many forms of so-called evidence against them under the guise of ‘confidentiality' laws. They are often denied access to their children to determine if any disclosures have been obtained through questionable tactics such as intimidation, deceit, the administration of drugs to the child, and the threat of never seeing their parents again unless they disclose abuse.

Additionally, the motive of many child abuse reporters is never investigated, resulting in many custody disputes being resolved through false reports against the other parent  -  as many as 80% of these reports. The accused must have the right to confront the witnesses against him.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are ‘held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor. Parents often find that the witnesses they subpoena do not appear for court hearings, including social workers, Guardians ad Litem, and therapists. The court sanctions these violations without allowing the parents the remedies they need to compel these witnesses to appear.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are ‘held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense and the inherent right to effective counsel for his defense. Again, we are dealing with an important issue, THE most important issue to most parents; their children. A parent is denied court appointed counsel UNLESS his rights are being terminated or he is facing criminal charges. Too sadly, most charges do not meet the burden of proof for criminal charges and CPS agencies file charges in civil - or family - court. This is an illegal ruse to avoid the fact that they do not have a legitimate case against the parent. By the time parental rights are being terminated, too much time has passed, too many violations of the parents' and the children's rights have been perpetrated and too many opportunities have been missed due to lack of competent counsel. It becomes a slam-dunk for the CPS agency.

Additionally, most cases are lost, not because the parent was guilty, but because there is virtually no attorney out there who will effectively represent a defendant. By their own admission, attorneys have too much to lose by presenting a vigorous and effective defense. They advise their clients to accept a false plea bargain, to cooperate and give up all their rights, just to make their own jobs easier.

Many parents, having been drained of funds and unable to find competent counsel, attempt pro-se defenses, only to find the courts biased against them. Still others look for help outside the Bar Associations only to find that while their non-licensed counsel may be truly competent, he is not allowed to represent them in court.

The amendment states "Assistance of Counsel" and does not include the qualification that said counsel be licensed to practice law.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are ‘held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. Removing a child from a loving and non-abusive home is cruel and unusual punishment, for the child and for the parents. Doing so without due process exacerbates the injustice. These children ostensibly have a voice through the GAL, but in substance, their voice is ignored by all who profess to protect them, and their voice is silenced to their parents whose hands are tied to protect their beloved child. This unwarranted and unsubstantiated separation is cruel and unusual punishment whether it comes before or after a conviction or without a conviction. The substance of the action is to punish.

Alternatively, the CPS agencies and the courts routinely leave truly abused children in the homes of their abusers, ignoring the pleas of the children and non-custodial parents to protect the children from the ongoing abuse, be they in State custody or in a divorced parent's home. These are the children who die, and CPS agencies knew of the abuse and did nothing to prevent it.

The States actively cover up the abuse of children they have in their custody and there are no provisions for independent investigations into such complaints. The children suffer at the expense of CPS agencies.

Even when a parent is not criminally charged, they are ‘held to answer' for charges that are, in substance, the same as if they had been criminally charged. If the substance is the same as a crime, then the protections must likewise be the same.

The right to decide whether to have children or not, without fear of having those children forcibly or unwillingly removed without true due process of law. Under the law, parents whose parental rights have previously terminated involuntarily are now subject to having their rights terminated on any other existing children as well as any child yet to be born, without due process, and without any reason given. This is unconscionable.

Additionally, the state cannot mandate that a person have a child, nor can it mandate that they do not have a child. Children are part of a family, the family is an institution that predates any government, and has rights that Government cannot intrude on. The family is as inviolate as a man's home. Our Government has displayed a casual disregard for this institution which is the backbone of our society. As families are destroyed willy nilly, so our society crumbles.

If the State wishes to raise children, let the State bear its own children. Since this is impossible, the State has no right to interfere with family matters unless they present a real danger to the child.

The right to raise said children with the values and teachings that the parents see fit, whether or not the State agrees with those values or teachings.   Children are being removed from homes for home-schooling, for Bible reading, for having guns in the home, for having their children born at home, for teaching the Constitution, and for any number of reasons that deal with the values and teaching the parents chose to impart to their youngsters.

The State has no right to remove children from non-abusive homes regardless of the State's position on certain teachings or beliefs.

The right of a child to be raised by blood relatives rather than the State. The State does not make a good parent, it has no vested interest in the welfare of the child, and cannot love and nurture a child. In the tragic event that a child must be removed from their home to protect their safety, the best way to mitigate the resultant trauma is to place the child with blood relatives. This is the child's RIGHT.

This is also the right of the blood relatives, be they grandparents, aunts or uncles, or siblings. Theirs is the vested interest, theirs is the ability to comfort and protect that child better than any State agency, because they have a blood tie to that child that will serve to genuinely nurture and love the child. Placing the child with any but a blood relative should only be done as a last resort.

Additionally, blood relatives should not be required to meet the same requirements as strangers who apply to be foster parents or adoptive parents. The blood tie should suffice along with the presumption of innocence. The blood relatives will be more likely to have the best interests of the child at heart, much more so than strangers or the State would. To require more is a violation of the integrity of the family bond and patently immoral.

If the child is to be adopted, blood relatives should have the first option, and they should be given the child in all cases except for previously proven abuse or neglect against the relative who wishes to adopt. To give a child to strangers is cruel to the child and to the blood relatives who have been denied the right to raise their own kin.

The right to refuse unwanted or unneeded medical or psychiatric evaluations, treatments or drugs, for themselves and for their children. Parents whose children are taken often find their children are placed on dangerous or questionable drug therapies, subjected to offensive and unnecessary medical examinations by practitioners whose expertise in certain areas is questionable, and forced to undergo traumatic therapies designed to help the child disclose nonexistent abuse. The child's fragile psyche is manhandled and manipulated until the child succumbs to the demands of the interrogator. They are exposed to adult sexual situations under the questionable guise of therapy and their natural inhibitions are brutally torn from them in the attempt to get a disclosure.

Their natural reactions to the separation trauma from their parents are misinterpreted as signs of sexual abuse and they are hammered to disclose.

Normal, happy, healthy children become traumatized drug-addicts, and dysfunctional while in state care, and the state erroneously treats the child as if the trauma was inflicted in the home instead of triggered by their very actions of taking the child from his parents.

When the parents plead to have their children back and state that they never had these problems at home, the CPS agencies refuse to listen and continue on their destructive course of intervention.

These agencies use the courts to order the parents into therapies designed to ‘treat' their nonexistent domestic relations problems; therapies in which the parent must admit guilt before being allowed to complete it successfully. Non-abusive, falsely accused parents must either falsely admit guilt or refuse to comply and risk losing their children permanently.

CPS agencies actually recommend medications and dosages, in some cases requiring parents to take Antabuse and increasing the dosage over and above what the doctor prescribed causing toxic side effects. In other cases, they put traumatized children on Ritalin and other drugs in an attempt to control the child's behavior problems that have been caused by the agency's intervention.

Most parents vehemently oppose these drug therapies in vain. The child learns to turn to a pill to solve his problems which cannot, in any way, be portrayed as a good thing. The parent must have the right to choose whether or not their children will be examined, treated and medicated.

The right of parents to select therapists, mental health professionals and medical practitioners of their own choosing, for themselves and for their children. Parents and children are ordered by the courts to attend therapies, and do not have the option of choosing who will treat them. The therapists they must go to will produce any diagnosis that agency wants or risk losing that source of income.

If a parent/child rightly suspects the evaluation might not be unbiased, they will further taint it by not trusting the therapist.

The true issue is that the patient must be able to trust their health care provider, and ordering them to providers that they don't trust or don't agree philosophically with is a violation of their right to choose their own providers, whether the State is paying for these services or not.

Furthermore, many of these people casually disclose private information to unauthorized sources, leaving another reason for not trusting them.

The right of children to be with their parents and of parents to be with their children. This speaks for itself. When two people have a child, a bond exists that cannot be severed easily, either for the parents or for the child. To attempt to sever it or to interfere with it is the ultimate cruelty. So harsh are the repercussions to the interference with that bond, that any intervention MUST be based on evidence, not supposition, of abuse.

This means both parents, under all circumstances. To deny a child access to either parent, or to restrict that access is a violation of that special bond, and an act of extreme cruelty.