How's this for a fun couple of days?

[kaetchen]

Yesterday, I get a call from a friend. She says that she received a call from a social worker for me on her cell phone. I call the social worker back, and find out that someone has reported our children to CPS - get this - because 'they are on a restrictive diet, and as a result, B is too thin.'

So, Social Worker person (I'll call her the nice lady

Comments

[parlor_games]

Really? I guess I only partially agree with this. I think if allegations are found to be completing without merit, and based on lies or maliciously reported, the harm to the family can be severe.

[kaetchen]

Just logging back in after a weekend offline. Thanks for the apology - and don't worry, I wasn't offended by your reply in the first place. :)

[parlor_games]

That is unfuckingbelievable, Kat. Outrageous. I agree, it was undoubtedly someone from Friday night practice. With the exception of a few people there that I like, that is a group of gossips, misfits, and socially disfunctional busybodies...which is why we simply *never* go out there, even though we would really like to see a handful of folks there. And now, I don't care who knows it.

I really hope that was misguided ignorance. But a call to you would have been the most kind and effective way to solve the issue. Your children have NEVER been deprived of food in my presence. They were always allowed to graze at will, provided there were healthy and low-sugar options available (they were the ones who always seemed to turn up their noses at junk, though).

I would be SO PISSED.

[kaetchen]

Thanks, dear. Your comment means a lot to me, since I know that under your well-renowned impartiality, lies one of the more deeply sensitive (in the good way) people I know.

[rhum]

I'm glad it was so easy for the social worker to see how healthy and safe the kids are.
But it bugs me that someone we know (I assume) would report you like that.

[kaetchen]

Yes, so was I. I mean, we've all heard the horror stories about CPS gone drastically wrong, so while I knew that my children are fabulous, it was still a stressful day. And the Social worker did a lot to alleviate that, making the meeting very peer-like, despite the fact that we both were aware that she could have wielded a great deal of power over me, my children, and my children's dad.

[skaldic]

I'm with parlor_games -- I'm appalled. That's so far over the top, it's ridiculous. And giving them the benefit of the doubt, that sort of misguided ignorance -- accusations based on hearsay -- is still unforgivable.

[kaetchen]

Thanks. Your point, I think, is my own biggest problem with this. Being generally a pretty happy person, I just can't wrap my head around the possibility that someone could either make such serious accusations to the state government based on EASILY refutable factual errors and hearsay, or that someone lied on purpose to make things sound worse (B's 'matted and unkempt' hair) than they are.

Sigh...

[sydneysd6]

As someone who associates with the mentioned Fighter Practice group on friday nights, I do have a comment to make

[el_exigente]

"Mis interpurted"? Is that like a "miss pelling"? Just wondering, since it spoils the pseudo-intellectual tone of the rest of the reply.

[mschryste]

Perhaps you missed this part: "The only source that fits the available evidence (whose number was provided to DSHS, what names they used for me, the source of the comments quoted in the allegations) is the SCA, and more specifically, Friday night fighter practice." Perhaps you don't know the years of personal history. Perhaps you were the "misguided innocent." Thanks for your concern.

[sydneysd6]

no, I didn't miss any of those things that were included. Thankyou for your concerned list of perhaps-s though. My hope was that a bit more critical thinking would be applied to this than was initialy manifesting in the posts. A few things to consider;the key phrase in her post was "AVAILABLE EVIDENCE". The case investigators are charged with protecting the anonymity of the person(s) making the complaint until such time as the charge is validated and results in a court case at which point the parent is alowed to know the identity of the person registering the complaint. So what ever evidence she was given would have been inconsequential and not conclusive enough to point directly to the person who made the complaint. Using phone number and name given by the person making hte CPS verification call as iron clad proof of who must have made the report is silly. The CPS worker is going to do their homework, they would have looked at official records and used what ever name was written down legally for addressing the mother, and they would