Author Topic: End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005  (Read 3150 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline hanzomon4

  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« on: October 05, 2007, 11:59:45 AM »
H. R. 1738

To assure the safety of American children in foreign-based and domestic institutions, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 20, 2005

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California (for himself, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. OWENS, Mr. MCDERMOTT, and Mr. VAN HOLLEN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
A BILL

To assure the safety of American children in foreign-based and domestic institutions, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005’’.

SEC. 2. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATIONS.

      (a) IN GENERAL.—In order to assure the safety and welfare of American children residing in foreign-based institutions, the Attorney General shall seek the cooperation of appropriate foreign authorities in order to investigate such facilities or institutions periodically. Such an investigation shall include a determination of the institution’s compliance with any local safety, health, sanitation and educational laws and regulations, including all licensing requirements applicable to the staff of the institution and compliance with this section. The Attorney General shall seek the cooperation of appropriate foreign authorities to remedy any threat to the safety or welfare of those children, discovered through such an investigation.

     (b) RULES AND ENFORCEMENT.—(1) The Attorney General shall make rules to protect the safety and wellbeing of American children who are kept in a foreign based institution for purposes of behavior modification.

(2) Whoever, being a United States citizen or national, or other private entity organized under the laws of the United States or of any State or political subdivision of the United States, violates a rule made under this subsection shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $50,000.

     (c) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section—

           (1) the term ‘‘foreign-based institution’’ means any facility or institution—

                  (A) owned, operated, or managed by a United States citizen or other private entity organized under the laws of the United States; and

                  (B) for persons, including persons who are residing in such facility or institution, for purposes of receiving care or treatment or behavior modification; and

           (2) the term ‘‘American children’’ means American citizens or nationals 18 years of age or younger.

SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO DEPARTMENT OF STATE’S COUNTRY REPORTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES.

     (a) PART I OF FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961.—Section 116 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151n) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

      ‘‘(g)(1) The report required by subsection (d) shall include, wherever applicable, a description of the nature and extent of child abuse or human rights violations against persons who are 18 years of age or younger at institutions described in paragraph (2) that are located in each foreign country.

     â€˜â€˜(2) An institution referred to in paragraph (1) is a facility or institution—

            ‘‘(A) owned, operated, or managed by a United States citizen or other private entity organized under the laws of the United States; and

            ‘‘(B) for persons, including persons who are residing in such facility or institution, for purposes of receiving care or treatment or behavior modification.’’.

     (b) PART II OF FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961.—Section 502B of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

      ‘‘(i)(1) The report required by subsection (b) shall include, wherever applicable, a description of the nature and extent of child abuse or human rights violations against persons who are 18 years of age or younger at institutions described in paragraph (2) that are located in each foreign country.

     â€˜â€˜(2) An institution referred to in paragraph (1) is a facility or institution—

            ‘‘(A) owned, operated, or managed by a United States citizen or other private entity organized under the laws of the United States; and

            ‘‘(B) for persons, including persons who are residing in such facility or institution, for purposes of receiving care or treatment or behavior modification.’’.

SEC. 4. GRANTS TO SUPPORT INSPECTIONS OF CHILD RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITIES.

     (a) IN GENERAL.—The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new title:
‘‘SEC. 304. USE OF FUNDS.

‘‘A State that receives a grant under section 301 shall use amounts under the grant to—

     â€˜â€˜(1) hire and train individuals who have appropriate expertise in the health profession, including the mental health profession, to carry out periodic, unannounced inspections of child residential treatment facilities in accordance with section 303(b)(5);

and

     â€˜â€˜(2) collect and maintain data from the inspections of such child residential treatment facilities to be included in the report required by section 306.

‘‘SEC. 305. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT.

‘‘A State that receives a grant under section 301 shall use amounts under the grant only to supplement the level of non-Federal funds that, in the absence of amounts under the grant, would be expended for activities authorized under the grant, and not to supplant those non-Federal funds.

‘‘SEC. 306. REPORT.

‘‘The Secretary may not make a grant to a State under section 301 unless the State agrees that it will submit to the Secretary for each fiscal year for which it receives a grant under such section a report that contains such information as the Secretary may reasonably require, including a detailed description of the number of child residential treatment facilities located in the State, the number of children residing at such facilities, the State domicile of each child prior to entry at such a facility, and the age, gender, and disability (if any) of each child at such a facility.

‘‘SEC. 307. DEFINITIONS.

     â€˜â€˜In this title:

           â€˜â€˜(1) CHILD.—The term ‘child’ means an individual 18 years of age or younger.

           â€˜â€˜(2) CHILD RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITY; FACILITY.—The term ‘child residential treatment facility’ or ‘facility’ means a facility that—

                 â€˜â€˜(A) provides a 24-hour group living environment for one or more children who are unrelated to the owner or operator of the facility;

and

                 â€˜â€˜(B) offers for the children room or board and specialized treatment, behavior modification, rehabilitation, discipline, emotional growth or rehabilitation services for youths with emotional, psychological, developmental, or behavioral dysfunctions, impairments, or chemical dependencies.

           â€˜â€˜(3) SECRETARY.—The term ‘Secretary’ means the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

           â€˜â€˜(4) STATE.—The term ‘State’ means each of the several States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
‘‘SEC. 308. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this title $50,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 and 2007.’’.

     (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5101 note) is amended by adding at the end the following:

‘‘TITLE III—GRANTS TO STATES TO SUPPORT INSPECTIONS OF CHILD RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITIES
‘‘Sec. 301. Grants to States.
‘‘Sec. 302. Application.
‘‘Sec. 303. Eligibility.
‘‘Sec. 304. Use of funds.
‘‘Sec. 305. Maintenance of effort.
‘‘Sec. 306. Report.
‘‘Sec. 307. Definitions.
‘‘Sec. 308. Authorization of appropriations.’’.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
i]Do something real, however, small. And don\'t-- don\'t diss the political things, but understand their limitations - Grace Lee Boggs[/i]
I do see the present and the future of our children as very dark. But I trust the people\'s capacity for reflection, rage, and rebellion - Oscar Olivera

Howto]

Offline hanzomon4

  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2007, 12:18:28 PM »
My opinion after reading this bill is that the name and mission is based on an ignorant assumption, that assumption being abuse only happens in unlicensed programs. We all know that's not true.

Unless a big chunk of this bill is missing, I don't see anything that actually deals with abuse. Nothing in this bill talks about the monitoring, restriction, or elimination of contact with family or authorities. Nothing in this bill addresses the right to privacy in regards to bathroom usage, the sharing and forced disclosure of personal information...... Nothing in this bill does anything to keep kids safe, it's all about paying States to license programs.

I understand that the federal government is limited in what they can do, but the name of this thing is misleading. Folks with personal experience need to write to Miller and explain that abuse is not limited to unlicensed programs. If anyone has ideas that would make this more then legislation with a pretty name send it to Miller, cause the dude seems a little clueless.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
i]Do something real, however, small. And don\'t-- don\'t diss the political things, but understand their limitations - Grace Lee Boggs[/i]
I do see the present and the future of our children as very dark. But I trust the people\'s capacity for reflection, rage, and rebellion - Oscar Olivera

Howto]

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2007, 01:33:12 PM »
Quote
I understand that the federal government is limited in what they can do, but the name of this thing is misleading.

It assumes that the licensing of programs will end abuse. So not true.

It's basically an incentive for states to create regulations, force programs to become licensed and submit to inspections. Many states whine that they don't license programs and monitor them because they lack the funds.

If a state doesn't license/monitor their programs, no federal funds. States are sanctioned with creating their own regulations, which can be quiet lame, the fed would not be involved with that.
In addition to inspection reports, they would be requried to submit an annual report to the Feds

Quote
‘‘The Secretary may not make a grant to a State under section 301 unless the State agrees that it will submit to the Secretary for each fiscal year for which it receives a grant under such section a report that contains such information as the Secretary may reasonably require, including a detailed description of the number of child residential treatment facilities located in the State, the number of children residing at such facilities, the State domicile of each child prior to entry at such a facility, and the age, gender, and disability (if any) of each child at such a facility.


This should also include accidents, deaths, physical/sexual assaults, and any other adverse effect the programs might have on youth.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #3 on: October 05, 2007, 01:54:49 PM »
So if, say, Utah decides to tell the government to go fuck itself, there's no legal recourse here?

This is bullshit. They need to start treating this shit as a federal civil rights issue.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline hanzomon4

  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #4 on: October 05, 2007, 02:56:41 PM »
Quote from: ""Deborah""
Quote
I understand that the federal government is limited in what they can do, but the name of this thing is misleading.

It assumes that the licensing of programs will end abuse. So not true.

It's basically an incentive for states to create regulations, force programs to become licensed and submit to inspections. Many states whine that they don't license programs and monitor them because they lack the funds.

If a state doesn't license/monitor their programs, no federal funds. States are sanctioned with creating their own regulations, which can be quiet lame, the fed would not be involved with that.
In addition to inspection reports, they would be requried to submit an annual report to the Feds

Quote
‘‘The Secretary may not make a grant to a State under section 301 unless the State agrees that it will submit to the Secretary for each fiscal year for which it receives a grant under such section a report that contains such information as the Secretary may reasonably require, including a detailed description of the number of child residential treatment facilities located in the State, the number of children residing at such facilities, the State domicile of each child prior to entry at such a facility, and the age, gender, and disability (if any) of each child at such a facility.

This should also include accidents, deaths, physical/sexual assaults, and any other adverse effect the programs might have on youth.


But a License won't end child abuse, so yes it's misleading. The reports would be helpful but from what we have seen in other cases like Chad(That just didn't report shit) or Skyview(calling it Hazing, instead of sexual assault) I doubt we'd get accurate reports, not a bad step though.

This bill is also mum on States that setup things like TACCCA, FACCCA which worries me....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
i]Do something real, however, small. And don\'t-- don\'t diss the political things, but understand their limitations - Grace Lee Boggs[/i]
I do see the present and the future of our children as very dark. But I trust the people\'s capacity for reflection, rage, and rebellion - Oscar Olivera

Howto]

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #5 on: October 05, 2007, 03:55:26 PM »
Quote from: ""Guest""
So if, say, Utah decides to tell the government to go fuck itself, there's no legal recourse here?

This is bullshit. They need to start treating this shit as a federal civil rights issue.


No it's not mandatory. States without licensing divisions do not have to create them. If they choose to, the Fed will grant them funds with operating expenses.

BTW, Utah does license/monitor, fwiw. Despite WWASPs effort to prevent it.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?p=61449#61449

They are already eligible for the funds provided by this legislation, but only if he requires any unlicensed programs (private boarding schools) to apply for licensure.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?p=50754#50754
Sounds as if they would be given more power/support to force licensing, if they will.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Che Gookin

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 4241
  • Karma: +11/-3
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2007, 01:32:42 AM »
Thank you for selling out George Miller.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline hanzomon4

  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #7 on: October 06, 2007, 02:02:27 AM »
C'mon, how did he sellout?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
i]Do something real, however, small. And don\'t-- don\'t diss the political things, but understand their limitations - Grace Lee Boggs[/i]
I do see the present and the future of our children as very dark. But I trust the people\'s capacity for reflection, rage, and rebellion - Oscar Olivera

Howto]

Offline Che Gookin

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 4241
  • Karma: +11/-3
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #8 on: October 06, 2007, 02:07:49 AM »
True.. he never really stood up for the survivors or the kids in programs in the first place.

Restatement:

George Miller, Thank you for being a bottom feeding lowlife of an opprotunist for using this entire problem as a way to score some quick votes and head lines!

Short version:

GM.. You suck.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline hanzomon4

  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #9 on: October 06, 2007, 02:11:09 AM »
Did he not try to get the DOJ to investigate wwasps? This legislation may be weak, but you're off on this one.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
i]Do something real, however, small. And don\'t-- don\'t diss the political things, but understand their limitations - Grace Lee Boggs[/i]
I do see the present and the future of our children as very dark. But I trust the people\'s capacity for reflection, rage, and rebellion - Oscar Olivera

Howto]

Offline Che Gookin

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 4241
  • Karma: +11/-3
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2007, 02:14:37 AM »
No.. I'm dead bang on. Look at the wider historical perspective. Licensing has been notoriously flawwed for decades.

This legislation will do more harm than good.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline psy

  • Administrator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 5606
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://homepage.mac.com/psyborgue/
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #11 on: October 06, 2007, 05:47:01 AM »
What we have here is a 1916 Ireland scenario.  Some want to bargain, legislate, take a middle ground path... Others see this is wrong and demand total abolition (analogous to the IRA).  Holy fuck i just compared us to "terrorists"... But it's true that one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.  Sue Scheff calls me an internet terrorist, but around here, I imagine I imagine perceptions are a bit different.

Point is, there are some (particularly in ASTART) who believe in treatment, not coercion...  and there are some who insist on abolition (as I do).  Problem is that none of the people like ASTART seem to read up on the history of this industry, or have bothered to read my site, or California's legislature on Licensing.  It doesn't work... first off.. there are loopholes in the language.  Benchmark should prove that.  Second off, the California drug licensing person who was assigned to me was either corrupt, hopelessly incompetent, sympathetic to the program, or some combination of those elements.  Legislation is jack shit without enforcement and although I see a lot of money blindly thrown at the problem (typical Washington behavior)
Quote
SEC. 301. GRANTS TO STATES
‘The Secretary is authorized to make grants to
States to support inspections of child residential treatment
facilities.
I see nothing that would guarantee abuse would not take place.  How many instances of Licencing department corruption can the feds find if they look, I just wonder...  How many have already been found and exposed?  And yet these fucking morons think state determined Licencing will solve the issue.

What about this divinely inspired idea:
Quote
(b) RULESANDENFORCEMENT.—(1) The Attorney
General shall make rules to protect the safety and
wellbeing of American children who are kept in a foreign
based institution for purposes of behavior modification.
Oh that's just a wonderfully fantastic idea!  We know he really gives a good god damn about torture.
Quote
(2) Whoever, being a United States citizen or na-tional, or other private entity organized under the laws of the United States or of any State or political subdivision of the United States, violates a rule made under this
subsection shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $50,000.
O.....  That's really going to scare the crap out of people like Lichfield...  I'd really like to have a look at the recent financials of the person who wrote / suggested / supported that part.

Look.  I really hope this bill goes somewhere but I don't think it will.  It's trying too many things that have already been tried and have failed.  Also, Unless my eyes are decieving me, The appropriations only seem to be for the years 06 and 07.  Didn't this happen with a certain border fence somewhere...

Quote
‘‘SEC. 308. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out
this title $50,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006
and 2007.’’.

I hope that doesn't mean what I think it is (that come '08) there will be no authorization to pay out any licensing cash.  Is this the actual bill being proposed?  I thought NATSAP was working on the "language of the bill" according to their recent press release (and I haven't heard a denial).  Where is the most recent version... or is this it?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Benchmark Young Adult School - bad place [archive.org link]
Sue Scheff Truth - Blog on Sue Scheff
"Our services are free; we do not make a profit. Parents of troubled teens ourselves, PURE strives to create a safe haven of truth and reality." - Sue Scheff - August 13th, 2007 (fukkin surreal)

Offline Che Gookin

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 4241
  • Karma: +11/-3
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #12 on: October 06, 2007, 06:43:02 AM »
I'd say the situation is worst than you think it is Psy. To me all of this need for licensing is all rather pointless to discuss. These facilities morph in and out and change like a chameleon from this day to that. Licensing merely promises that a facility will continue to operate under the annual inspections of the state.

Big whoop...

1 time a year inspection?

I remember the dodge and weave dance played out every single year at Eckerds and both Three Springs to ensure they were up to state administrative code. In short what I am saying for those who can't quite figure it out is that the average facility is in total compliance with state administrative codes for about 1 to 2 weeks out of the year.

Seems to me we are going after the wrong thing. Rather than being bothered with licensing why aren't we targeting the lack of due process rights for kids? Shouldn't a kid deserve the same competency hearing an adult does when determining the need for care? I believe our real target should be the total appalling lack of civil rights for children.

Not a few scraps of paper flung about by the states.

I don't call my self a terrorist. More a youth civil rights activist.

Now I will make this stipulation before someone else speaks up and asks why I've lost my gourd. I don't believe a civil rights act for kids would stop abuse in programs. I don't think anything will ever stop abuse against kids. I do believe that given time and education we can begin to combat the programmes that don't have the best interests of the kids in mind.

This of course leaves us with genuine treatment centers. Such a place is strictly voluntary or under order of the state in the event that the kid is deemed unable to make a rationale decision. Even in the event of an involunatry incarceration the kid should be represented by an advocate of some sorts and have an appeals process avaliable to him.

Am I one hundred percent comfortable with the above situation? Hell no.. But then again they probably won't authorize my request to bomb all programmes into the stone age so I'll push for what I hope is the easiest bit to attain.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #13 on: October 06, 2007, 08:29:04 AM »
Quote from: ""Wandering Waygookin""
Rather than being bothered with licensing why aren't we targeting the lack of due process rights for kids? Shouldn't a kid deserve the same competency hearing an adult does when determining the need for care? I believe our real target should be the total appalling lack of civil rights for children.


Sounds pretty much like NYRA's agenda -- eliminate ageism from our laws and constitutional rights.

This legal ageism is what allows kids to be kidnapped from their beds and incarcerated, drugged and potentially abused by agents hired by their parents -- because minors have so few legal rights.

If you fix that, the rest takes care of itself.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
End Institutionalized Abuse Against Children Act of 2005
« Reply #14 on: October 06, 2007, 05:42:28 PM »
unless the youth were to commit a crime like that - kidnapping, etc...then they would be tried as an adult and given all adult 'rights' ?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »