Master Post
After many hours of wrangling our lawyer got a copy of the DHS's "Individual Service Plan" for myself and my husband. It's a hoot. Counselors we've shown this to have hit the roof. It only has one signature attached to it, and that isn't anyone I've seen or talked to. Each section has a different date, and a different due date. Everything is out of compliance with the official state practices. Some of it is against state law, other parts of itare against official insurance practices. Some of it isn't even worded in complete sentences.
Part 1 says:
"...will correct her home deficiencies to corrrect but arenot(sp) limited to replaceing the dead bolt lock"
This is:
1) ungrammatical,
2) incorrectly spelled, and
3) the deadbolt lock they want me to remove is next to a front door window that's already been broken into before. The insurance people would hit the roof over that!
Part 2 wants the children's medical/dental records BUT doesn't offer to pay for them. I learned today that's not kosher.
Part 3 says:
"...will provide proof/confirmation that the children's educational needs are being met."
That's ILLEGAL in Mississippi.
Part 4:
"the dead bolt will be replaced with a safer type of lock..."
DHS, meet insurance people. Insurance people, meet DHS.
There's no "client" signature. There's no "social worker" signature. There is an "ASWS" signature -- but no date. I was told that the ASWS is the social worker supervisor. BUT the person who signed in the "ASWS signature" slot is not a social worker supervisor. She's not even a social worker. Melody Hamilton, who has the only signature on the entire document that they faxed our lawyer, is a student intern working in their office.
How many ways can you say FAIL!
2 comments:
You might consider contacting the ACLU at this point as well. I don't believe any agency of the government has the right to limit you in regard to protecting your property with a dead bolt.
The Fourth Amendment includes the clause, "The rights of people to be secure in their persons, houses, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause . . ." The "search and seizure" clause has been interpreted to pertain primarily to criminal cases, but the stated intent of this statement is to make people secure in their persons and possessions. In civil cases law enforcement officials presently are able to seize property without a warrant and place the burden of proof upon the owner to show that he did not commit a crime. In fact, some local governments now use civil seizures to supplement their budgets.
That was found on www.thefreemanonline.org
Just letting you know there's a family in Pittsburgh following your story and anxiously awaiting another update! We're pulling for you. It sounds terrifying, but I think if you're smart and stay ahead of them, you'll pull through. Other posters have given great suggestions. Stay safe.
Post a Comment