Here is the fraud doc
Would it not be easier to seek an injunction and damages from the court based upon denial of civil rights of the parents to raise and educate their own children..
Here are some relevant court cases:
Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982). The Court declared unconstitutional a New York statute that authorized termination of parental rights based on a preponderance of the evidence. Santosky is the first Supreme Court case to hold that even after parents are found unfit in a contested court proceeding, they retain constitutionally protected parental rights.
Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972). The Court held that Wisconsin’s compulsory education law violated an Amish father’s rights to take his 15-year-old children out of school to complete their education in Amish ways at home.
Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944). The Court held states may prosecute parents when they expose their children to serious hazards to their well-being.
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923). The Court held that a statute forbidding the teaching of the German language impermissibly encroached on the liberty parents possess. The Court explained that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects this liberty, incorporating “the right to marry, establish a home, and bring up children.”
Pierce v. Soc’y of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925). Relying on Meyer, the Court struck down an Oregon statute requiring children to attend public schools. This statute interfered with the right of parents to select private or parochial schools for their children and that it lacked a reasonable relation to any purpose within the competency of the state.
Duchesne v. Sugarman, 566 F.2d 817, 825 (2d Cir. 1977). The Second Circuit held “[T]he right of the family to remain together without the coercive interference of the awesome power of the state . . .encompasses the reciprocal rights of both parent and child.” The court explained that children have the constitutional right to avoid dislocat[ion] from the emotional attachments that derive from the intimacy of daily association with the parent.”
In Summary:
For years the fundamental liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children and handle their care, custody and management has been <a href=" removed link ">consistently upheld by the Supreme Court. Yet today federal, state and local agencies persist in finding ways to undermine the critically important parent-child relationship.
These actions include
removing children from their homes without sufficient cause,
intimidating and threatening parents with the loss of their children if they don't cooperate, ( I HAVE BEEN THREATENED WITH THIS ACTION By the judge)
withholding information from parents about important issues including medical information and relevant administrative information, (I HAVE BEEN DENIED ACCESS TO SUCH INFORMATION AND DENIED MY PARENTAL RIGHTS Without any evidence of my danger to my two young children)
providing medical treatment or access to prescription medication (such as abortions, vaccinations and contraception) without parental knowledge or consent, interrogating children (in public schools or public places) without parental knowledge or consent, and
providing information or access to inappropriate information that parents have explicitly forbidden their children from accessing.
(MY WIFE AND STEP CHILDREN CONSISTENTLY EXPOSES MY CHILDREN TO INAPPROPRIATE MOVIES (ie. Horror Movies, etc.) AND THEY HAVE NIGHTMARES)
