The Santa Rosa Police Department contends that the rape disclosed does not rise to a criminal activity and refuse to investigate without ever seeing the exit interview. They believe Community Care Licensing is the best agency to investigate the rape accusation disclosed in the report.
Saturday, June 28, 2014
Exit Interview Rape Accusation
The Santa Rosa Police Department contends that the rape disclosed does not rise to a criminal activity and refuse to investigate without ever seeing the exit interview. They believe Community Care Licensing is the best agency to investigate the rape accusation disclosed in the report.
Strip Searches
At
some point, it became official Valley of the Moon Children’s Home policy to
strip search every child who entered the facility. Strip searches have been confirmed stretching
back to 1995. Searches were performed by non-medical staff under the guise of
identifying injuries. Staff were ordered to check children’s genitals, breasts,
and buttock areas of every child entering Valley of the Moon Children’s Home upon
removal of their family of origin.
Strip
searches occurred in different rooms in the facility, including the shower,
bedrooms, and bathrooms. The non-medical searches were called by numerous names
including observation checklist searches, intake searches, and bruise searches.
Searches
to check for injuries and undetected abuses should have been completed by
medical professionals, in a medical setting. Subjecting children to strip
searches send the message that children have no bodily autonomy, staff had the
right to inspect every inch of their person whenever staff felt it necessary,
and they were powerless to stop it.
Strip
searching children was approved by Community Care Licensing in its program
statement. Community Care Licensing approved strip searching in either the 2001
program statement or in the revised program statement in 2005. Since we have
been able to confirm the abuses by child accounts all the way back to 1995, we
believe it is reasonable to conclude it was contained in the 2001 program
statement submission.
Non-medical
staff strip searches of all children entering Valley of the Moon Children’s
Home was facility’s official policy until 2013. A complaint by Foster Change Coalition forced an end to
the strip search policy.
Community
Care Licensing staff spoke with children in the home and none of the children revealed
being subjected to sexually assault by strip search. No former residents were
contacted. Valley of the Moon Children’s Home asserted that they stopped strip
searching prior to the complaint.
Community
Care Licensing cited Valley of the Moon Children’s Home for the policy they
approved and for working off the terms of their license by changing the intake
procedure without asking for permission.
A
victim of sexual assault at Valley of the Moon Children’s Home contacted
Community Care Licensing but was never interviewed by anyone at Community Care
Licensing. Had Community Care Licensing contacted the resident, they would have
learned the victim was subjected to exactly this brand of sexual abuse. Just
minutes after being admitted into Valley of the Moon Children’s Home, a staff
demanded the resident take a shower. Once naked in the shower, the staff
demanded that the resident open the shower curtain during a shower to “check
for bruises”. The former resident reports still having nightmares about this
and other abuses experienced or witnessed while at Valley of the Moon Children’s
Home.
State
and federal courts concluded such strip searches are gross violations of
children’s rights to be free of abuse and Fourth Amendment right to be free of
unreasonable searches.[1]
There are four important cases to note.
Darryl H. v. Coler in 1986, mentioned earlier regarding Marian. [2]
Eddings
v. Oklahoma
in 1982:
“That plaintiffs are children under the age of
eighteen is also a factor we must consider. Children are especially susceptible
to possible traumas from strip searches. As the Supreme Court has noted,
'[y]outh is more than a chronological fact. It is a time and condition of life
when a person may be most susceptible to influence and to psychological
damage.'" [3]
Doe
v. Renfroe in 1981:
“It
follows that a nude search of a child is an invasion of constitutional rights
of some magnitude.” “Violations of a person's 'cherished personal security,' _ whether engaged in by violent antisocial
elements of our society or by overzealous, insensitive police, must be equally
condemned. Both should be dealt with in accordance with legal consequences that
foster deterrence.”[4]
Franz v. Lytle in 1993:
The police
conducted strip searches of a child to check for child abuse injuries. The
Court refused to allow strip searches because the searches would be to
“balkanize the Fourth Amendment” even if they were performed to out of concern
for the children.[5]
The
courts have repeatedly called strip searches of people by social service staff
a violation of their dignity, a humiliation, and a violation of their Fourth
Amendment right. We assert it is sexual abuse. While staff may not have wanted
to have sex with the children, the strip search policy of rape victims and
assault victims was created sexual terror in the children which was used to
coerce their compliance. It is not clear if this was the initial intent of the
policy, but it was exploited to that end. In the minds of both the staff and
the children; staff have an absolute right to demand nakedness of the children
at anytime and children are not free to say no without consequence.
We do not know how many children
were sexually assaulted in this way but we estimate that the number is probably
in the thousands.
[1] See strip search section at the end of this
document for supporting court cases.
[2] 801 F.2d 893 (7th Cir. 1986)
[3] (455 U.S. 104,
115, 102 S.Ct. 869, 877, 71 L.Ed.2d 1 (1982)) Thank you to San Diego Foster Children Subject to “Body
Check”, Bill Grimm, National
Center for Youth Law
[4] 631 F.2d 91,
92-93 (7th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 1022, 101 S.Ct. 3015, 69 L.Ed.2d
395 (1981) Thank you to San
Diego Foster Children Subject to “Body Check”, Bill Grimm, National Center for
Youth Law
[5] 997 F.2d 784 (10th Cir. 1993) Thank you to San Diego Foster
Children Subject to “Body Check”, Bill Grimm, National Center for Youth Law
Terror of Sexual Assault as Coercion and Sexually Abusive Monitoring
It
is not necessary to make physical contact with a child to inflict sexual abuse.[1]
The American Psychological Association, the Incest Survivors Resource Network[2],
and the National Child Traumatic Stress Network[3]
all acknowledge non-touching sexual abuse. The American Psychological
Association website says, “Child sexual abuse is not solely restricted to
physical contact; such abuse could include noncontact abuse, such as exposure,
voyeurism, and child pornography.”
Any sexual
conduct, or threat of sexual conduct harmful to a child's mental, emotional, or
physical welfare is sexual abuse. Violating a child’s reasonable expectation of
bodily privacy, like watching on them in the shower or bedroom or bathroom or
in states of undress, is sexual abuse.[4] [5]
Exploiting
the fear of sexual abuse to coerce behavior is sexual abuse.[6]
A child cannot discern if the threat of sexual exploitation is just a hollow
threat or if it is a precursor to an attack.
A
facility owned by the agency responsible for identifying child abuse, and
caring for abused children cannot claim ignorance to children’s perception of potential
sexual exploitation. Staff at Valley of the Moon Children’s Home exploit sexual
terror in order to coerce compliance of the children in their care. Ygritte was
one such child.
After
an emotionally exhaustive afternoon dealing with the death of both of her
parents, Ygritte attempted to be by herself in her room away from staff.[7]
She closed the door and sat with her feet on the door, trying to assure her
privacy. Two male staff members pushed their way
in her bedroom.
Ygritte
left her room and went into the bathroom. One male staff member held the
bathroom door open while Ygritte was in the shower stall. A female staff member visually “checked on” Ygritte while she was in the shower stall with
the curtain drawn. A male staff member entered the bathroom but quickly left
with the second male staff member.
Ygritte
left the bathroom, turned around, walked back into the bathroom, and locked the
door to the bathroom. A male and female staff member tried to
unlock the door but were unsuccessful. They called for a key. Ygritte opened
the door but did not exit. Male staff member again obstructed Ygritte’s
attempts to lock the door to the bathroom and regain her privacy in the
bathroom. Ygritte tried to push the male staff member out of the way and kick his foot
out of the way so she could close the door to the bathroom.
When
Ygritte’s multiple attempts to escape sexually vulnerable and exploitative
situations by staff failed, she left the bathroom and attempted to leave the
facility by walking out the outside door. Two male staff members followed and restrained her. She told them to stop touching her but they
refused. The police arrived and Ygritte told them that she was hearing voices and
wanted to hurt people. The police took Ygritte to the hospital for
psychological evaluation. She was released from the hospital one hour later.
Ygritte was not kept in the hospital because it was determined that she was not
a danger to herself or anyone else.
When
Ygritte returned, she spoke with her mental health care provider Behavioral
Health Clinician Nina Roynoso. According to Supervisor Mark Regan’s written account, “She
[Ygritte] expressed to Nina that she had no intention of hurting herself, and
that she was wanting some space away from DCS [Direct Care Staff], and to be
left alone.”
Ygritte
was not a danger to herself or anyone else. Ygritte was in potentially sexually
exploitative position with four staff members; three men, and one woman. She
took extreme measures to assure the police would be called and she would be
taken away from the facility.
All
children at all facilities have an expectation that they will be allowed to
take a shower or use the bathroom without staff demanding to view their naked body or enter the shower
while they are naked or could be naked. Any child in the shower stall should be
assumed to be naked, even when the water is not running.
Staff
were commended for their professionalism in this incident. According to
Supervisor Mark Regan’s written report, “On 12/19/13 a debriefing was held with
all involved DCS and Supervisor Regan. The DCS all felt supported during the
incident. They were all acknowledged for their professionalism and utilizing their
dynamic risk assessment."
Inciting
fear of sexual abuse and ignoring fear of sexual abuse in order to coerce
behavior is no different to the child than a person expressly threatening to
rape them if they do not comply. Entering a shower without reason is a sexually
abusive and exploitative situation which cannot be unknown to staff.
Staff
justified their behavior by stating that she tried to kill herself approximately
a month before this incident when she was living at another group home. Valley
of the Moon Children’s Home’s license forbids them from taking children who are
a danger to themselves or others. If Ygritte was in immediate danger of harming
herself as was suggested in this report, then the Sonoma County Department of
Human Services deliberately endangered her life by placing her in a facility which
cannot take such children.
Either
Valley of the Moon Children’s Home knowingly violated the terms of their
license by housing a child they knew was a danger to herself or they lied to
justify the use of sexual abuse exploitation as coercion.
Based
on the mental health care professional’s assessment, Ygritte was not a danger
to herself or others. Any justification to watch her in the bathroom or shower
was summarily disproven by the mental health professionals who determined her
mental state and potential danger to herself.
As
punishment, Ygritte was placed on intensive monitoring which included increased
observation of her in her bedroom, bathroom and shower; exploiting the terror
of sexual abuse in order to coerce her behavior.
[1] Utah Safe Adopt “Child sexual abuse does not
always involve physical touching. It can include any experience or attitude
imposed on a child that gets in the way of the development of healthy sexual
responses or behaviors.” http://bit.ly/SVz1GG
[2] “The erotic use of a child, whether physically or
emotionally, is sexual exploitation in the fullest meaning of the term, even if
no bodily contact is ever made."
[3] “Sexual abuse can include both touching
and non-touching behaviors. … Non-touching behaviors can include voyeurism
(trying to look at a child’s naked body), exhibitionism, or exposing the child
to pornography. Abusers often do not use physical force, but may use play,
deception, threats, or other forms of coercion to engage children and maintain
their silence.”
[4] “Violations of bodily privacy - Forcing a child to
undress, spying on a child in the bathroom or bedroom” HealthyPlace.com
[5] Parents Protect! http://bit.ly/1wu8hwn
[6] “Parents who are physically abusive may believe
that their children need to fear them in order to behave, so they use physical
abuse to ‘keep their child in line.’ However, what children are really learning
is how to avoid being hit, not how to behave or grow as individuals.”
Healthguide.org
[7] Ygritte is the name we assigned the child.
Incident Report 7065-8365
Daenerys and Sexual Abuse as Punishment - Valley of the Moon Children's Home
Daenerys
exhibited warning signs of ongoing sexual abuse. Instead of helping her by
determining how she was being abused and by whom; staff employed sexual abuse
in order to coerce her compliance. [1]
Daenerys,
a seven year old girl, took off her clothes in front of a male staff member. A female supervisor came into the room and Daenerys rubbed
her naked bottom on the supervisor's pant leg.
Staff
restrained Daenerys. Staff member Robert Duffy writes in his written report of
the incident, “Resident then started to rub her naked buttocks against R.
Brunier’s pants leg. She was then placed in a two person transport by R Brunier
and J. McDonald and removed to the separation room.” She was locked in the room
for an extended period of time. The Separation Room is in a common area of the
facility, and it has windows.
Supervisor
Reyna Brunier’s written account of the incident adds, “Supervisor and DCS did not
feel comfortable performing a containment on the resident while nude from the
waist down.”
Staff
considered two choices of punishment for Daenarys’ sexual abuse outcry; a
physical restraint during which she would probably would be pinned to the
ground or held by a staff member; or restrain her and drag her through a common
area of the facility in order to lock her in a room with windows in a common
area.
Daenerys
was put on display in a sexually compromised condition as punishment for the
staff’s perceived slight. Exhibiting Daenerys in such a sexually compromising
position is sexual abuse.
Marian - A Story of Sexual Abuse at Valley of the Moon Children's Home
A
frightening act of sexual abuse was used to coerce, punish and humiliate a
child we named Marian.[1]
Marian
tried to run away from Valley of the Moon Children’s Home on February 1, 2011.
Two male staff members restrained her eight times to
keep her in the facility, then they locked in a room as punishment. Marian
finally submitted and stopped trying to escape. The two staff brought in a
shirt and they demanded that she change her shirt while she
was still in the locked room. They asserted that the shirt she was wearing was
off dress code. The locked room has a window, and she was in the view of all
staff and her foster sisters.
Forcing
Marian to strip in front of them was an act of sexual exploitation and
dominance which humiliated and shamed her while making her an example for
children at Valley of the Moon Children’s Home.
Even
though incident reports of restraints are required to be filed with Community
Care Licensing within seven days, this incident report was withheld by Valley
of the Moon Children’s Home staff for over two years. This incident report was
one of a pack of incident reports withheld after a citation for locking
children in rooms.
This
missing report only came to light when our advocates noticed a discrepancy in
the number of restraints given to us by Family, Youth and Children’s Division
head Nick Honey in 2013 and the number of incident reports we obtained in 2013.
After we informed Community Care Licensing of the missing reports, they obtained
them in July 2013.
As
far as we know, the police were never contacted to report this act of sexual
abuse, locking her in a room, or physical assault.
Marian
was only seven years old at the time of her sexual exploitation. It might be
tempting to think that because Marian was so young, she was less affected by
nakedness in public. The courts have ruled that children, no matter their age,
have an expectation of decency and to be free of such humiliation.
In Darryl H. v. Coler
in 1986, a police officer examined
the vaginal area of a two year old. The courts found the search illegal and a
violation of the child’s rights. In addressing the case the judge said,
“[a] child of very tender years may not
exhibit a subjective expectation of privacy in the same sense as an older
child. He is, however, a human being, entitled to be treated by the state in a
manner compatible with that human dignity.” [3]
A
child’s age does not create an excuse to violate the sanctity of the private
areas of their body and to do so is a violation of their dignity. The first
right in the Foster Youth Bill of Rights is a right to dignity. When the courts
have found a behavior a violation of dignity, then it is axiomatic that such a
behavior violates the right to a dignity as well as the right to be free of
sexual abuse.
Summary of Abuses at Valley of the Moon Children's Home
Valley of the Moon
Children's Home is a temporary shelter for kids who have been removed from
their homes due to abusive family members. This shelter's existence has
resulted in systematic abuse and wasteful spending because of failed oversight.
·
610 unjustifiable restraints in 5 years
·
41 Injuries resulting from restraints
Denied bathroom and forced to soil themselves
·
Strip searches
·
Direct sexual abuse accusations
·
Pedophile confessions
·
Isolation from family and friends
·
Coercion
·
Retaliation
·
Insults and degradation
·
Mechanical locks
·
False imprisonment
·
Money and belongings taken
·
Onsite school is both illegal and unhelpful
·
Approved incomplete and abusive program
statement
·
No or limited investigations of abuse complaints
·
Ignored abuse confessions
·
Failed to adequately review incident reports
·
At least 5 major revamps of practices
·
Abusive policies written by high level Sonoma
County Department of Human Services members
·
Employees must become whistleblowers against
their employer (Sonoma
County), and their own
interests, in order to report abuses against foster children.
¨
Many mandated reporters which foster children
interact with are employed by the county.
¨
Children have limited access to outside mandated
reporters.
The pervasive, system-wide
problems at Valley of the Moon Children’s Home are not a matter of a few bad
apples. No amount of reform can fix this shelter. Reallocating resources to finding foster
homes instead of funding Valley of the Moon Children’s Home would net better
results at a much lower cost.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)