#Intensive reunification programs | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

bountyofbeads · 5 years ago

Text

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-family-separation-traumatized-migrant-kids-dhs-watchdog-finds?ref=scroll

These are CRIMES against children. No question about it. Trump has TRAUMATIZED children and their families for a GENERATION. SADLY CRUELTY IS THE POINT. This Administration needs to be tried for CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. 😭😭😭🤬🤬🤬🤬

SHAME

‘Every Heartbeat Hurts’: Trump’s Family Separation Traumatized Migrant Kids, HHS Watchdog Finds

By Scott Bixby | Updated 09.04.19 7:12PM ET Published 09.04.19 12:33PM ET | Daily Beast | Posted September 5, 2019 10:42 PM ET |

Inconsolable children who could not stop crying. A chronic shortage of qualified staff. Trauma so severe that clinicians worried about their own mental health.

These are just some of the findings revealed in a damning report on the challenges of addressing the mental health needs of migrant children in U.S. government custody. The report, compiled by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Officer of the Inspector General (OIG) and released on Wednesday morning, found that Trump administration policies—most notably the disastrous “zero-tolerance” policy that resulted in the separation of thousands of migrant children from their families—exacerbated a mental health crisis among those in the care of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).

Citing interviews with approximately 100 mental health clinicians, as well as medical coordinators, facility leadership, and 28 federal field specialists assigned to 45 ORR facilities around the country, Acting Inspector General Joanne M. Chiedi found that “separated children exhibited more fear, feelings of abandonment, and post-traumatic stress” than children who were not separated from their families.

“Separated children experienced heightened feelings of anxiety and loss as a result of their unexpected separation from their parents after their arrival in the United States,” the report states, citing program directors and mental health clinicians tasked with caring for nearly 9,000 children, almost 90 percent of whom were from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. “For example, some separated children expressed acute grief that caused them to cry inconsolably.”

The trauma described in the 48-page report is brutal. One program director described a 7- or 8-year-old boy separated from his father as being “under the delusion that his father had been killed and believed that he would also be killed.” The boy required emergency psychiatric care.

According to a medical director of an ORR facility, children constantly manifested physical symptoms of the mental and emotional trauma inflicted by separation.

“You get a lot of ‘my chest hurts,’ even though everything is fine [medically],” the director said. “Children describe symptoms—‘every heartbeat hurts,’ ‘I can’t feel my heart’—of emotional pain.”

Many of the children were already suffering from “intense trauma” that occurred before they were separated from family members at the border, experiences in their countries of origin or during their journey to the United States that made treatment even more difficult. In one case, a mental health clinician reported that a child witnessed the murder of his mother, grandmother, and uncle after fleeing an abusive father. Another clinician shared the story of a child who was abducted by a gang and held for ransom while attempting to cross into Mexico from Guatemala.

“The gang held the child in a compound, where another individual was shot in the head,” the clinician said. “Later, a woman who helped the child escape from the compound was shot by the gang.”

ORR’s facilities were in no way prepared to adequately treat issues of that magnitude, the report found, in part because shifting administration policies made it difficult to know how long a child would be in their care. Clinicians reported being wary of having children revisit traumatic incidents, for fear that they would be unable to address those incidents in future therapy. Instead, treatment was focused on maintaining stability, an approach that clinicians referred to as the equivalent of a Band-Aid: “The goal is not to treat children’s underlying issues because children will not be in the facility long enough to make meaningful progress.”

Clinicians felt “unprepared” to handle the level of trauma they witnessed in ORR facilities, to the point that they began to feel traumatized themselves. Some colleagues, who had no experience in caring for kids, were “especially unprepared,” the report found.

Compounding the difficulty of the cases was the number of cases each mental health clinician was expected to handle. Although ORR regulations require a staffing ratio of 12 patients per clinician, some had caseloads of more than 25 children, which made building a rapport with patients and scheduling counseling sessions incredibly difficult.

“The most challenging thing is the lack of time due to the caseloads,” one lead mental health clinician told the OIG. “Some [children] have behavioral issues or are going through difficult times and you need to see them more during a given period. It becomes a strain on us.”

In a briefing with reporters on Wednesday, Amy Frontz, assistant inspector general for audit services, said that more than half of shelters supervised by HHS allowed new employees to begin work without completing a background check or screening by state child-protective services. More than half of the facilities employed case managers who didn’t meet requirements to serve as mental health providers.

Low compensation, demanding schedules and a scarcity of qualified candidates in remote locations exacerbated the caseload issues, the report found. Staff at ORR facilities described making appointments with psychiatrists and psychologists as far as three months in advance—all while children with severe mental health problems languished in inadequate care. Transferring children out of ORR facilities for treatment of underlying mental health problems, or for more severe mental illness, was incredibly difficult, clinicians reported, putting kids at risk of harming themselves or others.

“The facility tries to keep them safe, but there are many ways a child can harm themselves,” one clinician reported. “The children need a secure residential treatment center for children that are high-risk and need intensive therapy.”

“It is a temporary shelter, not a treatment facility,” a program director echoed. “There is also an issue where residential treatment facilities won't take minors who are aggressive, even when those minors are aggressive because they have untreated mental trauma.”

As clinicians were stretched thin, the population of the facilities grew ever larger, in part due to new regulations requiring federal background checks and fingerprinting of family members seeking to be reunited with their children, which clinicians fear discouraged family members from coming forward. The average length of stay for kids in ORR custody reached a high of 93 days in November 2018, which the report found resulted in “higher levels of defiance, hopelessness, and frustration among children, along with more instances of self-harm and suicidal ideation.”

Some separated children, clinicians said, isolated themselves from other kids, refusing to eat or participate in activities.

“Every single separated kid has been terrified,” one program director said. “We’re [seen as] the enemy.”

The “hectic” court-ordered reunification process presented its own complications in adequate treatment, the report found. Case managers weren’t always able to let children know when, where, or even if they would be reunified with their families, an uncertainty which “added to the distress and mental health needs of separated children.”

In a series of recommendations, the OIG called for increasing regional recruitment of qualified staff, limiting caseloads to an “appropriate maximum,” ensuring that external providers include mental health specialists equipped to treat severe mental illness in children, and, perhaps most importantly, “reasonable policy and practice decisions that can help to minimize the length of stay for children in ORR facilities.”

In a response to the report, Lynn Johnson, assistant secretary for children and families, wrote that she “welcomes” the report “as we work to continually improve ORR’s delivery of mental health care.”

#u.s. presidential elections #u.s. immigration and customs enforcement #u.s. news #u.s. border patrol #trump administration #president donald trump #donald trump #president trump #trumpism #trump scandals #immigration #immigrants #immigration reform #politics and government #us politics #politics

2 notes · View notes

jessicalynnhepner · 3 years ago

Text

Chapter 7—Emerging and Continuing Issues

lcohol and drug counselors treating clients who are involved with the child protective services (CPS) system should be aware of a number of emerging trends. These include limits on the length of time clients can remain on public assistance and increased demands on clients receiving aid, reforms enacted to the child welfare system that require CPS agencies to place far greater emphasis on children's health and safety and on permanent placement of children versus maintenance of parental rights, and constraints imposed upon substance abuse treatment by managed care.

Continuing trends also challenge providers to adapt new treatment regimes, acquire new skills, and advocate for client needs. While drug courts continue to provide mandated treatment for some substance abusers, a countertrend toward punishing substance abusers--especially pregnant mothers who have been prosecuted under abuse or neglect statutes--is evident in many State legal systems. The ever-changing demographics of drug use present new challenges, as an aging cohort of substance abusers are now parents to older children who are themselves at risk for substance abuse disorders. Increasingly detected through improved screening, clients with multiple diagnoses present complex needs that can be met only through collaboration and lobbying of managed care officials about the need for more complex treatment. At the same time, counselors continue to face requirements for professional education that require considerable expenditures of both time and money.

Go to: The Impact of New Legislation on Parents in Treatment In 1996, Congress enacted a major overhaul of welfare called The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. It transformed the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, which entitled qualified individuals with dependent children to assistance, into Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), a program offering limited relief. Unlike AFDC, TANF imposes work requirements on aid recipients, limits the amount of time adults can receive benefits, and bars benefits to certain categories of persons, such as individuals with felony drug convictions. TANF will undoubtedly have a major impact on parents in treatment. Refer to the forthcoming TIP, Integrating Substance Abuse Treatment and Vocational Services (CSAT, in press [a]), for an expanded discussion of welfare reform and substance abuse treatment.In addition to TANF, Congress has established a series of programs and funding streams that are designed to Extend services to troubled families to help them to remain intact or to reunite (i.e., family support and preservation services) Provide Federal payments to support foster care when children must be placed outside the home Expedite permanent placement for children who cannot be reunited with their families Provide assistance to increase the number of adoptions of children in foster care To qualify for funding, State child welfare programs must implement specific timetables and goals designed to expedite the return of children placed in foster care to their families or free them for adoption.The requirements and limitations Federal law places on States receiving Federal funding for child welfare and child protective services may have a profound impact on parents in treatment. Depending on how each State implements the law, the following examples illustrate how parents in treatment may be affected: States may be less tolerant of children living with substance-abusing parents. As States implement the requirement that the child's health and safety be the paramount concern, they may take a less tolerant view when children are living in households with one or more adults who abuse substances. Parents will have less time to comply with CPS agency mandates. As the 15-month time limit on maintaining the child in foster care goes into effect and States enforce requirements regarding prompt determinations about children's permanent placement, parents who cannot achieve sobriety after a year of treatment or otherwise comply with CPS agency mandates may be at greater risk of losing their parental rights. They may also lose the funding supporting their treatment. Parents with previous CPS agency involvement may lose parental rights quickly. Clients in treatment who have previously lost parental rights to another child may receive an expedited proceeding that denies them family preservation services and their rights to children currently in their care. Family Preservation and "Fast-Track" AdoptionThe Federal government has established a series of programs to fund and support States' efforts to help children and their families in crisis. These programs include Family Support and Family Preservation Services to strengthen family stability and facilitate the safe reunification of a child who has been removed from the home and Foster Care and Adoption Promotion and Support Services that support both the maintenance of foster care and encourage more adoptions out of the foster care system.These programs provide funding to States, but they also require States to adopt a number of important policies, timetables, and restrictions, including a significant emphasis on children's health and safety, permanent placement, prompt development, and frequent review of service plans; time limits on family reunification

services; and speedier termination of parental rights. In effect, the 1997 amendments to the Family Preservation and Support Services Act changed the emphasis from family preservation to child health and safety. This means that ensuring the child's developmental stability now takes precedence over extending "reasonable efforts" to reunify the family. For a more detailed explanation of this law and recent welfare reform laws, see Appendix C. Consequences of Losing Public AssistanceParents whose public assistance is reduced or terminated (e.g., because of changes in welfare law) may have difficulty providing their children with basic levels of food, clothing, shelter, and medical care. Will they find themselves charged with child neglect or abuse as a result? Most States prohibit a finding of child abuse or neglect if parents fail to provide the necessities of life because of poverty; however, it is not clear what will happen if their inability to provide is due to their failure to comply, for example, with welfare-to-work requirements. Treatment clients who lose public assistance may also lose their eligibility for Medicaid, which in some States pays for treatment.The child welfare system provides Medicaid benefits for all children in its care. Some States also provide Medicaid benefits for children living at home but in open CPS cases. In many States, however, parents are not eligible for Medicaid. Advocacy for entitling Medicaid benefits to those parents who are involved in the CPS system would benefit such parents who are seeking, or seeking to complete, treatment. The Combined Impact of Welfare Reform and Changes in Child Welfare LawsThe combined effect of new welfare reform requirements and changes in child welfare laws may place great pressure on parents involved with CPS agencies. To avoid losing their children, parents may be required to enter treatment, achieve sobriety, or meet other expectations from the CPS agency, all within a limited time period. Similarly, under TANF, welfare authorities may impose work requirements and sanction those who fail to comply.Those with substance abuse disorders, minimal work experience, and a lack of parenting skills can feel overwhelmed by these growing demands. Staying sober, by itself, is a difficult achievement for many. If they have to comply with work requirements and assume new parenting responsibilities, they may see all of this as impossible. For some, the response will be denial of the reality that the system has changed. Others may be overcome by hopelessness and be inclined to give up. Other parents will relapse. With the States placing greater emphasis on children's health and safety and permanent placement, any one of these responses could mean loss of parental rights. Moreover, States that choose to test welfare recipients for drug abuse may quickly detect a relapse, which could result in the reduction or elimination of benefits. Or a child welfare agency might conclude that a relapse means that reasonable efforts to preserve or reunite the family are no longer consistent with the goal of a safe and stable environment for the child.As welfare reform and changes in child protection laws are implemented, counselors will see increasingly stressed parents in need of supportive counseling and a web of other services. In these changed times, however, support will not suffice. If the parent in treatment is to emerge with her family intact, the counselor must combine support with a firmness rooted in the understanding that the rules in this area have changed and become less forgiving. The continuing challenge for counselors in the years ahead will be to provide support to clients while conveying to them the urgency of attaining or maintaining sobriety.

Go to: Emerging Issues Managed CareMore persons entering treatment are paying for their services through managed care systems that place limitations on the type and amount of treatment provided. Medicaid, Medicare, and welfare benefits, once provided through private insurance, are all being allocated to managed care. Accountants and other nonhealth professionals who may have limited health care background often are making treatment decisions. Typically, clients are receiving authorizations for fewer sessions at less intensity. A client who required safe detoxification once was funded for 21 days; now, limited funding allows for only 2 days. In the late 1970s, a pregnant substance-dependent mother could stay in the hospital for 5 days. Now, she is discharged almost immediately after giving birth.The amount of time most agencies must spend on the telephone with managed care representatives is staggering. Services a doctor or counselor believes are medically necessary are frequently denied (Rabasca, 1998). Programs once referred clients freely to appropriate services; now, additional services with lengthy justifications must be preapproved. Rather than taking into account the individual's circumstances, insurance representatives use reference manuals, such as the American Society of Addiction Medicine's (ASAM) Patient Placement Criteria for the Treatment of Substance-Related Disorders, 2nd edition (ASAM, 1996) or the Green Spring Health Services Medical Necessity Criteria for Utilization Management(Nyman et al., 1992), to determine the appropriate level of care.Clients with childhood abuse and neglect issues as well as a substance abuse disorder may face managed care restrictions on the number of visits they can make to mental health services. Managed care often will not pay for sexual abuse or physical abuse assessments and evaluations if the State is involved, often looking to the State to provide them; this complicates access to services. These restrictions may mean that both problems cannot be adequately addressed, particularly given the fact that abuse issues often do not surface until late in treatment, when the allotted number of visits may be nearly exhausted. Often by the time additional visits are approved, the continuity of therapy needed for the best chance of success may have been lost. Managed care may also deny treatment to clients with childhood abuse and neglect issues because they are not sufficiently motivated to deal with these problems.In several surveys of members of the American Psychological Association (APA), respondents reported that managed care created ethical dilemmas in which they were required to report confidential patient information as a condition of reimbursement (Clay, 1998). Clearly, such dilemmas are of particular concern in cases of substance abuse disorder because they may also involve issues of child abuse and neglect. (See TIP 24, A Guide to Substance Abuse Services for Primary Care Clinicians [CSAT, 1997a], for more information on the legal and ethical issues involved in sharing information with insurers and other third-party payors.)The strong backlash against such policies has recently resulted in legal actions at both State and Federal levels. Legislation is also under consideration at the State and Federal levels to increase accountability for the health outcomes of managed care agencies. In 1996, five States passed laws protecting consumers from managed care abuses; in 1997, 17 more States took such actions (Clay, 1998).Implications for providers include the following: Know how to "work the system" and speak the language of managed care. Some counseling agencies hire an individual specifically to perform this task. It is especially important to know a company's stated placement criteria. In cases of current child

abuse, counselors should be aware that when a CPS agency is involved, the capitation rate might be higher because it is expected that more services will be used. Because the managed care company is allocating more money per client, there should be a greater capacity to support substance abuse treatment that will benefit the entire family. Consider innovative strategies. In Florida, for example, five major substance abuse treatment programs combined and created their own managed care company so that they could compete with other managed care companies. Develop the capacity for different modalities of treatment. For example, a managed care caseworker refuses to authorize residential treatment for a person who has a history of substance dependency, is currently using, and has no motivation for treatment. The counselor as provider may set up smaller goals to work within the system, proceeding with low intensity motivational counseling once or twice a week. At the end of the authorized treatment period, the counselor may be able to report increased motivation and succeed in having a higher level of care authorized. Have proof that the treatment program or agency is successful and ultimately saves money. A treatment program can demonstrate its contributions by maintaining data on quality assurance and program evaluations that the program manager can use when he works with the managed care administrator. Counselors should also be prepared to provide factual data to demonstrate problems that have arisen from system constraints. Although counselors and treatment program administrators often focus on the negative impact of managed care, this trend can benefit clients by providing incentives for developing interagency collaborations and satellite clinics in different settings. In the not too distant past, few counseling programs would have been enthusiastic about locating a treatment program within a primary care clinic or a satellite child guidance clinic within a methadone maintenance treatment program. Today, although these ideas are still novel, they are by no means unthinkable. Since no one agency is likely to be able to meet all the needs of a family affected by substance abuse, particularly one in which child abuse or neglect has occurred, closer collaboration among services may result in more effective, family-oriented approaches to intervention.As legislators address managed care issues, counselors can be effective advocates, working to ensure that the care their clients need is available. By working proactively with others to raise systemic issues, counselors can ensure their concerns are represented in the legislative process. Vocal, clear, factual communication can help hold State and managed care agencies accountable for the results of their policies. (For more information on managed care, see TIP 27, Comprehensive Case Management for Substance Abuse Treatment [CSAT, 1998a].) Increased AccountabilityIncreasingly, funders are holding CPS agencies, health care services, and substance abuse treatment programs accountable for demonstrating specific outcomes. Programs must be prepared to demonstrate their effectiveness using objectively verifiable outcome measures. Failure to meet established goals may result in a loss of funding or in mandated systemic changes. The individual counselor may be asked to provide both qualitative and quantitative data (such as case histories) to demonstrate the quality of care she is giving. Such evaluations can be expensive.Clients who are in treatment counseling and also receiving services from other agencies (which is often true of those involved in allegations of child abuse and neglect) may be assessed repeatedly through interviews and questionnaires. The counselor can help prepare clients for this invasive

mandated reporting by emphasizing its potential benefits. Although time consuming to collect, such data provide a valuable opportunity to streamline programs and improve services.Class action suits have been filed in Federal courts against child welfare agencies in several States, resulting in many of them being placed under some form of Federal supervision. The mechanisms in place to hold the agencies accountable could affect substance abuse counselors in these States, who may receive increased requests for case and outcome data from agencies that must report to the court. A counseling agency that has a contract with a CPS agency should be prepared to demonstrate that the services provided are likely to affect the outcome positively or risk losing funding.Concerning accountability, some jurisdictions are moving to open family court hearings. (The Adoption and Safe Families Act now requires that foster parents be notified of all hearings and be given the opportunity to testify.) Clients will be affected because their cases, along with their substance abuse, are being made public. CPS agencies will be held more accountable because their work will be open to public scrutiny. Interagency CollaborationFrom the Federal to the community level, changes are being made that influence the way substance abuse treatment agencies deliver services. Increasingly, agencies must communicate and collaborate to meet a client's needs under the constraints posed by funding limitations, applicable laws, and managed care policies. Some counseling agencies have merged with other service agencies in order to deal with administrative burdens such as reporting requirements and the need to work intensively with managed care representatives. Many Federal grants require public-private partnerships and multidisciplinary treatment strategies formalized through memoranda of understanding.As agencies become more accustomed to working together, their attitudes toward collaboration also are changing. Agencies increasingly cross borders that were once sacrosanct. Practitioners are more aware that research and experience have demonstrated the importance of a wide range of support services (such as transportation, housing, and day care) for increasing the effectiveness of counseling (Feig, 1998). As a consequence, the role of the treatment provider is changing from one who works in relative isolation to one who is a partner within an integrated system.Many traditional treatment agencies are expanding their practice to incorporate mental health services. By doing so, they make treatment more accessible for clients with coexisting disorders. For example, an adult survivor who has mental health issues and is also a substance abuser may receive treatment for both needs at the same location. Such close partnerships provide a more cohesive approach to meeting clients' needs. In addition, this approach may provide a more solid funding base for agency services. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is committed to leading efforts to improve collaborative working relationships between the child welfare and substance abuse treatment fields and to supporting States' efforts to do the same. The Department's recent report to Congress, Blending Perspectives and Building Common Ground, describes several programs that can assist States and local communities in expanding substance abuse treatment for clients in the child welfare system, including the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grants, the Targeted Capacity Expansion Program, and Medicaid (DHHS, 1999).An innovative program in Connecticut by the Department of Children and Families (DCF) called Project SAFE (Substance Abuse Family Evaluation) directly links CPS agencies with substance abuse treatment (see Chapter 5). The experience over the past

3 years has led to more than 20,000 unduplicated referrals from CPS agencies to a statewide network of substance abuse treatment providers. Project SAFE provides priority access to substance abuse evaluations, drug testing, and various outpatient substance abuse services to clients identified by the CPS agency. Referrals are coordinated from the beginning through a statewide network that also coordinates other payment responsibilities. The Project has led to communication and a definition of roles and response guidelines between CPS agencies and the substance abuse treatment system.Connecticut's DCF recently created Supportive Housing for Recovering Families, which will provide drug-free housing assistance and case management for families who are reunifying and making a transition to the community after successful residential substance abuse treatment. DCF is working on outreach approaches once the CPS agency and Project SAFE identify a client as needing substance abuse treatment. DCF is also collaborating with the academic community to pilot motivational enhancement training and approaches to both the CPS and substance abuse treatment system as well as case management services.In the current environment, traditional funding sources are drying up, and many traditional programs are going out of business. Moreover, many Federal grants and contracts are now aimed at collaborative efforts. Once there were many funding streams; now there are only a few State-subsidized funding sources. Persistent, creative fundraising is essential, and success almost always depends on proactive strategies to form collaborations. Agencies must clearly define their responsibilities and nurse the relationships they will need to seek funding in innovative partnerships. Program funding may come from drug courts or from CPS agencies, which now have the flexibility to use a portion of their funding to support substance abuse treatment (see Figure 7-1 ). 📷 BoxFigure 7-1: Linking Child Welfare and Substance Abuse Treatment Systems. In a unique program currently being developed, the Connecticut Department of Children and Families plans to make voluntary substance abuse disorder assessments available to (more...)

Go to: Continuing Trends Changing Demographics Of Drug UseOver the past 20 years, the number of people over 35 years of age using illicit substances has increased significantly ( Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA], 1996). The 1995 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse indicates there is a large cohort of aging substance-abusing parents:In general, the aging of people in the heavy drug-using cohorts of the late 1970s, many of whom continue to use illicit drugs, has diminished any observable reductions in use among the 35+ age group and has resulted in an overall shift in the age composition of drug users... For example, in 1985, 19 percent of cocaine-related episodes involved persons age 35 or older. By 1995, this percentage had increased to 42 percent (SAMHSA, 1996).Epidemiological surveys indicate that actual substance dependence occurs most frequently during early to middle adulthood, when a substantial proportion of the general population is parenting minor children (Anthony et al., 1994). Consequently, treatment providers should continue to expect to find many parents of minor children in their caseload, with the attendant possibility of substance-related child abuse or neglect. Gender IssuesSome research now suggests that gender differences are an important factor in addiction and recovery (Magura and Laudet, 1996). When counseling clients whose families are affected not only by substance abuse but also by child abuse and neglect, research suggests that counselors can best meet the clients' needs by taking these gender-specific factors into account (Coletti et al., 1997).Women who are pregnant or parenting need "family-oriented services providing comprehensive care as well as parenting and family skills training, all of which usually remain unaddressed in traditional drug treatment" (Magura and Laudet, 1996, p. 203). In the opinion of many researchers, the absence of such specialized interventions may well result in an increased incidence of child abuse and neglect, as well as increased out-of-home placement (Magura and Laudet, 1996). Programs that meet such needs can help engage pregnant and parenting women and improve treatment for them, but such services are still not widely available (see Chapter 6).Men's roles as fathers also should not be ignored in providing substance abuse treatment. It is true that among clients who are parents, women are more likely to have children in their care and men more likely to be estranged from their children. But surveys of representative samples indicate that in the general population far more fathers than mothers have substance abuse disorders (DHHS, 1994) and men consistently outnumber women in all types of treatment (Gerstein et al., 1997). Consequently, though it is true that a greater proportion of women entering treatment are mothers and are more likely to have minor children in their care, the numbers of men and women seeking help who are parents are about the same (DHHS, 1999). Changes in welfare laws now require a mother receiving welfare to identify the father of her children. Consequently, fathers who seemed nearly irrelevant in the recent past have regained visibility. Legal changes in welfare laws also allow fathers to be present in the home without the loss of financial support. Historically, in an abuse or neglect situation, CPS agencies have worked to keep the mother and children together but assumed that an abusing father should leave the family; this view, however, appears to be changing. Fathers are increasingly recognized and supported, with resulting benefits for children. Courts are discovering the value of paternal relatives as placement options for children. As substance abuse among women rises and women continue to be disproportionately affected by the AIDS

epidemic, fathers in treatment may become viable placement options for children whose mothers cannot care for them.Fathers are increasingly motivated to assume a greater share of parenting responsibilities. Over the past 20 years, a number of social forces have converged to create new definitions of fatherhood. If these trends continue, more men who enter treatment may see parenting as part of their identity as men, and more of them may be distressed about their inability to function effectively as fathers because of substance abuse. Paternal substance abuse (most commonly paternal alcoholism) has been associated with spousal abuse, parental neglect, and failure to provide financial support (Chassin et al., 1996; Dion et al., 1997; Dukma and Roosa, 1995; Egami et al., 1996; Ichiyama et al., 1996). Because many fathers today show an increased willingness to work toward change for the benefit of their children, the treatment provider would be well advised to use this information to help motivate male clients.More practitioners in other settings are now actively concerned with the client as father and are conducting research to define associated issues and needs.On a limited basis, some substance abuse researchers are engaged in developing interventions to build parenting skills that are offered to both men and women (Luthar and Walsh, 1995). Prisons sometimes offer courses in parenting to male inmates. Specialized interventions have also been designed for teenage fathers, fathers with newborn infants, newly divorced fathers, and fathers with families on welfare. However, gender-specific interventions targeting the specific needs and concerns of fathers with substance abuse disorders still need to be developed and tested. https://whateveryparentshouldknowaboutcps.blogspot.com/2020/07/chapter-7emerging-and-continuing-issues.html

#Chapter 7—Emerging and Continuing Issues

0 notes

hfrenchk · 4 years ago

Text

Family Reunification - State Efforts Implementing FFPSA

This is an Executive Summary of a full-length 2019 report prepared for the Family & Social Services Administration of a Midwestern state government.

Key Trends in State Reunification Services

The Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA) eliminates the current 15-month time limit on the use of Title IV-B funds for family reunification services for children in foster care. Therefore, states may obtain indefinite federal support for children who are in foster care where the state is attempting reunification.

The FFPSA also clarifies that a child returning home from an out of home placement like foster care will now have access to Title IV-B funds for family reunification services for a period of 15 months after the child has been reunified.

The pool of Title IV-B funds available to states remains fixed, but the timeframes and ways that states may utilize that money has changed in important ways.

Research Supporting Family Reunification

As the FFPSA expands the ability of states to utilize Title IV-B funds, states are able to be more flexible in supporting the goal of quickly and safely reunifying families.

Recent research from the Casey Foundation and other sources show that a child’s placement in a family setting when safe and appropriate is often best for the child’s long term outcomes, and that these outcomes continue to improve as the time a child is placed in out-of-home care decreases, and as family reunification is achieved more quickly.

These findings, in combination with the FFPSA’s increased flexibility for Title IV-B funds available to support family reunification services, have led some states to further support and develop their programs for family reunification as they prepare for the FFPSA.

State Level Shift

As states shift to prepare for the FFPSA, many have included updating and expanding their family reunification programs as a component of their larger Family Preservation programs.

Several states, like Nebraska and Tennessee, included Family Reunification services in the scope of work for family preservation procurements or RFPs.

Other states, like New York, have expanded funding to directly improve Family Reunification practices among their existing provider communities.

Some counties, like Luzerne County, PA and Montgomery County, OH, have conducted procurements solely for Family Reunification services.

Executive Summary of State-Level Family Reunification Projects

Nebraska

Nebraska issued an RFP for Full Service Case Management for Child Welfare Services (including Family Reunification Services) with a Contract start date of 1/1/20. The contract term was five years with two optional one year extensions. The RFP identified specific performance measures for categories of Family Reunification Services, including median months to reunification for foster care children, rate of children in foster care for 24+ months who achieve permanency, and re-entry into foster care. The cost proposal specified that awarded Respondents may not be awarded a profit but may only be reimbursed for actual services provided. All Respondents had to submit a Cost Allocation Plan for administrative services "to enable DHHS to claim federal administrative funds under Title IV-E." Two vendors responded to the RFP. Contract was ultimately awarded to one contractor, Saint Francis Ministries. Total contract value is $196 million.

New York

The New York Administration for Children's Services (ACS) published its Foster Care three-year progress report for FY 2017 - FY 2019. This progress report discusses $6M of new funding appropriated to foster care agencies to develop a range of Family Reunification services, including further developing and supporting family visiting time, decreasing burdens for parents and stakeholders, and investing in further supports for parents. FY19 was the first full year agencies received this funding. No RFP associated with these services was issued.

Ohio (Montgomery County)

Montgomery County of Ohio issued an RFP for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Reunification Services (named because the program funding comes from Ohio TANF funds) The contract start date was 1/1/20, with a one year contract term and two optional one year extensions. The county estimates the cost of the program would be $100,000 annually and paid through TANF funds. Contractors self-identify performance targets in their proposal that are then negotiated after award.

Pennsylvania (Luzerne County)

Luzerne County of Pennsylvania issued an RFP for Intensive Family Reunification Services (IFRS). The contract start date was 1/1/20. Term of contract is one year. Luzerne County proposed using the North Carolina Family Assessment Scale for General Services and Reunification (NCFAS-G+R) as the Assessment Tool for IFRS. Luzerne County identified Long Term, Mid Term, and Short Term Goals of IFRS, with specific performance standards of reduction in recidivist behavior and reduction of placement time for Long Term Goals, and enhanced personal support networks and improved independence for Mid Term Goals. Short Term Goals were rooted in four theories of change, which acted as a foundation for the goals of the RFP. Respondents submitted a cost proposal that identifies all costs associated with performing the services of the contract. The county provided a payment schedule with the proposed payment disbursements associated with various actions along the IFRS case life cycle.

Tennessee

Tennessee issued an RFP for Therapeutic Family Preservation and Reunification Services for the Northwest Region of the State. The Contract Term is 10/1/18 – 06/30/23. Family Reunification Services are a component of the greater Family Preservation Services provided under this contract. The scope of work includes outcomes to be achieved by the Contractor, how the Contractor will utilize the Family and Advocacy Support Tool (FAST) or CANS assessment (TN's chosen assessment tool), identifying the types of data sharing the Contractor is expected to engage in, and outlining the required credentials for different staff positions. RFP Respondents submitted a Cost Proposal in which the Respondent entered an hourly rate for four (4) categories of services, each category weighted differently for scoring. Prior to this RFP, Tennessee’s Northwest Region provided Reunification Services as a part of the state’s Foster Care Placement Continuum or through a contract with Youth Villages and their Intercept Program.

Iowa

Iowa issued an RFP for Child Welfare Crisis Intervention, Stabilization, and Reunification Services. Contract Start Date was 7/1/17, with a two year initial term and four optional one year extensions. The services of this RFP were split up into three categories - Child Welfare Emergency Services (CWES), Foster Care Group Services (FCGS), and Supervised Apartment Living (SAL). Respondents submitted a separate proposal for each category of service they were proposing. Family Reunification services were mostly encompassed under the FCGS category. FCGS used performance standards (and associated incentive payments - not withholds) measuring length of stay, return to group care for CHINS, recidivism of criminally charged delinquent children, and discharge to a family like setting. The proposed payment methodology for FCGS services was a per bed, per day rate, at three different tiers of service.

0 notes

biofunmy · 5 years ago

Text

ISIS Leader al-Baghdadi Is Dead, Trump Says

WASHINGTON — President Trump announced on Sunday that a commando raid in Syria this weekend had targeted and resulted in the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State, claiming a significant victory even as American forces are pulling out of the area.

“Last night, the United States brought the world’s No. 1 terrorist leader to justice,” Mr. Trump said in an unusual nationally televised address from the White House. “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is dead.”

Mr. Trump said Mr. al-Baghdadi was chased to the end of a tunnel, “whimpering and crying and screaming all the way” as he was pursued by American military dogs. Accompanied by three children, Mr. al-Baghdadi then detonated a suicide vest, blowing up himself and the children, Mr. Trump said.

Mr. al-Baghdadi’s body was mutilated by the blast, but Mr. Trump said a test had confirmed his identity. The president made a point of repeatedly portraying Mr. al-Baghdadi as “sick and depraved” and him and his followers as “losers” and “frightened puppies,” using inflammatory, boastful language unlike the more solemn approaches by other presidents in such moments. “He died like a dog,” Mr. Trump said. “He died like a coward.”

Mr. Trump said American forces, ferried by eight helicopters through airspace controlled by Russia with Moscow’s permission, were met by hostile fire when they landed and entered the target building by blowing a hole through the wall rather than take a chance on a booby-trapped main entrance. No Americans were killed in the operation, although Mr. Trump said one of the military dogs was injured.

Mr. Trump, who is under threat of impeachment for abuse of power by pressuring Ukraine to investigate his domestic political rivals, appeared eager to claim credit for the raid, engaging in a lengthy question-and-answer session with reporters after his statement as he personally walked them through the details, promoted his own role and compared himself favorably to past presidents.

The White House released a photograph of Mr. Trump surrounded by top advisers on Saturday in the Situation Room where he monitored the raid on Mr. al-Baghdadi’s hide-out in Syria, much like the famed image of President Barack Obama watching the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011. Mr. Trump even seemed to suggest that killing Mr. al-Baghdadi was a bigger deal than killing Bin Laden.

Mr. al-Baghdadi never occupied the same space in the American psyche as Bin Laden, but proved to be a tenacious and dangerous enemy of the United States and its allies in the Middle East.

The son of a sheepherder from Iraq, Mr. al-Baghdadi, 48, was arrested by occupying American forces in 2004 and emerged radicalized from 11 months of captivity and came to assemble a potent terrorist force that overtook Al Qaeda. He promoted a virulent form of Islam and at one point controlled a swath of territory the size of Britain.

The discovery of Mr. al-Baghdadi’s location came after the arrest and interrogation of one of Mr. al-Baghdadi’s wives and a courier this summer, two American officials said. The location surprised his American pursuers because it was deep inside a part of northwestern Syria controlled by archrival Qaeda groups.

Armed with that initial tip, the C.I.A. worked closely with Kurdish intelligence officials in Iraq and Syria — including those caught off guard by Mr. Trump’s decision to withdraw American troops from northern Syria earlier this month — to identify Mr. Baghdadi’s whereabouts and to put spies in place to monitor his periodic movements.

For Mr. Trump, a successful operation against Mr. al-Baghdadi could prove both a strategic victory in the battle against the Islamic State and a politically useful counterpoint to critics in both parties who have assailed him in recent weeks for the troop withdrawal, which allowed Turkey to attack and push out America’s Kurdish allies from northern Syria.

But experts have long warned that even eliminating the leader of terrorist organizations like the Islamic State does not eliminate the threat. Mr. al-Baghdadi has been incorrectly reported killed before, and American military officials were concerned that Mr. Trump, who posted a cryptic message on Twitter on Saturday night teasing his Sunday announcement, was so eager to announce the development that he was getting ahead of the forensics.

A Defense Department official said before the president’s announcement that there was a strong belief — “near certainty” — that Mr. al-Baghdadi was dead, but that with any other president, the Pentagon would wait for absolute certainty before announcing victory. But Mr. Trump was impatient to get the news out, the official said, and Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper appeared on the Sunday morning shows as a last-minute addition to the programs to promote the apparent success.

Critics of the president’s decision to withdraw American forces quickly argued that the operation took place in spite of, not because of, Mr. Trump and that if the military had not slow-rolled his plan to withdraw, the raid would not have been possible. Rather than justifying a pullout, they said, the raid underscored the importance of maintaining an American military presence in Syria and Iraq to keep pressure on the Islamic State.

“We must keep in mind that we were able to strike Baghdadi because we had forces in the region,” said Representative Michael Waltz, Republican of Florida and a former Army Green Beret. “We must keep ISIS from returning by staying on offense.”

Mr. al-Baghdadi has been the focus of an intense international manhunt since 2014 when the terrorist network he led seized huge parts of Iraq and Syria with the intention of creating a caliphate for Islamic extremists. He was believed to hew to extreme security measures, even when meeting with his most-trusted associates.

American forces working with allies on the ground like the Kurdish troops abandoned by Mr. Trump in recent days have swept Islamic State forces from the field in the last couple of years, recapturing the territory it had seized.

Mr. al-Baghdadi’s death is another important victory in the campaign against the Islamic State, but counterterrorism experts warned that the organization could still be a potent threat.

“The danger here is that President Trump decides once again to shift focus away from ISIS now that its leader is dead,” said Jennifer Cafarella, research director for the Institute for the Study of War in Washington. “Unfortunately, killing leaders does not defeat terrorist organizations. We should have learned that lesson after killing Osama bin Laden, after which Al Qaeda continued to expand globally.”

The Islamic State has its roots in Al Qaeda in Iraq, a deadly radical Sunni group founded in the early years of the Iraq war by Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi. In June 2006, Mr. Al-Zarqawi was killed in a safe house by American bombs, but his group continued its devastating violence in Iraq, and the civil war worsened over the next year. Years later, Mr. al-Baghdadi, after a weak period for the group, transformed the organization into the Islamic State, with the help of officials once loyal to Saddam Hussein.

The American commando raid took place on Saturday in Idlib Province, hundreds of miles from the area along the Syrian-Iraqi border where Mr. al-Baghdadi had been believed to be hiding, according to senior officials. Counterterrorism experts expressed surprise that Mr. al-Baghdadi was hiding in an area dominated by Al Qaeda groups so far from his strongholds.

However, the Islamic State has extensively penetrated Idlib Province since the fall of Raqqa, its stronghold in northeastern Syria, in late 2017. The American operation on Saturday took place in a smuggling area near the Turkish border where numerous ISIS foreign fighters have likely traversed, Ms. Cafarella said.

“It could be that he believed the chaos of Idlib would provide him with the cover he needed to blend in among hordes of jihadists and other rebels,” said Colin P. Clarke, a senior fellow at the Soufan Center, a research organization for global security issues.

But there is also a more ominous possibility of why Mr. al-Baghdadi was in Idlib. “Baghdadi’s presence in Al Qaeda-dominated areas could signal many things,” Ms. Cafarella said. “Most dangerous among them is resumed negotiations between him and Al Qaeda leaders for reunification and/or a collaboration with Al Qaeda elements on attacks against the West.”

American counterterrorism officials have voiced increased alarm about a Qaeda affiliate in northwestern Syria that they say is plotting attacks against the West by exploiting the chaotic security situation in the country’s northwest and the protection inadvertently afforded by Russian air defenses shielding Syrian government forces allied with Moscow.

This latest Qaeda branch, called Hurras al-Din, emerged in early 2018 after several factions broke away from a larger affiliate in Syria. It is the successor to the Khorasan Group, a small but dangerous organization of hardened senior Qaeda operatives that Ayman al-Zawahri, Al Qaeda’s leader, sent to Syria to plot attacks against the West.

If Mr. al-Baghdadi’s death is confirmed, it would set off a succession struggle among top Islamic State leaders. Many other top leaders have been killed in American drone strikes and raids in the past few years. Anticipating his own death, Mr. al-Baghdadi delegated authorities to regional and functional lieutenants to ensure that the Islamic State operations would continue.

“There are few publicly well-recognized candidates to potentially replace al-Baghdadi,” said Evan F. Kohlmann, who tracks militant websites at the New York security consulting firm Flashpoint Global Partners.

Mr. Kohlmann said the next most prominent public figure from within the Islamic State is its current official spokesman, Abu Hassan al-Muhajir, an enigma himself whose exact pedigree is still unclear.

In announcing the raid, Mr. Trump put himself in the center of the action, describing himself as personally hunting Mr. al-Baghdadi since the early days of his administration. He said he watched the action on Saturday with Vice President Mike Pence; Mr. Esper; Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and others in the Situation Room “as though you were watching a movie.”

Unlike previous presidents announcing such operations, Mr. Trump ended his national address by taking questions from reporters. He made a point of thanking Russia, Turkey, Syria and Iraq for their cooperation and said Kurdish forces provided “information that turned out to be helpful.”

By contrast, he described America’s traditional European allies as “a tremendous disappointment,” repeating his complaint that they have not agreed to take captured Islamic State fighters who originated from their countries.

He said that American troops did “an on-site test” of DNA to confirm Mr. al-Baghdadi’s identity and that they brought back “body parts” when leaving the scene. Mr. Trump said two women were found there wearing suicide vests that did not detonate but were killed on the scene.

The raid could help Mr. Trump with at least some hawkish Republican lawmakers who had broken with him over his decision to withdraw troops from Syria even as the president refused to notify Speaker Nancy Pelosi or other Democratic lawmakers in advance as his predecessors did in similar circumstances, saying he did not trust them not to leak.

Mr. Trump invited Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, usually a strong ally who had been the most outspoken critic of his Syria decision, to join him for the speech on Sunday morning and then sent Mr. Graham to brief reporters from the lectern in the White House briefing room, an unusual spectacle for a lawmaker.

Mr. Graham called the raid “a game changer in the war on terror,” while adding that “the war is by no means over.” He said Mr. Trump had reassured him on his concerns. “The president’s determination over time has paid off,” Mr. Graham said. “We don’t give him enough credit for destroying the caliphate.”

He added: “This is a moment when President Trump’s worst critics should say, ‘Well done, Mr. President.’”

Democrats were not quick to take the advice. Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., a leading Democratic candidate for president, released a statement praising the military and intelligence officials involved in the raid without mentioning Mr. Trump at all.

Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee who is leading the impeachment inquiry, said “good riddance” to “a bloodthirsty killer,” calling the raid “an important victory.” But speaking on “This Week” on ABC, he offered no congratulations to Mr. Trump himself.

Instead, he said it was unwise for Mr. Trump not to notify the so-called Gang of Eight congressional leaders traditionally informed about such operations, noting that doing so would have been helpful for the president if something had gone wrong. He also said the success of the raid did not absolve Mr. Trump of the decision to abandon the Kurds by pulling out.

“It’s a disastrous mistake to betray the Kurds this way,” he said. “I think it just improves the Russian position in the Middle East, something they desperately want.”

Reporting was contributed by Rukmini Callimachi from Romania, and Edward Wong, Nicholas Fandos and Chris Cameron from Washington.

Sahred From Source link World News

from WordPress http://bit.ly/2JocqPB via IFTTT

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes

certainheartrunaway · 5 years ago

Text

“VOA Launches Rohingya Language Program”

Teachers gather with VOA Learning English instructor at the end of training. (Source: Inside VOA)

Many thanks to SWLing Post contributors, Eric McFadden and Bruce who share the following item from NPR:

The Voice of America has begun a daily radio show in Rohingya, the language spoken by Muslim refugees who have been forced to flee Myanmar. The program is called “Lifeline.”

Click here to read/listen at NPR.

Also, Inside VOA published the following press release:

VOA Launches Rohingya Language Program

Today the Voice of America’s Bangla language service started a five-day-a-week radio show in Rohingya, the language spoken by Muslim refugees that have fled Myanmar. More than 800,000 people have taken refuge at the Kutupalong camp, one of the world’s largest refugee camps at the Myanmar-Bangladesh border.

Titled Lifeline, the 30-minute radio show, is available through short and medium wave signals. The program focuses on the lives and needs of the refugees, providing them with valuable information on security, family reunification, food rations, available shelter, education and health including vaccinations and water purification. In addition, a daily segment of the program offers the refugees the opportunity to share their stories, extend greetings to their families and learn about the hazards of joining extremists groups. One overarching objective of the broadcast is to counter Muslim extremists’ narratives and recruitment efforts in the camps and inform the Rohingya about the U.S. and the international community’s involvement in the crisis.

“After visiting Cox’s Bazaar and the Kutupalong refugee camp last year, it became obvious to me that we needed to address the informational needs of these people caught in the fastest growing refugee crisis in the world today,” said VOA Director Amanda Bennett. “Providing them with a reliable and authoritative source of news, as well as practical information that will improve their lives, is what the Voice of America does well in various hotspots around the world.”

Prior to launching the Rohingya language program, a VOA Learning English team travelled to the Rohingya refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, in March of this year at the invitation of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. The VOA instructors offered six days of intensive training on teaching techniques and methods for 100 selected English teachers. The teachers, in turn, will use the acquired knowledge to train another 5,000 of their colleagues in the camps.

Click here to read at Inside VOA.

from Daily Ham News https://ift.tt/2ymL3j5 via IFTTT

from dxerhamnews https://ift.tt/319dv4z via IFTTT

#IFTTT #dxerhamnews

0 notes

blog-rhodeisland-blog · 6 years ago

Text

Strengthen Your Family Need to Succeed By Rhode Family Services

If you are interested to make some change in your family life but don’t know where to turn family service is a great way to get involved in programs that can address your needs. These programmes may take place in your office or homes of the organization and emphasis of many Rhode family services that can strengthen your relationships. Here are some examples of programs that may suite good as your family support.

Family-centered services- This may include family, in-home preservation and support services to families that are referred by prevention and adoption division, protective services and foster care. This program can render case management, mentoring and case coordination to families in need.

Family first programs- These programmes focus on keeping a family together through design that are intensive interaction, skill building, flexible, family-centered, goal-oriented, time-limited, etc.

Health start and health family’s programmes- This can help parents connect with community resource and strengthen skill to ensure the healthy development of their children & family. This also helps parents who may be unsure of their ability to manage change they will face with a new baby assisting, diploma, earning a degree, managing their money and much more.

Family reunification programme- This stands to develop and prevent re-occurring out of home placement in addition to reunifying children with their family following an out of home placement.

Individual family service plan

This is a part of the effort to help the family who might need different options that the agency has to offer. Individuals who are candidates for help come from different condition having no choice as what to do next. Family service plan helps them activate the mandate of the government agency to move and take control of a situation. There are many factors that are not limited to the behavior of family members and usually happened in the home. Family services cannot take away children without due causes which is immediately apparent.

The statement of neighbor, family, and friends of the unit can be vital in establishing this. The condition of the adult, child or victim can also be the basis of the assessment and officers need to bear in mind that some adults and children may be misleading when it comes to the difference in behavior.

#publications #Health & Wellness Resources

0 notes

bountyofbeads · 5 years ago

Text

The one superlative I can offer is that there has never in the history of the United States been anyone who sounded less like a President.

The biggest threat to national security squats in the Oval Office.

'I didn't tell Congress because I didn't want it leaked'

'I tweeted this when they landed on the ground there'

Landed. Mission not started nor completed. Our solderiers not out.

He. Is. The. Security. Risk.

#TrumpLeaks

#trumppresser

ISIS Leader Al-Baghdadi Killed in Raid, Trump Announces

President Trump said in a nationally televised address that American forces targeted Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the head of the Islamic State, in an operation in Syria this weekend.

By Peter Baker, Eric Schmitt and Helene Cooper | Published October 27, 2019 Updated 9:50 AM ET | New York Times |Posted October 27, 2019 |

WASHINGTON — President Trump announced on Sunday that a commando raid in Syria this weekend had targeted and resulted in the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the founder and leader of the Islamic State, claiming a significant victory even as American forces are pulling out of the area.

“Last night, the United States brought the world’s number one terrorist to justice,” Mr. Trump said in an unusual nationally televised address from the White House. “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is dead.”

Mr. Trump said Mr. al-Baghdadi died when he was caught at the end of a tunnel, “whimpering and crying and screaming all the way” as he was chased by American military dogs. Accompanied by three children, Mr. al-Baghdadi then detonated a suicide vest, blowing himself and the children up, Mr. Trump said.

“His body was mutilated by the blast,” Mr. Trump said, but he added that tests had confirmed his identity.

The raid took place on Saturday in Idlib Province, hundreds of miles from the area along the Syrian-Iraqi border where Mr. al-Baghdadi had been believed to be hiding, according to senior officials. The target of the raid was killed when he detonated a suicide vest he was wearing, officials said.

For Mr. Trump, a successful operation could prove both a strategic victory in the battle against the Islamic State and a politically useful counterpoint to critics in both parties who have assailed him in recent weeks for withdrawing American troops from northern Syria, which allowed Turkey to attack and push out America’s Kurdish allies. A senior American official confirmed that Kurdish intelligence officials in both Syria and Iraq helped locate the target of the raid despite the tensions over the Turkish operation.

But experts have long warned that even eliminating the leader of shadowy organizations like the Islamic State does not eliminate the threat. Mr. al-Baghdadi has been incorrectly reported killed before, and American military officials were concerned that Mr. Trump, who posted a cryptic message on Twitter on Saturday night teasing his Sunday announcement, was so eager to announce the development that he was getting ahead of the forensics.

A Defense Department official said there was a strong belief — “near certainty” — that Mr. al-Baghdadi was dead, but that DNA analysis was not complete. The official said that with any other president, the Pentagon would wait for absolute certainty before announcing victory. But Mr. Trump was impatient to get the news out, the official said, and Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper agreed to go on the Sunday morning shows as a last-minute addition to the programs to promote the apparent success.

Mr. al-Baghdadi has been the focus of an intense international manhunt since 2014 when the terrorist network he led stormed onto the scene in the Middle East, seizing huge swaths of Iraq and Syria with the intention of creating a caliphate for Islamic extremists. He was believed to hew to extreme security measures, even when meeting with his most-trusted associates.

Mr. al-Baghdadi’s death would be another important victory in the campaign against the Islamic State, but counterterrorism experts warned that the organization could still be a potent threat. Moreover, Mr. al-Baghdadi was no Osama bin Laden in the American psyche and hardly a household name in the United States, which may limit the psychological and political impact at home.

Counterterrorism experts expressed surprise that Mr. al-Baghdadi was hiding in Idlib Province, an area dominated by Al Qaeda groups that is hundreds of miles from his strongholds along the Syria-Iraq border.

If Mr. al-Baghdadi’s death is confirmed, it would set off a succession struggle among top Islamic State leaders. Many other top leaders have been killed in American drone strikes and raids in the past few years. Anticipating his own death, Mr. al-Baghdadi has delegated authorities to regional and functional lieutenants to ensure that the Islamic State operations would continue.

*********

The Latest: Trump says IS leader's death outdoes bin Laden's

Published October 27, 2019 | AP | Posted October 27, 2019 |

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Latest on Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State group who was killed in a U.S. military raid in Syria, according to President Donald Trump (all times local):

10 a.m.

President Donald Trump says the U.S. military raid that took out Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is a bigger deal than the 2011 killing of Osama bin Laden during the Obama administration.

Trump is detailing the operation during an announcement at the White House.

The president acknowledges that the death of bin Laden was significant, but he believes the news about al-Baghdadi is even bigger news.

Trump says that bin Laden didn't become a global name in terrorism until the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The president says that's in contrast to al-Baghdadi, who Trump says is responsible for building a caliphate.

___

9:55 a.m.

President Donald Trump says an on-site DNA confirmed that Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed in a U.S. military raid in Syria.

Trump is sharing extensive details from the mission during a televised address from the White House on Sunday.

He says debris from the tunnel where Bakr al-Baghdadi blew himself up in using an explosive vest made it difficult to get to his body.

But Trump says Americans were able to move the debris and confirm al-Baghdadi's identity.

Trump says those involved in the raid "brought body parts" back with them, even though there "wasn't much left" of al-Baghdadi's body.

He says "they have his DNA. More of it than they want."

___

9:45 a.m.

President Donald Trump says that watching the raid that killed Islamic State group leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in Syria as it was underway felt "as though you were watching a movie."

And he's suggesting that the video be released to the public to dissuade al-Baghdadi's followers.

Trump says that he watched much of the mission unfold from the White House Situation Room on Saturday night.

Trump says at the White House on Sunday that the U.S. had al-Baghdadi under surveillance for several weeks. He says that during the raid, U.S. forces flew low and fast, and were met with gunfire at points.

Trump is also suggesting that the footage of the raid may be released publicly so that the world knows al-Baghdadi spent his final moments "crying, "whimpering" and "screaming."

9:40 a.m.

President Donald Trump says Islamic State group leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi died after running into a dead-end tunnel and igniting an explosive vest, killing himself and three of his young children

Trump is describing the U.S. raid in Syria that killed perhaps the world's most wanted man.

The president says during remarks from the White House's Diplomatic Room that al-Baghdadi spent his last moments in utter fear and claims that the IS leader was "whimpering and crying" and died as "a coward, running and crying."

Trump had teased the announcement with a tweet Saturday night, declaring that "Something very big has just happened!"

He says the U.S. received immediate and positive identification on the body and that the world is now a much safer place.

___

9:25 a.m.

President Donald Trump says Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is dead after a U.S. military operation in Syria targeted the Islamic State group leader.

Trump says in a statement to the nation from the White House's Diplomatic Room that "al-Baghdadi is dead" — fulfilling the top national security priority of his administration.

He says no U.S. personnel were lost in the mission.

Al-Baghdadi presided over IS's global jihad and became arguably the world's most wanted man.

The announcement comes as Trump has been on the receiving end of bipartisan criticism in Washington following the recent pullback of U.S. troops from northeastern Syria. Critics fear that move will allow the militant group to regain strength after it had lost vast stretches of territory it had once controlled

___

8:40 a.m.

A senior Turkish official says that "to the best of my knowledge," Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi arrived at a location in Syria 48 hours before the U.S. military raid that's believed to have targeted the Islamic State group leader.

The Turkish official says in a written statement Sunday that there's been "close coordination" among relevant parties and that the Turkish military had advanced knowledge of the raid.

Turkey's army said earlier in a tweet that it had "information exchanged and coordination" with U.S. military authorities before the operation.

The U.S. raid with helicopters took place in the Barisha area north of Idlib city — a few kilometers from the Turkish border.

*********

The Latest: Official: Kurds worked with US to find IS chief

Published October 27, 2019 | AP | Posted October 27, 2019 |

BEIRUT (AP) — The Latest on the alleged death of Islamic State group leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a U.S.-led operation in northern Syria (all times local):

4 p.m.

The commander of the Syrian Kurdish-led forces says five months of joint intelligence cooperation with the U.S.-led coalition led to the killing of the leader of the Islamic State group.

Mazloum Abdi said in a tweet Sunday that the reported killing of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi took place in a joint operation following "cooperation on the ground and accurate monitoring" for five months. He called it a "successful and historic" joint intelligence work with the U.S.

The U.S. raid with helicopters took place in the Barisha area north of Idlib city a few kilometers from the Turkish border.

The Kurdish-led forces cooperated with the U.S.-coalition for at least four years to fight IS in Syria until they declared military victory against the group in March.

___

3:40 p.m.

A senior Turkish official says "to the best of my knowledge" Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi arrived at a location in Syria 48 hours prior to the U.S. military raid that is believed to have targeted the Islamic State group leader.

The Turkish official said in a written statement Sunday that there has been "close coordination" among relevant parties and the Turkish military had advanced knowledge of the raid.

In a tweet earlier, the Turkish army said it had "information exchanged and coordination" with U.S. military authorities prior to the operation but did not elaborate.

The official added: "I can neither confirm nor deny that any intelligence was shared to facilitate last night's operation."

The U.S. raid with helicopters took place in the Barisha area north of Idlib city a few kilometers from the Turkish border.

— By Zeynep Bilginsoy

___

7:45 a.m.

The leader of the Islamic State militant network is believed dead after being targeted by a U.S. military raid in Syria.

A U.S. official told The Associated Press late Saturday that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was targeted in Syria's Idlib province. The official said confirmation that the IS chief was killed in an explosion is pending.

President Donald Trump teased a major announcement, tweeting Saturday night that "Something very big has just happened!"

A White House spokesman, Hogan Gidley, would say only that the president would be making a "major statement" at 9 a.m. EDT Sunday.

*********

Islamic State's Baghdadi: a trail of horror and death

By Ahmed Rasheed, Ahmed Aboulenein | Published October 27, 2019, 6:03 AM ET | Reuters | Posted October 27, 2019

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Iraqi jihadist who rose from obscurity to declare himself “caliph” of all Muslims as the leader of Islamic State, has died in a raid by U.S. special forces in northwest Syria.

U.S. President Donald Trump said in a televised address from the White House that Baghdadi killed himself during the raid by igniting a suicide vest. Test results from the aftermath of the raid had positively identified Baghdadi, he said.

Baghdadi had long been a target for U.S. and regional security forces trying to eliminate Islamic State, even as they reclaimed most of the territory the group once held.

The Islamic State or caliphate that Baghdadi declared in July 2014 over a quarter of Iraq and Syria was notable for atrocities against religious minorities and attacks on five continents in the name of a version of an ultra-fanatic Islam that horrified mainstream Muslims.

The genocide of Yazidis, adherents of one of the Middle East’s oldest religions, illustrated the brutality of his rule. Thousands of men were slaughtered on their ancestral Sinjar mountain in northwestern Iraq and women were killed or taken as sex slaves. Some other religious groups suffered sexual slavery, slaughter and floggings.

The group also caused global revulsion with beheadings of hostages from countries including the United States, Britain and Japan.

The United States put up a $25 million reward for his capture, the same amount as it had offered for al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and his successor Ayman al-Zawahri.

U.S. air strikes had already killed most of Baghdadi’s top lieutenants, including Abu Omar al-Shishani, Abu Muslim al-Turkmani, Abu Ali al-Anbari, Abu Sayyaf and the group’s spokesman Abu Mohammed al-Adnani. Thousands of his fighters were also killed or captured.

Baghdadi was born Ibrahim Awad al-Samarrai in 1971 in Tobchi, a poor area near the town of Samarra, north of the Iraqi capital Baghdad, whose name he took.

His family included preachers from the ultra-conservative Salafi school of Sunni Islam, which sees many other branches of the faith as heretical and other religions as anathema.

He joined the Salafi jihadist insurgency in 2003, the year of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, and was captured by the Americans. They released him about a year later, thinking he was a civilian agitator rather than a military threat.

It was not until July 4, 2014, that he seized the world’s attention, climbing the pulpit of Mosul’s medieval al-Nuri mosque in black clerical garb during Friday prayers to announce the restoration of the caliphate.

“God ordered us to fight his enemies,” he said in a video of the occasion, which presented him as “Caliph Ibrahim, commander of the faithful”.

Thousands of volunteers flocked into Iraq and Syria from around the world to become “Jund al-Khilafa” - soldiers of the caliphate and join him in his fight against the Shi’ite-led Iraqi government and its U.S. and Western allies.

‘MAKE THEIR BLOOD FLOW AS RIVERS’

At the height of its power in 2016, Islamic State ruled over millions of people in territory running from northern Syria through towns and villages along the Tigris and Euphrates river valleys to the outskirts of Baghdad.

The group claimed responsibility for or inspired attacks in dozens of cities including Paris, Nice, Orlando, Manchester, London and Berlin, and in nearby Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

In Iraq, it staged dozens of attacks on predominantly Shi’ite Muslim areas. A truck bomb in July 2016 killed more than 324 people in a crowded area of Baghdad, the deadliest attack since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

The group also carried out many bombings in northeast Syria, which has been under the control of U.S.-backed Kurdish forces.

Most of Baghdadi’s speeches were distributed as audio recordings, a medium better suited to the secretive, careful character that for a long time helped him evade the surveillance and air strikes that killed more than 40 of his top commanders.

That caution was matched by ruthlessness as he eliminated opponents and former allies, even within Salafi jihadist ranks. He waged war on al Qaeda’s Syrian wing, the Nusra Front, breaking with the movement’s global leader, al-Zawahri, in 2013.

But by the time of his death in the raid this weekend, his fortunes - and those of Islamic State - were in rapid decline.

With the defeat of Islamic State in its stronghold Mosul, which he declared as the capital of his caliphate, in 2017 the movement lost all the territory it once controlled in Iraq.

In Syria, Islamic State lost Raqqa, its second capital and center of operations, and eventually earlier this year its final chunk of territory there when U.S.-backed Kurdish-led forces took back Baghouz.

STILL A THREAT

While the destruction of the quasi-state that Baghdadi built has denied the group its recruiting tool and logistical base from which it could train fighters and plan coordinated attacks overseas, most security experts believe Islamic State remains a threat through clandestine operations or attacks.

Islamic State is believed to have sleeper cells around the world, and some fighters operate from the shadows in Syria’s desert and Iraq’s cities, still launching hit-and-run attacks.

In his most recent audio message, in September, Baghdadi put on a brave face, saying operations were taking place daily and urging followers to secure freedom for women jailed in Iraq and Syria over their alleged links to the group.

“As for the worst and most important matter, the prisons, the prisons, oh soldiers of the caliphate. Your brothers and sisters; do your utmost to free them and tear down the walls restricting them,” Baghdadi said.

But the loss of territory in Iraq and Syria stripped him of the trappings of caliph and made him a fugitive in the desert border area between the two countries.

He was forced to travel incognito in ordinary cars or farm pick-up trucks between hideouts on both sides of the border, escorted only by his driver and two bodyguards.

The region was familiar territory to his men. It was the hotbed of the Sunni insurgency against first the U.S. forces in Iraq and then the Shi’ite-led governments that took over the country.

Fearing assassination or betrayal, he was not able to use phones and trusted only a handful of couriers to communicate with his two main Iraqi aides, Iyad al-Obaidi, his defense minister, and Ayad al-Jumaili, his security chief.

The two had been believed to be among the likely candidates to succeed Baghdadi, but Jumaili was killed in April 2017 and Obaidi’s whereabouts are unknown.

In any case, their military background and lack of religious credentials mean that any of Baghdadi’s deputies would struggle to inherit his claims to be caliph.

*********

Baghdadi's death: a major blow to Islamic State

Reuters Staff | Published October 27, 2019, 8:53 AM ET | Reuters | Posted October 27, 2019 |

(Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump announced on Sunday that Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi died during an overnight raid led by U.S. military forces in Syria, a further blow to a jihadist group that once held a swathe of territory in Iraq and Syria.

Where once they confronted armies, the extremist Islamist group’s adherents have in recent years staged hit-and-run raids and suicide attacks. In some cases, the group has claimed responsibility for atrocities such as bombings in Sri Lanka in April that killed more than 250 people.

Islamic State’s involvement is not always proven, but even if the link is ideological rather than operational, it is still seen as a security threat in many countries:

IRAQ

After defeat by U.S.-backed forces, Islamic State has reverted to the guerrilla tactics it was once known for.

Iraqi Security Forces routinely carry out operations against remnants of the Jihadist group, more than two years after its defeat.

Sleeper cells have regrouped in provinces including Diyala, Salahuddin, Anbar, Kirkuk and Nineveh, where they have carried out frequent attacks, including kidnappings and bombings aimed at undermining the Baghdad government.

Although cells operate mostly in rural areas, burning crops and extorting local farmers, in February, two people were killed and 24 wounded when a car bomb went off in Mosul, once the group’s capital in Iraq.

The Pentagon said in January that IS was regenerating faster in Iraq than in Syria. Analysts estimated earlier this year that about 2,000 active combatants now operate in Iraq.

SYRIA

After serious military setbacks, Islamic State slipped into the shadows, staging suicide bombings and ambushes. It has carried out bomb attacks in towns and cities in northern Syria in the past year, including targeting U.S. forces.

Syrian Kurdish forces, who crushed the jihadists across the north and east with U.S. help, have said they believe sleeper cells mushroomed in eastern Syria. They have warned of the risk posed by holding thousands of militants in prisons, including foreigners from around the world.

That warning came into sharp focus this month when U.S. President Donald Trump announced he was withdrawing U.S. troops from northeastern Syria, opening the way for Turkey to launch an offensive targetting Kurdish fighters near its border.

Turkey says it has captured some 200 IS detainees who fled prisons in the area of its offensive and has transferred them to other prisons under the control of Turkish forces and its Syrian rebel allies. President Tayyip Erdogan has said any IS prisoners will be brought to justice.

Islamic State fighters still hold some ground in Syria’s remote central desert in territory otherwise held by the Damascus government.

EGYPT

Egypt has seen no large attacks over the past year, but smaller incidents persist and the military is mounting a campaign against Islamist insurgents, mainly on the Sinai Peninsula.

The military says several hundred militants have been killed since it launched a major campaign in February 2018 to defeat fighters linked to Islamic State in Sinai.

A Russian passenger jet was bombed shortly after takeoff from the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh in 2015, killing all 224 people on board. The attack was claimed by Islamic State.

SAUDI ARABIA

Islamic State militants have carried out deadly bombings and shootings in Saudi Arabia against security forces and minority Shi’ite Muslims, after the authorities crushed an al Qaeda insurgency over a decade ago.

Baghdadi called for attacks against Saudi Arabia when the kingdom joined the U.S.-led coalition in mounting air strikes against his group. In his speeches, he also used derogatory terms when he referred to the rulers in Riyadh.

Kamran Bokhari, a director at Washington-based think-tank the Center for Global Policy, said earlier this year that Islamic State exists in the kingdom but Saudi security forces and intelligence service are “pretty much on top of things”.

YEMEN

Islamic State militants announced a Yemeni affiliate in late 2014 as the country descended into civil war between the Saudi-backed government of Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi and the Iran-aligned Houthi movement.

However, the group has since faced a tough resistance from Al Qaeda’s local branch, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), and both groups fought each other, especially in the southern province of al-Bayda. Al Qaeda and Islamic State are also fighting Shi’ite Houthis, which they see as heretics.

Islamic State has claimed several assassinations and bombings in south Yemen but it never held territory. Experts believe Al Qaeda, with older and deeper tribal connections, poses a bigger threat in the war-torn country.

NIGERIA

Nigerian group Boko Haram has carried out attacks in northeastern Nigeria since 2009 in pursuit of an Islamic caliphate. It has killed more than 30,000 people and forced 2 million to flee their homes. The group split in 2016 and one faction pledged allegiance to IS.

Islamic State’s West Africa Province (ISWAP) has focused on attacking military bases in raids over the last year. It has become the dominant militant group in the region.

The extent of support provided by Islamic State to ISWAP is unclear and many security experts say the relationship is mainly in name rather than direct funding and logistical support.

AFGHANISTAN

Islamic State in Khorasan (ISIS-K), which took its name from a historical region that covered much of modern-day Afghanistan and parts of Central Asia, appeared in late 2014 in the eastern province of Nangarhar, where it retains a stronghold. It announced its formation in January 2015.

The group’s leadership has pledged allegiance to Baghdadi but it is not clear that ISIS-K has direct operational links with the main movement.

It has claimed attacks on civilian targets in cities including Kabul and fought the Afghan Taliban for control of a number of rural districts. U.S. commanders say its forces number fewer than 2,000.

The movement is little understood and many Afghan officials in Kabul doubt the veracity of some of its claims of responsibility.

SRI LANKA

Islamic State claimed the Easter Sunday bomb attacks on churches and hotels in April and released a video showing eight men declaring loyalty to Baghdadi.

IS claimed the men in the video, released by its Amaq news agency, carried out the suicide bombings.

Sri Lankan officials blamed two domestic Islamist groups with suspected ties to Islamic State.

INDONESIA

Indonesia is the world’s most populous Muslim-majority country and most people practise a moderate form of Islam. But there has been a resurgence in militancy and authorities have said they believe thousands of Indonesians draw inspiration from Islamic State, while about 500 Indonesians are thought to have gone to Syria to join the group.

A court sentenced a cleric, Aman Abdurrahman, to death last year for masterminding deadly attacks. Abdurrahman is considered the ideological leader of Jemaah Ansharut Daulah (JAD) - a loose grouping of Islamic State sympathizers in Indonesia.

Suicide bombings in May last year in Surabaya that killed more than 30 were linked to JAD cells.

THE PHILIPPINES

The Philippines fears that extremists fleeing Iraq and Syria could find a safe haven in the jungles and remote villages of Muslim areas of Mindanao, where there is a long history of lawlessness, clan rivalry and separatist and Islamist rebellion.

Several splinters of the myriad armed groups in the southern Philippines have pledged allegiance to Islamic State, although none are known to have been endorsed as its Southeast Asian affiliate.

Islamic State has often claimed responsibility for bombings and rebel clashes with government troops in Mindanao, but their veracity is often disputed. (reut.rs/2GwL9IN)

0 notes

apexart-journal · 6 years ago

Text

Margaret Saliske Leaving Seoul

Medicine shop

Just peeled garlic

Google Maps, my love hate relationship

On Monday I had been scheduled to meet with refugee children in an after school program but the program only took place on Saturdays. When I arrived at the school the director greeted me but did not speak english nor did I speak korean. We sat at a table across from each other passing politely our business cards but were unable to learn what the other expected to have happen. Finally when translation came over the phone I was able to put back on my shoes, bow repeatedly and back out the door. It retrospect quite funny.

My last day it rained. It poured. It turned Seoul inside out. I skipped the scheduled visit to a fortress and instead went looking for the Yangnyeongsi Herb Medicine Museum. Like the fish market, it was immediately apparent when exiting the metro that I was in the vicinity. The strong damp smells of spices, ground medicinal plants and dried parts. The museum has an impressive collection of tools used in the harvesting and processing of medicine. Most fascinating were cabinets with jars of various roots, seeds, grasses, splayed reptiles and powders all with the intended healing properties listed in both Korean and English. I had wanted to visit this museum because I know that traditional medicine is still very much in use in Korea, hence the busy market outside the museum. It was interesting to read the variety of unrelated illnesses one plant could be expected to cure from relieving convulsions to dispersing lumps.

When I departed the museum into the rain I spent my final hours in Seoul returning to the vast indoor markets just wandering and taking in how the smell and intensity of displaying and pushing products varied between interconnected markets. It is impossible to retrace your steps once entering you just abandon your sense of direction. An endless labyrinth of products from herbs, dried fish, live fish, vegetables, fruit, fabric, cooked foods, kitchen utensils etc. Awnings casting golden and blue light over the displays. Smells so intense you feel like you are walking into something solid. I really wanted a part of me to stay there.

Now on the plane home I wonder what I will take with me. Will the usual things in my life come at me with less speed or with more clarity or will I get my pace back and only when waking early the first few mornings remember the smells and sounds of Seoul.

Observations on Korea. The quality of life the government provides for its citizens never stopped impressing me. There were so many amenities that made daily life easy to navigate. The city moved fast but it was clean, well laid out. They play little jingles before each metro pulls into the station. There are spotless toilets everywhere. You can’t get robbed even if you tried to set it up. But there are problems like no middle class jobs. Children have to live longer with their parents and their parents pressure them to get a job with a company and forget other aspirations. The suicide rate is a serious problem. The divide between an older conservative generation and the younger population with their differing views on reunification and immigration is the cause of a lot of stress. For Koreans my age and older who struggled through extreme economic hardship it is still about self preservation and building a strong economy. I hope the younger generation will survive the current pressures and make some needed changes. I was very aware of Koreans being proud of their cultural. Meanwhile returning to the US is ominous. My country is in a frightening state of decline.

#Margaret Saliske #Outbound to Seoul #Outbound to Seoul :)

0 notes

jennymanrique · 7 years ago

Text

Nonprofits, consulates in Texas aggressively seeking ways to assist separated families

Young immigrants arrive with their parents at the Catholic Charities Rio Grande Valley after they were processed and released by U.S. Customs and Border Protection on Tuesday, June 19, 2018, in McAllen. Photo: Eric Gay/The Associated Press

From Facebook's largest single fundraising drive in history to intense diplomatic efforts at the federal level, nonprofits and consulates in Texas are aggressively finding ways to help parents in detention reunite with their children in a shelter.

The zero-tolerance policy of President Donald Trump's administration has led to the separation of 60 children a day from parents at the border. It has also united those opposed to the practice.

Dave and Charlotte Willner, a couple based in Silicon Valley, Calif., began a Facebook fundraiser Saturday morning with a goal of $1,500 to help one family with legal fees. By Tuesday, they had raised almost $6 million. Private donors matched the effort with $250,000.

The money will go to San Antonio-based Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, the largest immigration legal services nonprofit in Texas.

“They are wonderful people who decided to fundraise and have blown us away with the generosity they have inspired,” said Jennifer Hixon, RAICES director of education and outreach, in an email.

Hixon said the money will go direct to her organization because Facebook doesn’t collect fees on donations processed through its fundraising feature.

“Regardless of political party, so many of us are distraught over children being separated from their parents at the border," said Charlotte Willner, who works at Pinterest and whose family is originally from Dallas-Fort Worth. "We can’t all be on the front lines to help these families, but by supporting RAICES, we’re able to do something that just takes less than a minute, and collectively have an impact.”

RAICES said the money will support two big projects: The Legal Representation, Advocacy, and Education Project that aims to represent released unaccompanied kids in Texas, and the Family Reunification and Bond Fund that collects money to pay bond to get parents released.

“This incredible effort shows how angry people are about this policy, and our ultimate goal is to ensure that every child in Texas won’t fight their immigration case without lawyer,” said Manoj Govindaiah, director of Family Detention Services at RAICES.

“Our No. 1 priority is to give the children back to their parents as quick as possible and assist the family with quality legal advice,” he added. “People are hearing that they should give up their cases and take deportation orders in the hope of seeing their children soon, but the option to apply for asylum and get reunified is worth it to explore.”

Looking for translators

Other organizations like the Texas Civil Rights Project are looking for Spanish, Mam, Q’eqchi’ or K’iche’ translators to assist families in the legal intake process in McAllen. Human Rights First, a national organization with roots in Houston, is also asking for donations to strengthen its pro bono program to help asylum seekers.

Volunteers of Neta, a Latino-run progressive media platform based in the Rio Grande Valley, are assisting asylum seekers who are sleeping at ports of entry because of overloaded border patrol intake centers.

“Refugees are being forced to endure extreme heat, above 100 degrees,” said Dani Marrero, director of Neta. “Many generous local residents from Texas and Mexico are bringing them supplies daily, but the need is growing.”

Neta is collecting diapers, underwear, bras, baby wipes, sandals, deodorant, hygienic supplies, water and non-perishable food items.

A new class of unaccompanied minors

Bill Holston, executive director of the Human Rights Initiative of North Texas, a nonprofit agency that provides legal assistance to refugees and asylum seekers, said his staff will continue offering counseling to kids in court, but “with the policy that denies asylum cases, we will be seeing just the cases of those released on bonds.”

“If the parents are deported, it might happen that some kids end up looking for a sponsor in Dallas, but this is too soon to tell.”

Holston said the zero-tolerance policy is creating “an entire class” of unaccompanied minors that didn’t cross alone but ended up alone in the system. “This overwhelms both the immigration and the criminal justice system an it is unclear how the reunification is going to happen,” he said.

Many North Texas organizations have joined efforts in the newly created Force for Immigration Rights & Empowerment and will share resources to connect people with legal aid and help them to navigate the new set of immigration-related policies, Holston explained.

Tracking where the kids are

Consulates in Texas also are helping to track where parents and kids are located to help them to reunite. “We are one of the first calls parents are doing,” said Gloria Alvarado, consul of Honduras in Dallas.

“The first thing we ask is if they cross with minors and if they can provide name, birthday and ID numbers,” she added.

Some parents are not bringing birth certificates, so the consulate has to locate other relatives in Honduras to get the correct data. Some children have aunts and uncles in the United States, but they want to go back with their parents.

“We have a good relationship with the shelters run by Catholic Charities and Southwest Key, so we have been visiting the kids,” she said.

Shelters historically have provided 1 social worker for each 7 kids, Alvarado said.

“Between April and May, there has been an increase of 30 percent of cases of Hondurans who ended up in immigration custody and need our help,” the consul said.

According to her figures, 95 percent are in the deportation process.

For the consul of El Salvador in Dallas, Veronica Pichinte, her focus is in supporting consulates in Houston and McAllen, where Salvadoran officers are insisting to law enforcement agents and Office of Refugee Resettlement personnel that they need to communicate directly with the immigrants.

“We know the parents are receiving an alien number and their kids names and ages are being included in their files” Pichinte said. “If we can’t avoid deportation, at least we hope that the families return together.”

Pichinte said consulate workers are visiting shelters and assuring that both parents are the ones deciding on the kids’ final destination. “We still don’t have a repatriation case in which just one member of the family is deported and we are devoted to keep the families together even in a repatriation event,” she added.

The consulates of El Salvador and Honduras weren't able to provide data on how many of their citizens have been detained, but the majority of the 2,300 families separated are from the countries of the Northern Triangle. The triangle includes Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala.

In a televised press conference Tuesday, Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray confirmed that just 1 percent of the cases at the border involve Mexican families. He said they have identified 21 cases, including one in which a 10-year old girl with Down syndrome was placed in a shelter in McAllen alongside her 10-year-old brother. Their mother was sent to a detention center in Brownsville.

“We know the father is a permanent resident and we hope to reunite the kids with him in the coming days,” Videgaray said.

Originally published here

#English #Texas #Consulates #families #immigrants #immigration #humanitarian aid #border #children separated from their family

0 notes

usviraltrends-blog · 7 years ago

Photo

New Post has been published on https://usviraltrends.com/do-you-want-to-direct-a-research-institute-germanys-max-planck-society-has-hundreds-of-top-jobs-to-fill-science/

Do you want to direct a research institute? Germany’s Max Planck Society has hundreds of top jobs to fill | Science

Gene-editing pioneer Emmanuelle Charpentier is a director at the Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology. A recent Max Planck Society report said there is a “bidding war” for female directors.

AP PHOTO/PETER STEFFEN

By Kai KupferschmidtMar. 15, 2018 , 10:45 AM

BERLIN—Erin Schuman and her husband Gilles Laurent left their jobs at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena a few years ago and moved their family, cat, and dog halfway across the globe to Frankfurt, Germany. It took some courage. She’s American, he’s French, and two of their daughters were in school; resettling in Europe was “certainly challenging,” Schuman says.

But the move came with huge professional benefits. Schuman and her husband, both neuroscientists, moved to the Max Planck Institute for Brain Research as “directors,” prestigious positions as the heads of large research groups that come with guaranteed funding until retirement and full academic freedom. They also had the opportunity to design a brand new lab. (“We worked with the architects to maximize the interactions and happiness of our colleagues,” Schuman says.) The move turned out to be a “tremendously enriching experience.”

Many scientists may soon have a similar chance. The Max Planck Society (MPG) recently took out ads in major scientific journals to recruit 20 new directors in fields ranging from astrophysics to terrestrial microbiology, in one of its biggest talent searches ever. Between now and 2030, roughly 200 of the 300 director posts at the 84 institutes will become vacant, says an MPG spokesperson. Many directors are coming up for retirement at the 20 institutes opened in the eastern part of the country after the German reunification in 1990, and so are many of their counterparts at older institutes in former West Germany.

For the society it marks a turning point: a chance to hire more women and more foreign researchers, and an opportunity to open up entirely new fields of research, because incoming directors can set their own course. (There are also plans to launch completely new institutes on cybersecurity and the origins of life.) But it’s also a huge challenge. Finding directors is a lengthy process, and competition from other institutions seeking top talent—especially women—is fierce. And some argue that the society should use the opportunity to rethink some of its traditions.

Founded in 1948, MPG has a €1.8 billion annual budget and is Germany’s leading research powerhouse. The Nature Publishing Index ranks it as the fourth largest contributor to high-quality research in the world; its researchers have won 18 Nobel Prizes.

Most of the institutes are led jointly by three to five directors who each also run their own research departments. As an MPG director, “You have an incredible liberty to research what you want, even changing your field if you like,” says Christiane Nüsslein-Volhard, who won a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine as a director at the Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology in Tübingen in 1995. There are periodic evaluations, but a poor result means losing only a fraction of your funding, says Schuman, who previously held one of the plum positions in U.S. science: as an investigator funded by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute on a 5-year contract. “I did not realize how the renewal clock of 5 years dissuaded me from going for risky ideas until I became a [Max Planck] director,” she says.

When a director leaves or retires, MPG doesn’t just look to “fill a certain slot,” says Jürgen Renn, director of the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science here. Instead it seeks excellent scientists and reshapes the institute’s mission around them, sometimes altering it completely. When the directors of the Max Planck Institute of Economics in Jena left within a few years of each other, for instance, prominent economists proved hard to lure to that city. So MPG in 2014 refashioned it into the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, which has since done pioneering work on the history of plague.

The hiring process is arduous. Traditionally, an institute’s current directors identify potential candidates, who are then reviewed by outside referees. (The recent ads were a new addition.) Settling on a new director can take years. The society currently fills about 10 positions a year, so the rush of openings may be a challenge. And the “explosion of research at universities all around the globe” means that competition “is a lot more intense,” says U.S. economist David Audretsch, a former director at the Jena institute.

Finding women is especially hard. The number of female directors has gone up from 4.5% in 2005 to about 15% today; MPG aims to reach 18% by 2020. (Among recent catches is gene-editing pioneer Emmanuelle Charpentier.) But a recent MPG report mentioned an international “bidding war” for senior female talent. To expand the pool, female scientists should receive much more support early in their careers, Renn says. One effort is MPG’s Lise Meitner excellence program, launched late last year, which will establish up to 10 new research groups led by women every year. Recruiting directors at a younger age could also help, Schuman says: “I know this younger pool has lots of qualified and amazing women who can join our ranks.”

Attracting international talent is another challenge. Under Germany’s federal system, MPG institutes are spread around the country, from big cities like Berlin or Munich all the way to places such as Plön, a small lakeside resort in the north, that are less attractive to foreigners who want an international school or an airport close by.

The biggest drawback of MPG institutes is their “outdated” isolation from universities, says Thomas Südhof, a biochemist and Nobel laureate at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, who was an MPG director in the 1990s but left after falling out with Hubert Markl, then MPG’s president. “Science is a team effort and it’s important who you meet in the hallway or in the cafeteria,” Südhof says. “The Max Plank Society would profit enormously if they integrated their institutes directly into universities.” Schuman says he has a point, but warns that integration might lead to a “class system” within universities that favors Max Planck appointees. MPG is trying another solution: bringing institutes in the same city together in campuslike clusters.

As to filling the wave of new director posts, “I think we should dare to be riskier,” Schuman says. “We should not be afraid of failing, but rather expect that some failures will accompany our riskier choices, which could lead to game-changing discoveries.” In other words, MPG may just need a bit more of the courage it takes for an individual scientist to pull up stakes and move their lab and family to another continent.

#Science

0 notes

clubofinfo · 7 years ago

Text

Expert: Ignoring the avalanche of evidence that prior sanctions on the DPRK are causing a devastating humanitarian crisis for the people of North Korea, especially the most vulnerable, on December 22, despite warnings of the catastrophic consequences to the people, the UN Security Council passed a new set of sanctions so draconian and inhumane that they must be compared to Hitler’s Nuremberg laws. In quintessentially bad faith, many of these Security Council diplomats who voted “yes” professed ignorance of the human suffering their prior sanctions were inflicting, or are wantonly indifferent to the human agony their votes for these new sanctions make inevitable. In view of the collapse of the DPRK’s socialist economic system these sanctions are intended to provoke, the ultimate question remains why China and Russia failed to veto these sanctions, while they have the power to prevent this catastrophe. What “arrangements” were made? Has the U.S. juggernaut succeeded in inducing the short-sighted submission of Russia and China, who must certainly anticipate the horrific results of a collapse of the DPRK, which will lead to the complete destabilization of the Eurasian continent, a permanent American military presence, and probably nuclear war. Surely Russia must remember that Gorbachev was assured by U.S. Secretary of State James Baker, that, in return for the Soviet Union’s agreement to the reunification of Germany, NATO will not expand one inch east of Berlin. Today Russia is surrounded by NATO bases. Was Gorbachev gullible or treacherous? Russians frequently suspect the latter. All five permanent members of the Security Council are themselves are in gross violation of Article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which requires their divesting their military arsenals of nuclear weapons; they are, instead, investing trillions of dollars in upgrading “nukes.” Article 6 of the NPT requires their negotiating, in good faith, a treaty to abolish nuclear weapons; this United Nations treaty was adopted this year, ignored by Russia and China, and opposed by the US, UK and France in a virulent campaign. The US is also violating article 1 of the NPT, placing nuclear weapons in 5 NATO countries: these 5 countries, including Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, and Germany are in violation of Article 2 of the NPT. In violation of the NPT, themselves, the Permanent 5 members of the Security Council have absolutely no right to condemn the DPRK, which is not even a party to the NPT. United Nations Security Council resolution 2397 dooms the UN to a legacy of destruction of stable, progressive independent nations including Iraq, Libya, and now the DPRK. Prior to the adoption of resolution, 2397, the UN Human Rights Commissioner revealed that the tough sanctions already imposed on the DPRK are obstructing delivery of desperately needed humanitarian aid. As a result, 70% of the population, 18 million North Koreans suffer from acute food shortages. Sanctions obstructing international bank transfers are blocking UN ground operations, preventing delivery of food, medical equipment and other humanitarian aid. According to AFP: ‘Aid groups are facing hurdles to clear customs for goods destined for North Korea, to ensure procurement and transport of aid supplies, as well as rising food prices that have shot up 160% since April,’ said UN Assistant Secretary-General Miroslav Jenca. On December 9, NBC news reported: The Trump administration’s primary North Korea strategy would do little to curb the country’s nuclear program, and could trigger a famine, according to experts. The White House is urging China to turn off oil supplies to the 25 million Koreans…many analysts say such a move would have minimal impact on North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs, and would instead hit the country’s agricultural sector, potentially leading to mass starvation. Dr. David Von Hippel, a senior adviser at the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability warned the results of an oil embargo could have a catastrophic impact on a humanitarian level. An oil cutoff would drastically reduce the amount of domestically grown food available to the civilian population….What arable land there is the DPRK farms intensively. They rely on tractors, irrigation pumps, refrigerators and transportation trucks to harvest and distribute food before it rots….even the current level of sanctions imposed in September (Resolution 2375) will impoverish North Korea’s breadbasket. On October 25 UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the DPRK, Tomas Quintana stated that he was alarmed by reports that sanctions may have prevented cancer patients from access to chemotherapy…the shipment of wheelchairs and essential equipment for persons with disabilities is now constrained…humanitarian actors are facing difficulties to source much-needed supplies and carry out international financial transactions. Following his return from Pyongyang, UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Jeffrey Feltman stated: What I was concerned about was the reduction in programs for the DPRK. The program is only 30 percent funded. It’s having a large impact on how the UN can deliver on its humanitarian programs. I was concerned about the overall lack of funding…which affects the UN’s ability to deliver life-saving equipment on the ground. This humanitarian disaster is neither accidental nor coincidental. All this information was publicly available to all 15 members of the Security Council prior to December 22, when they inflicted even more deadly sanctions on the people of North Korea. The Security Council is an accessory to these crimes. Though they boast, irresponsibly, that the sanctions contain “humanitarian exemption,” how do they explain the alarming failure to implement these “humanitarian exemptions,” and the fact that the tragic victims of these criminal and fatal sanctions are the majority of the people of North Korea? The damning answer is revealed in the investigation of the failure of “humanitarian aid” in the case of sanctions against Iraq, which resulted in another humanitarian catastrophe, including the death from starvation of more than half a million Iraqi children. In a brilliant work of investigative journalism by Joy Gordon, entitled “Cool War: Economic Sanctions as a Weapon of Mass Destruction,” (Published in Harper’s, 2002) Ms. Gordon States: News of Iraqi fatalities has been well documented (by the United Nations, among others), though underreported by the media. What has remained invisible, however, is any documentation of how and by whom such a death toll has been justified for so long…..But I soon learned that all U.N. records that could answer my questions were kept from public scrutiny. This is not to say that the UN is lacking in public documents related to the Iraq program. What is unavailable are the documents that show how the U.S. policy agenda has determined the outcome of humanitarian and security judgments…The operation of Iraq sanctions involves numerous agencies within the United Nations…These agencies have been careful not to publicly discuss their ongoing frustration with the manner in which the program is operated…Over the last three years, through research and interviews with diplomats I have acquired many of the key confidential UN documents concerning the administration of Iraq sanctions. I obtained these documents on the condition that my sources remain anonymous. What they show is that the United States has fought aggressively throughout the last decade to purposefully minimize the humanitarian goods that enter the country. And it has done so in the face of enormous human suffering, including massive increases in child mortality and widespread epidemics…what is less well known is that the government of Saddam Hussein had invested heavily in health, education, and social programs for two decades prior to the Persian Gulf War of 1991. Iraq was a rapidly developing country with free education, ample electricity, modernized agriculture and a robust middle class. The diplomats who heedlessly refer to failed “humanitarian exemptions” to these DPRK sanctions are privy to the facts excavated by Joy Gordon, and published in Harpers, and these diplomats are aware of the actual cause of the failure of “humanitarian aid.” This failure is the deliberate, premeditated killing of innocent North Koreans, and that is the purpose of these sanctions, which do not, in fact, affect the nuclear program. In any civilized, responsible organization, the perpetrators of these sanctions would be convicted of premeditated murder. North Korea is not an aggressor: they fought successfully against brutal Japanese colonization, and were then provoked into defending themselves from guerrilla attacks by U.S. client Syngman Rhee’s army, in 1949, which violated the 38 parallel to attack North Korea, the provocation that ignited the Korean War of 1950-1953. Today, the US, South Korea and Japan are imperiling the survival of North Korea with their incessant military threats. In the 1950-1953 U.S. led UN attack of North Korea, more than 3-4 million North Koreans were murdered by carpet-bombing, napalm, germ warfare and other weapons of mass destruction. These figures are confirmed by US General Curtis LeMay, and numerous others involved in perpetrating this massacre of North Koreans. As traumatic memories of the slaughter of 1 million Armenians by the Turks over 100 years ago still fester within the lives of today’s Armenians, as Hitler’s genocide of 6 million Jews 70 years ago cannot be forgotten by today’s Jews, so the massacre of more than three million North Koreans by a US controlled UN army can never be forgotten by North Korea, whose government is determined to protect North Korea from a repetition of this horror. And the only weapon that might deter the United States from another attempt to totally destroy the last remaining socialist country is their nuclear weapon, which might require the US to think twice before another attack. Thus, an alternative method of slaughter, UN Security Council Resolution 2397, despite alarming warnings of catastrophic humanitarian consequences, ruthlessly cuts 90 percent of oil supplies to the DPRK; the resolution demands that 150,000 North Koreans working in other countries must be expelled, and have their jobs eliminated within 24 months, exacerbating the impoverishment of North Korea; in addition to other restrictions, and together with a large number of previous travel bans against individuals crucial to the economic sector of the DPRK, Resolution 2397 includes further travel bans against 15 key members of the economic sector, and foreign trade representatives. Ambassador Han Tae Song, at the UN in Geneva earlier stated: It is obvious that the aim of the sanctions is to overthrow the system of my country by isolating and stifling it and to intentionally bring about humanitarian disaster instead of preventing weapons development as claimed by the U.S. and its followers. On December 7 it was reported that South Korea will spend almost $1,000,000.00 to purchase drones and grenade machine guns, for a “Decapitation Unit” to murder Kim Jong UN. This, of course, is not only criminal homicide, it is in violation of international law. On December 10 Reuters reported that Japan, the US and South Korea will hold additional military drills, immediately following the December 4 US- South Korea large-scale military drills held the prior week. This is an incessant military threat to the survival of the people and government of North Korea, and an intolerable provocation. On December 17 South Korean and U.S. forces conducted a joint military plan to invade North Korea, ostensibly to “remove weapons of mass destruction.” This “Warrior Strike” military exercise was held at Camp Stanley, north of Seoul, near the 38 parallel. US commander of Forces Korea Vincent Brooks, and Lt. General Thomas Vandal were present at the “Warrior Strike” military drills. By November 28, the government of the DPRK had not tested anything for almost three months. Instead of attempting peaceful negotiations in this stable atmosphere, as required by all Security Council Resolutions, the US, on the contrary, escalated its military threats against North Korea, with a series of deadly military drills. It is therefore preposterous that U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson stated on December 15 that North Korea must “earn” the right to negotiations. North Korea had conspicuously halted any testing for almost three months prior, and instead of seizing the opportunity to establish negotiations for peace, the US aggressively increased military threats. The DPRK Foreign Ministry called US President Trump’s national security strategy the most recent American policy seeking to stifle our country and turn the entire Korean peninsula into an outpost of American hegemony…Trump is seeking total subordination of the whole world. UN Security Council Resolution 2397 will be fatal to North Korea’s economy. It will destroy the majority of the people, but have little or no impact on weapons development. Finally, it is revealing that on December 4 the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution on the “Prohibition of the development and manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of such weapons: report of the Conference on Disarmament”. The DPRK voted “Yes” in support of this resolution. The U.S. voted “No,” in opposition. Again, on the General Assembly resolution on the “Promotion of multilateralism in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation” the DPRK voted “Yes,” in support of this resolution, while the U.S. voted “No” in opposition. It is obvious which country is a threat to world peace: it is not the DPRK. It is freezing in New York today. If an 90% oil cutoff were imposed on the United States, a huge number of civilians would freeze to death. The winter in North Korea is even colder. Resolution 2397 will condemn the people of North Korea to excruciating deaths. Ironically, December 22 is the United Nations “Holocaust Remembrance Day.” It is shameful that on December 22 the United Nations Security Council voted to inflict the Twenty–First Century’s Holocaust upon the people of North Korea. With the passage of Resolution 2397, the United Nations Security Council has become an instrument of barbarism and terror. • Featured image is from Zobiyen TV. • Article first published in Global Research http://clubof.info/

0 notes