NEWTON'S FIRST LAW AND THE DCF PLANTATION

Newton's First Law of Motion states that a body at rest will remain at rest unless an outside force acts on it, and a body in motion at a constant velocity will remain in motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an outside force.

The constant denial of racial issues or bias at the DCF Plantation by administrators boggles the imagination of reasonable thinking people. There are documents available highlighting the disproportionate disciplinary actions aimed at black and Latino male employees at Connecticut Juvenile Training School and Department of Children and Family facilities. However the predominately white administrators ( backed up by recently elevated sycophants of color ) refuse to even acknowledge something MIGHT be out of place at the old plantation. This narrative of denial leads me to wonder if Newton's First Law might be at work within the cognitive sphere of white administrators.

Notice how Newton describes a "body at rest will remain at rest unless acted upon by an outside force." The refusal of DCF / CJTS to acknowledge any chance bias etc might be going on shows unwillingness to truthfully analyze the issues at hand. Ergo, within the cognitive process of white administrators it appears that their brains ( a body ) is at rest due to the refusal to see problems in plain sight. Now it is common knowledge that if the body is not active it becomes heavy, lethargic and hard to activate. Let us apply that same idea to thinking of administrators on the plantation who for years have not looked critically at racial issues nation wide. All over America a hue and cry goes up from people of color about racial injustice by the dominant culture. In many instances the response to cries of injustice caused policies to change and some sort of justice toward the grievances to be addressed. However on the DCF Plantation cries for racial justice have been ignored for years by tone deaf whites leading the agency. To me this implies their thinking process ( brain = body ) is at rest and refuses to allow outside forces ( activists, protests, or public opinion ) to act upon it as a motivating force.

In light of what is written above how then does the DCF / CJTS duo of non- conformity get out of this position of being in cognitive rest? Well in my humble opinion the first thing is to look at what the issues are surrounding racial bias and address them in a productive manner. Then the second thing is to change leadership at troubled facilities like CJTS. William Rosenbeck is the Superintendent of CJTS and there have been several incidents of major proportions under his reign but no change in leadership occurred. You cannot expect things to change if weak in the knee leaders are afraid or incapable of maintaining order or implementing policies reflective of justice modes. Lastly, repressive actions against advocates of justice must cease on the DCF Plantation in order for " the body at rest" to have a chance for outside forces to impinge upon it.

Thank you mister Newton for helping to give DCF Plantation leaders a method out of their dilemma.

MEETING AT CONGRESSMAN JOHN LARSON'S OFFICE

A meeting was held at the Hartford, CT office of Congressman John Larson to address racism / bias within DCF / CJTS. Below are points of the agenda discussed by community members.


August 19, 2013

Introduction,                                                                                      

The community of Greater Hartford suffers from bias and discrimination as it relates to employees of color within the Department of Families and Children. For years various DCF employees/ community members have filed lawsuits, protested outside of facilities of DCF, spoken to the Fourth Estate, gone on a hunger strike and all to no avail. The DCF bureaucracy continues to exist in a multi- cultural environment where many of their adolescent clients are of color. Yet, over 66% per cent of all disciplinary actions are against an employee base (of color) not numerically representative of the total employment. We are asking Congressman Larson’s office for assistance in addressing this discrimination issue.




1. Why the disparity within DCF with regards to high disciplinary actions 66% against employees of color? (they make up less than 46% of employee base).

2. There is a need for and instrument by which employees can provide feedback, evaluate management, and rate progress on the degree to which they are addressing issues of bias or discrimination (administered by outside person of color).  Further, there is a need for an official mechanism for staff to give input and perspective into policy decisions and changes that affects the performance of their duties.

3. There is a need for regularized, independently facilitated dialogue about racial issues within the organization.  Management should be required to participate as a party to the discussion but NOT be allowed to run the meetings or control the agenda. (unlike in 2009 when DCF led "Courageous Conversation”).

4. Looking at the possibility of Congressman Larson’s office hosting a public meeting for a discussion on issues of bias/ racism that have plagued this agency for year. And looking into what reasons caused employees of CJTS to file a class action lawsuit plus go on a hunger strike.

5. Helping open political avenues that allow us to speak with other politicians about these issues [Senator Chris Murphy, members of the State Legislature, etc.].


Rabbi Donna Berman
Minister Cornell Lewis
Pastor James Lane

 The 10-12 minute meeting at 2pm on August 19, 2013 will focus on 4-5 issues.
The discrimination / bias within the Department of Children and Families as it relates to employees of color and suggestions to address those concerns.

DEMAND JUSTICE FOR JANE DOE

Justice for Jane rally and march September 27, 2014

Posted: September 21, 2014 in Call to Action, Events, Fight Back.



SATURDAY, September 27 @ 12 noon
RALLY at DCF Headquarters – 505 Hudson St., Hartford, CT
MARCH to State Capitol – 210 Capitol Ave, Hartford, CT
Car pool from New Haven – comment on event or contact justice4janedoe@gmail.com / 203.787.8232

Join us to demand #JusticeForJane!

For over a month now, Jane Doe, a transgender Latina teenager and abuse and trafficking victim, has been in solitary confinement at CT Training Juvenile School, a prison-like boys’ facility. After being held in a women’s prison without charges for over a month, Jane is suffering again – this time in a solitary cell surrounded by boys.

CT DCF and Commissioner Katz, who has been shamelessly protecting Jane’s abusers and demonizing Jane every step of the way, have gone to extreme lengths to make sure Jane is kept in these disgusting conditions and not allowed into a loving family or to demand justice for the horrific abuse she has been suffering since age 8.

Jane has waited long enough for legal maneuvering. We need to stand together in demanding the truth about Jane’s conditions, demanding that she be released immediately and that her abusers be brought to justice. Please join us to rally and march and say NO MORE to Katz and DCF’s abuse of Jane and other youth!

Justice for Jane!
Justice for all youth in DCF “care”!
Justice for all poor and LGBTQ* youth and youth of color!

Facebook page for this event.



Share this:
TwitterFacebook

Related
Justice for Jane Update. Furbirdsqueerly Stands In Full Support of Jane Doe.

HUEY P. NEWTON SPEAKS ABOUT THE GAY COMMUNITY AND INCLUSION

Huey P. Newton’s August 15, 1970 speech on gay rights and women’s rights.

Huey P. Newton:
During the past few years strong movements have developed among women and among homosexuals seeking their liberation. There has been some uncertainty about how to relate to these movements.

Whatever your personal opinions and your insecurities about homosexuality and the various liberation movements among homosexuals and women (and I speak of the homosexuals and women as oppressed groups), we should try to unite with them in a revolutionary fashion. I say ” whatever your insecurities are” because as we very well know, sometimes our first instinct is to want to hit a homosexual in the mouth, and want a woman to be quiet. We want to hit a homosexual in the mouth because we are afraid that we might be homosexual; and we want to hit the women or shut her up because we are afraid that she might castrate us, or take the nuts that we might not have to start with.

We must gain security in ourselves and therefore have respect and feelings for all oppressed people. We must not use the racist attitude that the White racists use against our people because they are Black and poor. Many times the poorest White person is the most racist because he is afraid that he might lose something, or discover something that he does not have. So you’re some kind of a threat to him. This kind of psychology is in operation when we view oppressed people and we are angry with them because of their particular kind of behavior, or their particular kind of deviation from the established norm.

Remember, we have not established a revolutionary value system; we are only in the process of establishing it. I do not remember our ever constituting any value that said that a revolutionary must say offensive things towards homosexuals, or that a revolutionary should make sure that women do not speak out about their own particular kind of oppression. As a matter of fact, it is just the opposite: we say that we recognize the women’s right to be free. We have not said much about the homosexual at all, but we must relate to the homosexual movement because it is a real thing. And I know through reading, and through my life experience and observations that homosexuals are not given freedom and liberty by anyone in the society. They might be the most oppresed people in the society.

And what made them homosexual? Perhaps it’s a phenomenon that I don’t understand entirely. Some people say that it is the decadence of capitalism. I don’t know if that is the case; I rather doubt it. But whatever the case is, we know that homosexuality is a fact that exists, and we must understand it in its purest form: that is, a
person should have the freedom to use his body in whatever way he wants.

That is not endorsing things in homosexuality that we wouldn’t view as revolutionary. But there is nothing to say that a homosexual cannot also be a revolutionary. And maybe I’m now injecting some of my prejudice by saying that “even a homosexual can be a revolutionary.” Quite the contrary, maybe a homosexual could be the most revolutionary.

When we have revolutionary conferences, rallies, and demonstrations, there should be full participation of the gay liberation movement and the women’s liberation movement. Some groups might be more revolutionary than others. We should not use the actions of a few to say that they are all reactionary or counterrevolutionary,  because they are not.

We should deal with the factions just as we deal with any other group or party that claims to be revolutionary. We should try to judge, somehow, whether they are operating in a sincere revolutionary fashion and from a really oppressed situation. (And we will grant that if they are women they are probably oppressed.) If they do things that are counterrevolutionary or counterrevolutionary, then criticize that action. If we feel that the group in spirit means to be revolutionary in practice, but they make mistakes in interpretation of the revolutionary philosophy, or they do not understand the dialectics of the social forces in operation, we should criticize that and not criticize them because they are women trying to be free. And the same is true for homosexuals. We should never say a whole movement is dishonest when in fact they are trying to be honest. They are just making honest mistakes. Friends are allowed to make mistakes. The enemy is not allowed to make mistakes because his whole existence is a mistake, and we suffer from it. But the women’s liberation front and gay liberation front are our friends, they are our potential allies,
and we need as many allies as possible.

We should be willing to discuss the insecurities that many people have about homosexuality. When I say “insecurities,” I mean the fear that they are some kind of threat to our manhood. I can understand this fear. Because of the long conditioning process which builds insecurity  in the American male, homosexuality might produce certain hang-ups in us. I have hang-ups myself about male homosexuality. But on the other hand, I have no hang-up about female homosexuality. And that is a phenomenon in itself. I think it is probably because male homosexuality is a threat to me and female homosexuality is not.

We should be careful about using those terms that might turn our friends off. The terms “faggot” and “punk” should be deleted from our vocabulary, and especially we should not attach names normally designed for homosexuals to men who are enemies of the people, such as Nixon or Mitchell. Homosexuals are not enemies of the people.

We should try to form a working coalition with the gay liberation and women’s liberation groups. We must always handle social forces in the most appropriate manner.

Many of us in the gay liberation movement remarked Thank You Huey. It was really the first time in the revolutionary struggle that I as a young queer truly felt a part of something and that something was revolutionary solidarity among the oppressed. We no longer were living in a one issue world of fighting for only “gay” rights but for the rights of all people and all people for us. This I believe was a real turning point in our battle as the old left and many homophobes on the new left after Huey P. Newton’s statement, had to move out from under their heavy hand over and on our people and into a new way of thinking and into the new day that we were all seeking and helping to dawn. In simple terms they could no longer consider themselves to be a part of the revolutionary solidarity as long as they clinged to out modded ideas on “gays”. (we use the term gay here as that was the term used as an umbrella term for the LGBT community at this time.)

MORE TROUBLE AT THE CJTS PLANTATION

Restraints Drive Child Advocate To Report Suspected Abuse Against DCF Treatment Facility


By JOSH KOVNER,
jkovner@courant.com
2:25 p.m. EDT, September 13, 2014

Staff members at a locked treatment unit for teenage girls in Middletown used excessive force in a series of physical restraints, the state child advocate says, prompting her office to take the unusual step of reporting four of the cases as suspected child abuse.

Child Advocate Sarah Eagan called for an independent investigation into the Pueblo treatment unit. Eagan and her investigators are mandated reporters of child abuse, like doctors and teachers and police. Pueblo is operated by the Department of Children and Families.

The four complaints were phoned into DCF's abuse hotline after the advocate's office viewed dozens of hours of videotapes of restraints at Pueblo. The investigators noted instances of prone restraints being applied against girls who were disobeying directions but not being physically threatening at that moment. Prone restraints occur when one or more staff members take a youth to the floor, face down, and hold the youth there, however briefly.

Prone restraints are prohibited in some states, and are not allowed to be used in privately managed group homes and other facilities that contract with DCF, according to Associate Child Advocate Miriam "Mickey" Kramer. The state Department of Developmental Services also does not permit prone restraints to be used in private group homes and other locations that serve intellectually disabled people, Eagan said.

[Get Your Newspaper Delivered To Your Inbox Every Day with eCourant]

Eagan said some of the restraints depicted on the Pueblo videotapes were unwarranted and excessive, and rose to the level of possible abuse. She said that her office considers the inappropriate use of prone restraints to constitute an emergency.

In addition, one male staff member was involved in a least three physical altercations with girls at the Pueblo treatment unit, but was not let go from DCF until after the third incident, Eagan said, She questioned the department's handling of that employee.

A supervisor at Pueblo -- an assistant unit leader who ordered one of the restraints that was called in as possible abuse -- has been replaced, Eagan said.

DCF officials said all four cases are under internal investigation by the unit that handles the most complex inquiries. If the department substantiates abuse in any one of the four cases, it would have consequences for staff and supervisors at Pueblo, and for policies and protocols in the unit.

During a conference call with The Courant this week, the department's chief lawyer, Barbara Claire, said tapes of the four cases were viewed by other DCF officials and, from their perspective, the restraints weren't considered excessive and did not rise to the level of child abuse.

"That's why we need an independent review," Eagan said.

It was DCF's position during the conference call that restraints at Pueblo and at the Connecticut Juvenile Training School for boys, also in Middletown, are not used to gain compliance from a youth who is only disobeying directions and is not being physically threatening. Restraints are a last resort and are used only when the safety of the youths or the staff are at stake, the DCF officials said during the call.

"We don't use non-compliance to put our hands on young women," said DCF's William Rosenbeck, superintendent of the juvenile training school in Middletown. The nearby Pueblo unit is considered part of CJTS for management purposes

However, all four of the suspected-abuse incidents at Pueblo involved restraints initiated by staff members, called youth service officers, for non-compliance by the girls before any of them had became physical, Eagan said.

She said that at least one of the girls had asthma, and that the prone position in which she was placed during the restraint was specifically prohibited in her treatment plan.

In response to Eagan's charges, Rosenbeck said staff members are trained in "non weight-bearing restraints" that are safe for even those youths with medical alerts.

Eagan and two of her investigators who viewed the tapes and the incident reports said it was very hard to tell whether staff members were putting pressure on the girls' chests or backs. But Eagan noted that at least one of the girls who was restrained said at one point that she was having difficulty breathing.

Asked again if prone restraints were ever used to gain compliance from a disobedient youth, Rosenbeck said, "It's not supposed to be used that way at all. Sometimes it's not easy to frame it that way …"

In all four instances of suspected abuse, handcuffs were used during the heat of a restraint; in one instance, a girl was in handcuffs within four minutes and remained in the cuffs for more than 25 minutes until she was escorted to her room, according to the child advocate's office.

DCF officials said this week that their policy is that handcuffs are used only "to safely transport" a youth.

Rosenbeck said that out of the 22 girls who have been in and out of Pueblo since March, four accounted for 77 percent of the restraints and assaults, and that Pueblo is otherwise stable and accomplishing its treatment goals.

Copyright © 2014, The Hartford Courant

UNIT LEADER PAID FOR NOT WORKING

The salary for Unit Leaders at Connecticut Juvenile Training School is between $55,000- $70,000 sources report. The CJTS facility is for incarcerated male residents and Unit Leaders have responsibilities of caring for Youth Service Officers and youth in their care. That is why the e-mail received by DCF Plantation Blog ( if true) is somewhat puzzling and troubling. In building  # 6 sources report how a Unit Leader is allowing a YSO to complete all paper work necessary for the efficient running of that particular Pod ( as Units are called ). No the YSO is not doing this because the Unit Leader has cognitive issues; there is a quid quo pro involved in the paper work scenario. In return for doing all the Unit Leader’s paper work this YSO is not disciplined or reprimanded in any fashion or form. Other YSOs employed at CJTS say this is why the paperwork doing YSO is allowed to verbally berate a resident for periods of time and not be disciplined.

To make matters worse the YSO doing the verbal chastisement is out in the open with it because of this tight relationship with the Unit Leader who avoids doing paper work with a passion. If we scrutinize the situation from another vantage point [ parallax view ] what is said to be occurring is some type of fraud upon the State of Connecticut and tax paying citizens. At a time when Governor of Connecticut Dannel Malloy is trying to cut three billion dollars from his budget, someone is getting paid for nothing. In fairness to readers, all of this being reported is from second hand talk of other employees at CJTS. But in the past their information has been reliable and accurate (to a point ) ergo, it is safe to assume this data has a modicum of truth to it. The Unit Leader in building # 6 is not some novice to the service of this kind of work; reports indicate the person has years of work experience with this particular agency. So if there is significant work history why does this person get paid while another person does their paper work? Stories of injustice, racism, bias, doling out of overtime to friends and gross incompetence continues to cascade out of CJTS Plantation.

Now we have the Unit Leader in building # 6 who is paid for not working.

TOXIC ENVIRONMENT

The consensus from people about Connecticut Juvenile Training School is that working there is hazardous to your health. I know there are incarcerated male residents at CJTS; assaults from these youth might cause injury. However the thrust of this story focuses not on assaultive youth but a toxic milieu created by bias, racism and unsupervised middle management. At CJTS a new employee enters into the work environment without realizing it is dysfunctional. Several types of bias exist at the facility ( favoritism towards liked employees, giving out milder forms of disciplinary action toward disliked employees ) and causes unbalance relations in that environment. It only takes a short time for new employees to understand that to exist at CJTS and get paid; something of value must be given up. This usually means not caring about injustices you see or hear about. As long as you get a pay check bi-weekly that is all employees need to care about.

Therefore, it is now clear the toxic milieu causes ethical people to shy away from being activists or pointing out minor issues to make the facility safer. At one point an employee sent an email to the facility Superintendent of CJTS and was told by others “ we do not send emails or write letters here.” The comment came as a shock because in other state facilities or corporations sending emails about issues is standard practice; not at CJTS plantation is this practiced. When anyone steps out of the prescribed boundaries laid down by management that employee is targeted for reprisals. Needless to say this kind of vindictive behavior by management will cause the ethical or moral employee to shrink back into the underbrush of denial or cowardice. The dominant culture at CJTS (management, school teachers, clinicians and middle management)  consists of Caucasians. This being said, the white culture imposes their worldview on the facility. There is very little sensitivity by white management at CJTS for the concerns of employees of color. In order for all employees at CJTS to endure such treatment there must be a trade off: more time off work for physical and emotional problems, less production during work time and less cooperation with peers. All of what is being discussed today leads to a toxic environment; under such working conditions nothing thrives, workers suffer burnout and white management become more repressive if they perceive employees threaten facility power structures.

Then there is the issue of upper management using middle management as instruments of daily oppression toward rank and file employees. CJTS facility Key Stone Cops leaders allow middle management to conduct business like they are feudal Japanese or Chinese warlords. By this I mean arbitrary decisions are made by middle management about who gets investigated, verbally or formally written up, and in some instances that gets terminated from the job. When such problems are brought before upper management the only response is to circle the wagons to keep out unwanted news. Only by the grace of some divine power has CJTS not become involved in more controversy than it has already. Yet white management continues to promote, encourage and maintain a toxic environment.

IS THERE A COVER UP AT THE DCF PLANTATION?

This story is written for DCF Plantation by a staff writer on loan from another blog.

The background ----

The following story is the result of multiple sources and employees at Connecticut Juvenile Training School. People describe a situation in which preferential treatment towards a female Youth Services Officer might have occurred. For some weeks on Unit 6 Delta a male resident has physically / verbally assaulted certain staff. In particular one female YSO certainly drew the ire of this resident and has been verbally abused. Sources report for some reason the Unit Leader has not deemed it necessary to nip such things like verbal abuse in the bud, therefore giving hatred fertile soil in which to fester. And so reports maintain the situation continued like this, resident being assaultive until it reached a curious point of no return.

On August 31, 2014 residents from 6 Delta were escorted to the cafeteria during first shift; while eating, the same resident mentioned previously began to make snide / inappropriate comments to the female YSO mentioned in this story. Other YSOs report that several supervisors were present in this cafeteria as the female YSO said things to the mouthy resident that could have escalated the situation. DCF Plantation readers have to understand that the cafeteria is filled with other residents from different Units; any agitation might cause a riot like situation. Why did the supervisors remain silent?

Cover up # 1---
Youth Service Officers sitting in the cafeteria at the time this YSO chided the resident are angry about what took place. These YSO’s claim supervisors should discipline the female employee. Now in fairness to our readers it must be stated that the YSOs doing the complaining said nothing to management about the incident. These eyewitnesses did not want to be seen as “snitching.” Wait, hold on a minute now. YSOs contact DCF Plantation Blog about the incident crying “she is treated differently because management likes her.” Yet these same employees invoke the street culture phraseology about not snitching, and then remain silent?

Cover up # 2---
The person in charge of Unit 6 Delta has experience as an administrator during employment at CJTS. Why did this particular Unit Leader allow such volatile situations like verbal or physical assault to reach crisis proportions and escalate from Unit to a crowded cafeteria? Next what must be examined is how supervisors sat around and condoned- through their silence- a female verbally chastising a resident of CJTS in front of peers and others. Now if you want male youth to react like an Atomic Bomb just call them out in front of peers; you certainly then have a recipe for that resident acting out to save face. However the issue at hand is the turning a blind eye toward the female YSO, (who according to those YSOs witnessing the incident) should receive discipline for her comments. In closing rumors are management tends to favor certain employees over others. And some YSOs wonder why management disciplines certain staff harsher than others [especially if the YSO is of color].

Well as this story ends it appears as if a question is lingering in the putrid cultural atmosphere at CJTS. Is there a cover up at the CJTS plantation?

SEEKING JUSTICE FOR LUIS !!

Please share

Call in Days Tuesday Sept. 2 – Wed Sept.3    
                                                           
Drop the Charges against Luis Anglero Jr. Now!

18 year old Hartford resident Luis Anglero Jr. was tased by Hartford police on Aug. 19.  While in the hospital he was charged with "breach of peace" and "interfering with police". Video and eyewitness reports show Luis is clearly innocent of any crime. Instead it was Officer Shawn Ware that acted in an aggressive and violent manner. We are demanding that the charges against Luis be dropped immediately. Furthermore we are demanding that Officer Shawn Ware be placed under arrest.

What can you do to make sure there is justice for Luis Anglero, Jr. and an end to the use of excessive force by Hartford Police?

Hartford area residents, activists, and community organizers are asking that on Tuesday Sept. 2 Call the Mayor, State’s Attorney, and the Hartford Police Department and demand that the charges against Luis be dropped immediately!

1.     Call the Mayor’s office (860) 757-9500


2.     Call the Hartford Police Department (860) 757-9800


3.     Call State’s Attorney Gail P. Hardy, 860-566-3190



Wednesday Sept. 3 8am Rally at Luis’s Court hearing
Community Court of Hartford, 80 Washington St, Hartford CT
Need more info? Contact Chris 860-593-6392