Cuts may hurt child-abuse cases

[cornermouse]

We probably ought to keep a running tally on this stuff.

http://www.news-leader.com/today/20050403-Cutsmayhurtchil.html

St. Louis — A proposal to eliminate all state funding for centers that interview possible child abuse victims will make convicting abusers more difficult, prosecutors say.

Gov. Matt Blunt has proposed cutting $1.9 million for the 15 child assessment centers in Missouri. He praised the centers' work but said the cuts are necessary to balance the budget.

Administrators from most of the child assessment centers said the cuts would force them to either close or drastically cut services. And they say that could mean that thousands of possible victims would be interviewed in police stations by people who may not have the skills needed to get a conviction.

"I can't tell you how disturbing this cut is," said Jefferson County prosecutor Bob Wilkins, who is also president of the Missouri Association of Prosecuting Attorneys. "You will never find a prosecutor in this state that is not an advocate for these centers."

Blunt said he hopes the centers can find other sources of funding to continue their work.

"I think the assessment center programs work, but I also think we have to live within our means," Blunt said.

Greene County Prosecutor Darrell Moore said he doubts Blunt truly understands the value of the assessment centers. Moore, who like Blunt is a Republican, said many party members in the governor's hometown of Springfield are frustrated over the budget cuts.

"There are a lot of prominent people here in the Republican Party that are flabbergasted by this," he said.

The centers have become more popular nationwide in the past decade after research touted them as places where children can feel safe as they describe abuse.

Prosecutors such as Ed Postawko, who handles child sex cases for the St. Louis circuit attorney's office, said the centers connect victims with experts who are trained to gather the best forensic evidence possible without asking leading questions that might spoil an investigation.

[sandnsea]

1. Tax cut Republicans are flabbergasted

by budgets that cut real live services. :crazy:

[cornermouse]

2. Short sighted to the point of being blind.

[slor]

3. "We have to err on the side of...

greed".

[cornermouse]

4. Boy, isn't that the truth.

In my opinion, he has higher ambitions. We need to keep a track record.

[bling bling]

5. He didn't waste any time did he?

Blunt has eagerly made cutting the poor, elderly, and children from his budget a priority. How typical.

[Mary in KC]

6. We need Phil Kline in Missouri to fill in the gap

He is so concerned about child rape. (NOT)

What is wrong with the picture? Its like all of the pixtels are just falling apart.

[newportdadde]

7. Blunt is just swining that axe.

Damn does the guy have no heart at all. Maybe a criteria for politicians should be you have to have a real job and punch a clock for 10 years before you run for office instead of riding daddies coattails into public service.

I have a feeling we will be seeing Senator Blunt in a few years if we aren't careful.

[Moderator]

8. cornermouse

Per DU copyright rules
please post only four
paragraphs from the
copyrighted news source.


Thank you.


DU Moderator

[proud2BlibKansan]

9. They cannot keep up with

the cases they have on their plate now. No way wil they be able to do any better if they eliminate these centers.

I have taught in the state of Missouri for two and a half decades and I could literally write a novel full of horror stories detailing my experiences as a mandated child abuse reporter and DFS's failure to respond to reports in a timely or efficient manner. The last bad case I had we were forced to call Jeff City to get DFS to respond. And when they did, they immediately removed three kids from a parent we had been reporting for nearly two years.

My favorite bad DFS story involves a little girl 20+ years ago who came to school and graphically described her stepdad having sexual intercourse with her the night before. When I called to report it the DFS worker asked if the girl had any visible physical injuries, like bruises. I said not that I could see and DFS said well then we just don't have time to look into this. So I asked how in the world can a 7 year old describe sexual intercourse using such specific and graphic details unless she had actually experienced it? The DFS worker said well their policy was no physical marks meant no investigation. So my boss called back and said she had bruises. DFS came to school, interviewed the girl and immediately took custody of her. Stepdad was arrested and convicted of rape. But we had to lie to get DFS to care.

That was over 20 years ago. Dealing with DFS isn't a whole lot different today. Services need to be increased, not cut back.