About NNN
Since March 2005, New Nebraska Network has been the state's premier source of progressive online political commentary and community-building.

Please support our efforts by becoming engaged, spreading the word, and contributing what you can towards our continued growth as a voice for change in Nebraska politics.


Join the Network

Frontpage RSS Feed

Diaries RSS Feed

Daily E-mail Updates

Read NNN Archives
(pre-August 2007)

Managing Editor:
Kyle Michaelis,
kyle@newnebraska.net

NNN is a meritocracy. Contribute and you will be rewarded.

Local Spotlight

Poll
Have you given up hope on a strong Democratic challenge to Gov. Dave Heineman in 2010?
Yes
No

Results

Search




Advanced Search


Event Calendar
February 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Local Blog Roll
  • NDP Blog for Nebraska
  • Cartoons by Neal Obermeyer
  • Cartoons by Bill Dunn
  • Midwest Democrat
  • Blog for Rural America
  • Omaha Blog
  • Freedom Road Project
  • Lincolnite
  • Eye On Omaha
  • Public Christian
  • Nebraska Blue
  • The Dark Stuff
  • Revolution-21
  • The Watchdog Post
  • Scenic Route (GI Ind.)
  • City Weekly Media Watch
  • Omaha TV News
  • Harold W. Andersen
  • Nebraska Watchdog
  • Leavenworth Street
  • Objective Conservative
  • Red State Eclectic
  • Heartland Notebook
  • Weird Harold
  • Joe's Shack
  • Check With Chip
  • Don't Let Me Stop You
  • High Plains Patriot
  • Guerilla Spot
  • The Ag Blog
  • Nebraska Pulse
  • Economic Trends
  • Right-Wing Professor
  • Art Diamond
  • Vital Signs
  • Unicam Watch (Right-Wing)
  • Patriotic Resistance (Anti-Obama)
  • Mark Fahleson - NE GOP

  • 50 State Blog Network
  • Alabama
  • Arizona
  • California
  • Colorado
  • Connecticut
  • DailyKos
  • Firedoglake
  • Florida
  • Georgia
  • Idaho
  • Illinois
  • Indiana
  • Iowa
  • Louisiana
  • Maine
  • Maryland
  • Massachusetts
  • Michigan
  • Minnesota
  • Missouri
  • Montana
  • MyDD
  • Nebraska
  • Nevada
  • New Hampshire
  • New Jersey
  • New Mexico
  • New York (a)
  • New York (b)
  • North Carolina
  • North Dakota
  • Ohio (a)
  • Ohio (b)
  • Oklahoma
  • Open Left
  • Oregon
  • Pennsylvania
  • Rhode Island
  • Swing State Project
  • Tennessee
  • Texas (a)
  • Texas (b)
  • Utah
  • Vermont
  • Virginia
  • Washington
  • West Virginia
  • Wisconsin

  • Does Dave Heineman Deserve Blame For The Safe Haven Debacle?

    by: Kyle Michaelis

    Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 02:04:26 AM CST


    Earlier this year, Nebraska became the last state to adopt a safe haven law that allowed parents and guardians to abandon their children without fear of prosecution.  We were, however, the first state to adopt such legislation without a defined limit on the age of the children who could be abandoned under the law.  That's drawn considerable national attention over the last few months after the law took effect and dozens of minors (most in their early teens) were left at hospitals across the state.

    Now, as you probably know, the Nebraska Legislature is in the middle of a special session called by Gov. Dave Heineman with the sole purpose of amending the law to place a cap on the age of children eligible for safe haven protection.  Heineman first indicated that he favored the law applying only to newborns in the first 72 hours of life, but he's since shown willingness to accept a safe haven that extends throughout a babies' first 30 days - perhaps even through its first year.

    The dilemmas raised by this whole situation have been numerous and ugly.  The one thing they all have in common is that they've made Nebraska look very bad.  Unfortunately, most of the mockery and scorn has been directed at our state legislature.  That's extremely unfair, especially since it was Heineman who signed the bill into law and who later delayed in calling a special session while the situation grew into a genuine crisis.

    Of course, it's unfair to point a finger at any one person for a bill that passed the legislature with only one dissenting vote.  But, Heineman gave the final go-ahead and hasn't been held to account in the sligthest - even though he admitted to its flaws upon the bill's signing on February 13th, 2008.

    Gov. Dave Heineman signed the state's safe haven bill late Wednesday morning, though he said he has some misgivings about the broad nature of the Nebraska measure....

    "Yes, I am going to sign it. Yes, I have some concern," Heineman said during a Wednesday morning news conference. "We have decided to expand beyond infants."

    But senators can make adjustments to the law in future years if problems develop, he said.


    This wasn't some unforeseen consequence.  Heineman recognized the possibility that we'd see precisely what came to pass, and he signed the legislation anyways.  Every time one of those children has been dropped off, it's been Heineman's safe haven in action.
    Kyle Michaelis :: Does Dave Heineman Deserve Blame For The Safe Haven Debacle?
    Recognizing that so many parents and guardians could be brought to such a desperate act as abandoning their children, Heineman might have embraced this incredible responsibility he'd helped thrust upon the state.  Instead, his only focus has been personally avoiding the political consequences without any apparent compassion for the suffering and frustration that have become increasingly evident in so many Nebraska families.

    As for that one true voice of dissent against the safe haven bill, it belongs to the only true winner in this horrible situation - term-limited State Senator Ernie Chambers.  Here's what he had to say weeks before Heineman signed the legislation into law:

    Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers, who has opposed the bill all along, and even filibustered it, said he "made a deal with the devil" on the compromise to "more or less get out of the way" of its passage.

    "I don't like society putting its stamp of approval on women abandoning their babies," he said....

    The bill does not deal with the underlying causes of child abandonment, he said.

    "What is it in a society that will make a young woman feel so desperate that she can not hold on to what may be the most important thing in her life?" he said. "Those she should be able to turn to for sustenance and nurturing may be the ones who come down on her the hardest."

    Young women should be made to know that a baby is for life, he said. Society has the obligation to address these issues in such as way that she does not think automatically that the way out of a difficult situation is to throw her hands up and abandon her child, he said.


    You might argue that Chambers failed with his decision not to filibuster the safe haven legislation in the 2008 session as he had the year prior.  But, he chose different battles in his last year, and the outcome here only adds to Chambers' reputation.  His foresight and sharp intellect have been without peer in Nebraska politics for decades, but it's his clearly-defined and principled positions that will be the most missed since we'll no longer have such a measure against which others' obvious failings might be judged.

    Chief among those is Heineman, who should be able to throw around his weight a lot more in Chambers' absence.  If anything, this example should serve as a cautionary tale to the entire state of what we can expect if there's no one in the legislature standing up to Heineman and challenging the go-along-get-along attitude of the prevailing status quo.

    Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
    Print Friendly View Send As Email
    He does deserve blame (0.00 / 0)
    This issue falls right at the feet of Dave Heineman, and even Mike Johanns before him. A lot of these underlying issues can be traced to the mental health "reform" that Johanns forced onto this state before taking off for greener pastures. When that went into affect, services to help out struggling families started to drop off.

    With Heineman, one only has to look at his appointee, Todd Landry, and the fact he has clearly been carrying the water for the team. He's been giving a political position all week, not a position based on the reality of the facts at hand. It was insulting when he commented earlier this week (from the LJS):

    Todd Landry, who oversees the state's children and family services, painted a much different picture, saying "there are resources available parents can and should access."

    "It is not the role of government to intervene in a family's life," Landry said.

    Landry doesn't have a clue. He's not been on the front lines. He's mainly been involved at the management level. The fact is that those services are not readily available out there. Especially the further west you get in the state.

    I worked for Child Protective Services from 5 years. The constant struggle was finding the services to help those families that came into our system. The trend seemed to be parents with drug problem and mental health issues, and children with mental health and behavioral problems. There was also usually a lot of poverty surrounding these families. You found that some would try to get help, but the barriers they faced were:

    - Not knowing where to go to find services to get help in the first place.
    - Not having health care coverage, or if they did, not being able to afford the costs for office visits or medication.
    - Not having the general knowledge and education to know how to go about getting the help in the first place.

    There was also the fact that if those mental health or drug abuse issues were there, these were people who didn't have the ability to function with basic living skills, let alone have the ability to think about how to get the help they need. Too often it took a person hitting bottom to finally see what was happening, and recongnizing they needed help.

    When children came into the system (whether they were children who were abused or teens with juvenile delinquency issues), even as Case Managers we struggled to get the help the families needed. There was no central service. Instead, we'd have to set up things like in-home family support (not usually available just to the general public) that covered parenting education, budgeting, working on case plan goals like setting up and making all appointments. If we wanted to just send a parent to parenting classes, that would only happen if they were available in the area. Months would go by before a counselors office or the YWCA would offer a class.

    When it came to setting up counseling services, the pool of available counselors seemed to be shrinking every year. The reimbursements for working with the state were getting less and less. Some areas had no available services at all, and if you had families in small rural towns, it was not unusual to have to send them 50-150 miles away to get the counseling and assistance they needed.

    We should be proud of the people that have been stepping up to the plate this week. Every report you seemed to read comments from Gwen Howard, Steve Lathrop, Amanda McGill, Annette Dubas, and Don Preister. I especially loved this report with comments from Preister:

    Nebraskans want things cheap, said Omaha Sen. Don Preister.

    "Our children are under siege and largely it's because we are cheap," he said.

    "We closed mental health facilities to save dollars. Being cheap. Now we are looking at only a three-day (changed to 30 days) safe haven law. Being cheap," he said.

    "I don't think being cheap is economical."

    And then these comments was reported:

    Omaha Sen. Gwen Howard, who retired after 34 years working for Health and Human Services as a social worker, also talked about her perception of Landry's comments that "once we correct the age, the problem will disappear."

    "The problem is not going to disappear," she said. "Everyone doing the work knows that. Every parent of a troubled child knows that. Everyone in the the court system knows that. Why doesn't the director of children and family services know that?"

    Instead agency leaders downplay the problem, she said.

    "We need a department that that is attuned to the needs of the people who come to them. We need a director of child welfare who is going to be honest with us, who is going to come with solutions," Howard said.

    Lincoln Sen. Danielle Nantkes took a long-term perspective.

    "A human service system devoid of leadership and appropriate funding ... over the course of many, many years brings us to this point," she said.

    "Those are not unintended consequences," she said of the drop-offs. "Those are serious consequences."

    Then she pointed to the other problems facing Health and Human Services, including potential loss of federal funding for the Beatrice State Developmental Center for Nebraskans with developmental disabilities.

    "How many task forces do we need? How many class action lawsuits do we need? How many Department of Justice investigations do we need?"

    They are right. Anyone that has been working directly with this issue could have told Landry and Heineman, but they didn't want to listen. I remember about 3 years ago, Heineman wanted to reduce the number of children in foster care because Nebraska had the highest per-capita rate. Result? All of his hacks set out to reduce those numbers NOT by finding ways to be proactive. Nope. They actually CUT OUT voluntary cases, and then required us Case Managers to start writing up fewer case plan goals. Say, for example, if a child was removed because a dirty house (we're talking cockroaches everywhere, animal feces on the floor, no food in the house, etc). We find out after the removal the parent is doing drugs, and that's why they can't take care of themselves let alone their home and their kid. Sorry, but we could no longer address drug use. If we could get them to clean up the home to an acceptable level, we'd put the kid back right away, and maybe not even persue a case beyond the initial hearing. Did it correct the real problem? Nope. But it sure got those numbers down for Dave Heineman.

    So is Dave Heineman to blame? You betcha.....

    Sorry for writing such a long post, but I was thinking of puting this up and this gave me the opportunity.


    It's to his credit then. (4.00 / 1)
    Count me among those few who believe Nebraska's Safe Haven Law has been, on balance, a net positive, if for no other reason than it exposed the utter failure of social services in both this state and across the country.  Changing the law will not help a single child and could hurt quite a few.  Worst of all, it will let the rest of us get on with our lives and forget all about the fact that their are people out there who desperately need our help.  Don't think for a second that is not exactly what they want.

    Bingo (0.00 / 0)
    Exactly.  Saving money takes precedence over people in Governor Dave's world.

    [ Parent ]
    Safe Haven (0.00 / 0)
    As someone who has been involved to one degree or another with child welfare issues for 25 years I can see firsthand that the original Safe Haven law served as a magnifying glass to highlight the sad, sad status of state services for families in crisis.  Yes, the cuts put forth by our recent governors have come home to roost.  You just can't keep cutting and cutting services to people without tragic results.  The people who made use of this law were not lazy, or self centered, in their actions.  They were desperate.  This law allowed them to get help for their children.  We can only hope that the 2009 Unicameral will address the underlying causes that led these families to take the drastic actions that they did.

    New Nebraska Network
    Not Just Red to Blue - More than One Label for Another


    Active Users
    Currently 1 user(s) logged on.

    Menu

    Make a New Account

    Username:

    Password:



    Forget your username or password?


    NNN on Twitter

    101st Legislature

    Progressive Partners
  • Coalition For Lifesaving Cures
  • Nebraskans For Obama
  • Change That Works - Nebraska
  • Nebraska Democratic Party
  • Nebraska Young Democrats
  • Nebraskans for Peace
  • Center for Rural Affairs
  • Nebraska Appleseed Center
  • Center for People in Need
  • ACLU Nebraska
  • Sierra Club Nebraska
  • Common Cause Nebraska
  • Voices For Children
  • Opportunity@Work
  • Power Up Nebraska

  • Politicians & Candidates
  • Tom White for Congress (D-02)
  • Lee Terry for Congress (R-02)
  • Rebekah Davis for Congress (D-03)
  • Adrian Smith for Congress (R-03)
  • Sen. Ben Nelson (D)
  • Sen. Mike Johanns (R)
  • Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-01)
  • Rep. Lee Terry (R-02)
  • Rep. Adrian Smith (R-03)
  • Gov. Dave Heineman (R)
  • Atty Gen Jon Bruning (R)
  • Unicameral Directory
  • Mayor Jim Suttle (D, Omaha)
  • Mayor Chris Beutler (D, Lincoln)
  • Nebraska Democratic Party
  • Nebraska Green Party
  • Nebraska Republican Party
  • Heineman for Governor (R)
  • Bruning for Atty Gen (R)

  • Local Media
  • Nebraska State Paper
  • Prairie Fire
  • The Reader
  • North Platte Bulletin
  • Sandhills Express
  • Southwest Nebraska News
  • NET Nebraska Public Radio
  • KFAB Talk Radio (Omaha)
  • KLIN Talk Radio (Lincoln)
  • Channel 3 - CBS (Omaha)
  • Channel 4 - ABC (Kearney)
  • Channel 5 - NBC (Hastings)
  • Channel 6 - NBC (Omaha)
  • Channel 7 - ABC (Omaha)
  • Channel 8 - ABC (Lincoln)
  • Channel 10 - CBS (Lincoln)
  • Channel 42 - Fox (Omaha)

  • Submit a Letter to the Editor
  • Omaha World-Herald
  • Lincoln Journal-Star
  • Daily Nebraskan (UNL)
  • Grand Island Independent
  • Kearney Hub
  • North Platte Telegraph
  • Norfolk Daily News
  • Fremont Tribune
  • Columbus Telegram
  • McCook Daily Gazette
  • Scottsbluff Star-Herald
  • Hastings Tribune

  • Powered by: SoapBlox