let it be entered into the official record



1.9. Space —————————————  1.11 Eve >>

It’s been kind of a crappy month/week/whatever but to bring you all some levity after my moaning I have *FINALLY* completed my latest review/recap. Here there be gifs. SO MANY gifs. I’d say I’m sorry but I’m really not. This ep is so riddled with boyband!Mulder and ridiculous effects it would be a crime not to gif the shit out of it. 

This one’s for Max Fenig’s hat. ONWARDS

Keep reading

Messi 500: The Legend Continues

With only 28 years, Leo Messi held tomorrow Wednesday at the Camp Nou his 500th game as a player of FC Barcelona , a spectacular figure that will let you enter the exclusive club of 500, made ​​to date by Xavi , Puyol , Iniesta , Migueli and Valdes . The peculiarity is that Leo joins this ranking, having broken all the possible records and being considered by many as the best footballer of all time, thanks, among other things, his 424 goals in this five hundred games on their four Golden Balls (which in a few days will be five) or its 24 goals in finals.

Together with 5 trophies

The celebration of the 500 official matches of the Argentinian player will have the number five as a common axis. He ends 2015 with five cups won by the team, five trophies in which the participation of Leo Messi has been the capital and essential for achieving a new record year.

Court Summary: Guest Post by Andrew of Fosterwee

“I’ve attended Blitzen’s permanency hearings for 4.5 years but don’t understand the legalities around them.  I especially don’t understand Sandy’s case or what happened in court yesterday, but won’t let that stop me from sharing my muddled perspective.

Act One was the typical Kafkaesque learned helplessness absurdity that defines family court.   The sworn permanency report was entered into the official record.  Rebecca’s lawyer noted that most of the information in the permanency report was factually wrong, including listing the wrong judge and all the wrong case workers.

Nobody seemed surprised by this.

The judge asked the agency case worker who submitted the report to take the stand.  Rebecca’s lawyer questioned her under oath.  The case worker agreed that the report she had submitted into evidence was largely inaccurate.  The reason that it was inaccurate is that many (most?) of the fields are automatically filled in through an online ACS database called Connections.  The case workers aren’t able to edit the auto-filled fields so they knowingly submit inaccurate information.

I was stunned.  Nobody else in the courtroom seemed at all surprised.

Rebecca’s lawyer went through the permanency report section by section pointing out errors.  The case worker, new on the job almost by definition, acknowledged that she didn’t know much about the case but agreed that most of the listed information was both auto-filled and wrong.

Nobody suggested that any of the data be corrected or that the submission of correct data to the court was either preferable or possible.

(Quick learned helpless tangent.  I was recently in the tiny office of a family court lawyer and it was sweltering.  The court lawyer was complaining about the heat and said that she’d been miserably hot in that office every day for three years and that nothing could be done about it.  Our lawyer noticed a thermostat in the office and suggested that the court lawyer turn it to a lower temperature.  Impossible, said that court lawyer, those thermostats don’t work.   My lawyer tried the thermostat. Cool air immediately flooded the room. Court lawyer was ecstatic and called it life-changing.  In three years she had never actually tried the thermostat.  Nobody in Rebecca’s courtroom had ever tried to edit a permanency report in Connections; they exist in a world where nothing works.)

Act Two was about Sandy’s permanency goal.  The judge announced the continued goal of adoption. All parties agreed.  As an afterthought, the attorney for birth mom suggested that the goal also be listed as return to parent.  The judge agreed that return to parent was also Sandy’s goal.   ACS lawyer said fine, concurrent planning, as long as the record reflects that the real permanency goal is adoption.  Everyone affirmed again that Sandy’s real permanency goal is adoption, but that reunification was also a goal

This was one of several parts of the hearing that I’m confused about.   What does it mean to have two diametrically opposite permanency goals? Isn’t that similar to having no permanency goal?  Noncurrent planning, as Carrie calls it.

Act Three was where things got surreal and depressing. The judge asked if anyone wanted to make a motion to change visitation plan.   Nobody did – not birth mom, Rebecca, Sandy’s law guardian, the agency or ACS.  It looked like the hearing was over.

Then the judge made a speech and said that she was changing the visitation schedule anyway and that Sandy should have unsupervised community visits with birth mom.  The judge called them sandwich visits, meaning either they’d begin and end at the agency or that Sandy will live forever sandwiched between worlds and never be able to attach to the bread.  

The moment the judge uttered the word “unsupervised,” three lawyers leapt up with shocked looks and began to lawyer-scream at the judge.

The ACS attorney was stunned, adamant and fierce.  She said this was unheard of and couldn’t happen.  She mentioned the parallel hearing taking place and suggested the judge should listen to that testimony first.  She talked about evidence the judge should read, with experts saying that unsupervised visits were a bad idea.

Rebecca’s attorney was passionate and focused her arguments on Sandy’s safety.  She and Rebecca are fully knowledgeable about the history of the case and she cited many reasons why unsupervised visits would fly in the face of the established facts.    

Sandy’s attorney argued that it didn’t make sense to switch Sandy’s schedule now and gently-but-firmly offered the compromise of holding the visitation change in abeyance pending the result of the other hearing.

I felt sure that the combination of the three attorney’s powerful arguments would convince the judge to postpone her plan.   But no. The judge insisted that unsupervised community visits begin now, for the first time in Sandy’s life, over the objections of ACS, the agency, the foster parent and the law guardian.

Stunningly, the judge seemed to base her decision on a sentence in the permanency report that suggested that birth mom visits at the agency were going well.  Yes, that’s the discredited permanency report riddled with inaccuracies, written by the new case worker with help from auto-fill.

The judge also noted that this case would go on for a long time, seemingly tipping her hand to some of her upcoming rulings.  

Rebecca, through her attorney, asked the judge what this meant in the big picture.  Is the goal still adoption?  How long will her life and Sandy’s life remain on hold?  I didn’t hear an answer, or any acknowledgement that permanency matters in the life of a child or a foster parent.

I’m devastated and furious that Sandy has spent all 1200 of her days in foster care.    I don’t see a path out for years to come.  I believe that Sandy will spend her fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh birthdays without permanency or security which will have long-term consequences for her developing brain.

Sandy is a powerless three year-old whose fate is in the hands of judges she’ll never meet.  We, Rebecca’s Fosterhood community, have experience, relative power and a collection of privileges.  How can we activate to support Sandy, Blitzen’s siblings and the children, parents and foster parents trapped in a system that damages all of us?”