Child Abuse-Neglect Victims Guidance

[eek40]

You know what MM?

I cannot believe you post things that should remain confidential.

I don't care that you're not using any names.

We know where you live, we know where you work. It doesn't take much more than that to figure out who you may be talking about.

Your lack of responsibility in regards to confidentiality scares me.

I work with children with issues also. And that's about all I would dare say on this board.

It's a matter of knowing what is right and what is wrong. I believe you are being irresponsibly wrong.

Wow, I am surprised at this post, as a CASA I may post about a case that is frustrating me but there is nothing that would allow anyone to figure out who I was talking about, regardless of where I work or live! I sent Marla a long email for us to vent back and forth and I still would have no clue who she was talking about nor would she me...right marlasmom?
If you are looking up that much detail on someone that seems like your issue.
Aimee

 

[DisMN]

You have a good point BUT......anywhere else in the country this might not be much of anything... HOWEVER......MM lives and does her "job" in the general area of Disneyworld. What sort of website is this she's been posting about her clients on? A Disney site.

It's entirely possible that someone could recognize their own family from what MM has written here about them. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together when MM has herself been so free with personal information about herself and others.

I think some of you are really allowing this to be a bigger issue than it needs to be. Let it go already.

BTW, I doubt 50 billion people read this board daily. And I don't think I, even if I worked hard at it, would be able to figure out who the heck these people are that marlasmom is talking about. You're talking about slim to none chances, and reporting marla to local authorities, just to rat her out and cause her to potentially lose her job, is just using your power as a "mandated reporter" for revenge because she didn't agree with you. While you have made some really good points, I think she's gotten the point, and won't be discussing things like this again in the future.

What ought to be taken into consideration is that marla probably meant well, and obviously has a heart for the kids she works with. Why beat this thing to death?

 

[CRB#33]

Wow, I am surprised at this post, as a CASA I may post about a case that is frustrating me but there is nothing that would allow anyone to figure out who I was talking about, regardless of where I work or live!

Good for you. As it should be.

If you are looking up that much detail on someone that seems like your issue.
Aimee

I don't need to look up any details on Marlasmom. They've been here and other places. Along with lots of other people.

My issue?

No, I believe it's the issues of an innocent child and innocent children.

That says enough.

 

[nuke]

Why beat this to death?

Because people have been telling her not to share this information for months now and she chooses to ignore the advice. She obviously doesn't GET it.

 

[VanBrujah]

sigh...Van Brujah....as I said before, I read MM's posts. they're vague enough so that no one could identify the people involved.

They shouldn't be posted at all, no matter how vague.
Which part of that don't you get?

indeed, if MM is correct, and family court in florida is not closed to the public, what she posted on this board is a matter of public record and therefore no client confidentiality attaches.

She is seldom, if ever, correct.


However, assuming that anything she posted IS public record, one would still have to go and look it up - you'd have to know who you were looking up, and what you were looking for. You can't just go to the courthouse and ask to see the records of, to borrow your example, "two boys. the father has custody. the mother ran off to another state to avoid paying child support. when she came back to this state, she was thrown in jail. so she filed a habeus petition alleging the father wouldn't let her see the boys. the boys are aged 12 and 10."


You also wouldn't look for it on The DIS Discussion Forums, would you?

No, you wouldn't. Because it doesn't belong there.

 

[ChrisnSteph]

You have a good point BUT......anywhere else in the country this might not be much of anything... HOWEVER......MM lives and does her "job" in the general area of Disneyworld. What sort of website is this she's been posting about her clients on? A Disney site.

It's entirely possible that someone could recognize their own family from what MM has written here about them. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together when MM has herself been so free with personal information about herself and others.

While I understand what you are saying, I seriously doubt that any of the children in the cases MM spoke of or the "familes" involved are taking their kids to WDW and discussing all things Disney on this website. Again, a slim to zero chance. I just think MM meant well, and she's being bashed much harder than she needs to be. Again, I see both sides, but I feel some people here are going above and beyond in order to be "right".

 

[Lessa of Pern]

Chris, MM's got a prior history with some of the people doing the bashing. if it had been someone else who posted the remarks...half of this thread wouldn't even exist. and that's the sad truth.

VB, I won't bother to debate with you. the animosity you have for MM must be clouding your thinking.

 

[ChrisnSteph]

She is seldom, if ever, correct.


However, assuming that anything she posted IS public record, one would still have to go and look it up - you'd have to know who you were looking up, and what you were looking for. You can't just go to the courthouse and ask to see the records of, to borrow your example, "two boys. the father has custody. the mother ran off to another state to avoid paying child support. when she came back to this state, she was thrown in jail. so she filed a habeus petition alleging the father wouldn't let her see the boys. the boys are aged 12 and 10."

You also wouldn't look for it on The DIS Discussion Forums, would you?

No, you wouldn't. Because it doesn't belong there.

EXACTLY! You don't have enough information to know whose case to ask for, because the info you have is too VAGUE. That's the point. It's not as easy to identify these people MM is discussing as everyone seems to think is. Your issues with MM seem to be a bit more personal, don't you think?

 

[RobinMarie]

I really do not understand the debate. You should not post any information which may be considered confidential. It's not up to anyone here to acertain whether or not the information is vague enoughto be posted without breaking any confidentiality guidelines.

To the OP, if you seek guidance it should be from your supervisor. Good luck.

 

[CRB#33]

You know, I don't give two hoots if I'm "right."

I work with children daily with "issues." All sorts of them. All different kinds of cases.

I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am allowed to discuss their issues with very, very few people. I know who those people are and not a one of them is here. I hear the word "confidentiality" on a daily basis.

I wouldn't dare post about these children here, vague or not. And very few people even know where I'm from.

It's called taking responsibility for what I know is the right thing to do. Not being "right."

It sounds to me like there are people here who are determined to be "right," but it sure isn't anyone with the same feelings on the subject as me.

 

[marlasmom]

Did my previous thread get poofed? I said that some of the people who are posting here have issues with me or think they have issues with me. How they have the prescience to determine my motives is completely beyond me. They are simply pot stirring for sheer pleasure. I responded to someone who said the GAL didn't stay with the case long enough and that things had changed and I said I was mandated to see children at a minimum of once a month. I also said that I see one family only once a month because it's not necessary and I see another very frequently because it is necessary.

I know the system and I could never figure out who Eek was talking about nor could she determine who I was talking about.

It's interesting though that Van Brujah posted on another board that he hoped my daughter would die. He gleaned the info that she was very sick from this board and possibly another one that he can read but is not permitted to post on. That really upset me. She almost did die. I really don't give a * what he thinks. If he does think.

 

[VanBrujah]

"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest."

- Mark Twain



"I never did give anybody hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell."

- Harry S. Truman

 

[nuke]

EXACTLY! You don't have enough information to know whose case to ask for, because the info you have is too VAGUE. That's the point. It's not as easy to identify these people MM is discussing as everyone seems to think is. Your issues with MM seem to be a bit more personal, don't you think?

No most of don't have enough information to figure out who she is talking about but we don't know who is reading here. What if one of these kids neighbors or friends reads here. There might be enough "vague" information for them to figure it out. Then who's best interest is it in? Not the childs.

 

[janette]

I went back and reread everything MM posted on this thread.

MM posted very general statements, nothing that could be used to identify any of the children she represents, so you can all rest assured no confidentiality was viiolated.

you're right, family court proceedings are closed to the public. but what you don't realize is that when a family court makes a ruling, they often publish a decision. they hide the identity of the participants by referring to them by their initials, but the underlying facts are part of the court's dedcision and are published.

I don't think it's a good idea for her to share the details simply because people who've posted on this thread believe she's done something wrong. she hasn't, of course, but it's a better idea not to do something if people are going to accuse you of wrongdoing.

How often do you talk about court cases you are involved in on a public board? Even those that are closed it doesn't seem to be something I remember ever seeing.

Confidentiality is a very important, I do very boring work and I doubt anyone would even be interested in it but I don't talk even in generalities in a public board and very rarely say anything even in more private company. We've been asked to add a confidentiality statement to every email I send from work.

Privacy issues are a very hot button in our society right now. Sharing your own personal information is up to you but sharing someone else's is another matter.

 

[Lessa of Pern]

I don't post about my cases because they're very boring. do you really care how many thousands of gallons of benzene leaked out of the pipeline ...or the police officers who claim to have been exposed to hazardous substances leaking out of the truck parked in front of the... or who's responsible for the MTBE in the groundwater under the proeprty located at...

but lawyers frequently swap "war stories."

 

[CRB#33]

but lawyers frequently swap "war stories."

Oh well, now that makes it all good and okay.

Come on.

Teachers swap student stories in the faculty room too. Is it right? Absolutely not and they can get in huge amounts of trouble for doing it.

Just because people do it doesn't make it right.

Especially people that work with children or doctors or lawyers.

You should know better.