Colorado Department of Human Services (CDHS) is under great scrutiny by Colorado legislators demanding that they fix the broken systems of child welfare and CPS (Child Protective Services). Colorado’s Child Welfare System Interim Study Committee has met each month this summer hearing testimony from various system leaders and constituents who the system has failed. Legislators are demanding change.

This story is about one aspect of CDHS’s policy negligence and a partial explanation of why it fails to protect the health, safety, and well-being of our children. The story is an often repeated one where a special interest group influenced legislation to serve their own selfish interest instead of laws that protect the common good or a child’s best interest.

It starts with the murder of a 10 old boy by his father who then committed suicide. Because the parents had been embroiled in a multi-year very ugly custody battle, CDHS had many previous contacts with the family. When CDHS has prior contact with a family, state law requires CDHS to assemble a Child Fatality Review Team and issue a Child Fatality Report. CRFT 19-074 in this case.

CFRT 19-074 listed parental alienation as an identified risk and contributing factor in the boy’s homicide. The report identified a systemic gap in that a definition of parental alienation was not included in Colorado Children’s Code abuse and neglect definition. The report recommended adding a definition of parental alienation in Colorado Children’s code definitions of abuse and neglect.

Because of CFRT 19-074 recommendations, CDHS formed a Domestic Violence & Child Welfare (DV&CW) Task Force in part to follow through with the recommendations. This is where this CDHS policy starts to be corrupted by special interest. The special interests were championed by those associated with MomsFightBack.org (MFB) (a DV advocacy group that want policymakers believe that moms can do no wrong). MFB plays the victim card with great success.

First, some quick context. For the past decade, I have advocated for equal shared parenting in Colorado. In 2015, I was able to get SB15-129 Preserving Parent-Child Relationships sponsored and introduced. While the initial bill draft was overly ambitious, after it was watered down to pretty much nothing, it passed the Senate unanimously. The bill then died in House Judiciary Committee even though the Chair was the bill sponsor because two advocacy groups came out in force to oppose the bill. The Family Law section of the Colorado Bar Association (CBA) and domestic violence (DV) advocates. Equal shared parenting is opposed by lawyers and DV advocates in every state.

DV advocates regularly lie about, defame, and falsely accuse those who oppose their policies to discredit and silence the opposition. Nationally, it is SOP (standard operating procedure) for DV advocates to lie about the intent of a policy, the data, and those who oppose them. DV advocates are well funded by VAWA and organized. In 2015, it was rumored that there was a restraining order against me keeping me from the Capitol. Their standard MO.

During the first public DV&CW Zoom meeting in September 2020, MFB members in the chat, wrote that 50/50 was wrong, parental alienation was junk science, and that false allegations of abuse rarely happened. (Knowing the audience, I was cautious and cited data to the contrary. Here’s the chat transcript. Later through the CORA request, I learned that my chat responses were considered “disrespectful” and used as a prelude of defamation to come.) Two weeks after the meeting, the CDHS task force facilitators issued updated value guidelines that stated “parental alienation and false allegations of abuse were…distractions from the purpose of the group.”

Not only were the updated guidelines contrary to the recommendations in the CFRT report, but it also falsely alleges the facilitators “reviewed information available on these issues…”. This false statement is an example of how CDHS is heavily influenced and misled by bad actor, extremist DV advocates to reach its negligent policy position on parental alienation and false allegations of abuse.

At the second Zoom meeting, participants were assigned to breakout rooms. Being fully aware of the revised guidelines, the target on my back, and the audience, I was on my best behavior. No matter. Bad actors don’t need to substantiate their lies. They know how powerful their false allegations are and have the relationships to ensure that they work.  Here is the task force facilitator advancing their lies about me. She claims “he is displaying characteristics common among domestic violence perpetrators and his agenda is to undermine efforts that hold people like him accountable…he intimidates others and makes the meeting space unsafe.” Can you imagine a more damning allegation than that to an advocate in this space? It’s wrong, a complete lie, a fabrication, and diminishes CDHS’ integrity.

A week later, I received this email reprimand for my “behavior”.  I waited to respond because I didn’t want to negatively impact anyone who was associated with me. Here is my email response three weeks later.

Lying about, defaming, and falsely accusing others is SOP for DV extremist advocates. But the responsibility of advancing policy that is based on reliable data, evidence, and science is directly on the shoulders of policymakers in CDHS to properly inform Colorado legislators. Legislators must be able to count on CDHS doing its due diligence.

When CDHS leadership fails to ensure that CDHS does its due diligence and instead relies on gender ideologies, falsehoods, and misinformation, they betray the public trust. When CDHS policies are not founded in reliable data and the wealth of peer reviewed social science that is published in leading public policy, legal, and mental heath journals, instead of protecting our children, CDHS exacerbates rates of child abuse and domestic violence.

In March, as two House bills (HB23-1108 & HB23-1178) that were based in gender ideologies and falsehoods had been introduced, I sent this letter to Kevin Neimond, CDHS Chief Policy and Communications Officer, informing him of CDHS’ negligence. Unfortunately, because my character had already been defamed, Kevin did not reply.

Because CDHS did not do its due diligence on parental alienation, because CDHS instead relied on the ideological beliefs and falsehoods from a few extremist DV advocates, CDHS policy is negligent in protecting the safety and well-being of Colorado’s children and families.

A large part of fixing the broken systems of child welfare and CPS will require CDHS to do its due diligence and support domestic violence policy that is:

  • Inclusive: All victims, regardless of gender, deserve to be heard and to be helped.
  • Fairness: All parties, regardless of gender, are entitled to fairness and due process.
  • Science: Domestic violence programs should be based on reliable data, evidence, and science.

Until policy is inclusive and fair, regardless of gender, and based in reliable data, evidence, and science, CDHS will continue to fail our children and families.