We have come to the conclusion through our own experiences, case histories of other people going through the corrupt CPS circus and other reports that anyone who is going through a CPS A&N case should be cautious in regards to any guadian ad litem or child's attorney who has been appointed by the judge in your case.
On the surface, the idea of someone representing your child in a CPS case sounds good. You may even get a false sense of security that they will do the right thing by your child. Don't be fooled, in most every instance, they are in collusion with CPS.
They are a part of the scheme to take children. We have seen time and time again where the guardian ad litem or child's attorney is not only friends with the judge and some of the CPS workers but they also belong to the same "community" organizations and sometimes, they even donate money, services or their time to foster and adoption agencies.
That should never be and it is a direct conflict of interest but that is how it often works.These guardian ad litems or child's attorney spends very little time with the child to even know what would be in the child's best interest. They don't know the child at all. They know very little about anything except what they read in the reports they get from CPS. Can you say - biased reports?The definition of a guardian ad litem - might be call the child's attorney because they are lawyers in some cases:A person appointed only for the purposes of prosecuting or defending an action on behalf of another such as a child or mentally-challenged person. Also called ad litem.
This is usally granted to the child’s attorney.A few things about immunity for guradian ad litems and attorneys for children (borrowed from https://protectingourchildrenfrombeingsold.wordpress.com/tag/guardian-ad-litems-can-be-sued/) :Guardian ad litems and Appointed Counsel are not protected by immunity. In Wiederholt v Fisher, 485 N.W. 2d 442, 169 Wis. 2d 524 (1992) “In child custody matter, guardian ad litem does not represent child per se; rather, guardian ad litem’s statutory duty is to represent concept of child’s best interest.” When those guardian ad litems don’t bother to meet the minium standards – they become subject to liabilty. (Collins v Tabet, 111 N.M. 391,806 P 2nd 40 (N.M. 1990)
In other words when a Guardian ad litem just goes through the motions and does not really work the case they can and should be held liable. Most Guardians don’t work for the child, they work for Child Protection Services.According to Bonds, 64, N.M. at 345,328 P. 2nd at 599 the appointment as guardian ad litem of a minor child is in the postion for the highest trust and no attorney should ever blindly enter in an appearance as guardian ad litem and allow a matter to proceed without a full and complete investigation into the facts and law so that his clinets will be fairly and competently represented and their rights fully and adequately protected and preserved…. Bonds proposed that a guardian ad litem holds a position of the highest trust and suggest that he or she is a fiduciary.
Judge Donnelly compares the position of Guardian ad litem to that of a general guardian or conservator and is subject to liability to their wards for the harm resulting from ordinary negligence in the discharge of their duties. They are actually charged with a higher standard of care than are other people involved.In Downs v Sawtelle, 574,F 2d 1 ( 1st Cir.1978) a federal judge in the Court of Appeals ruled that immunity was inappropriate for guardians because they are considered private parties and they are not confronted with the pressures of office, the decision making of the threat of liability facing governors or high level public officials.According to J.W.F. v Schoolcraft, 763 P.2nd 1217 (Utah, 1987) A guardian ad litems job is to put themselves in the shoes of the child and look at the factors as the child would if he or she were old enough and their judgment was mature enough to make a decision.