dhhs child protection lies about dr. carl baum
DESCRIPTION
DHHS Child Protection Lies About Dr. Carl BaumTRANSCRIPT
Child Protection Lies about what Dr. Baum Found
-----Original Message-----From: Carl Baum, MD <[email protected]>To: Eileen King <[email protected]>Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>Sent: Tue, Jun 28, 2011 9:47 amSubject: Re: in the interest of Mila Malenko
Mr. Dalton:
I am writing to confirm Ms. King's statements, below. Ms. Austin completely misinterpreted my clarification of minor details in my sworn affidavit. Apparently she has failed to understand the simple and central tenets of this affidavit, that NO amount of methamphetamine should appear in the urine of a child, and that no one has explained this finding. I have absolutely not retracted my affidavit, and would be happy to testify to that effect.
As a mandated reporter of child abuse and neglect in my state of Connecticut, I am shocked that DHHS has closed Mila's case without a full investigation, and urge the Commissioner to re-open the investigation immediately.
Sincerely,
Carl Baum
______________________________________________________ Carl Baum, MD, FAAP, FACMT | Associate Professor of Pediatrics | T 203.641.TOXI (8694) | http://toxikid.orgYale University School of Medicine | Center for Children's Environmental Toxicology | Yale-New Haven Children's Hospital
From: Carl Baum <[email protected]>To: Eileen King <[email protected]>Cc: [email protected]: Fri, Jul 8, 2011 3:46 pmSubject: Re: Handrahan/Malenko case: From Carl Baum, M.D. regarding his Affidavit on NMS Labs Toxicology Report
Ms. Potter: I am writing to confirm Eileen's update, below. I would be happy to provide testimony as the need arises. Thank you for your attention to this matter./ On Jul 8, 2011, at 3:31 PM, Eileen King wrote: Dear Ms. Potter: Dr. Baum asked me to pass this along to you. He spoke with Gov. LePage's assistant Micki Mullen today and affirmed his affidavit to her.
-----Original Message-----From: Eileen King <[email protected]>To: [email protected]: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]: Tue, Jun 28, 2011 8:05 amSubject: in the interest of Mila Malenko
June 28, 2011
Re: In the Interest of Mila Malenko, DOB 11/29/2006
Dear Mr. Dalton,
I am taking the liberty of writing to express my astonishment that the DHHS investigation regarding Mila Malenko's undisputed exposure to l-methamphetamines has been closed without a finding. As you know, the toxicology report from NMS Laboratories found 56ng per mL of l-methamphetamines in Mila Malenko's urine sample, a reportable level.
In May 2011, I asked Carl Baum, M.D., an Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Director of the Center for Children's Environmental Toxicology at Yale-New Haven Children's Hospital to read the NMS Toxicology report and prepare an affidavit setting forth his observations and concerns (if any), which he did. Dr. Baum's Affidavit, dated May 26, 2011, is attached and he has been cc'd on this email.
Last week, Dr. Baum advised me that Rebecca Austin, the DHHS case worker assigned to the investigation, had sent him a letter and asked to speak with him in order to clarify some points in his May 26 Affidavit. They spoke on June 22nd and afterwards Dr. Baum wrote to me that
"[Rebecca] now understands that I cannot rule OUT the possibility of meth lab exposure, and that I cannot rule IN an inhaler as the explanation."
Dr. Baum and I also spoke about this in a phone conversation that day and he repeated this statement to me.
Today I was told that DHHS has closed the investigation without a finding, based on the alleged representation by DHHS that Dr. Baum has stepped back from, repudiated, softened or otherwise weakened the opinion he expressed in his sworn Affidavit as an expert in children's toxicology and exposure to illegal drugs.
I immediately called Dr. Baum to verify whether this was true, since today's news was in complete contradiction with our telephone conversations and email exchanges on June 22.
Dr. Baum confirmed my understanding of his Affidavit and our conversations: he has _not_ retreated or backed down or weakened his opinion of the troubling questions raised by the NMS Toxicology Report. He said emphatically that no young child should have that amount of l-meth in his or her urine. And he restated what he told Rebecca Austin: "I cannot rule OUT the possibility of meth lab exposure, and I cannot rule IN an inhaler as the explanation."
Either Rebecca Austin did not understand what Dr. Baum was at pains to explain to her or she has mischaracterized and/or distorted it.
Mr. Dalton, I expect that you will want to know for yourself what Dr. Baum actually said and thinks about the high levels of l-meth in Mila Malenko's urine. I urge you to contact him immediately. His cell phone is 203-641-8694. It is unconscionable that a child in need of protection would be subjected to this poor quality of investigation in which facts are either misunderstood or misrepresented. This child deserves better.
We have a child: who has had high levels of l-meth in her urine with no plausible explanation for how it got
there. whose father has plead guilty to shoplifting children's cough syrup. whose father wrote in an email that he never, ever uses over the counter inhalers on his
daughter and forbids the mother to ever do so, either. whose father has removed Mila from school and appears to be holding her hostage in
their home. about whom the reputable agency, Spurwink, had concerns regarding sexual abuse,
recommending supervised visitation for her protection: a recommendation rejected without explanation by DHHS.
who told her mother that her father had hit her in the forehead with a metal pan, and the bruise documented by an ER visit. Her recantation was obviously compelled.
whose father has forbidden her to see and spend time with her mother (who has joint legal custody and court ordered parenting time) in direct violation of the current court order.
whose father and his representative have told this child's mother that DHHS now requires her visits to be supervised and who have produced an "official" letter purportedly on DHHS letterhead and using your name, Mr. Dalton, as the authority. This "official letter from DHHS" was shown to police officers who wrote your name on a piece of paper and gave it to Dr. Handrahan. Based on this purported "official letter from DHHS" the officers refused to enforce the current court order that gives the child time with her mother.
As I understand, DHHS at no time has written any such letter. I am surprised that DHHS does not have a problem with individuals forging an "official" dispositional letter in DHHS' name and showing it to police officers in order to keep a child from her mother who has the lawful right to see and parent her daughter.
It is abundantly clear that Mila Malenko needs immediate protection. Domestic violence lethality risk scales and the wealth of information that we (and I assume DHHS) have on domestic violence indicate that any sort of hostage taking is a high risk indicator for lethality. Moreover, this is emotionally abusive to Mila and no doubt has caused psychological harm to her. She has not seen her mother in over a month. How can a small child who loves her mother make sense of this? What is she being told?
Neither DHHS nor Mr. Malenko have given a plausible reason for Mila to have 56ng per mL of l-meth in her urine. No child should have this amount in their urine and typical over the counter inhaler use does not explain this high level.
The fraudulent production of an "official DHHS" dispositional letter that has been shown to the police must be investigated and prosecuted.
The record of email exchanges, meetings and other exchanges between Mr. Waxman and any personnel at DHHS need to be preserved and kept in the case files. Dr. Handrahan should be given access to the case files as is her right as a parent with shared legal custody.
My organization has been approached by the BBC for a television production about child abuse in America and how children are being failed by the very systems mandated to protect them. This case unfortunately is a good example of how child protection services, through influence and apathy and poor investigative practices, has left a child in a home where she obviously at risk.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely yours,
Eileen KingRegional DirectorJustice For Children - DC1875 Connecticut Ave NW Ste 710Washington, DC 20009202-462-4688 voice815-301-5516 faxwww.justiceforchildren.org