Irrelevant Thesis: Two of the stranger scales are the True Response Inconsistency Scale (TRIN)7 and the Variable Response Inconsistency

Scale (VRIN)8. Responses to paired items deemed inconsistent, scores one point on each scale for each pair.

For two statements to be inconsistent, they must be contradictory.

The statements “I love my Father” and “I hate my Father” are

contradictory. Putting forth as inconsistent two statements that do not address the same logical category or are not contradictory, suffers from irrelevant thesis. A pair of items from the VRIN Scale are:

6. My father is a good man, or (if your father is dead) was a good man.

90. I love my father, or (if your father is dead) I loved my father.

The two items neither address the same logical categories nor contradict each other if both are answered “TRUE” or both answered

“FALSE.” The contradictory of “My father is a good man” is “My father is a bad man.” It is possible to hate a father who is good if, for example, he were a missionary or diplomat posted abroad and absent from a child’s life. It is also possible for a child to love a father who is abusive.

The TRIN and VRIN tables may be viewed in their entirety in the footnotes.

Pulling it all together

In the privacy of your own home, you, too, can make your own junk science instruments that are self -validating! Amuse your friends! Develop your own “mental health” snake oil! BROWN’S AMAZING UNIVERSAL SWISS ARMY TOOL OF INTELLECTUAL FRAUD, demonstrated below, incorporates the logical fallacies

identifiable in the MMPI. It is pure junk science that can be adapted to place any label one might want on a person who would take the “test,” while being of virtually no

scientific value. This can be accomplished by using carefully crafted bifurcated multiple scale associations with both responses. High statistical associations with any human trait or activity are ensured by the subject of the three statements.

Although this “test” is obviously ludicrous, the reality is that equally ludicrous items have been used in the “mental health” industry for over fifty years to send people to prison and mental institutions. To be labeled as whatever a test is “designed” to detect, all one has to do, is select an answer for every item included in one of these purported evaluation tests structured to produce false positives. If the intellectual fraud is completely successful, the person evaluated will also accept the false results as true.

One cannot help but be reminded of the successful Nazi propaganda that resulted in

Jews actually purchasing tickets to board trains that would take them to gas chambers.

BROWN’S AMAZING UNIVERSAL SWISS ARMY TOOL OF INTELLECTUAL FRAUD!

1. I am right-handed.

TRUE FALSE

Spouse Abuse Potential Deviant Life Style

Child Abuse Potential Stress Scale

Ego Strength Work Problems Scale

Committed Child Abuse Anxiety Scale Committed Spouse Abuse

2. I am left-handed.

TRUE FALSE

Spouse Abuse Potential Ego Strength Child Abuse Potential

Deviant Life Style Work Problems Scale Stress Scale

Committed Child Abuse Committed Spouse Abuse Anxiety Scale

3. I am breathing.

TRUE FALSE

Spouse Abuse Potential Health Concerns

Child Abuse Potential Lying Scale

Committed Child Abuse Acute Anxiety Committed Spouse Abuse

Deviant Life Style Work Problems Stress Scale Ego Strength Anxiety Scale

Inconsistency/Deception Scale 1. I am right-handed. TRUE 2. I am left-handed. TRUE 1. I am right-handed. FALSE 2. I am left-handed. FALSE

FINDINGS FROM RESPONSES

[Responding TRUE to both items or FALSE to both items would score one point on the Inconsistency/Deception Scale. This sounds reasonable until one considers how special populations could respond. An ambidextrous individual could honestly answer TRUE or FALSE to both questions.

Persons without limbs, by accident or birth defect, could answer FALSE to both questions.]

A person answering TRUE to item 1 would be "diagnosed" as follows:

Respondent’s answers indicate past acts of both child abuse and spouse abuse. Potential to engage in child abuse and spouse abuse is indicated, as are ego strength problems. It is possible to calculate the minimum and maximum scores for each scale created by bifurcation.⁹

Probing for the bottom of the snake pit

Those who may be tempted to dismiss Parts Three and Four of this series as intellectual nit-picking should keep in mind that old adage about knowing a tree by its fruit. The consequences of this intellectual fraud for children, and the organized crime it supports, can be the destruction of their entire lives. Junk science is used to place children on psychoactive drugs, remove them from parental custody, label them as violent or sexual predators, and to justify forced placement in institutions or treatment programs.

This is not the worst atrocity committed by the alliance of political extremists and criminals exploiting the child protection, mental health and social work systems. Parts Five and Six will examine how children and adults are manipulated to lie and provide false testimony that financially benefits the criminal interests and helps political extremists achieve their goals.

Footnotes

1In addition to professional publications and government reports, the popular media also reports horror stories about excesses and incompetence in the child protection system. Media article links to stories may be activated through “Lifting the Veil: Examining the Child Welfare, Foster Care and Juvenile Justice Systems” at:

http://home.rica.net/rthoma/newslink.htm [NOTE: This website http://home.rica.net/

has moved to a new address at http://liftingtheveil.org/.]

---(1) Audio News from Around the Web.

Audio news on the topics of foster care, child welfare and juvenile justice gathered from some of the Web's leading news sources.

(2) Featured article series

A selection of newspaper series exploring child protection, foster care, groups

homes, juvenile justice and more. Included are links to series from the Boston Globe, Sacramento Bee, Las Vegas SUN, and more. Updated March 21, 1999.

(3) 1999 News roundup

Articles on the subjects of child protection, foster care, and juvenile justice drawn from many of the leading newspapers. Articles are arranged in reverse

chronological order, dating back to the beginning of the year. Frequently updated.

(4) 1998 News roundup

News articles dating back to the beginning of 1998.

(5) 1997 News Roundup

News articles dating from June through December 1997.

2Links to STUDIES, SURVEYS, AND AUDITS describing the state of affairs in the administrative divisions of the child protection system may be activated through:

http://home.rica.net/rthoma/studies.htm [NOTE: This website http://home.rica.net/

has moved to a new address at http://liftingtheveil.org/.]

I. Foster Care

(1) Assessing How Well the Foster Care Program In Kansas is Working, Part II:

Funding, Staffing, and Monitoring Issues, Legislative Division of Post Audit, Report 99PA03.2, December 1998. (Download complete PDF report.)

(2) Assessing How Well the Foster Care Program In Kansas is Working, Part I:

Services and Placements, Legislative Division of Post Audit, Report 99PA03.1, November 1998. (Download complete PDF report.)

(3) Foster Care. Tennessee Division of State Audit, Audit 97113, November 1998. (Download complete PDF report.)

(4) Foster Care: Agencies Face Challenges Securing Stable Homes for Children of Substance Abusers. General Accounting Office, GAO/HEHS-98-182,

September 30, 1998.

(5) Foster Care: Implementation of the Multiethnic Placement Act Poses Difficult Challenges. General Accounting Office, GAO/HEHS-98- 204, September 14, 1998.

(6) Verifying Information Provided by the Department of Social and

Rehabilitation Services on its Compliance with the Terms of the Foster Care Lawsuit Settlement Agreement--Monitoring Report #8, Legislative Division of Post Audit, Report 98PA34.2, July 1998. (Complete PDF report.) See also Eye on Kansas for related reports.

(7) Retroactive Claims Under the Title IV-E Foster Care Program in Indiana U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-05-97-00026, January 22, 1998.

(8) Foster Care Training Administrative Costs Claimed for Federal Reimbursement by the California Department of Social Services. U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-09-96-00066, September 4, 1997.

(9) The State of the Children: An Examination of Government-Run Foster Care, Conna Craig and Derek Herbert, Institute for Children, National Center for Policy Analysis, August, 1997.

(10) Report of Costs Allocated to the Title IV-E Foster Care Program (State of Missouri) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-07-97-01027, June 11, 1997.

(11) Foster Care: State Efforts to Improve The Permanency Planning Process Show Some Promise. Letter Report, GAO/HEHS-97-73, May 7, 1997.

(12) Summary Report on Nationwide Audit of Training Contract and

Administrative Costs Charged to Department of Health and Human Services Supported Programs. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-02-95-02002, April 25, 1997.

(12) Foster Care: State Efforts to Expedite Permanency Hearings and Placement Decisions. Testimony, GAO/T-HEHS-97-76, February 27, 1997.

(13) Hevesi Audit Find Unsanitary Conditions At HRA Group Homes. Office of New York City Comptroller Alan G. Hevesi, Preliminary Audit Findings,

November 28, 1996. Auditors were barred and ejected by HRA personnel from seven homes during unannounced visits. Roaches, rodent droppings, spoiled and outdated food, chemicals stored with food and a lack of inventory records were found at group homes run by the Human Resources Administration during a follow-up audit by the Comptroller.

(14) Allocation of Title IV-E Training Costs - Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-05-96-00013, August 20, 1996.

(15) Follow-Up Audit Report on The Human Resources Administration's Foster Care Tracking and Claiming Systems. Office of New York City Comptroller Alan G. Hevesi, Bureau of Financial Audit EDP Division, 7F 96-128, June 24, 1996.

Details a pattern of gross fiscal mismanagement, and the use of "generic

addresses" for foster children by the New York City Administration for Children's Services.

(16) Core Dataset Project: Child Welfare Service Histories. Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago. April 8, 1996. (16) Review of Missouri Claims for Training Costs. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A- 07-95-01008, February 21, 1996.

(17) Retroactive Claims for the Title IV-E Foster Care Program Resubmitted by

the Missouri Department of Social Services. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-07-95-01010, February 20, 1996.

(18) Maintenance Payments Retained by Child Placing Agencies in the Texas Foster Care Program. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-06-95-00035, February 6, 1996.

(19) Review of Rising Costs in the Emergency Assistance Program. U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-01-95-02503, October 6, 1995.

(20) The Wisconsin Study of Youth Aging Out of Out-Of-Home Care: A Portrait of Children About to Leave Care. Mark Courtney and Irving Piliavin, School of Social Work and Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin-Madison, September, 1995.

(21) Improvements Needed in Monitoring Child Placing Agencies in the Texas Foster Care Program. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-06-94-00041, August 5, 1995.

(22) Foster Care: Health Needs of Many Young Children Are Unknown and Unmet. Letter Report, GAO/HEHS-95-14, May 26, 1995.

(23) Report to the General Assembly: Selected Issues in Foster Care. South Carolina Legislative Audit Council, Reference: LAC/94-2, January, 1995.

(24) Respite Care Services for Foster Parents: Six Case Studies. U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Inspection, August 1994. Summary

(25) Foster Care: Parental Drug Abuse Has Alarming Impact on Young Children.

Letter Report, GAO/HEHS-94-89, April 4, 1994.

(26) Audit of Title IV-E Foster Care Eligibility in California for the Period October 1, 1988 through September 30, 1991. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit A-09-92-00086, March 18, 1994.

(27) Review of Retroactive Foster Care Title IV-E Claims Submitted by the Missouri Department of Social Services. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Audit (A-07-92- 00601, March 8, 1994.

(28) Residential Care: Some High-Risk Youth Benefit, But More Study Needed.

Letter Report, HEHS-94-56, January 28, 1994.

(29) Foster Care: Federal Policy on Title IV-E Share of Training Costs. Letter Report, GAO/HRD-94-7, November 3, 1993.

(30) Cohort 2: A Study of Families and Children Entering Foster Care 1991-1993. Child Welfare Partnership, Portland State University

(31) Cohort2 Study: Branch Level Reports - State Summary and individual SOSCF Branch Level Information, including tables and graphs.

(32) Cohort2 Study: Final Report - Full Text of the Final Report, including tables and graphs.

(33) Cohort2 - Data Maps - Maps reflecting Level of Vulnerability and Family

Factors.

(34) Cohort2 - PowerPoint© Slide Show - Slide show overview of Cohort2 Findings

(35) Using Relatives for Foster Care. Richard P. Kusserow, Office of the HHS Inspector General, OEI-06-90-02390, 1992.

In document Compendium Involving Organized Crime and the use of Psychiatry (Page 85-91)