The complaint has been investigated and
resolved to the customer's satisfactionResolved Hillsborough County School Board — ESE Services
resolved to the customer's satisfaction
MALPRACTICE AND ILLEGAL RENDERING OF SERVICES BY HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD CHILD FIND FDLRS OF TAMPA
I would like to register a formal complaint against Tampa the Hillsborough County School Board and the Tampa division of CHILD FIND for malpractice, misdiagnosis of condition, fraud, excessive tests and treatment, practicing medicine without a license and quality of care.
I received a statement from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida indicating that my son [Christian Smith DOB 03/08/08] received multiple evaluations. Further research showed one of the providers to be FDLRS / CHILD FIND. When I contacted the department by email, Robin Elting [School Psychologist] responded by telephone. I made her aware that in no way was I contacted, as required by law, regarding my son's alleged behavioral issues. I made clear that there is an existing court order preventing these actions. She stated that the matter was between myself and the Mother, who is the Respondent in the case. She also stated that prior to my mail, she had no way to contact me.
Robin Elting stated that she would contact me with information regarding the person(s) responsible for my son's treatment. After I contacted her supervisor, It was made clear that she is the person responsible.
PLEASE NOTE: Robin Elting stated that the mother informed her of plans to gain sole decision making authority. Of course the mother was unsuccessful. However, this is clear indication that Robin Elting was aware of the Father’s presence in the life of the minor child. At no time, before or after, did anyone from the Hillsborough County School Board make any attempt to contact me as the Father. Why? When in the course of the IEP I furnished guidelines showing that reasonable attempts were to be made in contacting the father per HCSB and Child Find regulations the board changed the subject. Why?
I have been provided with no evidence of the FDLRS program's attempt to follow their own guidelines and protocol in verifying the existence and identity of the Father. Because my three year old son is not able to self advocate, he has been used as a guinea pig in order to increase the FDLRS / CHILD FIND quota for further funding. It is my belief that the Mother is attempting to have my son declared as a ESE candidate for the purposes of financial gain. Although the signature of her email reads that she is a school psychologist, Robin Elting is not a licensed psychologist according to the Florida Department of Health website. It is my belief that both of these suspects are in collusion.
It is interesting that Robin Elting stated that she was informed by the mother of her attempts to return to court in order to gain sole decision making authority. This statement indicates that she was aware of the existence of the Father. The school psychologist stated that a skill to be "worked on" is sitting still. Please inform me of a daycare facility where three year old children are immune from this. Furthermore, there are no incident reports on file regarding my son in his present daycare facility [Kiddie Campus]. According to the Hillsborough Daycare Licensing Department, previous records from the Tadpole's Daycare Facility, where my son was previously enrolled, have been mysteriously lost. In our brief conversation, Ms. Elting made clear that she was unaware of my son's present daycare facility.
Because the Mother is a Caucasian female, the unsupported allegation made regarding her own son for monetary compensation was accepted without question. I provide medical, dental as well as vision coverage for my son. My child support payments are current. As the Petitioner, I reopened my son's case [08-DR-013201] and successfully increased our time sharing. My name is listed on the emergency contact list at his daycare facility. My contact information is available in my son's medical record with his pediatrician. My name is listed on his birth certificate. How is it possible, that no information was available for CHILD FIND to contact the Father?
Please refer to the enclosed documentation. Not only has this been a display of the unnecessary treatment of a minor, it has also clearly shown racial and gender bias on behalf of FDLRS / CHILD FIND agents. The Mother has been arrested and served time in jail and prison, on multiple occasions, for drug related offenses. The Mother's eldest daughter was removed by DCF from both the Mother and maternal grandmother. The Father of the Mother's third child was recently arrested for the second time on drug charges, the maternal grandmother is a teacher for the Pasco County School Board whose para more is a convicted sexual predator. These factors do not seem to have significance related to the reporting agenda of the Mother. I am Hispanic therefore assumption was made that my input and the legal responsibility to contact me was unnecessary. No responsibility will be expected nor will there be any consequences for any party. Only productive citizens are burdened. Habitual recipients of public assistance are exempt. If, as Lisa Lee Thanz stated, the initial information was accepted on good faith then why was I required to provide evidence. Is there a separate rule of law for Hispanic Fathers?
After weeks of Cristina Benito refusing to acknowledge my correspondence, I was able to contact her. With the knowledge of living free from accountability, she began to laugh pathologically. In answer to the question of why I was not contacted she replied that it was unfortunate. When asked specific questions regarding the contents of the October 26, 2011 IEP summary she incorrectly answered that the mother stated she could not attend. She explained that funds were received by child find through state and federal sources and that my son’s child count was a factor. She then began to laugh again. If given the opportunity, I would have referred her to a Tampa Tribune article on the financial incentive of the school board to classify children as ESE. However, she stated that the issue of my son's well being was only a factor as it affects the Hillsborough County School Board. Overall safety is not a consideration.
She was unaware of the date the consent was signed. She was unaware of the date the reevaluation was to begin. That comment was followed by her statement indicating that treatment would begin on Nov. 4, 2011 despite my request for a second opinion and the violation of procedural safeguards. She also stated that she found my questions offensive and that the persons performing the evaluation were “busy” and therefore it may be some time before my son could be reassessed. From the conversation, it is obvious that Benito is completely unfamiliar with my son’s case. Her duty in resolution has been to ignore and subsequently finalize the matter quickly in order for funds to be justified by the program. She then abruptly disconnected the call. In addition to a substantial amount of documentation, I provided a Hillsborough County Court Order signed by Judge Catlin of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit which reads that the Father’s contact information shall be furnished to all medical and educational providers. That did not matter to Cristina Benito who in her ignorance of state law pursues her own illegal agenda. Her focus is comment on semantics and deviate by addressing the definition of "treatment". Her answer to every question regarding my son is “I don’t know” and that his treatment was not a "big deal". One of the qualifying questions for these services is "Does you child pick his (her) nose?".
What matters is not that the process was conducted illegally, nor that once made aware of the violation the Hillsborough county school board continues. What matters is that Cristina Benitto was told by a layperson that her actions and that of her staff contradict their own policies. In her position it appears that there is no level of accountability. Therefore, her ego rules decisions. She made reference to fictitious statues. Since that incident, no person in the employment of the county has been able to provide clear direction in obtaining this alleged "rule".
What logical sequence of events explains my son being treated while a re-evaluation is pending? When the re-evaluators find that my son does not warrant "services", the unnecessary actions will have taken place. The time-line makes sense when the source of monetary compensation is understood.
Mistakenly believing that I will let the matter go, those capable of resolving the travesty have buried their heads in the sand. The superintendent, who holds a public office, has not responded. None of the commissioners have responded. The HCSB members who were elected to prevent instances such as this are silent. The failure to reply is an indication that an improper diagnosis was conducted and that the elected officials do not wish their names tied to this conduct that will surface in the upcoming election.
I plan to provide this information to all of your opponents. How many Fathers have all of you subjected to this unconscionable process?
The unnecessary medical care is abusive. An audit of this agencies practices is in order. My next step is to write detailed editorials to several newspapers. .