DCYF Ombuds Help Denied
Despite being told that it would be a complete waste of time, Kathy Elkins sent a letter full of much of the information listed under the DCYF/CPS page to the Ombuds for help and let her know that Thigpens have an Administrative Hearing Scheduled for the Spring of 2025. The Ombuds knews this upon receipt of the complaint.
Yet, over 3 months later, Kathy received the response below.
There is no place for families who are terrified about the negligence and falsifications to go to for help.
In January 2025 Kathy asked the DCYF Oversight Committee to look into this matter.
I have never seen this amount of falsification and neglect with any organization and I have seen some concerning things in many places. This is the worst by far and no one is wiling to make this better and safer so that people are no longer terrorized that their child may be taken from them.
OMBUDSMAN said she determined the Department's conduct was "consistent with State Laws and Policies".
What’s truly alarming is that everything I reported was completely accurate, despite not having the same access to files that she had. She should have been fully aware that what I reported was true, along with additional, even more concerning issues.
Families who are falsely accused and left to deal with incomplete investigations often have nowhere to turn for support or help.
What is even more frightening is that this horrific file full of unethical conduct, negligence, may seem so routine to the Ombudsman that she truly may feel that it IS consistent with what she sees on a regular basis.
When I filed a complaint with the Ombudsman highlighting specific issues—all of which were true—I later discovered there were even more serious concerns in the file that I had been unaware of at the time.
One striking statement in their response stood out: *"In addition, because the matter is now pending administrative hearing action, OFCO no longer has jurisdiction to intervene."* This comment was included in their reply dated 11/1/24, yet the same information was known as early as 7/17/24 when I initially filed the complaint. Why wasn’t I informed right away that the Ombudsman’s office couldn’t assist? Instead, they waited over three and a half months to provide this response.
My concern is whether any genuine investigation was conducted. Although the Ombudsman claimed to have reviewed the file, the details I’ve outlined below reveal a shocking lack of thoroughness, fairness, and, at times, even ethical consideration. Families like mine are left unsupported when faced with incompetence and unethical actions by DCYF. The response I received failed to directly address the ethical issues I had clearly outlined in my complaint. Furthermore, DCYF’s records confirm not only the validity of my claims but also reveal additional serious issues.
During this time, I was in contact with the Ombudsman’s office by phone on multiple occasions. Each time, I was told they still needed to review the file. It became increasingly clear that the investigation was not being treated with the seriousness it deserved. The response I eventually received was vague and dismissive, falling far short of what families need when raising valid ethical concerns about CPS/DCYF staff.
This level of disregard is unacceptable when families rely on these systems for accountability and oversight.
She kept repeating phrases like, "It sounds like the system is working exactly as it should"
Response: Wow, really? You find out that DCYF staff are completely unethical, their expert lies in court, you report it to the Ombuds, and her response is that there is nothing wrong? The system is supposed to work ths way? It is ok to harm children.
I hold fast to the idea that there is no evidence that DCYF has done nothing more in the case of Mary Bridge than to facilitate more and more harm to children and families only to line the pockets of DCYF and Mary Bridge staff.
"You can tell the AG" — no, thank you. The Attorney General (AG) failed in their responsibility to file an accurate and impartial petition with the court. During the hearing, the AG stated, "I think it is very interesting both the absence and involvement of Detective Wade, and I think it suggests that these parents have had a lot of protection that others wouldn’t have had otherwise. I think that is a very interesting point for the court to consider." Judge: "Protection from the Police?" AG: "No, the police were protecting them."
The Ombudsman was literally suggesting that unethical actions should be reported to the AG, as if the AG wasn’t already representing DCYF, Mary Bridge, and Dr. Lamb.
This was, without a doubt, the worst advice I’ve heard in the past year.
The situation followed the same pattern the family had encountered before when filing complaints:
1) Initially, the interaction was very positive, giving the impression they were genuinely concerned and willing to help. The ombudsman mentioned her father was a doctor and expressed serious concern about how the diagnosis process unfolded. However, in later follow-up calls, her tone shifted. She stated she could completely understand how DCYF could confuse a forehead bruise with a skull fracture, as both are head injuries. She justified their actions by pointing out that an initial x-ray suggested a possible fracture, claiming this warranted no accountability for adding the word "possible" into a later report. Here's the issue: DCYF wasn’t contacted until 11:38 PM—nearly three hours after the 8:51 PM x-ray and two and a half hours after Blake’s skull fracture diagnosis. Law enforcement was informed specifically about the skull fracture, and CPS was contacted for the same reason. When I raised my concerns about Dr. Lamb's perjury witnessed by multiple DCYF staff, and that Lamb appeared the following days as if there had been no comments to their leadership about their concerns about her, the ombudsman dismissed it, saying something to the effect of “they can’t just accuse someone in court,” which was not what I suggested. What I expected was that at least one of the two individuals present, who spent most of their time seemingly distracted on their phones, would take notes and report such glaring misconduct to someone—whether a supervisor, the Attorney General, or another authority. It was particularly alarming considering they were aware Dr. Lamb falsely testified about seeing a rectangular bruise half the length of the skull during her exam and later claimed there had never been a skull fracture - and they knew, but the family did not, that Lamb had altered her report 19 days after issuing it. 2) This initial concern was followed by an unsettling and dismissive attitude toward these outrageous issues.
Following the complaint, the Ombudsman should have identified the following critical information in the case file:
1) Four emails sent by DCYF to Dr. Lamb, which involved accepting a "new" false report. These emails raised obvious follow-up questions that were never addressed.
2) A photograph of the garment taken by DCYF, which provided key evidence regarding an arm line. This detail appears to have never been discussed or shared with Dr. Lamb, law enforcement, or the Thigpens.
3) The complete intake records, which clearly show they were falsified and misrepresented under penalty of perjury by DCYF in their Dependency Petition.
4) A phone call on 10/9/23 that was never documented in the file but an text was sent thanking them for hearing the family out. This was the specific conversation Kathy referenced in her letter. How could the Ombuds verify everything was fine if there were not notes in the file about the conversation?
5) McCauley misled other DCYF leaders during meetings by omitting key information that was available in the file. She ignored the skull fracture mentioned in her founded letters, falsely suggested there was an additional intake, and disregarded the original police reports that identified only a skull fracture. Furthermore, she quoted Thigpen's explanation of the skull fracture in the founded letter without acknowledging it was for a diagnosed skull fracture. Their single "reasonable" explanation for a bruise—documented in a text message that no one reviewed—was deemed implausible before CPS or law enforcement were even involved. Multiple people reiterated this to her during the 10/9/23 phone call, which she failed to document.
This is just one of many instances where requests for intervention were made to address egregious errors, negligence, and falsifications that ultimately harmed a child.
By August 2024, Mary Bridge, DCYF, the Ombudsman, and the Washington State Medical Board were all notified of these issues. Despite being informed, none of them took action to assist or resolve the situation.
This website was created to shed light on these failures. These entities collectively enable greed, corruption, incompetence, and negligence, supporting one another instead of prioritizing the safety and well-being of children. As a result, children continue to be harmed, accountability is avoided, and no meaningful changes are made to protect them. Mary Bridge and DCYF supervisors must be held responsible for their negligence, deceit, and failure to fulfill their duty to report Dr. Lamb to the Medical Board.
DCYF should have already terminated its MedCon contract with Mary Bridge. If the welfare of children is not enough of a priority, the sheer amount of wasted taxpayer dollars should have prompted an investigation a long time ago.