what has been happening in state family courts and CPS agencies is strictly unconstitutional:

Likewise, the standard practices of child protective "services" are also extremely violative in nature, very rarely comply with the parents' Constitutional and Due Process rights to retain custody of their kids, absent the pre-requisite clear and convincing finding of very serious unfitness. There must be this, and an attorney, or it's all void.

The real truth, under the real law, and as consistently ruled by the United States Supreme Court for nearly an entire century now, is that no state agency, entity, or official - which includes a state family court judge - may ever take away any parent's custody of their children, without having first found, and only by "clear and convincing evidence", that the parent is seriously unfit to parent the children in question - i.e., what has been happening in state family courts and CPS agencies is strictly unconstitutional: the taking away of any parents' pre-existing child custody, without first proving serious parental unfitness by clear and convincing evidence.

In other words, if a state family court judge has taken away your pre-existing custody, in either a divorce, paternity, or CPS action, without first finding, by serious evidence, of serious danger of child abuse or neglect, then that order - no matter if it is a "temporary" or "permanent" custody order - is unconstitutional, and is already legally null and void. Such unlawful orders violate a parent's various individual constitutional rights to due process, under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th and 14th Amendments, and, for divorce and paternity custody disputes between the parents, is also violative as gender discrimination, for upholding the right of one parent to retain their pre-existing custody, while taking away the custody of the other parent without lawful basis.