The U.S. Supreme Court could establish a nationwide standard for children's rights, stopping speculation and rumor causing a child''s removal

North Platte Nebraska's newspaper - The North Platte Telegraph. > News
By Mark Young
Court case could end 'speculative' HHS practices

The North Platte Telegraph

A case to soon be heard in the U.S. Supreme Court could establish a nationwide standard for children's rights, stopping speculation and rumor from causing a child's removal from a home.

According to Richard Wexler, executive director for the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, oral arguments will begin in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on March 1 that could set better guidelines to protect the rights of children.

"It deals with how workers for agencies like DHHS [Department of Health and Human Services] and law enforcement go about deciding if there is enough evidence to substantiate a case and/or take away a child," said Wexler.

"Right now, in Nebraska, DHHS workers are free to walk into a school, pull a child they think might have been abused out of class, interrogate her for hours, ask all sorts of leading questions and otherwise traumatize her based on no more than someone's anonymous call to a hotline alleging abuse," he added.

The Ninth District Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Greene family, which has been seeking fundamental rights for children involved in DHHS cases. Since the appeals court decided in favor of the family, according to Wexler, the U.S. Supreme Court has an opportunity to set down minimum standards for all states to follow, ending speculative power given to caseworkers.


"This case may decide if innocent children have the same rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizure as suspected criminals," he said.

Wexler said he understands that sometimes the trauma of the interrogation is necessary, "but the overwhelming majority of allegations are unfounded," he said. "The minimal protections sought by the Greene family [in Camreta vs. Greene] - protections that are already law in many other states - have been proven to do nothing to impede finding real abuse."

Wexler said a favorable ruling would end "hair-trigger" assumptions that abuse is taking place, which can cause real trauma in a child's life when that child is removed from his or her family based on unfounded accusations.

Organizations want action, not promises

Child Protective Services Director Todd Reckling told the Telegraph on Monday that a system as large as HHS would have breakdowns, but that a system of checks and balances are in place to protect innocent parents while ensuring the safety of children.

Wexler criticized that statement.

"I've said for years that the quickest way to tell when someone at a child welfare agency is being disingenuous is when they tell you there are checks and balances," said Wexler.

Wexler said not even the highest levels of government have the power and authority to intrude into an American citizen's private life as CPS does. Wexler said not even in the aftermath of 9-11 do anti-terrorism agencies have similar power.

"Had [former attorney general John] Ashcroft proposed these kinds of polices, civil libertarians would have been in an uproar, yet this is, in fact, the law governing child welfare," he said. "So where exactly are the 'checks and balances' Reckling is bragging about?"

FAM Director Melanie Williams-Smotherman said Reckling's goals are not the same as her organization, as Reckling stated.

"Mr. Reckling wants people to believe that the goals are the same, but we have to understand that's in rhetoric only," she said. "While senior management at DHHS may like being quoted in the media as having the same goals as advocacy organizations, their actions tell a different story time and again."

Williams-Smotherman said cases have been brought directly to Reckling and that more often than not "have ended in worse retaliation against the families we were trying to help," she said.

Reckling insists that as part of the reform, CPS is actively looking at policy changes, especially when it comes to removing a child from a home.

"Part of the problem with the whole child welfare debate is that we all say the same things, but we mean very different things by what we say," said Wexler. "So it doesn't matter what people like Todd Reckling say. What matters is what they do."

Courts and CPS

The court system can play a big part in CPS cases. Reckling admitted that what is decided in court is most often based on the documentation provided by CPS caseworkers, investigators and guardian ad litems, who are often attorneys assigned by the courts to act on the child's behalf during a case - especially during a custody dispute.

It's this "in between" process where families say injustices are being done, but they also point the finger at guardian ad litems who sometimes enjoy a "cozy" relationship with other attorneys and judges who are involved in the same case.

Williams-Smotherman said the entire system is broken "and not just for the foster parents, as is popular and safe for legislators to suggest," she said. "Every day that judges, attorneys guardian ad litems, service coordinators, the Ombudsman's office, the Foster Care Review Board, our legislators and our governor allow such obvious violations to civil liberties to continue on without demanding immediate sweeping changes, the public is being denied justice."

Williams-Smotherman said it's the worst form of government abuse, "all at the expense of innocent children, who are the most victimized and harmed by these realities," she said.

If you have a CPS story to tell, you can contact Williams-Smotherman at melanie@familyadvocacymovement.com or call (402) 689-9613.

Click on this story at nptelegraph.com to post your comments, or e-mail
mark.young@nptelegraph.com.

(Editor's note: An HHS spokesperson said the Child Protective Services department is prepared to release information on the Brandi Knutson case, featured in a Feb. 12 story in the Telegraph, which according to the spokesperson shows that CPS was no longer active in that case after 2009 and that Lincoln County District Court had authority from that point forward.)