Bipartisan Interest In Family Court Scandal,Susan L. Rosenbluth

A problem raised by two members of the New Jersey Orthodox community has now become a bipartisan political issue. The subject of inequities in the Family Court system, whereby responsible parents, usually mothers, often lose custody of children when an allegation of sexual abuse is made involving the spouse, has been adopted as a campaign plank by Jeanine Pirro, the Republican candidate for New York State Attorney General, as well as by Chris Owens, Democratic candidate for Congress from Brooklyn's 11th District.

The issue has plagued Dr. Amy Neustein, an Edgewater, N.J.-based sociologist, who, together with Michael Lesher, a Passaic attorney, wrote about the problem in their recent book, From Madness to Mutiny: Why Mothers Are Running from the Family Courts - and What Can Be Done about It.

A few weeks ago, Dr. Neustein and Mr. Lesher appeared at a press conference on the steps of New York City Hall along with Ms. Pirro, Mr. Owens, and NYC Council member Letitia James to discuss the problem. Ms. Pirro and Mr. Owens pledged to work to solve the Family Court abuses, and Ms. James said she will be holding hearings on the issue next fall.

No Retaliation

At the conference, Ms. Pirro, former Westchester County District Attorney, said, if elected as Attorney General, she would review how the Family Court handles cases in which a mother claims that the child's father sexually abused her child.

The review, she said, would include an examination of the policies and procedures used by the Department of Social Services in evaluating the allegation of sexual abuse. A former Family Court judge herself, Ms. Pirro was especially concerned about the punitive measures too often imposed against the parent advocating on behalf of the child, simply because the good-faith fears of abuse could not be definitively substantiated.

"No parent should face retaliation from the very system whose help he or she seeks to protect the child. An allegation of sexual abuse that is made in good faith but proves to be unsubstantiated cannot and should not be used as the basis for awarding custody [to the other parent]," she said.

Painful Pattern

In their book, Dr. Neustein and Mr. Lesher detail numerous instances in which the Administration of Children's Services (ACS) and other child welfare agencies misuse resources and public funds to remove children unjustly from the homes of parents, usually mothers, because they are trying to protect their children from alleged abuse.

It is a pattern with which Dr. Neustein is painfully familiar. In 1986 she lost custody of and then even visiting privileges with her then-six-year-old daughter, her only child, when an ACS contracting agency charged her with "child neglect" on the sole ground that she believed her child had been abused.

In the 20 years since she last saw her daughter, Dr. Neustein has campaigned dauntlessly to win back her child and, at the same time, to help other women who find themselves in similar circumstances. She has offered support, at no charge, to countless mothers who are facing penalties in family court for suspecting child abuse by a father, and was the recipient of the Woman of Valor: Lifetime Achievement Award at the Battered Mothers Custody Conference at Siena College earlier this year.

Affects Jewish Community

In their research for their book, Dr. Neustein and Mr. Lesher studied more than 1,000 cases. "And, sad to say, many of these cases are from the Jewish community," said Mr. Lesher, who called the problem "a civil-rights crisis." He charged child-welfare officials with ignoring New York laws.

New Laws

Dr. Neustein's personal story outraged Ms. Pirro and Mr. Owens and so did the results of her expert analysis of the problem. At the press conference, Mr. Owens said he supports federal legislative action consistent with Dr. Neustein's and Mr. Lesher's recommendations. He said, if elected, he will demand new laws to address the problem of ACS agencies unjustly removing children from their homes based on good-faith accusations of abuse.

Mr. Owens recalled that his father, Congressman Major Owens, had held hearings featuring Dr. Neustein on "this ACS scandal," and he pledged to carry on that work.

"I will work to make sure that federal money is not misused to punish mothers who try in good faith to protect their children from abuse. The child welfare system should not make innocent mothers 'childless' in retaliation for the mothers' asking the system of law enforcement and jurisprudence to protect their children," he said.

"We need to ensure that victims of batterers or child abuse are not victimized again by the child welfare system. The resources of ACS and sister agencies must be used to protect children - not their abusers," he said.

Destroying Families

New York City Councilwoman James agreed. By acting as they have been, Family Court judges, she said, "are not protecting families; they are destroying them."

At the press conference, Mr. Owens introduced Caroline Gordon, a resident of the 11th District whom he called a victim of some of the same forces that had victimized Dr. Neustein.

Like Dr. Neustein, Ms.Gordon was penalized by Brooklyn Family Court, when she brought charges of abuse against her son's father a few years ago. She has not seen her child in four years.

"This issue is not black or white, male or female, Democrat or Republican, but an issue of fairness and justice that everyone should understand and be willing to support," said Mr. Owens.

Preventing Abuse of Power

Mr. Owens said he endorses amendments to the federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act that would link federal funding to the reform of child abuse prevention and treatment procedures at the state level - another proposal made by Dr. Neustein and Mr. Lesher. Mr. Owens also supports the modification of confidentiality rules in child abuse cases so that family court proceedings and records are no longer sealed in all circumstances.

He agreed with the researchers that oversight is required to assure that judges do not use their contempt-of-court powers to award custody to one parent as a means of punishing the other.

Perhaps most importantly, he supports meaningful higher court review and federal legislation allowing parents to seek relief from the federal courts in cases in which their civil rights may have been violated.

Guilty of Belief

Also at the press conference were representatives of the New York chapter of the National Organization for Women and Susan Lob of the Voices of Women Organizing Project (VOW).

Listening to Dr. Neustein's story, Ms. Lob, director of VOW, said she was outraged that the courts and child welfare system have the power to remove a child even from "caring, non-abusive parents."

She noted that, throughout her ordeal, no one ever accused Dr. Neustein of abusing her child. Even her critics had accused her only of believing her former husband was guilty.

No Contact

Ms. Lob noted that many mothers, including Dr. Neustein, have no contact with their children "due to decisions by the court that place children in danger."

"These decisions are often based on false information, discredited theories, lack of due process, and other serious injustices," said Ms. Lob.

Speaking for the Albany-based New York chapter of NOW, the group's president, Marcia Pappas, said she grieved with Dr. Neustein and all mothers who have lost their children after making good-faith charges of abuse.

"These mothers are treated as if they were the guilty parties," she said.

Forced to Fight

As Westchester DA, Ms. Pirro said she became aware that, historically, women such as Dr. Neustein have been forced to fight for their rights across the country.

Ms. Pirro said that while she certainly does not advocate automatically "taking the woman's side," she vehemently opposes the idea of "muzzling mothers with fear that if they make a good-faith claim of abuse, they risk losing their children."

"All claims must be investigated and no one may be punished just for making the claim. If it turns out to be false or if there is insufficient evidence to proceed, then so be it, but there must not be punishment as there was in Dr. Neustein's case," she said.

Noting her experience as a family court and county judge, Ms. Pirro said she knows judges rely on reports made by child-protective agencies.

"But I have also been a district attorney, and I've seen enough to know that sometimes a 'review' is not an investigation. This issue is simply about mothers losing their children because they had the audacity to either pass on information or report that their child may have been sexually abused," she said.

Susan Rosenbluth is editor of The Jewish Voice and Opinion, Englewood, NJ

Read Comments (0)

Bipartisan Interest In Family Court Scandal , Susan L. Rosenbluth