Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer | Boynton Beach

New York Husband and Wife have seven Children together.

One of their Children reportedly arrives at school with one eye bloodshot.

This apparently precipitates a report of alleged child abuse to New York’s child welfare agency.

Children are removed from Husband and Wife’s home and taken into child protective custody.

And placed in foster care, reportedly in three separate foster homes. Nearly three years ago.

Along the way, an eighth child of Husband and Wife is born. She joins her siblings in foster care.

Husband and Wife claim to have complied with the Family Court’s juvenile dependency case plan with the expectation of being reunited with Children.

They maintain that they are good parents who provided a loving home. They are critical of the care provided by New York’s child welfare agency, citing the agency’s unnecessary medication of one Child for hyperactivity, inadequate security, Children’s complaints of insufficient food and appearance of bruises and cuts on Children.

But Husband and Wife assert that they got wind that their parental rights were going to be terminated and Children were going to be adopted.

Wife has a supervised visitation with Children at a foster care and supervised visitation facility.

Children walk out of the facility with Wife.

And Husband and Wife allegedly go on the run with Children.

For seven days. Until they are caught by law enforcement.

And Husband collapses and is hospitalized for several days.

Children are in good condition. Husband and Wife are arrested on charges of kidnapping Children.

Husband and Wife later plead guilty to interference with custody.

They serve sixty days of confinement and are also sentenced to three years of probation.

Children remain in foster care. Husband and Wife are barred from any contact with Children.

A hearing on visitation for Husband and Wife is forthcoming.

Read more in

• this NBC TV New York news article: Parents Who Abducted 8 Kids Speak of Life on the Run

• this UK Mail news article: The EIGHT children abducted by their parents from foster care are found safe and ‘in good condition’ by NYPD

• this New York Times article: Recalling Days on the Run With Abducted Children

Mother has eight year old Son, who is an honor student actively engaged in his school community.

Son is overweight. Extremely.

Just under 220 pounds. Sixty of them gained in one year.

At least one doctor has characterized Son’s weight gain as “life threatening”.

Doctors have ruled out a medical reason for Son’s weight gain, concluding that it is “environmental”.

Ohio child welfare agency (Agency) intervenes due to Son’s sleep apnea.

Son is deemed to be at high risk of developing serious weight-related health conditions.

Son fails to lose weight after a year.

So … Agency removes Son from Mother’s care and places him in foster care.

Ohio juvenile dependency court rules that Mother has neglected Son’s medical care … because Son has not dropped any excess weight to speak of.

Mother and Son are granted one visit per week. For two hours.

An Ohio public defender reports that, by contrast, other Ohio parents have been allowed to keep custody of their children despite having serious drug abuse issues and having beaten their children.

Son has reportedly lost some weight in foster care. But his foster parents are reportedly struggling to keep up with Son’s medical care.

Mother is seeking to regain custody of Son.

Son is representative of the seventeen percent of American children who are obese.

The foster care system is already stretched thin serving children who are abandoned, abused and neglected as those terms are commonly understood.

While some in the medical community advocate placing children in foster care to combat extreme obesity, others reject such extreme measures based only on probability of children developing certain medical conditions, rather than actual diagnoses.

Proposals have been advanced to provide enhanced services to obese children and their families so that such obese children can remain in their homes. Arguably a more practical alternative from a societal perspective and a more palatable alternative from the families’ perspectives.

Read more in this Reuters article: 219-pound boy shows growing problem of extreme obesity and this Cleveland Plain Dealer piece: County places obese Cleveland Heights child in foster care.

Oregon Mother has three month old Baby.

Mother reads the Old Testament and decides that she wants Baby to be circumcised.

But Mother fears Baby is too old for a doctor to agree to perform the circumcision.

So Mother watches YouTube videos on circumcision.

And decides to perform the circumcision on Baby herself.

Using a box-cutter.

Only Baby bleeds excessively and suffers great pain during the circumcision.

So Mother dials 911 for assistance.

Mother is arrested for harming Baby.

Mother pleads guilty to criminal mistreatment.

Mother is sentenced to five years’ probation…

And ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation.

The Court finds that she loves Baby and had no intent to hurt him.

Baby has since recovered and lives with his three siblings … in the child welfare system. Mother has supervised visits with Baby and his siblings.

Read more in this New York Daily News article: Mom who used box-cutter to circumcise 3-month-old baby gets five years probation.

Florida Mother and Father have a Toddler together.

Mother takes Toddler to a shopping center in a stroller on a weeknight.

Mother tells Toddler to stay put outside, while Mother goes to get Toddler a candy bar.

Mother allegedly enters a bar – and gets a cocktail.

Soon, it starts to rain outside.

Patrons of the bar call police about the Toddler left alone outside in the rain.

Mother is arrested.

At her first appearance in court, Mother tries to tell the presiding judge that she went to the bar to apply for a job.

Read more in this New York Daily News article: Florida woman tells judge she was going to look for a job when she left baby outside a bar.

Every state views it differently. In fact, an argument could be made that every family court judge views it differently.

What?

Drug use. By a parent.

The potential field of drugs that may be used and/or abused is broad: cocaine, methamphetamines, heroin, too many to name really … and marijuana.

The latter of which more and more states are legalizing use of for medical purposes.

Not all the same?

Perhaps, perhaps not.

Family law and juvenile dependency law often draw no hard and fast distinctions based on the particular drug of choice – or the type of use.

In family court or juvenile dependency court, the answer to whether the particular drug of choice – or the nature of the use – matters may well depend on what state you live in … or which family court judge or juvenile dependency court judge a case – your case – happens to be randomly assigned to.

Right now, in New York City, for example, the child welfare agency may be following a policy of filing civil child neglect charges against parents caught with nominal amounts of pot and/or who have admitted to authorities using marijuana in the past. In cases where law enforcement takes no criminal legal action. But makes a notification or report to the child welfare agency hotline.

Although the criminal justice system’s hands are tied from even making an arrest, such parents still face loss of child custody of their children – or restrictions on their contact with their own children – through the family court system or the juvenile dependency court system. Often without any proof of actual demonstrated neglect or harm to their children.

And their children could be forced into foster care, at least temporarily.

Child welfare agencies often maintain that even recreational or medical marijuana users may in fact neglect their children. Fail to send them to school. Leave them unattended. Otherwise suffer impaired judgment while caring for them which exposes them to danger or risk. And, of course, that may be true.

Representatives of parents, on the other hand, counter that, once such parents are on the child welfare agency’s radar due to possession of nominal amounts of marijuana or admission of pot use, the agencies then are in a position to seek other grounds to act against the parents – and, as a result, sometimes they may in fact look for those grounds – and they may in fact find them. And, if they exist, in the context of child protection, does it matter how they were identified?

Such parents ultimately face high stakes consequences. Not only as to custody and visitation and timesharing. But also restriction of their prospects for employment working with children in a variety of capacities.

In New York, this civil court record raises a cloud over such parents until the parent’s youngest child turns twenty-eight years old.

In contrast to New York, California, which has legal medical marijuana use, now requires a showing of actual harm to children before their child welfare agency may mount a juvenile dependency case for removal of the children.

Needless to say, one may take a different view of these complex cases depending upon whether one’s vantage point is parental rights or children’s rights.

Read more in this New York Times article: No Cause for Marijuana Case, but Enough for Child Neglect.

Ten year old Arizona Child lives with her Aunt, her legal guardian, her two adult Cousins and her Grandmother.

Child weighs just fifty-nine pounds.

Child takes a popsicle without permission.

When her family finds out, Child is punished …

Her cousins allegedly lock her in a storage container roughly 3 feet by 1 foot by 1 foot in size.

Where Child suffocates.

It turns out Child was frequently punished by putting her in that storage container, among other punishments.

Child was also forced to eat animal waste, sleep on the floor of a shower and walk barefoot on extremely hot Arizona concrete.

Cousins are charged with murder.

Aunt and Grandmother are charged with child abuse and kidnapping.

Read more in this New York Daily News article: Ame Deal, Arizona girl suffocates to death after being put in box over Popsicle, family charged

Connecticut Mother and Friend are out in the park with Mother’s four year old Son and ten month old Daughter.

There is a partially drained forty ounce bottle of beer. By Son.

And Mother allegedly orders Son to “chug” what is left of it.

Then reportedly calls Son an alcoholic.

Another parent out in the park signals police officers on foot patrol.

When the officers approach the Daughter, they note that her baby bottle smells of alcohol.

Son and Daughter are taken to the hospital.

Both children test positive for alcohol consumption. Daughter also tests positive for cocaine.

Mother confesses to authorities that Friend gives Son a bottle of beer every day. Mother admits cocaine use but denies knowledge of how Daughter tests positive for the drug.

Mother and Friend are both arrested on charges of risk of injury to a child and second degree assault.

Mother and Friend are confined.

Son and Daughter are presumably taken into child protective custody.

Read more in this New York Daily News article: Juliette Dunn arrested for giving 4-year-old and 10-month-old beer and cocaine and this Connecticut Post article: Cops: Mom gave her children beer and cocaine.

Mother and Father have Child.

Mother and Father provide food, clothing and shelter to Child.

Child becomes overweight, in fact, clinically obese.

And the problem is growing worse, not better.

Childhood obesity reportedly sets Child up for a host of health problems in both the short term and the long term.

Which is why the medical establishment now advocates that Child be removed from his parents’ home and placed into protective custody to address Child’s obesity, where his parents have failed to get it under control. They argue that this is less extreme than surgical remedies.

And in a small number of extreme cases in a handful of states, such as New York, California and Texas, obese children have been taken into temporary protective custody.

About two million kids in the US are obese.

Read more in this Yahoo Shine Health article: Should parents lose custody of super-obese kids? and Foster Care Proposed as Solution for Extreme Childhood Obesity.

Oklahoma Husband and Wife are divorcing.

Husband and Wife have Children together.

Children are removed and taken into protective custody because Husband uses a “sex toy” in the presence of one of their Children.

Wife drops Husband off at a lake for a fishing trip.

After Husband’s scheduled return, Wife allegedly files a report with the police to the effect that Husband has gone missing.

Due to changes in Wife’s account, police arrest her.

Wife later reportedly admits that Husband solicited her assistance in staging his death.

Husband is said to have been looking to avoid outstanding warrants for his arrest. And to start a new life after a sex change surgery.

Wife reportedly went along with Husband’s plan to be done with Husband and in the hope of re-gaining custody of Children.

Both Husband and Wife now stand charged with conspiracy to commit a crime by filing a false police report.

Read more in this Oklahoman news article: Divorcing Stillwater couple accused of trying to fake man’s death.

Michigan Mother has a three year old Toddler.

A Neighbor finds Toddler walking in the parking lot of a business next to a busy highway. The Neighbor contacts law enforcement authorities.

When authorities contact Mother, Mother is asleep and slow to respond. Authorities learn that a similar incident took place a week before.

Toddler is taken into protective custody and placed in foster care.

The government files a dependency petition alleging neglect of Toddler.

On a temporary basis, Mother is granted only weekly supervised visitation with Toddler by the Michigan family court. The family court Mother also orders that Mother be subjected to random drug testing.

Read more in this [Bad Axe, MI] Huron Daily Tribune article: Bad Axe mother to have supervised visitation.

California Mother and Father have three year old Son together.

During Father’s visitation and timesharing, Father allegedly abducts Son, from California to Arizona.

For the second time this year.

An arrest warrant is issued for Father.

Son is found, unhurt, with both of his parents.

Mother’s role in the incident is unclear.

Son is taken into child protective custody.

The timesharing during which Father allegedly makes off with Son is a visitation supervised by Child Protective Services.

Read more in this [Palm Springs, CA] Desert Magazine article: Abducted 3-year-old from Moreno Valley found unharmed in Arizona.

Texas Husband and Wife have two Sons, ages five and eight.

Wife and one Son are members of the Cherokee Indian Nation.

Husband and Wife allegedly chain their five year old Son to his crib-bed overnight, every night.

Husband and Wife are arrested for false imprisonment, child endangerment, child neglect, malicious punishment.

Sons are placed in foster care.

Sons are reportedly frightened of Husband and Wife.

The child welfare agency asks the Texas family court to terminate Husband’s and Wife’s parental rights to Sons.

The court awards Husband and Wife no visitation or timesharing with Sons.

Husband and Wife then request visitation with their younger Son.

A guardian ad litem for Sons recommends against visitation with Husband and Wife’s older Son based on the Son’s expressed preferences, and recommends only therapeutically supervised timesharing with younger Son.

Sons’ maternal grandmother is willing to have Sons placed with her if Husband and Wife’s parental rights are terminated.

Read more in this Austin Daily Herald article: Visitation denied for parents who chained son and this Austin Daily Herald article: Child-chaining parents plead guilty.

Last October I posted about an unusual case in Mexican Mother Wins Return of Daughter Who Runs Away to Canadian Aunt Because of Alleged Abuse.

Mother was awarded custody of Daughter in her parents’ divorce, but Daughter has maintained that Mother abused her. Although Canada granted Daughter refugee status, Mother secured Daughter’s deportation and return to Mexico under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

On appeal in Canada, however, a reversal paved the way for Daughter’s return to Canada for lack of a risk assessment hearing prior to her deportation. With intervention in the case from the UN Commissioner for Refugees and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the appellate court granted Daughter another hearing.

But Mexican authorities had no interest in the Canadian court’s rulings. So Daughter once again fled Mexico, with help from the Aunt with whom she had lived in Canada.

Now Daughter is back in Canada, which she considers her home. And a Canadian family court has ruled that she may remain in Canada permanently, in the care of her aunt.

Read more in this Canada.com news article: Teen embroiled in international custody battle can stay in Canada and this CBC News article: Deported teen refugee back in Toronto.

Florida Mother has four Children, ages 10, 11, 14 and 16.

Children’s Aunt has custody of Children and has been raising them for several years.

Aunt, who lives in Alabama, brings Children to Florida to visit with Mother.

Aunt reportedly allows Children to go on a drive with Mother.

Mother allegedly crashes the car.

The 14 year old Child is killed in the accident.

It is reported that Mother is legally intoxicated at the time. In fact, her blood alcohol level is said to be 4 times the legal limit.

The Florida court finds that Mother was not allowed unsupervised visitation and timesharing with the Children and again orders that Mother not have unsupervised contact with the Children.

The court modifies custody of Children, stripping it from Aunt, who reportedly allowed Mother to have the Children unsupervised, and awarding it to Childen’s great aunt and uncle.

The court also enters a restraining order of protection against Mother’s Boyfriend, who reportedly beats the Children. Boyfriend is also arrested on charges of domestic violence.

Both Mother and Aunt may face criminal charges.

Read more in this [Orlando] WFTV 9 news article: Alleged Drunk Mom’s Kids To Stay With Aunt, Uncle.

April is National Child Abuse Prevention Month.

A good time to recall that “[y]ears of scientific studies have shown that research-based child abuse prevention programs can give struggling parents the tools they need to become self-aware, better-equipped, more patient parents.”

Especially when the child is very young and bonding and attachment are beginning.

Child abuse prevention programs build on parents’ strengths and teach them about normal child development, how to address challenges and how to manage stress from those challenges.

One veteran child welfare advocate asserts that these programs “break the cycle of abuse and neglect”.

Read more in this [South Florida] Sun Sentinel article: Efforts can slow child abuse cycle.

Father is deceased.

Texas Mother allegedly drives in her car with her five year old Daughter.

Mother is arrested for driving while intoxicated. For the third time, reportedly.

Texas family court awards temporary custody of Daughter to Father’s sister (Aunt) in November of 2009.

Mother, who is on probation, is awarded visitation and timesharing with Daughter.

Eighteen months later, Mother now seeks custody of Daughter, asserting that she is much improved.

Certain issues in the case are on appeal.

The family court may terminate Aunt’s temporary custody.

Read more in this [San Antonio] KENS TV 5 news article: Mother with DWI convictions fights for custody of her child.

Some months ago, a four year old Brooklyn Girl, who weighed only eighteen pounds, died of malnutrition, dehydration, drug poisoning and injuries resulting from abuse.

New York’s child welfare agency was already involved in the Girl’s life and had assigned a caseworker to her case.

At the time of her death, the Girl had allegedly been beaten regularly … and bound to her bed.

Her mother and grandmother both reportedly were aware of these facts.

The Girl’s mother and grandmother have both since been indicted for murder and manslaughter, respectively.

The Girl’s caseworker and his supervisor both allegedly subsequently made false entries in the Girl’s case file to reflect, fraudulently, that the child welfare agency had done its job, visiting, or attempting to schedule visits to the Girl’s home, and checking on her welfare.

In fact, the caseworker reportedly made no visits or attempts to check on the Girl and had not complied with the agency’s requirement of biweekly checks.

For their alleged negligence and attempted fraud in this case, the child welfare agency’s caseworker and supervisor were indicted for criminally negligent homicide, official misconduct and endangering the welfare of a child, as well as falsifying and tampering with public records.

The charges against the child welfare workers are believed to be the first of their kind in New York.

The child welfare workers’ defend that they were just following orders from higher ranked individuals in the agency and, apparently, that they are unfairly being made scapegoats.

The child welfare agency is concerned that the charges will adversely impact recruiting of child welfare staff.

Read more in this New York Times article: Welfare Worker and Supervisor Charged in Death of Child.

New York Girlfriend and Boyfriend have been dating for over six months.

Girlfriend is 32 years old, a foster parent of a 17 month old Baby and a 9 year old girl, and the mother of an 11 year old girl.

Boyfriend is 19 years old.

Girlfriend left Baby in Boyfriend’s care while taking the two girls to school.

When Girlfriend returned home, Baby was unconscious and in respiratory distress.

Baby was later diagnosed with broken ribs and a ruptured spleen, and was assessed as being in critical condition.

Baby’s injuries are under investigation by authorities.

Law enforcement authorities suspect that Baby’s injuries are the result of Boyfriend beating Baby.

Boyfriend turned himself in to authorities and is now under arrest on charges of assaulting Baby.

According to accounts of third parties, Boyfriend believed that Baby needed to grow “tougher”.

Yet Girlfriend reportedly insisted that Boyfriend is “good” to her children.

Prior to the suspected beating, Baby had been recovering from prenatal heroin addiction and doing well in foster care with Girlfriend.

In fact, Baby’s adoption by Girlfriend is underway.

It is unknown whether recent events jeopardize the adoption.

Read more in this New York Times article: Arrest Made in Beating of a Child in Brooklyn.

Kentucky Father places Infant son into an oven. A cold one, but an oven.

Father is arrested for this conduct.

A Kentucky criminal court judge bars Father from having any contact with Infant.

Close to a year ago.

Now, Father’s attorney requests supervised visitation for Father, since Father is at-large on bail.

However, the criminal court judge denies Father’s request, and extends his earlier ruling absolutely prohibiting any contact with Infant.

Read more in this Paducah Sun article: Dad in oven case gets no visitation and this Lex 18 NBC TV News article: Man Not Allowed Contact With Infant Son He Put In Cold Oven.

A former juvenile court judge in Pennsylvania retired in disgrace about two years ago.

Part of his job was sentencing youth offenders.

There are many reasons to favor one juvenile correctional facility over another with respect to any particular juvenile offender’s circumstances and needs.

Keep in mind that juvenile courts’ objectives generally include treatment and rehabilitation of juvenile delinquents, rather than mere punishment.

This particular judge allegedly chose correctional facilities for sentencing based on his own personal financial gain, not the juvenile offenders’ circumstances and needs.

And, as a result, this particular judge was recently convicted of twelve separate counts of racketeering and conspiracy … for extorting up to millions of dollars from the developer and owner of certain juvenile correctional facilities to which he sentenced juveniles in his court.

Read more in this New York Times article: Pennsylvania: Mixed Verdict for Disgraced Judge

Today, child welfare agencies are most frequently associated with removing children who have been abandoned, abused or neglected from their families, and placing them in foster care or other alternative placements.

Immediate insulation from worst case scenarios.

The long-term outcome? Arguably, not so good.

Studies show that:

1. more than half of the young adults coming out of foster care are unemployed in their mid-twenties

2. one quarter don’t have a high school diploma or equivalent credential, and only six percent have achieved higher level degrees

3. sixty percent of males have already been convicted of a crime

4. seventy-seven percent of females have been pregnant

5. twenty-five percent have post-traumatic stress disorder

There is another approach to child welfare. Intensive, in-home services, including mental health and juvenile justice, furnished to youth and their families, without breaking the family up, often without separating family members.

Programs self-report on their “graduates” as follows:

• two years out of the programs, eighty-three percent of kids are doing well with their own families

• two years out of the programs, eighty-five percent remain in school or have attained a high school diploma or equivalent credential

• two years out of the program, eight-two percent have had no run-ins with the law

• these programs carry a price tage of about ten percent of traditional child welfare intervention

These programs practice Multisystemic Therapy, and maintain close contact with and oversight of the children in their programs and their families.

Speaking less clinically, the children are happier and have greater stability.

Read more in this New York Times Article: A Families-First Approach to Foster Care.

Mother and Father have a long history with child protective services.

Some of their children have been taken into protective custody and placed in foster care a number of times.

But Mother and Father kept having more children.

They now have seven children.

Mother and Father have been charged over the years with substance abuse, domestic violence, educational neglect and medical neglect.

Mother and Father reportedly haven’t always visited regularly with their children while they were in foster care.

Mother and Father have allegedly misused government funds made available to them.

Mother and Father’s children have been in protective custody on and off for ten years.

Their children are stuck in limbo.

Family court judge orders the child welfare agency to petition to terminate Mother and Father’s parental rights, in the hope that the children may achieve permanency with different parents.

Read more in this Albany Examiner article: Judge orders ACS to file termination petition after 10 years of neglect.

A South Dakota Mother and Father reportedly suffer from substance abuse and psychological conditions.

Mother and Father have a four year old Daughter together. They split up.

Grandparents seek custody of Daughter.

A US Supreme Court decision in 2000, Troxel, virtually eradicated grandparent custody and visitation rights previously recognized by many states.

Nonetheless, in the last several years, some states have been testing the boundaries of Troxel, trying to revive grandparents’ rights.

Especially where, as in this case, for whatever reason, the parents are less than model.

At trial in family court, the grandparents’ petition is denied, because the law it is predicated on is held to be unconstitutional. The specific defect cited by the divorce court is that grandparents may be awarded custody without a finding that the parents are unfit.

But the family court is reversed on appeal to the state’s highest court. Redemption is delivered by a requirement that a court favor fit parents and award custody to third parties only in extraordinary circumstances, such as parental unfitness, abandonment or neglect.

The South Dakota Supreme Court rules that Troxel falls short of mandating that parents be found unfit before awarding custody to a third party. According to them, Troxel requires only that fit parents’ wishes be substantial deference.

Read more in this CBS TV news article: S.D. High Court Backs Grandparent Child Custody

Budget cuts have been impacting the courts, including family courts, for years now – with no end in sight.

Leaving more cases, with fewer personnel and resources to process them.

Coaxing out every efficiency imaginable.

Encouraging introduction of electronic filing and eventual phasing out of paper filing.

All the while relentlessly inching ever-closer to testing the very limits of justice.

The above is from and about the courts of Oregon.

But it would seem to apply equally as well to Florida’s courts, including Florida’s divorce courts, in recent years.

Read more in this Yamhill Valley [OR] News Register article: Judge worries about court cuts.

Illinois Husband and Wife have four Daughters from ages four to fifteen.

Wife is not happy in the marriage. Wife files for divorce.

Husband is not served with divorce paperwork. On the contrary, Husband and Wife reportedly reconcile.

Husband and Wife attend a holiday party together on December 5th.

Husband is allegedly intoxicated.

There is snow on the ground in the area where they live.

On the way home from the party, Husband’s and Wife’s car crashes into a light pole.

Husband is killed in the accident.

There are footprints leading away from their vehicle.

And Wife is nowhere to be found.

Subsequent searches, as permitted by the local weather, have turned up no leads as to Wife’s whereabouts or fate.

An unlikely and unforeseeable tragedy.

Which leaves Husband and Wife’s four young Daughters inadequately provided for or protected.

In this instance, the Daughters’ paternal aunt and uncle have reportedly filed for guardianship of Daughters. This is not necessarily a rapid or inexpensive process.

When parents don’t plan ahead and make arrangements for such unlikely and unforeseeable tragedies, their children are at risk of being taken into child protective custody and placed in foster care by child welfare agencies.

Have you planned ahead and made arrangements to protect your children from the unlikely and unforeseeable tragedy that has stricken this family?

In Florida, a straighforward will and a simple designation of a preneed guardian for your children can generally provide the care you want your children to have in such a situation … without the need for an expensive, drawn-out guardianship proceeding or child welfare agency involvement.

Why not add these items to your New Year’s resolutions – and actually follow through and do them? For your children’s sake.

Read more in:

• this Chicago WLS-TV ABC 7 news article: Records show missing mom had filed for divorce

• this Chicago CBS 2 news article: Police Hope To Resume Search For Tanya Shannon

• this Chicago Fox News article: Search for Tanya Shannon On Hold

Husband and Wife’s four year old Child is in foster care, placed with Wife’s ex-boss.

Husband and Wife are now seeking custody of Child.

Child is in foster care because Wife pleaded guilty to statutory rape.

Because Wife became pregant with Child when she was in her thirties … and Husband was fifteen years old.

And that is when Husband and Wife married, despite the twenty-two year difference between their ages, and Husband being a child under the law.

(The marriage was allowed under Georgia law – at that time – due to Wife’s pregnancy. The law has since changed, reportedly.)

Husband and Wife’s efforts to gain custody of Child are denied. But Husband is awarded greater timesharing with Child.

Read more in this UPI article: Judge nixes custody request of teen, wife.

Mother allegedly abuses drugs.

Mother has been investigated by the state’s child welfare agency on at least six occasions. Previous allegations against Mother include taking drugs in front of her children.

Mother allegedly was on so many drugs while she was pregnant recently that her speech was slurred and was unable to walk down stairs.

Mother’s ten day old Baby dies … in a running washing machine.

Mother’s other children have been removed from Mother’s care and placed with relatives.

Ohio law was recently amended … to reduce the number of cases where children are removed from a parent’s care. Last year, Ohio removed more children from a parent’s home than all other states but one.

Under the new law there, a child must face an “imminent safety threat” rather than a mere “risk of danger” to justify removal. And a parent’s drug addiction, by itself, is not deemed to constitute an imminent safety threat.

Read more in this Tulsa World article: DHS laws for child removal defended.

Missouri Father has an adult pregnant Daughter.

Father also has a teenaged Son who, apparently, joined the family from foster care.

Son suffers from mental illness and, at times, allegedly is very aggressive.

Son presently lives in a group home equipped to provide appropriate services to meet Son’s special needs.

This arrangement is likely court-ordered through either a juvenile dependency case or a juvenile delinquency case or related cases of both types, as a result of Son’s alleged prior assault on Father.

Son is released to Father for the Thanksgiving holiday. Father and Son go to Daughter’s home for the holiday.

Over the visit, Son reportedly becomes enraged and allegedly assaults Daughter.

Upon arrival of other family members, who assist in restraining Son, Father calls Son’s Therapist.

Therapist advises Father to call the police.

Father calls the police.

The police arrive …

And ask Son whether Son wants to leave for a psychiatric facility.

Son indicates that he does not.

The police advise Father that they cannot take Son to a psychiatric facility against his will.

Father then requests, as an alternative, that they arrest Son and take him to juvenile detention.

The police advise Father that they cannot arrest Son because he is a minor.

One of the officers on the scene is a supervisor.

The officers suggest that Father take Son home with him, away from Daughter.

Father arranges for a family member to return Son to his group home.

Read more in this Kansas City [MO] Examiner article: KCPD refuse to remove homicidal teen from the home.

This particular family lives in Missouri.

But there are similar families facing similar challenges throughout Florida.

Depending upon Son’s precise conduct and history, Florida law provides at least two different mechanisms for immediate intervention in crises such as this:

• Baker Act-ing (seventy-two hour commitment for psychological evaluation) and

• Arrest on domestic battery by a juvenile

In Florida, law enforcement officers should be familiar with both processes and, in appropriate cases, should be prepared to assist a parent with whichever measure is most appropriate in the case at hand.

In the event that law enforcement officers will not intercede in the immediate family crisis or in the event that family assistance is needed beyond the immediate crisis, a family law attorney with additional experience in juvenile law and, ideally, further experience in mental health law and/or substance abuse law, should be consulted as soon as possible.

Davenport, Iowa apparently thinks so. The City has a local ordinance that holds a parent accountable if their child breaks the law or causes a third party harm.

Accordingly, the ordinance imposes punishments for their children’s infractions on parents.

Parental punishments progress with each succeeding infraction, from a mere warning, to attending mandatory parenting classes at a parent’s expense, to monetary fines starting at $750.

As written, the ordinance requires an “accused” parent to prove that the parent has not been negligent in supervising their child. Failing that, if the City deems the parent responsible, the punishment stands.

Son is arrested for having “pot” and violating the local curfew.

The City of Davenport “punishes” Mother.

Mother takes the matter to court.

At trial, the court rules in Mother’s favor, and awards Mother significant attorney’s fees.

The City of Davenport appeals.

Iowa’s highest court then holds that some of Davenport’s ordinance is unconstitutional, because it deprives parents of due process.

In particular, the court strikes the ordinance provision that relieves the government of having to prove that the parent was negligent and, as written, unconstitutionally shifts the burden of proof to a parent to prove that they were not negligent.

And the appellate court upholds Mother’s victory at trial.

Otherwise, the ordinance stands though and the court approves, conceptually, holding parents accountable for their children’s misdeeds.

But now the law will require the government to put on affirmative proof of the parent’s negligence and, presumably, that that negligence “caused” the child’s misconduct. So, the ordinance no longer stacks the deck in favor of government … and, arguably, now stacks the deck in favor of parents.

Read more in this [Davenport, IO] Quad-City Times news article: Parental responsibility law takes hit from Iowa court and this Des Moines / Ames WOI-DT 5 ABC TV news article: Parts of Parental Responsibility Law Struck Down.

Husband and Wife have three Children together.

Husband is arrested for allegedly murdering Wife … before Children’s eyes.

And then fleeing from the scene with the Children in tow.

Husband is now in jail awaiting trial.

Children are in foster care.

Both sets of Children’s Grandparents are in the process of qualifying as foster parents for Children.

At a family court hearing concerning the Children, Husband requests that the Children visit Husband in jail. Husband believes that the Children would like to visit him in jail.

The Children’s paternal Grandparents support the Children visiting Husband in jail.

The Children’s maternal Grandparents object to any such timesharing with Husband.

The attorney appointed to represent the Children also objects to any timesharing with Husband, because the Children may be called as witnesses at Husband’s criminal trial and Husband might attempt to influence the Children’s testimony during visitation.

Husband’s attorney counters by proposing electronic monitoring to guard against witness-tampering. It is unclear how effectively such monitoring could guard against manipulation.

The Children’s attorney asks the Court to speak with the Children’s therapists before ruling on visitation.

The family court judge indicates he will consider Husband’s request for timesharing but that he will take no action regarding any existing criminal court orders barring or limiting contact with the Children or witnesses in general.

One can only speculate about Husband’s motivations for timesharing.

Read more in this Mankato [MN] Free Press article: Murder suspect requests visitation for kids.