…AND BATTERED MOTHERS

              It would seem to be only common sense: If a woman is beaten by a husband or a boyfriend, don't punish her again by taking away her children.   And don't punish her children by tearing them from the arms of a loving mother and throwing them into foster care.

                   But it took a class-action lawsuit to persuade the Administration for Children's Services.   Ruling in the case of Nicholson v. Williams , U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein found that such cases were not aberrations.   He found that ACS “routinely” took children from mothers just because those mothers had been beaten, and he ordered the practice stopped. [i] (Highlights of the judge's decision are on the following page).

                   As a result, the problem has diminished.   But why did ACS fight so hard to cling to an approach that does so much harm to women and children?   Why did it continue the fight even as it was proclaiming itself “reformed”?  

Yes, “witnessing domestic violence” can be harmful to some children.   But Judge Weinstein found the consensus of expert opinion is clear: Taking children from battered mothers is much, much more harmful.   Asked flat out by a reporter, “What was worse for you: watching [the beating] happen or being taken from your mom?” a child replied the way almost anyone would expect: “Being taken away from my mother,” she said. [ii]

And in some cases, ACS rushed to remove children even when they had not witnessed the violence at all.

These are the stories of four such women and their children.   Except as noted, the facts and quotes are drawn from Judge Weinstein's decision:

Sharwline Nicholson held down a full-time job while pursuing a college degree in behavioral sciences and caring for her two children.

She decided to break off a relationship with her daughter's father because he lived far away in South Carolina.   When she told him, he became enraged.   “He started hitting on me, pounding me, kicking me…” [iii]

But even as she was bleeding profusely, suffering from a broken arm, broken ribs, and gashes to her head, as she called 911 and waited for an ambulance to take her to a hospital, she arranged for a neighbor to care for her children.

But that wasn't enough for ACS.   As Nicholson lay in her hospital bed, ACS took the children from the babysitter and threw them into foster care with strangers.

When ACS workers came to her hospital room to let her know, “there was no softness, no comfort, no explanation of where [the children] were, nothing,” Nicholson said.   “I compare it to kidnapping.   I compare it to death.” [iv]

The ACS case manager said the children were in “imminent danger” because their mother was in the hospital and couldn't protect them.   The case manager admitted he deliberately delayed notifying the court of the “emergency” removal to gain leverage over Nicholson and force her to meet ACS demands.   He said this practice is common.

ACS charged Nicholson with “engaging in domestic violence” in front of the children.   In fact, when she was beaten one child was asleep in another room, the other was in school.

“It reached the point where I said ‘Oh, why did I call 911,'” Nicholson said. [v]

Nicholson could not even visit her children for eight days, and then only with supervision at a foster care agency.   Notes Judge Weinstein, “Ms. Nicholson was able to locate her nine-month-old daughter within the building by following the sounds of her crying.”   She found her “sitting on a chair by herself with tears running down.” She had a rash on her face, yellow pus running from her nose, and she seemed to have scratched herself.   Her son had a swollen eye.   He said the foster mother had slapped his face.   When another foster mother was assigned to take him away, he asked the new foster mother: “You're not going to hit me, are you?”

Even after the court ordered the children returned, on condition that the family stay with a cousin in The Bronx, ACS stalled for days – on grounds that the children would not have adequate bedding.

Long after being reunited, the harm ACS did to her children remains.   Once, when her son heard police were in the building he froze and said “Oh no, they're going to take me.” [vi]

Winning back her own children has been only the beginning for Sharwline Nicholson.   She's joined the Board of Directors of the Child Welfare Organizing Project, and helps other families fight ACS.   She hopes to open her own shelter for battered women and their children. [vii]

Ekaete Udoh is from Nigeria, where she was forced into an arranged marriage with an abusive husband.   The couple had five daughters. Udoh repeatedly obtained orders of protection against her husband, who claimed an inherent right to abuse his wife.

One night while Udoh was asleep her husband punched one of the children in the eye.   She rushed to protect her daughter and took her

                                                            (over)

to a doctor.   After Udoh complained to police, her husband left the family home and never came back, ultimately returning to Nigeria.

One of the children told an ACS worker that “I felt very comfortable staying with [my mother]. I am safe .... I told her I didn't think it was necessary to be removed, and I felt a great suffering if I was removed from my house.”

Nevertheless, after first demanding that Udoh show up in Family Court, ACS then took away her children on grounds that, if the mother was in court, the children would have no one at home after school – even though the children still at home were 12,13,16 and 17.   ACS said the children might not have keys to the house.  

                    The petition accused Udoh of neglect and of “engaging in domestic violence.”   It falsely claimed that she had not sought orders of protection.   Spaces on the petition where ACS is supposed to justify removing the children without a court order and explain why removal was necessary were left blank.

                    That didn't stop Family Court from rubber-stamping the initial removal.   And even after the court ordered the children returned, ACS waited for eight more days.

                    The Legal Aid Society, which represented the Udoh children, joined in   demanding that they be returned home, noting that, while in foster care, the children were “missing classes because their foster mother is unable to get them to school on time” and,

ironically, “the foster mother has refused to provide house keys to the children and they have been locked out of their foster home repeatedly.”   One child called the time in care “very uncomfortable … [the foster mother] treated us like we were criminals.”

Michele Garcia was beaten, for the first and only time, after an ex-boyfriend flew into a jealous rage.   Garcia immediately took out an order of protection and moved herself and her three children in with an aunt.

An ACS domestic violence specialist found that, in Judge Weinstein's words, “the children had no physical injuries, they had not been hurt during the attack on Ms. Garcia, their basic needs were being attended to, they were clean and neat, and they exhibited no symptoms of developmental disabilities. [The specialist] concluded that Ms. Garcia was a strong woman who would do anything to protect her children, and that removal of her children was not necessary.”

Nevertheless, six weeks after the incident the children witnessed, after the family was safely settled with Ms. Garcia's aunt, the agency took the children away, apparently because Garcia had exercised her legal right not to have the children interviewed by strangers until she was sure that would not traumatize her children.   The children were placed with a relative of the abuser.

When one of Ms. Garcia's children asked the caseworker why she and her siblings were being taken away from their mother, the caseworker replied: “Over a phone call, if your mom would have called, you would not have been removed.”

At trial, [a supervisor] testified that … the reason that she believed the children were in “imminent danger” was that the children were not receiving counseling and “ACS had no idea what was going on”

The children apparently didn't get any counseling in foster care, either.

Nevertheless, Family Court found Garcia guilty of neglect and, even after Judge Weinstein's ruling, ACS refused to drop the charges.   It took a state appellate court decision to overturn Garcia's conviction. [i]

Michelle Norris was assaulted by her boyfriend when she announced she was breaking up with him.   She called the police, got an order of protection and she and her two-year-old son moved out.

When she went back to collect her things, the boyfriend showed up, beat her again, grabbed the boy and locked himself in the bathroom.

The police forced Norris to leave.   Then ACS charged her with “engaging in domestic violence” and “leaving [her son] with an abusive man.”   The ACS worker said the fact that the police forced her to leave was “irrelevant.”   ACS also threw in a charge of drug abuse, but later admitted that was unfounded.

Nevertheless, the court imposed requirements for drug testing and, of course,   “counseling” and “parent education.”   Then ACS, on it's own, threw in requirements that she maintain a job and get a two-bedroom apartment – a task made harder by the fact that she was forced to pay for her own “counseling” and “parent education.”

When she finally got her son back, he had been traumatized by foster care. “He screams [whenever] I even walk in the other room. He thinks that I am leaving. Every time the doorbell rings he gets hysterical. … I think he's very afraid to be away from me ever again.”

[i] The full text of the decision in Nicholson v. Williams is available at http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/nyc/nchls nwllms030102drft.pdf

[ii] Dawn Fratangelo, “Double Jeopardy,” Dateline NBC , July 31, 2001.

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Wendy Davis, “Active Parenting,” City Limits , June 2002, p.17.

[v] Ibid.

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] Ibid.

[i] Wendy Davis, “A Battered Mom isn't a Bad Mom, Court Tells City,” City Limits E-Mail Weekly , March 10, 2003.