Citation Numbers: 1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 11428, 23 Conn. L. Rptr. 106
Judges: BRENNEMAN, J.
Filed Date: 10/8/1998
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
At 7:20 pm that same day, DCF secured a 96-hour administrative removal of all three children from their home under the authority of subsections (c) and (d) of Sec.
After several brief hearings in the Plainville court, the matter was transferred for an expedited evidentiary hearing on the sustaining of the OTC to the Child Protection Session of the Superior Court, for Juvenile Matters in Middletown. On June 8, 1998, Evalina and David V. filed a motion to dismiss the case for failure to grant an evidentiary hearing on the OTC within ten days, as required by subsection (b) of Sec.
At the time of confirming the OTC, the court also granted DCF's oral motion for a psychological evaluation of all family members and their interactions. This was conducted by clinical psychologist Dr. Julia Ramos-Grenier on July 28 and 29, 1998, and her written reported submitted to the court on August 13. As a court-ordered document, it immediately became available to the court and counsel for all parties. ln that report, Dr. Ramos-Grenier, inter alia, concluded that:
(1) while Raiza repeated to her that she had been hit by her mother with objects, "Raiza did not strike this evaluator as a credible reporter given her psychological/behavioral functioning at this time, the materials reviewed, the lack of corroboration of her statements by her sister, and the results of the present evaluation." (page 5).
(2) Josette reported being hit by her mother, though never with objects, and "Josette does appear to be a credible reporter since she was consistent in her statements and does not show any significant emotional or personality dysfunction." (Id.)
(3) Dennis was ". . . suffering emotional trauma at the separation from his mother and father . . ." (Id., p. 1.)
Dr. Ramos-Grenier concluded by recommending that Josette, as well as Dennis, return to the care of Evalina and David V. CT Page 11431
Notwithstanding the continuing obligation of all parties, but particularly DCF which had initiated the separation of these children from their parents, to bring to the court's attention any change in circumstances which diminished the imminency or any risk of physical injury justifying continuation of the OTC,.DCF did nothing to bring the psychologist's conclusions and recommendations immediately to the court's attention.
In this situation the state cannot consitutionally "sit back and wait" for the parent to institute judicial proceedings. It "cannot . . . [adopt] for itself an attitude of `if you don't like it, sue.'" Duchesne v. Sugarman,
566 F.2d 817 ,828 (2d Cir. 1977) cited with approval by Speziale, CJ, writing for a unanimous court in In Re Juvenile Appeal (83-CD), supra at p. 291.
Consequently, the parents of Dennis V., on September 3, filed a Motion to Revoke or Dismiss the OTC on the two children Dr. Ramos-Grenier recommended returning home. Notwithstanding the requirements of the Practice Book2
no hearing on this motion had been scheduled prior to a judicial pretrial with the undersigned at Plainville on September 23, 1998. At that time, DCF expressed a willingness for both Josette and Dennis to be returned home but only after the parents admitted, or entered pleas of nolo contendere
to the allegations of physical abuse of all three children and sexual abuse of the girls. The parents were willing to enter such a plea to an allegation of uncared-for, within one of the definitions of Sec.
Since the criterion for a OTC removal of "imminent risk of physical injury" and not the general best "interests" criteria that may be considered following an adjudication of neglect, it is the responsibility of the judicial authority to reexamine the continuing need to keep the child out of the home as the imminency or the risk changes. Since the confirmation of the OTC on June 12, 1998, the imminency of the risk o Dennis appears to have significantly diminished:
1) The only "reporter" who alleged that their mother hit Dennis "hard" was Raiza, found by the psychologist to be a less than credible reporter. No corroboration of any kind was offered that any physical discipline imposed by the mother on Dennis rose (or sank) to the level of abuse.
2) The parents have completed or engaged in all of the "steps" articulated by the court in May of 1998 necessary for the return CT Page 11433 of their children and are willing to submit to an adjudication that would permit court-ordered Protective Supervision to accompany the children back to their home.
3) Dr. Ramos-Grenier recommended the immediate return home of Dennis and Josette.
4) DCF itself would have terminated the OTC upon the entry of an adjudication of abuse, rather than uncared-for, indicating that any risk of injury was no longer imminent.
5) The parents, on the advice or their counsel, could not agree to an adjudication of abuse while criminal charges were pending.
Based upon the foregoing, the undersigned proposed terminating the OTC on the two children whom Dr. Ramos-Grenier recommended sending home, and who DCF agreed could go home upon an adjudication of abuse. The petitioner protested taking such action without a further evidentiary hearing. Because the Middletown CPS judge had heard evidence relating, to the abuse of Josette, to which the undersigned had had no access, the proposed return of Josette was reconsidered and suspended. There appeared no reason, however, why an evidentiary hearing was necessary for Dennis, for whom separation from home was more traumatic than for his sister, and whose "abuse" consisted of his half-sister's reports of his having been spanked by their mother. Whatever risk of physical injury would be presented by his return, could not be predicted to be either serious or imminent. The parties respondents are free to return to the judge in Middletown who confirmed the OFC on Josette, based upon testimony heard in June, with the changed circumstances delineated above and a request for Josette to be returned home prior to conclusion of the full trial which reconvenes in Middletown in January.
This order is entered without prejudice to the respondent CT Page 11434 parents to seek revocation of the OTC on Josette before the judge in Middletown who heard testimony relating to the imminency of risk of physical injury justifying continuation of temporary custody four months ago with their current motion based upon changed circumstances since June of 1998.
Judgement entered at Plainville September 23, 1998.
Articulation entered at Plainville October 8, 1998.
Frederica S. Brenneman, Judge