A Brooklyn mom who kicked an abusive partner out of the home is being subjected to traumatic and invasive searches by caseworkers from the city’s child welfare agency, according to court papers filed Wednesday.
The case takes aim at a broader issue: Survivors of domestic violence often agree to government supervision in order to maintain custody of their children, lawyers, advocates and researchers told the Daily News. In this case, the court stated the searches were aimed in part at making sure the father was “not there,” and therefore able to harm the child.
But critics charge these orders perpetuate a “double abuse of women” — by their partners, then the system — as moms and their children are subjected to surveillance after reporting domestic violence.
The woman, identified in court papers as Ms. W to protect her identity, is appealing the court-ordered supervision of her and her 1-year-old daughter by the Administration for Children’s Services, which has an open case against the father. She has not been accused of any wrongdoing.
The woman says caseworkers from ACS routinely show up to search her apartment. Sometimes the agency calls or texts, but a few times they have shown up unannounced. The woman has lost track of how many times caseworkers have come to her home, but estimates it’s around nine since August.
“They have searched everywhere,” said Ms. W. “They came late at night — check every room, living room, bathroom, cabinets, refrigerator. My home is my sanctuary, and I felt like I had to explain my home. I’m being judged. It is embarrassing. I have to remove my daughter’s diaper and show them that she doesn’t have any bruises.”
David Shalleck-Klein, executive director of the Family Justice Law Center and one of her attorneys, said ACS supervision is a frequent requirement for survivors of domestic violence to maintain custody — but is often deeply misguided.
“The boundless home-search order against Ms. W, a loving and caring mother who is not accused of anything, is blatantly illegal,” said Shalleck-Klein, who is representing Ms. W alongside the New York University School of Law Family Defense Clinic and the law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.
“Worse, it further traumatizes a family that is recovering from domestic violence. The government should not perpetrate this type of double abuse,” he said.
In New York State, more than 15,000 out of 57,000 incidents of child maltreatment have domestic violence as a factor, according to federal data.
Shalleck-Klein described the appeal as “groundbreaking,” with the potential to prevent the Administration for Children’s Services from “punishing” Ms. W and to overhaul the agency and Family Court’s treatment of victims of abuse.
Ms. W called the police on her abusive partner, who labeled her a “snitch” and “stupid,” then slapped and hit her and “ripped the dreadlocks out of her hair,” according to the brief.
Ms. W, afraid for herself and not wanting her child to witness the violence, told her abusive partner he had to leave. Before he left, he went into her bathroom and urinated in the bathtub, court documents show. She reported the abuse to her therapist, who reached out to the Administration for Children’s Services.
“When he hit me in front of [my child],” she said, “and with the verbal abuse, that’s when I said ‘enough.’ And I used my reflex and kicked him out and told him to never come back.”
On the last day of of August, she obtained a Family Court order of protection for him to fully stay away from her and her daughter. He has not been back to the home since, her lawyers allege.
But the appeal says the requirement for Mrs. W. to undergo regular supervision as part of the court order “was based on generalized speculation and stereotyping.”
“The Family Court stated, ‘Sometimes people follow [orders of protection] very carefully but sometimes people, including the victims, sometimes change their mind and then the orders get violated. And I don’t want that to happen.’ There was no finding specific to Ms. W.”
Josh Gupta-Kagan, a constitutional law professor who specializes in child neglect and abuse law and legal systems at Columbia Law School, doubted there is a strong rationale for the home searches on the basis of whether the abuser would return.
“That’s a pretty patronizing attitude toward a domestic violence survivor and possibly sexist attitude,” he said, “and doesn’t respect her as a decision-maker for what is best and safest for her child. She’s entitled to the presumption that the decisions she makes are best for a child. Unless the state can prove otherwise, I don’t think they’re justified in treating her this way.”
Ms. W had no history with the Administration for Children’s Services before this case, according to the appeal. She has told the court she wants nothing to do with her former partner.
“I don’t want my daughter growing up in a violent house,” she said. “I don’t want her to be traumatized. I don’t want her to see these things. Our house is peaceful when he’s not there — that’s how I want my daughter to grow up.”
A child neglect case was filed against the father in Brooklyn Family Court on the same day as the order of protection, according to her lawyers. Ms. W said she was told by the judge that to maintain custody of her daughter, caseworkers would need to visit their home.
“I didn’t agree with this, but I’ll do anything to keep my daughter,” she said.
ACS is prohibited by law from sharing information about individual cases, according to the agency, but may ask the Family Court for supervision if necessary to protect the safety of a child.
Child welfare workers have reduced the number of filings for court-ordered supervision by nearly half since 2019, data shared with The News show, but ACS conceded that judges often order supervision when the other parent has been issued an order of protection. ACS holds that Family Court has discretion to issue supervision orders.
ACS Commissioner Jess Dannhauser has previously acknowledged that home searches can be distressing for parents and children, and has looked to reduce unnecessary probes with varying success.
“We know CPS [Child Protective Services] investigations alone can be inherently traumatic and intrusive for families,” Dannhauser told state officials this fall.
At least two different caseworkers have searched Ms. W’s home since the case started. She said she asked the agency how long the supervision would continue but received a vague response — only that the searches would “take a while” and it would be a “long time” until the case is closed.
“Why am I being investigated,” she said, “when the case is against the father? They say I’m not being investigated, but it always feels like I am.”
The home searches have been particularly painful for Ms. W, who as a child was separated by ACS from her family and placed into foster care. “I’m so scared of saying the wrong thing,” she said, “and then they will take my daughter away.”
