Articles Posted in Child Abuse & Neglect

In Matter of Richard TT. (Kara VV.), the Appellate Division, Third Department, considered whether the Family Court of Schenectady County erred in proceeding with a neglect fact-finding hearing without the mother or her attorney present. The case involved important questions about a parent’s right to counsel in Family Court Act article 10 neglect proceedings, and the procedures that must be followed when assigned counsel seeks to withdraw. The decision also addressed how the failure to give proper notice of withdrawal can affect the validity of a neglect finding.

Background Facts

The mother and father were unmarried parents of four children born between 2003 and 2013. In July 2020, the Schenectady County Department of Social Services (DSS) received a report concerning the children. The children were removed from the parents’ care and placed in DSS custody. DSS filed separate neglect petitions against each parent under Family Court Act article 10.

In New York, corporal punishment by a parent is not automatically considered abuse or neglect. The law allows for reasonable physical discipline, but when the actions of a parent result in physical injury or pose a risk to a child’s physical or mental health, they may cross the line into neglect. In Matter of Z.V. (J.V.), the Family Court considered whether a father accused of physically harming his daughter should be allowed court-ordered visitation with her. The court also addressed whether an outside evaluator should assess the possibility of visits. This case highlighted how visitation decisions in neglect proceedings focus on the child’s safety and well-being.

Background Facts

On May 31, 2024, the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) filed a neglect petition under Article 10 of the Family Court Act. The petition was filed on behalf of 12-year-old Z.V. against her father, J.V. According to ACS, on May 22, 2024, the father entered the bathroom where the child was and told her to “square up.” He took her laptop and provoked her to retrieve it. During the confrontation, he allegedly placed the child in a chokehold and wrestled her to the floor. The child reported that she struggled to breathe and felt like she was about to die.

In New York, parents may discipline their children, including using reasonable corporal punishment. However, when that discipline becomes excessive or causes harm, it can cross the line into child neglect or abuse under the Family Court Act. When the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) receives a report of suspected child neglect involving physical force, it can file a petition under Article 10 of the Family Court Act. In Matter of Z.V., the court was asked to decide whether a father accused of using excessive force against his child should be permitted to have a professional evaluate whether visitation should occur.

Background Facts

On May 31, 2024, ACS filed a neglect petition against the respondent father, J.V., on behalf of his 12-year-old daughter, Z.V. The allegations centered on an incident that occurred on May 22, 2024. According to the petition, the father entered the bathroom and told the child to “square up.” He then took her laptop and encouraged her to try to take it back. When she attempted to retrieve it, the father allegedly placed her in a chokehold.

In New York, parents are legally permitted to discipline their children using reasonable corporal punishment. However, when that punishment causes injury or creates a risk of harm, it may be considered abuse or neglect under the Family Court Act. In Matter of A.H. (J.H.), 2025 NY Slip Op 50317(U), the court considered whether a mother’s alleged physical discipline of her child crossed that legal line. The case arose after a report was made to child protective services regarding an incident that led to visible bruising on the child’s arm. The court conducted a detailed hearing to determine whether the conduct amounted to neglect.

Background Facts

The case began on February 9, 2024, when ACS filed a neglect petition against the respondent mother, J.H., regarding her child, A.H. A day earlier, the child’s father, who was not named as a respondent, filed a family offense petition based on allegations that the mother had used excessive corporal punishment. The court issued a temporary order of protection and ACS followed by filing a neglect petition. ACS alleged that on February 1, 2024, the mother hit the child on his right arm, causing a bruise. The child reportedly asked for an ice pack at school on February 6 and showed the bruise to a school nurse. ACS sent a child protective specialist (CPS) to investigate.

In New York, the Statewide Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment (SCR) maintains records of indicated reports of abuse and neglect. These reports can affect a person’s ability to work with children or adopt. In the case of Matter of Johnny S. v. New York State Office of Children & Family Services, the Appellate Division, Third Department, reviewed a challenge to two such reports. The case focused on whether the petitioner had committed child maltreatment, and whether the reports should remain in the SCR.

Background Facts

The case arose after the Albany County Department of Social Services (DSS) investigated allegations that the petitioner, Johnny S., had sexually abused his teenage stepdaughter. The child, born in 2001, made several allegations during the investigation. DSS found the reports to be indicated and filed them with the SCR.

Family Court decisions can significantly impact families, particularly when they involve decisions about a child’s future care. A permanency goal in New York refers to a plan established during family court proceedings to determine the long-term living arrangement for a child in foster care. Goals can include reunification with parents, adoption, placement with relatives, or another planned permanent living arrangement. The goal is set based on the child’s best interests, safety, and well-being. It provides a framework for the child’s future, ensuring stability and security. Permanency planning is important because it seeks to minimize the time a child spends in temporary care, promoting continuity and reducing the potential emotional and developmental impact of prolonged uncertainty.

This case involved a mother who appealed a Family Court decision to change the permanency goal for her child from reunification to placement for adoption. The court considered the child’s best interests, the mother’s progress with services, and the risks associated with returning the child to her custody.

Background Facts

This case involved proceedings under Family Court Act Article 10 to determine whether the maternal grandmother of three children, Talia, Jonah, and Adele, was legally responsible for their care and whether she neglected them. In April 2014, the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) initiated proceedings against the parents and the maternal grandmother, alleging abuse and neglect of Talia and derivative abuse and neglect of Jonah. After Adele’s birth in February 2015, ACS brought a third proceeding alleging that Adele was derivatively abused and neglected. The allegations centered on the maternal grandmother’s role in caring for the children and her failure to protect them.

The maternal grandmother had a substantial presence in the household. She visited daily, stayed overnight two to three times per week, and provided regular care for Talia, including feeding, diaper changes, bathing, and supervising her while the mother rested or performed household tasks. Despite these responsibilities, the grandmother contested that she was not a person legally responsible for the children and denied the allegations of neglect.

Question Before the Court

In Admin. for Children’s Servs. v. Ketly M, the Family Court of Kings County addressed allegations of child neglect against a stepmother. The case raised questions about the use of corporal punishment and its legal limits. The court found that the stepmother had neglected one child through excessive corporal punishment and derivatively neglected two other children in the household.

In the context of child neglect, corporal punishment refers to the use of physical force as a disciplinary method. While parents or guardians may use reasonable physical discipline, excessive corporal punishment crosses the line into neglect under New York law. Neglect occurs when physical force causes harm or poses a substantial risk of harm to a child’s physical or emotional well-being. Actions such as hitting a child with objects or inflicting injuries demonstrate excessive corporal punishment. Courts assess whether the punishment was reasonable based on the circumstances, the child’s age, and the severity of the discipline (see Family Ct Act § 1012(f)(i)(B)).

Background Facts