If you watch much television, you've probably heard of a product called Mike's Hard Lemonade.
And if you ask Christopher Ratte and his wife how they lost custody of their 7-year-old son, the short version is that nobody in the Ratte family watches much television.
The way police and child protection workers figure it, Ratte should have known that what a Comerica Park vendor handed over when Ratte ordered a lemonade for his boy three Saturdays ago contained alcohol, and Ratte's ignorance justified placing young Leo in foster care until his dad got up to speed on the commercial beverage industry.
Even if, in hindsight, that decision seems a bit, um, idiotic.
Ratte is a tenured professor of classical archaeology at the University of Michigan, which means that, on a given day, he's more likely to be excavating ancient burial sites in Turkey than watching "Dancing with the Stars" -- or even the History Channel, for that matter.
The 47-year-old academic says he wasn't even aware alcoholic lemonade existed when he and Leo stopped at a concession stand on the way to their seats in Section 114.
"I'd never drunk it, never purchased it, never heard of it," Ratte of Ann Arbor told me sheepishly last week. "And it's certainly not what I expected when I ordered a lemonade for my 7-year-old."
But it wasn't until the top of the ninth inning that a Comerica Park security guard noticed the bottle in young Leo's hand.
"You know this is an alcoholic beverage?" the guard asked the professor.
"You've got to be kidding," Ratte replied. He asked for the bottle, but the security guard snatched it before Ratte could examine the label.
Mistake or child neglect? An hour later, Ratte was being interviewed by a Detroit police officer at Children's Hospital, where a physician at the Comerica Park clinic had dispatched Leo -- by ambulance! -- after a cursory exam.
Leo betrayed no symptoms of inebriation. But the physician and a police officer from the Comerica substation suggested the ER visit after the boy admitted he was feeling a little nauseated.
The Comerica cop estimated that Leo had drunk about 12 ounces of the hard lemonade, which is 5% alcohol. But an ER resident who drew Leo's blood less than 90 minutes after he and his father were escorted from their seats detected no trace of alcohol.
"Completely normal appearing," the resident wrote in his report, "... he is cleared to go home."
But it would be two days before the state of Michigan allowed Ratte's wife, U-M architecture professor Claire Zimmerman, to take their son home, and nearly a week before Ratte was permitted to move back into his own house.
And if you think nothing so ludicrous could happen to your family, maybe you should pay a little less attention to who's getting booted from "Dancing with the Stars" and a little more to how the state agency responsible for protecting Michigan's children is going about its work.
Doing their duty Almost everyone Chris Ratte met the night they took Leo away conceded the state was probably overreacting.
The sympathetic cop who interviewed Ratte and his son at the hospital said she was convinced what happened had been an accident, but that her supervisor was insisting the matter be referred to Child Protective Services.
And Ratte thought the two child protection workers who came to take Leo away seemed more annoyed with the police than with him. "This is so unnecessary," one told Ratte before driving away with his son.
But there was really nothing any of them could do, they all said. They were just adhering to protocol, following orders.
And so what had begun as an outing to the ballpark ended with Leo crying himself to sleep in front of a television inside the Child Protective Services building, and Ratte and his wife standing on the sidewalk outside, wondering when they'd see their little boy again.
A vain rescue mission Child Protective Services is the unit of the Michigan Department of Human Services responsible for intervening when someone suspects a child is being abused, neglected or endangered. Its powers include the authority to remove children from their homes and transfer them to foster parents who answer only to the state.
By law, CPS officials are forbidden to discuss the particulars of any investigation.
But Mike Patterson, Child and Family Services director for the Wayne County district that includes Comerica Park, said that in general his agency's discretion is limited once police obtain a court order to remove a child from the parental home -- usually authorized, as in Leo's case, by a juvenile court referee responding to a police officer's recommendation.
"Once the court has authorized a child's removal," Patterson told me, "we cannot return the child to the parental custody" until the court has OK'd it.
But that doesn't explain why CPS refused to release Leo to the custody of two aunts -- one a social worker and licensed foster parent -- who drove all night from New England to take custody of their nephew.
Chris Ratte's sisters, Catherine Miller and Felicity Ratte, left Massachusetts at 10:30 the night of the fateful lemonade purchase after the police officer who'd reluctantly requested a removal order told Ratte the state would likely jump at the chance to place Leo with responsible relatives. But when the two women arrived at the CPS office early Sunday, a caseworker explained they would not be allowed to see Leo until they had secured a hotel room.
The sisters quickly complied. But by the time they returned to CPS around 10:30 a.m., their nephew had been taken to an undisclosed foster home, where he would remain until a preliminary court hearing the following afternoon.
By that Monday, April 7, when Ratte and his wife returned for a meeting with Latricia Jones, the CPS caseworker assigned to their case, no one in the family had been able to talk to Leo for a day and a half.
More investigation needed At a hearing later that day, Jones recommended that Leo remain in foster care until she had completed her investigation, a process she estimated would take several days. It was only after the assistant attorney general who represented CPS admitted that the state was not interested in pursuing the case aggressively that juvenile referee Leslie Graves agreed to release Leo to his mother -- on the condition that Ratte himself relocate to a hotel.
Finally, at a second hearing three days later, Graves dismissed the complaint and permitted Ratte to move home.
Don Duquette, a U-M law professor who directs the university's Child Advocacy Law Clinic, represented Ratte and his wife. He notes sardonically that the most remarkable thing about the couple's case may be the relative speed with which they were reunited with Leo.
Duquette says the emergency removal powers of CPS, though "well- intentioned" are "out of control and partly responsible for the large numbers of kids in the foster care system," which is almost universally acknowledged to be badly overburdened.
Ratte and his wife have filed a formal complaint with the CPS ombudsman's office.
"I have apologized to Leo from the bottom of my heart for the silly mistake that got him into this mess," Ratte wrote in the complaint. "But I have also told him that what happened afterward was an even bigger error, and I would like to be able to say to him that institutions, like people, can learn from their mistakes."
I have had my own experience with Wayne County DHS. These people are a treat. What angers me even more is the article claims that CPS workers were actually annoyed by having to take the child, but stated they were just following protocol.
I can guarantee you I know the Michigan child protection law better than any of those people involved in that case, and they had many, many outs. What I would bet actually happened is that a CPS supervisor had a brief summary of what happend (most likely "Parents were serving child alcohol") and made a snap decision, ordered his/her worker bees to collect the child and bring him back to the hive, completely disregarding what those on the scene were saying.
This is far too common place among Michigan CPS. It goes both ways. I have seen so many uniformed decisions by CPS management that have not only led to unnecessary removals, but also leaving children in dangerous situations where several eventually died.
This needs to change, but no real effort is underway. Please don't think that Children's Rights lawsuit is going to make a difference, They will condem foster care to no end while praising CPS. Apparently they believe only one half of the system in Michigan is broken... that would be odd indeed.
It looks like this turned out OK, and rather quickly (although one day separated form your child by the state is an eternity), but mark my words, not so much as a slap on the wrist will be handed out to anyone involved.
> I have had my own experience with Wayne County DHS. These people are > a treat. What angers me even more is the article claims that CPS > workers were actually annoyed by having to take the child, but stated > they were just following protocol.
> I can guarantee you I know the Michigan child protection law better > than any of those people involved in that case, and they had many, > many outs. What I would bet actually happened is that a CPS > supervisor had a brief summary of what happend (most likely "Parents > were serving child alcohol") and made a snap decision, ordered his/her > worker bees to collect the child and bring him back to the hive, > completely disregarding what those on the scene were saying.
> This is far too common place among Michigan CPS. It goes both ways. > I have seen so many uniformed decisions by CPS management that have > not only led to unnecessary removals, but also leaving children in > dangerous situations where several eventually died.
> This needs to change, but no real effort is underway. Please don't > think that Children's Rights lawsuit is going to make a difference, > They will condem foster care to no end while praising CPS. Apparently > they believe only one half of the system in Michigan is broken... > that would be odd indeed.
> It looks like this turned out OK, and rather quickly (although one day > separated form your child by the state is an eternity), but mark my > words, not so much as a slap on the wrist will be handed out to anyone > involved.
Many people in Family Rights get all excited about those "Children's Rights" law suits, but I too have come to the conclusion that the suits are more beneficial TO the system.
Who is REALLY behind those law suits anyway? Who is REALLY behind the group filing?
On May 5, 1:02 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Many people in Family Rights get all excited about > those "Children's Rights" law suits, but I too have > come to the conclusion that the suits are more > beneficial TO the system.
On May 5, 7:24 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
> On May 5, 1:02 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Many people in Family Rights get all excited about > > those "Children's Rights" law suits, but I too have > > come to the conclusion that the suits are more > > beneficial TO the system.
> On May 5, 7:24 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > On May 5, 1:02 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Many people in Family Rights get all excited about > > > those "Children's Rights" law suits, but I too have > > > come to the conclusion that the suits are more > > > beneficial TO the system.
> On May 5, 9:46 am, LK <Patis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 5, 7:24 am, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > > On May 5, 1:02 am, Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Many people in Family Rights get all excited about > > > > those "Children's Rights" law suits, but I too have > > > > come to the conclusion that the suits are more > > > > beneficial TO the system.
G > Many people in Family Rights get all excited about G > those "Children's Rights" law suits, but I too have G > come to the conclusion that the suits are more G > beneficial TO the system.
The smoking gun here is the ACLU. ACLU has rarely ever championed the rights of the intact family.
The ACLU has pulled for more MONEY for Foster Care contractors, to supposedly provide better services, as if that takes MONEY rather than responsibility.
ACLU seems to focus on the individual rights OF the child as in state care, emancipation, and combatting parental authority. Politically LIBERAL, they seem to be very much supportive of caseworkers and the Child Protective Services agencies and their POLITICAL AGENDA.
It's not the same but in some ways like the way that pedophiles want more kids emancipated and empowered to make their own choices, sexual or otherwise, unfettered by parental restraint.
Children’s Rights is one of the country’s leading child advocacy organizations, an independent watchdog holding state-run child welfare agencies accountable for providing quality services to endangered children. We use legal advocacy, research and analysis to ensure improved policies and practices, and public education to promote and protect children’s rights.
Our work has improved the lives of many thousands of children. We won’t rest until every state in the U.S. lives up to its constitutional and statutory obligation to provide basic services, care and protection to abused and neglected children. The degree to which we succeed is a measure of our humanity.
Founded by Marcia Robinson Lowry, a nationally recognized expert in child welfare reform, Children’s Rights began as a project of the American Civil Liberties Union. It became an independent non-profit organization in 1995.
THE MISSION The mission of Children’s Rights is to promote and protect the rights of children who are abused and neglected by creating meaningful and lasting reforms in government systems so that all children remain safe and secure and have the opportunity to grow up in loving families.
THE GOAL The goal of Children’s Rights is to ensure that government child welfare systems uphold the rights of children who are abused and neglected in order that they:
Remain safe from abuse and neglect;
Live in appropriate family settings whenever possible while in government custody;
Receive adequate medical, mental health and educational services; and
Return quickly to their families whenever possible or, through the adoption process, find a new permanent loving family.
ACTION AGENDA Expose what happens to children who are abused and neglected;
Utilize the power of the courts to compel government systems to fulfill their legal obligations to children;
Educate the public on why child welfare systems fail and how they can be fixed;
Research issues that have a direct impact on the lives of children to find practical solutions to the most pressing problems facing child welfare systems; and
Collaborate with child welfare advocates, professionals and policymakers to advance a common agenda and improve the lives of vulnerable children.
Meet our Executive Director Marcia Robinson Lowry Mae Ackerman-Brimberg, paralegal Anita Anthony Estling, executive assistant Sara Bartosz, senior staff attorney click here for bio Laurie Bensky, senior policy analyst click here for bio Emmy Curet, administrative assistant click here for bio Julian Darwall, paralegal Amy Driver, director of finance click here for bio Julie Farber, director of policy click here for bio Jeremiah Frei-Pearson, staff attorney click here for bio Elissa Gelber, staff attorney click here for bio Yasmin Grewal-Kok, staff attorney click here for bio Brooks Halliday, public relations manager click here for bio Daniel Holt, staff attorney click here for bio Chris Iseli, director of communications Bill Kapell, senior staff attorney click here for bio Talia Kraemer, paralegal Click here for bio Susan Lambiase, associate director click here for bio Katie Linehan, paralegal Marcia Robinson Lowry, executive director and founder click here for bio Katie Linehan, paralegal Ira Lustbader, associate director click here for bio Jethro Miller, director of development click here for bio Nelida Mulero, bookkeeper click here for bio Shirim Nothenberg, staff attorney click here for bio Rachel Podolsky, foundation relations manager Jessica Polansky, staff attorney click here for bio Samantha Rudolph, administrative assistant click here for bio Megan Spence, development coordinator Aaron Sussman, paralegal Eric Thompson, senior staff attorney click here for bio Sally Weissman, director of administration click here for bio Gena Wiltsek, staff attorney click here for bio
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Stuart H. Coleman, Esq. Managing Partner Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP
Robin L. Dahlberg, Esq. Attorney ACLU
Lynn M. Edens
Richard D. Emery, Esq. Senior Partner Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP
Lawrence J. Fox, Esq. Partner and former Managing Partner Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Daniel Galpern Executive Vice President CurtCo Media Labs
Jeffrey Gracer, Esq. Partner Sive Paget & Riesel, P.C.
Marcia Robinson Lowry, Esq. Executive Director Children's Rights
Howard Maisel Former Partner, McDonald and Company Investment Bankers Former Vice President and Board Director, Burmah Castrol Limited UK
Alan C. Myers, Esq., Co-Chair Partner Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, LLP
Alice Rosenwald, Co-Chair American Securities Holdings Co.
Melissa Salten, Esq. Attorney Expert in Taxation and Estate Planning
Anne Strickland Squadron President Theater Unlimited, Inc.
Marcia Robinson Lowry Founder and Executive Director, Children's Rights
Under Ms. Lowry's direction, Children's Rights currently supervises the monitoring of landmark child welfare reform court orders in Connecticut; the District of Columbia; Fulton and DeKalb counties in Georgia; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Mississippi; New Jersey and Tennessee. She is also leading active litigation to reform failing child welfare systems in Michigan, Rhode Island and Oklahoma, with several other states under investigation.
Her work at Children's Rights, which she founded in 1995, uses the power of the courts, combined with policy initiatives, to develop realistic, long-term solutions to improve the lives of abused and neglected children. These efforts have created concrete changes in child welfare systems such as more funding and resources, improved management and better outcomes for children.
Formerly director of the Children's Rights Projects of the New York Civil Liberties Union (1973-1979) and of the American Civil Liberties Union (1979-1995), Ms. Lowry has a long history of working to improve services for abused and neglected children. She pioneered the first body of law to protect kids dependent on child welfare systems, bringing increased attention and public scrutiny to systems that were all but ignored.
She received her B.S. from Northwestern University and began her career as a journalist. She earned her J.D. from the New York University School of Law.
> G > Many people in Family Rights get all excited about > G > those "Children's Rights" law suits, but I too have > G > come to the conclusion that the suits are more > G > beneficial TO the system.
Evidently you don't know what a "smoking gun" is, greg.
> ACLU has rarely ever championed the rights of > the intact family.
Really?
Please post the evidence of that.
> The ACLU has pulled for more MONEY for > Foster Care contractors, to supposedly provide > better services, as if that takes MONEY rather > than responsibility.
> ACLU seems to focus on the individual rights OF > the child as in state care, emancipation, and > combatting parental authority. > Politically LIBERAL, they seem to be very much > supportive of caseworkers and the Child Protective > Services agencies and their POLITICAL AGENDA.
> It's not the same but in some ways like the way > that pedophiles want more kids emancipated > and empowered to make their own choices, > sexual or otherwise, unfettered by parental restraint.
|
