Thursday, July 6, 2023

Homeless Youth Handbook

The Massachusetts Appleseed Center for Law and Justice has published a handbook for unhoused youth. 

The Homeless Youth Handbook contains the following chapters:

Safety and Stability
Police Interactions
Status Offenses
Foster Care
Turning 18
Housing and Contracts
LGBTQ+
Education and Schools
Employment 
General Criminal Law
Healthcare and Medical Rights
Mental Health and Substance Abuse
Birth Control, Abortion, and Pregnancy
Dating and Domestic Violence
Identification
Consumer and Credit
Public Benefits
Going to Court and General Civil Law
Immigration & Undocumented Youth
Trafficking

The first time you open the Handbook a general disclaimer pops up with a specific head note:

Disclaimer: On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court eliminated the federal constitutional right to abortion. The ruling leaves it to the individual states to decide whether to protect the right to an abortion. The HYH has not yet been updated to address these recent developments. We are working on updates.

You can access the disclaimer on subsequent visits by going to www.homelessyouth.org/en/disclaimer.

The Handbook seems to be a great resource. Mass Appleseed's June update newsletter says, "If your organization is interested in receiving a training on the Homeless Youth Handbook, reach out to our staff

Thursday, June 15, 2023

SCOTUS: ICWA constitutional

The U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act in Haaland v. Brackeen. ICWA wins by a 7-2. The majority opinion was written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Gorsuch wrote a concurring opinion. Justices Thomas and Alito dissented. Here is a link to the PDF: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-376_7l48.pdf

Friday, September 9, 2022

IL Court rules that parents have a right to obtain their child’s full electronic medical record

 The Family Justice Resource Center reports in its Summer 2022 Newsletter:

In a new Circuit Court ruling (Cook County IL), Prieto v. Rush University Medical Center, Judge James N. O'Hara ruled that parents have a right to obtain their child’s full EMR and that a hospital’s failure to release a full EMR, complete with the audit log and revision history, is a violation of the Supreme Court’s discovery rules, as well as federal information blocking regulations.

It addresses the issues that come up in child abuse cases when hospitals refuse to give parents access to their children's electronic medical record once the child protection team becomes involved or a report has been made to the government child protective services agency. The article says that under HIPAA and HITECH "Parents are entitled to their child’s EMR as long as parental rights have not been terminated." I believe the federal CURES Act highlights and broadens parents' rights to obtain and share their children's complete EMR.

Often the records that medical providers give to parents or their attorneys in response to release authorizations and to courts in response to subpoenas are incomplete and inaccurate, leaving out statements that do not support the allegations of abuse and entries that were subsequently edited out or amended.

Practice note: Attorneys for all parties in care and protection (dependency) cases need to seek the full EMR including audit trails.

Friday, January 28, 2022

Family Integrity & Justice Works

I just read some of the articles and reviews of the inaugural issue of The Family Integrity & Justice Quarterly Journal, the publishers of which describe it as: 

a forum for bold, actionable movement toward replacing many traditional child welfare approaches that do not support family unity and strengthening with approaches that focus on preventing the need for child welfare involvement by keeping families safely together.

I highly recommend it, as do several of my colleagues. I look forward to reading the rest of the first issue and expect future issues will be as on point for my practice as the first. See more and the free, peer reviewed, journal here:  fijw.pubknow.com/quarterly-journal/

Thursday, September 30, 2021

PARENT GUIDE TO SCHOOL DISCIPLINE

The Massachusetts Appleseed Center for Law & Justice has released the comprehensive-seeming "PARENT GUIDE TO SCHOOL DISCIPLINE: WHEN MY CHILD IS DISCIPLINED AT SCHOOL, A Guide for Massachusetts Families."massappleseed.org/projects/parent-guide-en/

Tuesday, March 30, 2021

Mass. Mandated Reporting Law under consideration

The CommonWealth Magazine article, 

State considering major expansion of child abuse reporting laws 

takes a close look at both sides of the proposal to add more categories

to the Massachusetts list of people who are required to report to DCF

when they suspect children are being abused or neglected.


See the current list Mandated Reporters here: Mass. General Laws 

Chapter 119, section 21. This subsection tells when mandated

reporters "in [their] professional capacity" are required to 

"immediately communicate with the department orally and, 

within 48 hours, shall file a written report with the 

department detailing the suspected abuse or neglect":
reasonable cause to believe that a child is suffering physical or emotional injury resulting from: (i) abuse inflicted upon him which causes harm or substantial risk of harm to the child's health or welfare, including sexual abuse; (ii) neglect, including malnutrition; (iii) physical dependence upon an addictive drug at birth, ... or (iv) being a sexually exploited child; or (v) being a human trafficking victim as defined by section 20M of chapter 233. Mass. Gen. Laws c. 119, sec. 51A(a) 
Section 51B, the DCF 2009 Intake Regulation, and DCF's 2020 Protective Intake Policy lay out what DCF is supposed to do when it receives a 51A report of child abuse or neglect. Yes, there are unresolved discrepancies between the policy, which are DCF's directions to its employees, and the earlier regulation, which has the force of law. For these reasons, the significance of the consequences of becoming involved in the DCF investigation / intake process, and reasons set out in my 2012 post, "When DCF Comes a-Calling: How to Try to Stay Out of the Fire When You're Already in the Frying Pan" you should definitely consider seeking counsel if someone tells you they are reporting you to DCF or if you get a call or visit from DCF. If you cannot afford and attorney, seek out a Legal Services program for free representation
If, after reading the above and maybe also "The Mandated Reporter Commission Status Report to the Legislature, December 28, 2020," you have an opinion on whether the definitions of "mandated reporter," "abuse," "neglect," when things must be reported to DCF, what protections people who report to DCF should have, and what rights and remedies people should have when they have been reported to DCF, consider contacting your State Representative or State Senator to inform them. If you don't know who they are, use this form from the Secretary of the Commonwealth to find out.


 

Friday, February 19, 2021

The Prosecutor's Story

Prosecutors say that they only charge people when they have a strong case.
  • Is it true?
  • Is it trash talk, like that of basketball players?
  • Is it legitimate public relations?
  • Is it a form of jury tampering? 
I was listening to a former federal prosecutor recently discussing whether the twice-impeached, former POTUS would be prosecuted for his criminal behavior. I want exPOTUS45* to be held responsible for the many harms he has caused and his civil, moral, and criminal misdeeds. I was a bit disheartened by the commentator's presentation, which seemed to say that there was a less than 100% chance of some of the prosecutions I hope to see.

Then, my defense attorney conscience kicked in and asked me the questions above.

Despite the presumption of innocence set out in our Bill of Rights and taught as an essential part of our government legal systems, jurors and even judges often come to the process of adjudicating the facts of a case with an assumption that the defendant wouldn't be here, the government wouldn't have brought a case against them, law enforcement personnel wouldn't have arrested them, child protective services wouldn't have taken their children away, if they didn't do anything wrong.

I suppose it's natural for people who have never been wrongly accused or who have been taught in school or by popular media that law enforcement personnel follow the law and the evidence and, like the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, "always get their man," to believe where there's smoke, there's fire or when there's a case something bad happened.  Hearing the prosecutors' drumbeat that they won't charge without a strong case made me worry that it would overwhelm the presumption of innocence for most audiences. It would be consistent with their preconceived notions of justice and the legal system.

The concept of confirmation bias says that people more readily accept ideas that are consistent with what they already believe. The concept of cognitive dissonance says that people tend to reject ideas that do not conform to their preconceived notions.

I think it would be improper for a prosecutor to include an assertion about the inherent strength of a case in an opening statement or closing argument. It may even be improper to ask a witness a question that would produce such a self-affirming response.

But doesn't the statement have a similar effect, of degrading the presumption of innocence, when the vast majority of jurors and judges hear it or read it every day from the news sources they seek out and trust?