 So here we are with the session that we are going to be starting to speak about the Department of Children and Families. We have with us tonight, Ted Kenny, who will explain his role. He's an attorney and he's in charge of that department of DCF is called. We're here to talk about the role that DC have F has in the life of many people, and in particular with people who a lot who are medium income, maybe low income people, and they, and DCF is often in their lives and in the lives of many of our citizens. This event is Vicki Vermont Institute of Community and International involvement is sponsoring this. And we want to thank the Association of Africans living in Vermont for giving us space and the Caroline fund. And what else the Attorney General's office for giving us kindly Ted Kennedy who's in charge of that department and who will lead our discussion tonight. So with that I will introduce Ted Kenny. And again, an old colleague of mine Kenny, an old colleague of mine Ted and I've known each other for probably 100 years can. Yeah. And so he take it away, Ted and if you'll explain what it is that you do and what you don't do, and what you would like to do. I am my official title is that I am the division chief in the Attorney General's office for the human services, the agency of human services. The agency of human services is technically therefore our client and my client, I don't work for DCF. I am one of the lawyers that advises them. And in that I am, I'm kind of in charge of the lawyers that do that, and the agency also has a whole swath of state government in it including corrections, mental health, etc. The basics of it is that the lawyers that are in the in this section represent the department for children and families so I, my background is that I've been a lawyer since 1991. I did not always work for the state in fact I only started working for the state in the last year for the first time other than that. I've either had my own practice, or been with other lawyers. When I had my own practice, I was, I had a bunch of different contracts with the gender general system. And what that meant is that I would represent people who were accused of crime adults who were accused of crime in in what's now called the criminal division and adult court. But I also had a juvenile defender contract. What that meant is that DCF, or the state's attorney's office I represented, depending on the luck of the draw there would be times I would be representing a mother in court. I'd be representing a father or I'd be representing the children, or, you know, just mix and match I would be on all sides of the aisle. And Sandy and I actually had a number of cases over the years together where sometimes we're on the same side and sometimes we were not. But that that certainly did give me a interesting, and I think a very good perspective. And the name of this presentation is the Department for Children and Families, the influence of DCF in family lives of Vermonters. And before I go much further I'm going to note that I'm going to be looking over, because I have a couple of different computer screens in front of me in the era of COVID. And over here is where my notes are so I'm, I'm not trying to look pensive or wise, I'm reading my notes. And if I end up sounding wise, then that's, that's just, that's just coincidence. I'll interrupt you for one moment, because many years ago, prior to you becoming a lawyer, I guess I was the juvenile prosecutor for a while in the state's attorney's office. First, when Bill Sorrell was the head of the state's attorney's office and then with Mark Keller, and it certainly was one of the more important elements, certainly of my life as well. It's critically important work, no matter which side of the case you are on or assigned. It's super, there's, I don't think there's anything more important in the law. I suppose, I suppose we could think of examples but none come to mind. The influence of DCF and family lives so let me, let me start with defining what DCF is DCF does stand for the Department for Children and Families. Those of us who are older will remember that the name of the, this part of the government used to be different it used to be called SRS right social and rehabilitation services, but they changed to DCF, but it's the same thing. It is Vermont's child welfare agency. It's job. And you know this is, I understand having been a lawyer on all different sides of these cases that there will be, that the system is not always perfect so when I say things like what its job is I mean, ideally what its job should be. And its job is to make sure that children and young adults under the age of actually now 19 are safe or that they're safe from abuse, that their basic needs for things like food and clothing and shelter and healthcare are met. And that families are supported in achieving these goals when these things may be in jeopardy or questionable. That's what DCF's charge under the law is a little more specifically with with what DCF does to make that real. What does it actually do what are the nuts and bolts of what it does well. A number of things. First thing is it investigates suspected child abuse and neglect cases. And by the way, there is a swath of what DCF does that I'm not going to get into tonight because it would be a topic for an entirely different topic. It really involves juvenile delinquencies if young if young people are charged with what would be a crime if they were older than DCF is involved, basically with the equivalent of being a probation office they are in charge of making sure that they that the children do what they're supposed to do to rehabilitate themselves. But I'm not going to be getting into that because it's again it's a, it's a different, it's a different topic. So they investigate suspected child abuse and neglect. They evaluate children's safety needs through these investigations and assessments. If required, they set up services and support parents. And what the parents need to keep the children at home and safe. If it's not possible then they place children in temporary out of home care, if it's necessary to keep the children safe. They work with parents and relatives so the children can return home safely if they are taken out of the home. And then as a last resort, if, if, and this is very last resort if things go wrong for months at a time. They would find a permanent home for the children who can't return home safely and I'll get more into that later. But that's, that's the, that's, that's the worst case scenario. So essentially DCF is designed to be a family safety net is designed to help people when they're struggling with issues that make the children's lives. Make their health or safety in danger, make their psychological or emotional health in danger. DCF is designed to try to come in and be a safety net for, for that and again, I understand having been on all sides of these cases that DCF is run by human beings and human beings make mistakes. So I know that I'm in a kind of an ideal world here. And that is, that is the ideal that it is by law supposed to try to live up to. So one, one question that this brings up that I wanted to address is the scariest one. And that's whether DCF is going to take a child away from a family permanently. Well, there are there are times when, when that does happen, the children actually most of the time when a child is taken out of the home they actually get returned back. If everything goes according to plan and most of the time it actually does. But the answer of will DCF take my child away is that DCF is obligated to work with parents on a plan to keep the child at home in the first place. And its first instinct is not supposed to be to take children out of the home. This is something that I've seen, you know, since the 1990s where it's kind of a pendulum where it swings back and forth, where sometimes DCF is accused of acting too quickly to take children out of the home. And there are other times, it seems like the pendulum swings back and DCF is in the media because it did not move quickly enough to take. So it's, it's, it's a continuous, you know, as, as, as my boss TJ Donovan says, quoting his uncle, a wonderful former state senator, there are no final, there are no final battles in politics, and there is no final battle. Human human endeavors either. So, the first thing they would do is work with parents on a plan. If that plan does not work or if it cannot work, then DCF would ask a judge to review the case and died if the child must be removed from the home. This is one of the most important points here is that, you know, under American law, under Vermont law, parents have an absolute right, a constitutional right to raise their children, and children have a constitutional right to be raised by their parents. But, like any right, it can actually be lost if, if they parents can lose that right if they hurt the children or don't give them what they need. Now, again, these cases can get into a gray area but generally speaking it's not that people are children are taken away from parents because the parents don't own a home or they don't have a swing set or something like that there there's more serious going on in these kinds of things but the, I, I understand from my time in court over the decades that people are very concerned with DCF and whether they are going to jump in and suddenly take, take children away. I will share with people that my, my, my daughters are teenagers now. And when they were, when they were toddlers and when they were babies, this kind of thing being a lawyer and being having done this work myself and seeing things that go on in court. And this, this fear would enter my head sometimes. I was there, nothing ever. I was never accused of anything, but I realized that, you know, so I'm telling you that so that you realize that it's, you know, it's understand that I understand that this is a real concern in the community. But the big thing is that there is a constitutional right to raise your children and DCF has to go to a judge to get permission and a court order to take a child out of the home. Can I interrupt and ask a question. What about emergency hearings. Yeah, can DCF based on, for instance, if a neighbor calls DCF and says that there's abuse going on next door. Do you have to go in front of a judge before you would enter that home or get an order before you even enter the home or not. Yeah, is it ex party. Yeah. Yeah, so that means that the parents are not there in court to argue about it. And actually they're a most cases do not start that way but more than enough do aware. Where a situation arises where children are where information comes to DCF that a child is being very seriously abused or neglected. And in those cases, then an emergency hearing an emergency petition, which is really just a court filing, which is asking the judge on paper. Please give us the authority to go get this child and a report sworn to under oath on in writing. Supporting that this says, this is why it is, it is not. As lawyers say it is not a pro forma thing meaning it's not just well I filled out the paperwork and this is what I get it's not like you, you know you put the coins in a vending machine and it pops something out it's not like you go and you put your papers into court. And then, you know you get your order and you can go get your kids the judges do take it seriously and I'm not saying they always get it right either. But judges will read those reports and make a decision based on on them and sometimes they say no. Sometimes they say, this is not that much of an emergency, even if all of this stuff is true. So, go, you know, hand, hand these papers to these people and we'll have a hearing right away now, Sandy brought this issue up about what, you know, is it ex parte it is in terms of going to get the children, but the law is that the, the court has to have a hearing where the parents are allowed to be at and make their case later though right later usually later that day. In in Burlington it used to be in Chittenden County that they had family the family court judge that was doing this, these kinds of cases or as lawyers say this docket, because we're fancy and we can't just say cases. And a judge that is doing the that docket almost always reserves time between one and 130 every day. Really now, yeah, left blank where if there is an emergency situation, the judge will. That's that's when that will come in and deal with it every day. Yeah, and, and that's, you know, that's one of the dangers in family court as a lawyer is if you, if you have a hearing scheduled for 130 in a divorce case in some of the smaller counties Franklin County, or Addison County, or Grand Isle. And then an emergency situation has come on the clerk is going to tell you just wait. As soon as the judge is done and sometimes you can be waiting in the hallway for an hour waiting for you to, you know, because the judge is busy doing these emergencies. So that they, they don't just take your child away and then you never see them again. They, you will be in court if not that day then the next day. And I don't know if our listener or audience knows what X party means maybe you could. Well, what that X party means that only one side is talking to the judge without the other side being there and that's extremely unusual it's very special rules for it because the court is set up so that whatever is said to the judge is heard by both parties by everybody in the case. The exceptions to that are emergencies and this would be one of those kinds of emergencies. Another would be in a divorce case if there was a situation like this that you can do an ex parte case situation. I had an ex parte case is a private practice attorney where a clients. RV Winnebago type thing had been taken by his neighbor and we filed ex parte to have the sheriff show up with one of those big trucks to tow it away. Before he could sell it illegally and so I mean ex parte and it worked and you got it. It did. The big question was where they were going to put it. The sheriff was saying I'm not taking it back to the office. Yeah. So that that I'll get into the court process again in a minute but let me get a little more into detail of what DCF will do why it would open an investigation in the first place because again most of these cases are don't start with court they don't start with an emergency. They start a little slower than that, almost all of them, but not all of them. DCF will open an investigation if it receives a report that a child has been abandoned. Has been physically emotionally or sexually abused. Does not have enough food or clothing or shelter or health care. Is that significant risk of being abused or neglected, or was that is without proper medical care education or other necessary things. Those, those are the big categories there is pretty much the sky is the limit it's, it's, you know, human nature and you can't anticipate every, every scenario but those. Those are the big reasons generally why a case is opened DCF has a obligation under Vermont law to investigate every case that comes in. Yeah, at least at least to look at it, and they, and they do. I will say I've had, I've had divorce cases where one of the, one of the parents is making so many reports to DCF the DCF finally says their their investigation of it is we received this but we know that this person lies. The other parent does, because we've investigated it 100 times. That's, that's that, but they, they do have to at least do something but they usually will do an actual investigation. Let me let me share with the group what the definition of child abuse is under Vermont law. And if anybody is taking notes that the citation of where you can find this is in the Vermont statutes annotated those are the laws that the legislature passes. In Article 33 Vermont statutes annotated section 4912. And it says that abused or neglected child means a child whose physical health, psychological growth and development, or welfare is harmed or is at substantial risk of harm by the acts or omissions of his or her parent, or other person responsible for the child's abuse. An abused or neglected child also means a child who is sexually abused, or at substantial risk of sexual abuse by any person, and a child who has died as a result also counts as an abused or neglected child. So a couple of things out of that that you should keep in mind one is that it's not just what child abuse is not defined in Vermont just by what somebody does. It can also be defined by what a parent does not do that any normal parent would. And so that that would be something as well so that an example that has come up many times and again a lot of this stuff is very dark. Then, yeah, it is, it is what it is. But if, if a parent knows that their spouse and let me put the genders in because it's had cases where there are women doing this but it almost always it's men who are sexually abusing a child. And the mother knows that that's going on and isn't doing anything about it. Then the mother that that is an omission to protect the child that does count as child abuse. Likewise, obviously the per the man involved in that scenario would be abusing the child obviously. But that's that's the kind of thing as well. It's not though I want to be clear about this that it's if a child is being physically or sexually abused and the parent is not. And one of the parents is not doing anything to stop it. That parent is very likely not going to get into legal trouble if they come forward to protect their child. I've, I've never seen it where a mother goes to the police and says, my, my new boyfriend has been hitting my son for no reason. And I need, I need help. They're not going to, they're not going to throw the woman in jail because she didn't do anything before or something like that. So I want to dispel that if that's a concern that comes to mind. Again, I'm sorry to interrupt you can I ask a question, please, because I've seen cases though where a woman is being abused herself by her partner male usually, and that is considered also grounds I think if she puts up with it, that she could lose her children too, is that correct. That is correct. The thought is that the children living in that circumstance are being psychologically, mainly psychologically but also emotionally abused and neglected that they're being exposed to a violent situation that is harming their development and will basically perpetuate and continue a cycle of this kind of activity. Children, children learn from example more than anything else. So yeah, that that is true. It, it's not the fear that a lot of people have and I've represented a very large number of women who have been abused. They begin to fear that if they go forward to say anything about it, that they will somehow lose their children and the men who are doing the abusing will say that I one of the last private cases I had was a teacher. I was actually representing her in a personal injury case where she had been hurt, and we were making a claim for the company that was responsible for her being hurt. And I called her about the about her case and she sounded very upset and I asked her what was wrong and she had just blurted out that her husband had been abusing her terribly. And she was a teacher, and he was a businessman, and he had not done anything to leave a bruise, but he had a gun. He said that he was going to kill her. He said that he would, that if she, if she left him, he would get the best lawyer he could and he would, he would take the baby and she believed him. And, and it's, it's easy. We're off topic here but let me just finish my thought is that it's, it's easy to think that that, you know, how could, how could she believe that she is a college educated professional she was a early education teacher I think second grade teacher in a rural part of Vermont. And the answer is that it didn't start out that way. He didn't, he didn't one day say this because if he had she would have said, What are you talking about you've lost your mind. It was one little step at a time. And it's the analogy and I actually don't know if this is scientifically true but a frog boiling in water that if you drop a frog into boiling water, it'll jump out. If you drop the frog in room temperature water and you slowly put the temperature up, it won't jump out, because it will keep acclimating to it. And so I said that that was a textbook example but you know she she was not in any trouble herself to, you know, to go to the authorities and I luckily her parents were up visiting as luck would have it and the situation was entirely resolved in 24 hours. And they are now divorced. Right. So, just add something real quickly. Hello. Can you hear me. Yes. Yeah, Charlotte then I'm a lawyer but I just wanted to bring up something that I found terribly shocking. It was a case I worked on years ago for Kirk Hughes I was then a paralegal. These two daughters, these two young women had been virtually abused by their stepfather. From the time they were almost infants till they were young teens. And it turned out that the mother knew about it. And she encouraged it. She told the girls, this is how you're going to learn about sex. And what ultimately happened is the girls finally sued, and they sued DCF. And DCF was punished with a $10 million fine, if you like. It was a big case, but what shocked me is that apparently this happens that there are a lot of a lot of women maybe in rural areas that that have this opinion. You know, this is how you're going to learn about sex. Charlotte, I really wouldn't say that there are a lot, or that it occurs only in rural areas. If that kind of abuse happens, it certainly is also occurring in cities, I would guess. Yeah, fair enough. So, when I had the public defender contracts in Franklin and Chittenden County, every case I ever had where a woman was accused of sexual abuse in her children. She had basically she was also physically abused by the man and was basically led into it. But it's still not that they're not responsible. At that point, but yeah, that case made precedent by the Vermont Supreme Court that Charlotte was just talking about and was a big, a big, big decision. So, yep. So how does how would DCF investigate these a case if they get a report that a child is being neglected or abused in a family. What do they do. Well, the first thing, I don't know first, but they're they're their instructions are to do the following and none of these are mandatory but they're what they are as the case requires it's what they are to do. They're to visit the family home if it's safe to do so. They are to interview the parents or other adults in the home who serve in a parental role to try to figure out what's going on. By the way, a lot of cases get dismissed at the not even they're not in court, a lot of cases get closed by DCF. But when, when that happens a lot don't but it's entirely possible that DCF will look around the house and say, you must have a neighbor who hates you because we got a report that this place is full of garbage but it's clearly not. See you later. But they will interview the parents and other adults they'll go to the home. They can underlaw, if, if the child if the parent is. I guess the suspect of of significant abuse or neglect and this is usually in cases where there is sexual abuse or neglect. Then the law allows the DCF workers to speak to the child. Without the parents permission. It almost always happens at school. That is the DCF has a legal right to do that and they do do that. And that they don't need any permission because if they needed permission then they would be asking the abusive parent, can we talk to the child about you abusing the child and the abusive parent would say, no, no you cannot. So they are allowed to do that. And actually let me stop here and just want to be clear because these these cases that end up in court, usually do involve if they're sexual abuse that usually involves a stepfather a boyfriend, or the father. But the vast majority of child sexual abuse is actually older child on younger child. The percentages are most. Most sexual abuse is a teenager or older teenager on a younger child. It's usually not the biological father, but there are more than enough cases where it is. So they all take. Also accurate that many stepfathers to. Yeah. That's, in fact, I was involved in cases when I had the contracts where the stepfather was sexually abusing the stepdaughter but not his own biological daughter. Yeah, anyway. But, but again, you know, I had a friend who was a radiation technician I don't know the actual words for it but she she treated people who had cancer. Sure. She, she and I were talking once and we both concluded that she thinks everybody has cancer. And I think every child is being abused. And she, she told me I was wrong and I told her she was wrong it's just that's what we see all day because that's what we do. And it's important to keep that in mind, you know, the vast majority of children are not being abused they're not being neglected. And, you know, when we talk in these terms it's easy to go dark, as we say, you know, have a, but anyway, the one DCF investigates these cases they they have a number of factors that they consider. These are things like the child's vulnerability, the caretaker conditions that pose a current danger for the child or threaten the child's immediate safety, and the family's capacity to keep the child safe in the immediate future. If the child is not in any immediate danger. It's not going to be some sort of emergency thing in fact it might not even go to court. It's not going to be any number of cases where a child has been abused by somebody who is not a permanent member of the family or a neighbor or something like that and in those cases, it does not go to court DCF will provide services. And the parents voluntarily agree to, you know, work with DCF and then DCF closes the case, and the family goes on without without the government in its life, at least not that part of the government. The, so that brings me up to the next question is, which I've been speaking of for some time but let me just emphasize, does DCF always find a problem when it investigates. It does not. If there is no risk to the child found, then DCF will close the case. If the risk is low or moderate, then DCF will try to work with the family and if everything goes well DCF will close its own case, not a case in court, but its own case on its own files within 60 days or so. That's, that's, but they comes knocking does that mean that you're only steps away from losing your children forever No, I don't want to underestimate I don't want to undersell how scary that can be or what could happen if there's a serious problem, or, or something goes horribly wrong, but the vast majority of the time that that's not the case. So, what does DCF do if help is needed. There is a process that they follow. They are to identify the issues that the family needs to address. They have to assess the child's condition, not just the family but the child specifically. They are to assess the family's capacity to protect the child. We talked about that a moment ago. To identify ways the extended family can help. Is there an aunt and uncle family friends, grandparents who can assist the family through a situation. And identify the services the family might need those in the last 10 to 15 years, by and large that is that involves substance abuse, and putting parents into drug treatment programs. But that's, that's the kind of that'd be an example of pointing people in a direction so that they can get the help they need so that they can be good parents and actually even that phrase let me stop there for a second. The law actually says that parents only need to be adequate. But that, that is, I suppose you could look at that from a one perspective and say, well, that's a very low standard, but it's, it's not adequate means adequate means good enough. And the reason for that standard is that they don't want a judge coming in and saying, well, the biological parents, they're adequate, but the foster parents my goodness they're college educated they're wealthy they have a wonderful backyard. So I'm going to go with that and give give these people a child. No, all all a parent has to be is adequately. But to get there. DCF will oftentimes recommend individual counseling, family counseling as a group parenting classes to teach parents expectations of certain ages that the children are at. And as I mentioned substance abuse treatment for alcohol or drugs, and even job training, if, if that's a requirement. So the next question is when, when would a case go to court. And that's where that's where most people's focus is in these cases. Because that's scary. The answer is, it's, it would be a serious situation. If a parent hurts a child, if a parent neglects a child. If a parent does not protect a child from abuse or neglect. If the parent is abusing is using drugs or abusing alcohol. Or if there's been sexual assault or sexual exploitation. The example that was given sometime ago was exactly right if the children are actually being exploited in the home in a sexual way then that case will go to court. So the next question would be what is the court process what would one expect if, if that is going on. Well, if that if it comes to that is what I should have said. What I'm missing to know is that the, the lawyer that files these is actually the state's attorney, not the Attorney General's office. The state's attorney and Sandy was in this job when she was a deputy states attorney is is the local prosecutor and they file what's known as a petition. Petition petition just means the allegation. It's the document that is the allegation in equivalent in a criminal case would be an indictment it says what what they think you did wrong. In a civil case it would be a complaint where a car accident I'm the complaint reads that the person went through a red light and hit me and I got a broken arm, something. But this is this in this area of law is called a petition. And they asked the judge in the, in the allegation they asked the judge to find that the child is a child in need of supervision. CH ins, chins, and that's what everybody calls it chins. If you say chins, people in the area will know, we'll know what you mean. And these are known as chins proceedings. And the chins paperwork that the states attorney files will give DCS side of the story. And, you know, again that that that's the first thing that the judge reads. Now parents, you know, I want to be clear it's not like all is lost big brother is there you are doomed. If this ever does happen. They have a right to their own lawyer. If they can't afford a lawyer, one will be provided for them that's what I did. And I want to be clear, I took that job very seriously and worked hard for my, my clients. I don't. Well, I suppose there are some lawyers that I would say are probably not as good as others as in any profession, but by and large the lawyers that do this in Vermont take their job very seriously. And they, they, they will be your lawyer, even if you're not paying them. Interestingly enough, each parent has a right to their own lawyer. The mother gets a lawyer, the father gets a different lawyer. The reason for that is because you, you can't tell as the case goes forward depending on the family dynamics family circumstances. The parents might not be allies. They might start out as allies and not end that way or they might not start as allies but end up a team. But each one gets a right to their own lawyer. Even if you don't have money to hire one. You have a right to see the DCF report that gets filed with the judge and the process will allow you to dispute disagree with DCF side of the story and give your version of events. The thing is though, that's not what's going to happen on the first day, it will happen. It will, but not on the first day. The first hearing would be a preliminary hearing where everybody comes to court if it's been an emergency, then it'll be like sandwiched in and scheduled that way. But at a preliminary hearing, and I suppose this sounds a little unfair but in the scheme of the entire process, it actually works out in a balanced way. But at the first hearing, the judge has to presume that the report that DCF is filed is true. They have to take it at first at face value. And go with that now they don't keep that point of view after that day. But in the first, the first thing that they do is they look at it and say, if this report is true, does it rise to the legal definition of child abuse or child neglect. And if it does not, then the judge would dismiss the case rate then in there. That almost never happens. It could. But it's the judge is supposed to review it for is what lawyers say a prima facie case which means if this is all true. Does does it hit all of the ingredients for child abuse, child neglect. The judge will not presume that to be true at later hearings, but at the preliminary hearing based on what's in that report and having to take it as true. In a serious case where the children, the judge will decide where the children will live until the judge can figure out at a hearing where everybody gets more time to present stuff. The judge will decide where the children are going to live. Are they going to go into foster care or are they going to be returned home, but the judge will issue a court order to the parents, you know, do not let Uncle Joe around the children. Whenever they go to school. This medicine must be given to the child, you know, whatever the issue is whatever the situation is. That can happen as well. If the children are told are going to be living somewhere else than at that hearing the judge will almost always come up with a court order for what kind of contact the parents will have with the children. Whether they can see them, how they can see them phone calls. Does it have to be a supervised visit things like that. And then at the also at the preliminary hearing the judge will schedule another hearing that will determine so the judge can see for herself or himself. If this stuff is even true and have witnesses and evidence and things like that and they'll put a scheduling order in place for that. The next step of the court process would be actually not taking place in court. But that would be where the lawyers who are representing the parents would have a chance to talk to the parents and this is this is measured in days and weeks. By the way, this is not like that day. But the lawyers will talk to the parents, they will investigate the case, read the reports. Talk to witnesses, even possibly question the DCF worker in in some kinds of things that are called a deposition where the you can ask the questions before you even get to court and they're under oath and it's a little more informal because they're usually recorded and there's there's no judge. But these these kinds of things would again be measured in weeks. Another, another thing that might be happening the whole time depending on the case is that it's possible that you may try to reach an agreement if you're the parents you may try to reach out of court. So it'll go back to court but an agreement between the parties between DCF and the parents. It could be that the parents will do counseling and then get the children back in the home. If a dangerous person is living in the home that person would leave and they would get a court order that they're not allowed to come back a restraining order. All of that is completely up to the parents though, if the parents don't want to agree. They don't have to. They can, they can wait and they can present their case to the judge and the judge will listen to their side of the story. I would say though that that if the lawyer does recommend that something works out where you're going to get your children back. That is something you should very seriously consider. Yeah, I used to tell my clients that when I had the parents and not the children and say, look, you know, they, they say that you need to do alcohol counseling you say you don't have an alcohol problem. Okay, do the counseling, even if you don't have an alcohol problem and then you'll do really well at it, and you'll get your children back and but if this is about pride or the principle of the thing. I would trade my pride for my children. And a lot of people would do that but some people would not and we have a contested hearing. Ted before is, I'm wondering if anybody has any questions because we're approaching seven o'clock I don't know what your schedule is but maybe, maybe, maybe people do have some questions I don't know that. Yeah, I probably have another five minutes on what I'm okay. I got I got time. In the court process the next thing would be if it doesn't get resolved it'd be a merits hearing that's basically the same as a trial in these kinds of cases. If the judge decide DCF and each parent would get a chance to tell their side of the story, each side's lawyer would get a chance to question the witnesses that come to court. Everybody would get a chance to introduce evidence under the rules of evidence, but have a chance to do that. It is a formal process it really is, you know, court, real judge. If the judge decides that DCF was right that the child was abused or neglected, then the judge will will say so either say so that day, which is not most of the time. Most of the time judge will say I'm going to take this under advisement, and they go back and they think about it and then he or she will write type. What they found to be the facts and what they concluded from that. And so then if that does happen the judge would schedule a disposition hearing which is the now what do we do part. If the judge decides that DCF was wrong, then the case is dismissed, and nothing else happens. Either side can appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court, the Vermont Supreme Court will hear the case. The Vermont Supreme Court will only listen to cases for legal mistakes, it will not. It will not decide who was telling the truth except except in extreme circumstances. It will usually decide whether the judge made a mistake in introducing certain kinds of evidence to the judge misunderstand a rule. I get something wrong about that but it won't, it's not a do over in front of the Supreme Court. If there is the next stage because the judge said that found the DCF was right, then the disposition, a disposition report is written by DCF. The disposition report is to the judge and everybody gets a copy of it. It's supposed to be three days before a hearing so you have time to read it and think about it. And that'll tell the judge what, what DCF thinks happened and what DCF thinks should happen next. Almost always, almost always includes steps that the parents will take to become better parents to make sure the children are not abused or neglected and basically to either get the children back. Or if the children have been in the house the whole time, which is possible, which happens, a good chunk of the time, just to get DCF out of their life. Consider it's me like a roadmap that if you do these following things and do them adequately then, you know, you will get the children back and DCF will be out of your life. To come up with that plan DCF will have talked to the parents witnesses family members professionals. People like that. Parents can disagree with the plan, either all of it or a part of it. I agree with, you know, that I need to go to alcohol counseling but I really don't have an anger problem. I had that one time where I yelled, but and the judge might say yeah you're right you don't have to do that. If a disposition plan is put in place. It really should be followed. The plans happen a lot where the children are still living in the home, or they're being transitioned back to the home. So, it's important to follow that if that, you know, again, just in a, in a brutal nuts and bolts way. If you want your children back and you want DCF out of your life. Follow the plan. If the disposition plan is not followed in a serious way, and parents, you know, if there's a serious abuse serious neglect serious mental health issues that are not being addressed, or anything like that. And it goes on for long enough, then DCF can go back to ask the judge to terminate parental rights and parents will no longer be the parents ever. It's, it's a death penalty for parenting, basically. That involves a huge new case more huge hearings, more witnesses more evidence. They're, they're big deals. If the judge agrees with DCF at that, then the children would no longer belong to the parents the parents would not be the parents of those children anymore. That can also be appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court. I bring that up so that I flesh out the entire spectrum, but do keep in mind that that that is rare. The vast majority of the DCF cases do not end in a termination of parental rights so to wrap up. Let me let me just emphasize that people, whether you are a citizen whether you are not a citizen. You have a protected constitutional right to raise your children as you see fit. But that right is not total. It is not absolute. You are not a king or a queen. DCF can ask you, or if they that doesn't work, they can ask a judge. They can ask you to do things if your children are in danger to make yourself a better parent or to make sure the children are not in danger or harm. And if the case does go to court, parents have a right to a lawyer and a right to tell their side of the story to the judge, all throughout the case. So it's not, and again, I know that there is oftentimes fear in the communities. Sometimes, sometimes that fear is justified, I have to say. Sometimes DCF is staffed by people who are being human beings reach the wrong conclusion. But there is a system in place that will, that will, if you, if you do the system. The odds are that this will not end in a nightmare and that everything will, you know, your life will go back to normal. There are no promises, but that is, that is generally how these cases actually do and so that is my case that's my conclusion. Thanks. Thank you, Ted. Really thank you a lot. That was very good presentation. But I do have a question or something that I heard recently. First of all, the mission of DCF is to reunify families right. Yes, I mean that is the mission that the biological family or the adoptive family should be unified and that's in the best interest of the kids. Right. And one of the ways that DCF does this is by visitation with the parent. Although the kid might be in a foster situation, might be in the custody of DCF. However, in general, visitation is allowed with the, with the biological or adoptive family right yes. I heard recently that because of COVID those visits had been shut off. Is that true. But there is some truth to that. Because of the uptick in infections. And because parents who because children who are in state custody are not in the same pod family as their biological parents. That does pose a greater risk of infection so the, the department is asking parents to voluntarily change to video visits for the next. I don't even know how long honestly, it depends on the science I guess. But yeah that that is true if that, if that can't be worked out, then it really depends on the circumstances. So one example would be if, if the parents are generally. If everybody involved the foster parents, the social worker the parents themselves are not in a class of people that would find coded extremely difficult to deal with, or if somebody in their family isn't in that so somebody's under no suppressed or has underlying condition that would be very hard for them to survive COVID. If that's the case then there's, it's likely if that those face to face visits are going to continue on provided, which right now everybody is supposed to be wearing a mask anyway, but provided that that mask is actually in place. It's a very fluid policy that the but if, if there is a situation where, where a say a foster family has a child who is struggling with cancer treatments and is immunosuppressed, then the, the department either probably through the state's office that's where that's who handles most of these cases would ask would go to would go to the judge, and the department would be asking the judge to make the visits video visits. And I say no DCF does not have the power by itself to decree an order that all visits are going to be suspended. These visits are in place because they are a court order and then you get into powers the, the DCF is part of the branch. And they have to obey court orders like everybody else and the judicial branch is separate and the judicial branch is the one that said this is an order do it. If, if DCF just shuts off the visits and they would be violating a court order. There are extreme circumstances though Sandy where DCF does have the authority to stop a visit if there is risk of harm to a child. That's true all the time. So if the child that's in foster care is, you know, immunosuppressed, they're not going to say well, go to the visit anyway and let's just hope you end up okay well we wait for the court to decide but that that's extremely rare. And that would be an emergency hearing and, you know, everybody would try to get in as fast as possible but. But I know they know there's been some confusion about that and I can't get much more into it but there's been. Yeah, a lot of work behind the scenes on that. Right, right. That's how I happen to hear about it is behind the scenes but thank you for clarifying that I think Barry has a question right Barry. I think he's not there, right in the chat there might be in the chat yeah. Two questions when the complaint is sworn to who's sworn to by whom. Generally the DCF investigator. It'd be the investigator that is reporting what other people are saying on personal knowledge or information and belief the answer is both. If the DC is the author of the report that would be swearing to it and the author if they have firsthand information would put that in the report. Otherwise they would be relaying what other people told them, and that would be on information and belief. That's that's the same in pretty much everything I mean a criminal case starts in Vermont where the police report comes in police almost never actually see a crime happening. They respond after the crime occurred and they talked to the victim or they talked to witnesses, and then they report what they said and present that to the court. Basically the same thing. Have independent studies been done to determine the level of class racial religious bias on the part of investigators judges etc. I don't know but I have to assume that they have been. I will tell you that the. Is a big. That is a big issue in the Attorney General's office. We have. TJ Donovan actually had a 21 day course that we took about an hour, an hour a day. This summer on implicit bias and prejudice and that that thing that kind of thing. Levels of there been investigations and studies on this, I have to imagine there have been. I have to imagine that that is part of the system implicit bias is everywhere. I will say I'm, I'm sure I am, I would know that I am guilty of that too. And I think that's the first step, but, but yeah, that's, if the, if the follow up question to that would be, I don't want to put words in anybody's mouth but is there class and racial and religious bias in the system. It's got to be got to be. And that's, that's a problem that we need to need to keep working on. Charlotte, Charlotte. Yeah. On the question of foster families. Is it true that foster that the law has really not caught up with the rights of foster families. Well, it depends. Foster foster families are not parties to a chins case. When I had the contract they weren't even allowed in the room. That at least has changed. They are allowed to come in and observe and they are heard the judge, the judge will let them speak in certain kinds of hearings, but but they are not party status. They, they don't have the right to file motions or argue the case or call witnesses. So, in a way, isn't that unfair? I'll give you an example. My husband and I fostered a child. And the child had very difficult emotional situation. And just because the child acted up when a DCF person visited and ran and got knives and was throwing them around, but it was not against us. It was against DCF. We had a child from our home and we had no recourse, none whatsoever. It was very painful. This little kid did not want to get thrown in yet another house by DCF. And there you get the whole problem of litigation. I mean, I'm sure they interpreted the event as the child was endangered because he was grabbing knives. You see, that's one thing I learned that foster families, you know, they go through a lot as well and they have very little legal recourse. Yeah. I, you know, I haven't looked at the law in on that area in a number of years, but my understanding is that that would still be the case that the foster parents would not have a legal remedy. They couldn't go to court on something. And that that's really not a good thing. Wouldn't you say, I mean, foster families take on a lot. Sure, they do. The right response to that the right legal response to that I hate to say it but the actually just the way the system is set up. That's something that the legislature would have to address. To me it's in the same category as de facto parents. The Supreme Court, at least three cases that I know of, ruled that the person who was the domestic partner of the biological parent, so the boyfriend or the girlfriend or whoever, that when that relationship broke up, the boyfriend had been dad for nine years and the child is nine. No, right. And the Supreme Court said in three different cases. Until the legislature speaks on this. This is the way it is it's not our job we interpret the law, the law is set by the legislature. If we did something on this it would be, we would be the legislature and we're not. And the legislature finally did move on that and finally did create a de facto parenting statute. That is that has been used. Actually, it's very uncertain about that so uncertain about what rights people have with children simply by being with with a biological parent for instance, if that you know it doesn't. I mean it could be harmful to a kid to give rights to that kind of a person also, but in the case of foster parents they're hired also by the state basically they're paid by the state isn't that true. And I don't know if there would ever be a time when they would really have legal rights to a kid. Yeah, I think, I think you're right and I think, well, as it stands now, the legislature could always change that. Are there other questions because I do have one but I don't want to interrupt anybody else anybody else have a question, because I wanted to know something about cultural differences I've had people come to see me who are not born and raised in the United States and and for instance thought that DCM have been intrusive because they had spanked their kids, or worse, I mean, seriously spanked the kid, and basically thought that they in their own countries had that right and of course it used to be in the United States that you could also spank your kids and not get into any trouble about it. But do you see any problems with cultural differences Ted, and the involvement of DCF. Well, you know, the statement I would the answer I'd give would be probably unsatisfactory because it's going to be a blanket statement but the answer is yes. I think that's got to be true. Anytime human beings are involved in one person's from one culture and other person culture but I, you know, I am not, I am not a social worker and I don't actually work for the department I'm the lawyer who supervises the lawyers who work for the department and have done these cases for years, but I don't, I don't know what kind of cultural training DCF has. I do know that that you know that I did, there is bias and in about other cultures and in the people who are in the system from when I was doing these cases in the 90s I had a guardian Ed Lightham once who was an elderly gentleman. He did, did not like him. And he, he made a statement once that these two men of they were from there, they were Arabic. I don't remember which specific country they were from but one of them was accused of sexually abusing child. And he, he said that he thought that that might be because of the Arabic culture. That's crazy. It's just insane. And you know I, I told him so. But, you know, it on the other hand though you know the, the, the culture of that by that example the culture of spanking that's changed in the United States has changed. I know I was a kid. I know when we grew up when I grew up it was quite alright to spank I mean it would never be an even question I don't know what other people's experiences with that but that's a really. I mean I remember being, you know, that we were kind of hit on occasion in the public schools, you know, your knuckles were wrapped and stuff like that and it wasn't illegal. It was acceptable wasn't it. Any other questions anyway. I've got a follow up to Charlotte's question. In that situation. What would the role the moment, I believe you said that the child has an attorney right. Yes. Okay well if the child has an attorney shouldn't the attorney be looking into whether it's in the child's best interest to have been taken away from a foster home. That would be the reasons that were stated, and maybe get in touch with Charlotte, or whoever, and, you know, be able to call her as a witness. Sure, you know I that that would involve getting deep into the disposition, or, you know, probably would be at the disposition phase phase. And that would require, you know, probably an emergency motion or some kind of motion by the child's attorney. I don't know the chances of success of such a thing but would, would a child's attorney be able to make that move on as I don't know it sounds like they probably would. I actually I don't I don't know the legal answer to that I, I do know as as a lawyer and bury your, your an attorney that my, my thought one this these back in the day was give it a try. It might not work, but see what happens. Anybody else have a thought, but it is getting late and I do have one final question. I have heard often that children themselves if they've been abused or neglected, nevertheless always want to be with their biological family, and that it is the sense of the law, I think that the biological or adoptive family is in the best interest of the children, and that that is a real mission. Is it or not Ted to reunify those families. Yes, because it is assumed it's in the best interest of the child that that is the presumption, the legal presumption that actually means something not just presumption like well I presume that that's that's the that's the direction that the court is pointed in at the beginning of the case. In some cases, Vermont Supreme Court has said point blank that, and as I said, not only is there a constitutional right for parents to raise their children, but the children have a constitutional right to be raised by their parents, and to overcome that constitutional right. It's, it's the highest legal standard in civil law is clear and convincing evidence that that just something that. So that being said, that that is how this that's where it is supposed to go. That system is pointed in that direction. Okay, paper. Great, thank you. And it actually generally is. Yes, that's great thank you very much Ted any final thoughts or questions before we close for the day any of you guys up there. Thank you. That was great. That was really good. Thank you very much. Sandy was so good to see you again. Yeah, right. Me too. Ted, when this code is over, we should get some coffee. Yes, right. Yeah. Thank you.