Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, March 22, 1995 TAG: 9503220062
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: LESLIE TAYLOR STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
A Virginia Court of Appeals ruling earlier this year struck down the ``reason to suspect'' category of child-abuse cases. The category included incidents in which a caseworker suspected a child had been abused or neglected, lacked strong evidence to prove it, but kept a file anyway.
The state Department of Social Services decided not to appeal the ruling, eliminated the category and ordered case workers to start purging their files.
More than 3,000 cases fell into the reason-to-suspect category statewide during the fiscal year that ended in June 1993, the most recent available statistics.
That year, the Roanoke, Roanoke County, Botetourt County and Craig County departments of social services had a combined 46 reason-to-suspect cases. Individual breakdowns for those localities were not immediately available. Montgomery County had 10. Franklin County had 21. Statistics for the Bedford County Department of Social Services were not available.
The category's elimination is being called a victory for the civil rights of adults but a blow to the protection of children.
``You lose tracking ability and the ability to provide services to families where you really have a gut feeling that abuse and neglect has occurred,'' said Shannon Brabham, executive director of the Child Abuse Prevention Council of Roanoke Valley.
The reason-to-suspect category has come under attack in recent years as unconstitutional. Critics contend that state law makes provision only for ``founded'' cases, in which there is evidence the abuse occurred, or ``unfounded'' cases, in which there is no evidence.
There are three categories of child-abuse cases: ``Unfounded'' cases are those where no evidence has been found to support a complaint of child abuse or neglect; ``founded'' cases are those where ``clear and convincing'' evidence exists to support a complaint; ``reason to suspect'' means that a review of facts shows no clear evidence that child abuse or neglect occurred, but that there is reason to believe it may have occurred.
Supporters of the court's decision say the reason-to-suspect category's gray area left it wide open.
``One of the concerns and howls you'll hear from people who count themselves among child advocates is that this will take away a tool of safety,'' said Barbara Bryan, a Roanoke woman who serves as communication director for the Toledo-based National Child Abuse Defense and Resource Center, which defends adults it believes are falsely accused of child abuse.
``The truth is that until the system re-adopts the due process that the Founding Fathers set up, then everybody's in jeopardy - children and families.''
The reason-to-suspect designation was enough to land anyone suspected of child abuse on the central registry for one year. The registry is used by schools and day-care centers to screen people who work with children.
One Roanoke man, who asked that his name not be used, said Tuesday that his reason-to-suspect designation kept him from serving on the family and youth board of a parents' organization. His daughter's day-care center had made a complaint to Child Protective Services about a bruise on his daughter's abdomen, the man said.
The complaint was investigated. Though there was not ``clear and convincing'' evidence of child abuse, the man was given a reason-to-suspect designation.
``Because of this stuff, they did not want me on the board,'' he said. ``There are a lot of things that you cannot do with your child if [the activity involves] other kids.''
Lee Ann Chestnut, a Child Protective Services worker for Montgomery County, said she can understand the opinions of those who oppose the reason-to-suspect designation.
But without it, ``a lot of families might slip through the cracks,'' Chestnut said. ``It helps to know if someone has had past involvements with Child Protective Services. It sends red flags up when needed.''
The case that led the Department of Social Services to eliminate the category originated in Fairfax County, where a drug and alcohol counselor was accused of molesting a 17-year-old girl about a year ago.
John Keats, the lawyer who represented the counselor, said a Child Protective Services worker first called the case founded. But when Keats' client appealed the ruling, a department hearing officer said there wasn't enough evidence to call it a founded case. He changed the ruling to ``reason to suspect.''
Keats appealed that ruling, saying there was nothing in the law to support the category.
The case made it to the state Court of Appeals in February, where the reason-to-suspect finding was overturned.
The Associated Press provided information for this story.
by CNB