Howell & Howell Family Law Blog

WELCOME TO MY NIGHTMARE! PART 2

howellfamilylaw — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 22:02:53 +0000

By Robert Howell, a private dependency attorney representing parents in Los Angeles County
Over the weekend I learned that Governor Schwarzenegger used his line item veto power and removed funding for AB3632, a program in the Department of Mental Health that assures children they will receive educational and mental health services when their mental health issues interfere with their education.
The reason for this suspension is that the state owes counties in excess of a $133 million dollars for reimbursement of the costs they have had to bear funding these programs. Once again, the state and the Governor have chosen an at risk minority to single out for elimination of their services. The children qualified under this program include those with ADHD, autism, emotional disturbances (such as depression, attachment disorder, OCD) or more serious mental health diagnosis of bi-polar or schizophrenia.
With the state removing the responsibility for this program from the county, it will be up to individual school districts to find the funding, even after the Governor cut their budgets. As an attorney representing parents seeking these services from school districts, my job has gone from tough to almost impossible. For those parents who children are or will be affected, it is little consolation that the program ‘might be’ funded in the future.
Over the past two years my family has urged me to consider moving to another state, one that is not enduring the deep recession of California. As a parent and as an attorney I have to respectfully decline, because now more than ever we have to fight for those children whom this decision has put more at risk than ever before. Welcome to my nightmare, part two!

Welcome to My Nightmare!

howellfamilylaw — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 18:01:32 +0000

By Robert Howell, a private dependency attorney representing parents in Los Angeles County
The more you know the worse it is, at least in dealing with DCFS. Each day I meet with my client’s and listen to horror stories about how their family has been torn apart by the intervention of DCFS.
It is thus ironic that the intent of the legislature regarding Welfare and Institutions Code Section 300 is that nothing in that code section should be used to disrupt the family unnecessarily or intrude inappropriately into family life, prohibit the method of parental discipline, or prescribe a particular method of parenting.
The facts are, at least in Los Angeles County that DCFS most often acts in a way that violates the legislative intent. In my own practice I have had to defend many parents who were dealing with aberrant teen age behavior (usually the result of mental illness) or the normal tensions brought on by raising children in a poor economy (translate that as poverty). Discipline is also a big issue, as the dependency courts continually find that spanking a child is jurisdictional and remove the child from the parent. Finally, the most egregious intervention into family life is when DCFS is not in agreement with a parent’s method of raising their children. These allegations are the most insidious, because they usually add other allegations to hide their true intent.
However, the most tragic and far reaching allegation used to destroy a family is an accusation that there is sexually inappropriate behavior, usually by the father. When this happens DCFS immediately begins to drive a wedge in the family, insisting the mother seek a restraining order, commences a divorce and never allow the father around the children again. These families usually never recover from this intervention. What furthers the tragedy is that the father is still being labeled a sex offender, yet has none of the protections that would have been afforded him if he were charged criminally (in most my cases there is no criminal charge). Adding to this tragedy is that the victim (especially if it is a teenage girl) often recants, admitting it was a false allegation used to gain power in a family where she did not like the rules being imposed on her. In several of my cases I have tried to have the matter reheard, without success.
Thus, I must participate in an event that results in the destruction of a nuclear family unit. Statistics indicate that the national average for returning children to their families is 80%, but the average in Los Angeles is closer to 30%. Thus, if your children are placed into the custody of DCFS, it is twice likely in Los Angeles County than for the rest of the county that they will never return home!
Finally, I recently attended a conference for attorneys who represent parents in which one of the speakers, a well respected child psychologist with more than 20 years of dealing with DCFS, noted that in her experience, children removed from the home (even the home of the abuser) are more likely to suffer severe emotional trauma than if they had been left in the home with their abuser. Welcome to my nightmare!

Los Angeles County Settles Civil Rights Case Arising From Alleged Misconduct of its Social Workers for $220,000

howellfamilylaw — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:18:24 +0000

The County of Los Angeles settled a civil rights action brought by the grandparents of two minors for the warrantless removal of the children from their home in violation of the family’s constitutional rights to familial association free from unwarranted government interference. The County of Los Angeles, while denying the allegations of the complaint, agreed to pay $220,000 to settle the case. Approval of the settlement by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is pending. “RE: Marshall v. County of Los Angeles, et al.
Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
Case No. BC 377071
Judge: Hon. Kenneth R. Freeman, Dept. 64

The suit also alleged that the policies, practices, or procedures employed by Los Angeles County Social Services in the removal of Plaintiffs’ grandchildren from the their care violated the family’s constitutional rights, under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The alleged unlawful policies, practices or procedures pertained to the removal of children without first obtaining a warrant to do so; the removal of children absent evidence to support a suspicion of imminent danger or serious physical injury; continuing detention of children after learning there was no basis to do so; and, failing to adequately train employees regarding the Constitutional rights of parents and grandparents who have a long standing custodial relationship with their grandchildren.

Los Angeles County and the individual social worker defendants deny any wrongdoing.

Lead counsel Shawn A. McMillan states “Our clients are hopeful this case will cause the County and its Department of Social Services to implement procedures to prevent future similar conduct by County social workers and protect other families.”

Plaintiffs’ counsel in the case were: Los Angeles area attorney Robert Howell, of the Law Offices of Howell & Howell and the San Diego area attorneys were: Shawn A. McMillan, of the Law Offices of Shawn A. McMillan, APC., Donnie R. Cox and Dennis Atchley of the Law Offices of Donnie E. Cox (Oceanside), and Paul Leehey.

For additional information, contact:

Robert L. Howell, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF HOWELL & HOWELL
1250 E Walnut St., Ste.140
Pasadena, CA 91106

Telephone:(626) 568-1900

Fascimile: (626) 568-1904

Shawn A. McMillan, Esq.

　

　

www.mcmillan-law.com

www.howellfamilylaw.com PRWEB) March 19, 2009 — Frank and Ola Marshall, the maternal grandparents of the two minors who were removed from their home and detained in foster care for forty-four days in 2006, alleged that social workers removed the children in the absence of probable cause and without first obtaining a warrant to do so. The Marshalls also alleged that once the children were removed from the home, social workers intentionally fabricated evidence and suppressed material exculpatory evidence, among other things, as part of their effort to continue to detain the children. Email: rhowell@howellfamilylaw.comOur clients are hopeful this case will cause the County and its Department of Social Services to implement procedures to prevent future similar conduct by County social workers and protect other families. “

CRIMINAL vs. DEPENDENCY

howellfamilylaw — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:09:14 +0000

I often advise my dependency clients that they would have more rights in criminal court than they do in dependency. Some examples:

If you are charged in a criminal case and you request a lawyer you are immediately provided with one.

a) In dependency the Social Workers interview parents without any right to an attorney and if you request one, they will remove your children (if they haven’t done that already).

Once charges are filed in a criminal case you know what you are facing and if they can’t prove the charge as it is written, then you are acquitted.

a) In dependency, if they don’t prove the allegation as written, the judge can ‘…conform it to the proof’ offered at trial and rewrite the allegation.

At a criminal trial, hearsay is for the most part not going to be admitted as evidence.

a) In dependency there is an exception in Welfare and Institutions Code that allows for almost all hearsay to be admitted, at least that generated by DCFS.

In criminal court the prosecution must turn over all evidence in a timely fashion.

a) In dependency, you can be presented with evidence on the day of trial and you have to deal with it, even if you object.

In criminal court the prosecution must notify you of all witnesses being called, and do so well in advance of the trial.

a) In dependency, you can be presented with the County’s witness list on the day of trial and you have to deal with it, even if you object.

In a criminal trial you have the right to a trial by jury of your peers.

a) In dependency you only get the judge or commissioner or referee.

In criminal court there is the prosecution and the defense.

a) In dependency there is County Counsel (prosecution), minor’ counsel, and counsel for the other parent. You can find yourself in trial with ALL of them against you.

Finally, the burden of proof in a criminal matter is beyond a reasonable doubt.

a) In dependency the burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence, or ‘more likely than not.’ Not really much of a burden for the County Counsel.

The lesson here is be prepared for the fact that the system is HEAVILY weighted against a parent in dependency court. Although you may be appointed an attorney by the court, consider whether or not that attorney will provide you with the best representation possible, because you’re going to need it!

Qui Tam Complaint

howellfamilylaw — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:21:50 +0000

A friend of mine recently made me aware of a problem involving medicating foster children. This is something I have had expereince with, in that I watched a 12 year old foster child come into court in shackles and drooling because she was over medicated. When I finall got her to UCLA for a full physical and psych exam, it was discovered she had a tumor which contributed to the symptoms she had been displaying. However, it was too late for her: she had gained 50 pounds, was diabetic, suffered undertermined side effects on her brain, and became infertile. When first admitted to the hospital she was give 5 different psych medications. This is a tragedy that happens everyday, but the confidentiality of children’s courts keeps these issues out of the public eye. For more info go to: http://psychrights.org/pr/100125MatsutaniUnsealingNR.pdf

Dependency, What to do when your children are removed by DCFS.

howellfamilylaw — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:22:04 +0000

One of the most traumatizing things that can happen to parents and children is to have their children removed by the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). Unfortunately, DCFS conducts interviews of parents and children without a right to counsel first. Thus, they often discover information that they can use to justify taking the children, information they would not have gotten if in the parent(s) had the right to speak with an attorney first, or have an attorney present when they were interviewed.
So what can you do? You can refuse to be interviewed or you can ask to have an attorney present when you are interviewed, either of which may not prevent DCFS from detaining the children. However, it will give them less information to plead as to why your children should be detained from you. You may also assert your 5th Amendment right to not reveal information that may incriminate you. Understand, statements you make to social workers are discoverable by District Attorneys and should your case involve criminal charges, everything you tell a social worker can be used against you in a criminal proceeding.
What you should do is immediately contact an attorney qualified to practice in Dependency Court and seek counsel as to your rights and legal options. ADVISEMENT: The preceding is for informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as legal advice.

Domestic Violence

howellfamilylaw — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:52:33 +0000

What is domestic violence?
When two people reside together, have a relationship and engage in any type of violence towards the other (physical, emotional or verbal), it is considered domestic violence. Such behavior can result in criminal action, dependency court action, civil action or in the family law courts, it will be a factor the court must consider when dealing with child custody, visitation and support and it is a factor to be considered in spousal support.

What do I do if I am a victim?
There are many organizations in the Los Angeles area that assist parties who are victims of domestic violence (see our links page). Each person must decide how they will deal with their particular situation based on the facts and circumstances of your case. Seek assistance immediately.

What if the other person is not related to me or we have no relationship?
In this type of case, you will have to file for a civil harassment restraining order. These petitions are handled in much the same way as domestic violence petitions, but are usually heard in civil and not family law courts.

Do I need an attorney to file for protection?
No, most courts have a special office and personnel to help you fill out and file the necessary paperwork. However, if your circumstance is that you are involved with Dependency or Family law court, it is advisable to seek the assistance of an attorney.

At the Law Office of Howell & Howell, Robert Howell and Leslie Howell have extensive experience with these issues. Leslie Howell was trained and worked as a counselor for LACAAW (Los Angeles Commission on Assaults Against Women). Robert has litigated numerous domestic violence and civil harassment cases. Robert and Leslie have the experience and knowledge you need to protect all your rights domestic violence proceedings.