How a CPS case starts - "we will just talk and look around"

When CPS is at your door, most likely they came without a court order or search warrant and most likely they ask for access to the house and "just to talk and look around".


I am always amazed at the general illiteracy of the American population as to their own constitutional rights when CPS comes to people's doors.


People charged with child neglect usually come to me after they have talked to CPS and give them access to their home to "look around" (obtain an opportunity to testify as to results of the search, true or false) and "talk" (obtain an opportunity to testify to a confession, whether it happened or not).


Yet, the most successful cases that I have had are those where potential respondents in CPS cases did not allow CPS to come into their house and did not talk to CPS, either because people immediately called an attorney when CPS was at their door, or because they figured it out on their own and refused to talk to CPS or let them access the house. 


People who engaged in the game of "we will just look around and will just talk to you" later find out the hard way that trusting CPS was wrong.  When people become respondents in child protective proceedings, they are amazed at how easily social workers lie on the stand under oath, but at that point nothing much can be done. 


Once the fact of communication with CPS or the fact that CPS was inside the residence was established, and after that is established, it becomes a game of credibility between CPS and the parents, and CPS usually wins, especially that in New York such cases are decided by judges only, and judges are heavily leaning toward CPS.


People who are unfamiliar with the court system are usually in complete shock from the lies they read and hear about themselves from the court pleadings of CPS, from the so-called "casenotes" and especially from the stand.  I have clients repeatedly asking me, how can governmental officials whose salary my clients support as taxpayers, lie under oath.  I do not have answers as to that, but such lies teach people really fast that the government is not to be trusted and is not their friend, no matter what they say.


Often CPS workers come to people's homes together with the police.  That is done both for reinforcement and protection of the social workers, and for the police to be able to readily press charges and make arrests. 


When people refuse to allow CPS and police in their homes, most often CPS threaten that if people do not "cooperate", the matter will be worse.  In reality, often the opposite is true.  Yet, when threatened that their children are going to be taken away unless they cooperate, many parents yield to the pressure, open their doors and talk, and later on learn the hard way that they shouldn't have done that.


Child abuse and neglect cases are the most emotionally charged court cases.  At the same time, evidentiary standards in such cases are the most loose across civil cases, even though constitutional, reputational and employment rights of parents and caregivers of children are affected by such proceedings the most.


During years of working in the law office of a trial lawyer dealing with CPS issues and later when I practiced law myself and handled CPS cases, I witnessed that people usually had no idea as to the complexity of proceedings that can be spawned from "just talking" to CPS and "just letting them look around" their house. 


Such "talking" and "looking around" can in fact trigger four types of proceedings in two categories:


Category 1, lawsuits against parents/caregivers by the government:

1. administrative (to address the so-called "indicated reports");
2. civil proceedings in Family Court (child abuse and neglect proceedings); and
3. criminal proceedings for endangering welfare or minors, a misdemeanor in New York

Category 2, lawsuits by parents/caregivers against the government:


4. Civil rights actions against CPS and state courts under the Civil Rights Act of 1871.


Proceedings in Category 1 are usually running parallel to one another and are designed to reinforce one another.  It is thus most advisable that when parents seek to hire an attorney, they hire an attorney who is ready, willing and able to handle all three types of cases within Category 1.


Lawsuits in Category 2 can be commenced parallel to proceedings in Category 1, depending on the issues raised in proceedings in Category 1. 


In 2014-2015 I am planning to publish a series of books about child protective proceedings in the state of New York and in federal courts covering a wide range of subjects pertaining to such proceedings, including but not limited to the scope of proceedings, evidentiary standards, interaction between administrative, civil and criminal proceedings, constitutional issues in such proceedings.

By blogging and publishing books on the subject of defending parents in child neglect/abuse proceedings, I hope to raise public awareness as to what is going on behind closed doors of child protective proceedings. 


From years of experience with CPS I have come to believe that the child protective system does more harm to the families and children than good and should be drastically reformed from the bottom up.



Update in October of 2016:  due to harassment by the New York State and local government that forced me and my family to leave the State of New York, due to the retaliatory disciplinary proceedings against me as an attorney because of my activity as a civil rights attorney and attorney who defended parents against CPS, and because of the resulting suspension of my law license and efforts to appeal the suspension, my work as to the books slowed down. 

Yet, I am still planning the series of books educating parents and preparing them to defend themselves and their children against the CPS.

The first book of the series is going to be published soon, hopefully by the end of the year 2016.