|
|
 |
Mother sues North’d agencies, officials for taking away her her
disabled daughter
|
| By Mark Gilger, Staff
Writer |
September 14, 2002 |
|
mark_g@newsitem.com
WILLIAMSPORT — A Coal Township woman has filed a lawsuit against two
county agencies and four individuals she alleges unlawfully took away
her disabled daughter and falsely accused her of child abuse.
Susan C. O’Neil-Krankowski of 923 W. Walnut St., Coal Township, filed
the suit on behalf of herself and her 6-year-old daughter, Kaitlin
O’Neil, on Wednesday in U.S. District Court.
Named as defendants in the suit are Northumberland County Children and
Youth and its director, Jane Kearney; Northumberland County Mental
Health/Mental Retardation and its director, Judy Davis; Diana Stine, a
supervisor with Children and Youth; and Beth Miller, a former Children
and Youth caseworker.
When contacted about the lawsuit Friday, Kearney and Davis reserved
comment.
The Coal Township woman is seeking compensatory and punitive damages,
including emotional stress, mental anguish, humiliation, attorney’s fees
and violations of her constitutional rights.
O’Neil-Krankowski alleges the defendants violated her procedural and
substantive due process rights, conducted an unreasonable search and
seizure, committed false imprisonment and conspiracy and abused her due
process rights.
According to the lawsuit, the child, who is autistic, received services
through the county’s Mental Health/Mental Retardation department prior
to Sept. 11, 2000, that her mother was displeased with. The plaintiff
said she made complaints to numerous state and federal agencies claiming
Mental Health/Mental Retardation violated the civil rights of her
daughter and herself.
O’Neil-Krankowski said Mental Health/Mental Retardation officials became
aware of her complaints, which threatened the integrity of the agency.
After meeting to discuss the allegations, Kearney and Davis decided to
seek removal of the child from her mother, the suit alleges.
On Nov. 7, 1999, Northumberland County Children and Youth alleges it
received a general protective services referral claiming O’Neil-Krankowski
was having trouble caring for her daughter due to her disability.
On Aug. 25, 2000, Children and Youth allegedly received another general
protective services referral claiming the plaintiff was locking her
daughter in a playroom and utilizing caregivers found in the newspaper.
On Sept. 11, 2000, Children and Youth claims it received a child
protective services referral claiming that O’Neil-Krankowski was
physically abusing her daughter by locking her in at night, not
providing adequate supervision and giving her Nyquil, Benadryl and an
unknown substance to make her drowsy.
Agency workers went to O’Neil-Krankowski’s home to investigate the
allegations and, on Sept. 11, 2000, Northumberland County Judge William
Wiest allegedly issued a verbal order permitting Children and Youth to
remove O’Neil-Krankowski’s daughter from her home. The order was never
memorialized, except by reference in future orders, into written form,
the plaintiff claims.
On the basis of the order, Kearney, Miller, Stine, police and other
officials allegedly went to the plaintiff’s home, forcefully entered it
and forcefully removed her daughter from her care. The plaintiff claims
the allegations against her were not sufficient to remove the child.
After being removed from the home, the plaintiff said her daughter was
taken to a place unknown to her and held there against her will. She
said the actions were not authorized by the father of the child.
O’Neil-Krankowski also maintains that no factual hearing, beyond a
hearing conducted by the Department of Public Welfare on an abuse
determination, was ever held in relation to the matter.
On Sept. 20, 2000, eight days after the child was taken from her home,
the Northumberland County Court of Common Pleas ordered a study be
conducted on the home of the child’s aunt, Ann Naylor. The court also
ordered O’Neil-Krankowski to have liberal visitation and contact with
her daughter. The child was then placed in Naylor’s custody.
But the following month, Children and Youth sought and received an order
from the county court granting it legal custody of the child. No hearing
was held prior to the order being issued, the suit alleges.
Also that month, Children and Youth filed a petition alleging abuse or
neglect on the basis of the prior allegations, but with more particular
reference to O’Neil-Krankowski’s decision to discontinue services
provided through Northumberland County Mental Health/Mental Retardation.
The petition alleged the plaintiff’s decision to discontinue voluntary
services amounted to child abuse and made an assertion that the child’s
mother had an undisclosed mental disorder.
The suit states that the assertion the plaintiff suffered from an
undiagnosed mental disorder was not based upon the opinion of any
psychologist, psychiatrist, therapist or other medical professional.
In November 2000, Stine issued a report of abuse based upon the
allegation that the plaintiff had denied her child developmental,
emotional, social and educational services, which interfered with her
development. But the report failed to identify any abusive acts
committed by the plaintiff toward her daughter, according to the suit.
In March 2001, Children and Youth offered to drop the matter if the
plaintiff agreed to move to Texas, and on Sept., 10, 2001, Children and
Youth voluntarily discontinued its action in relation to the child.
O’Neil-Krankowski, who has since regained custody of her daughter,
appealed the sole determination of abuse entered against her and a
hearing was held before the Department of Public Welfare on Dec. 11,
2001.
On July 15, 2002, a judge determined that O’Neil-Krankowski did not
abuse her daughter and, on Aug. 16, the Department of Public Welfare
issued a letter indicating that the status of the child abuse report
filed against O’Neil-Krankowski had been changed to “unfounded.”
The letter also indicated that Children and Youth had been directed to
destroy its records and that the acts of all the defendants were, at all
times, outrageous and committed with reckless disregard for the rights
and privileges of the plaintiffs.
The letter further stated that Kearney’s acts were intentional and
committed with the intent to deprive O’Neil-Krankowski and her daughter
of their constitutional rights.
|
| ©The
News Item 2002 |
|
Reader
Opinions |
|
|
Date: Sep, 14 2002 |
These public
servants should be fired as there is no excuse for there
actions.Most of them don't have children,but try to tell mothers
how to raise them.This happens all over the country when will
the system realize you can't put wisdom into these job positions
by reading it out of a book.
|
| |
|
|
|
Number of
Opinions: 1 |
1 - 1 of 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
