Yes, Abuse Claims Must Be Investigated . . . but Then What?

The knock came late one evening in early February. The two children were asleep and the Branches, Anita and Dale, were talking in the family room of their Saugus home. At the door were two strangers. The man was a sheriff’s deputy. The woman was a social worker from the Department of Children and Family Services.

“They said, ‘We want to see your daughter, Christie Branch,’ ” said Anita, a 39-year-old manicurist. “They said, ‘We need to take her into the front yard to look at her.’

“I said, ‘Why?’ And the woman said, ‘We’ll discuss it in a little bit, after we check it out.’ ”

Anita woke the child, and the deputy took the weeping, disoriented 5-year-old to the front lawn, where he examined the back of her thighs with a flashlight.

“Christie was screaming,” Anita said. “She wanted me, and I couldn’t go with her. That was the hardest part. I asked the social worker, ‘What is going on here?’ And she said, ‘It’s been alleged that Dale Branch has been beating Christie on the back of the legs to cause blisters.’ ”

The Branches were stunned. For more than three years--and it is documented in her medical records--Christie has been treated for eczema that causes a rash on the back of her thighs.

Moments later, the deputy returned. Anita thought he looked angry.

“He said, ‘This is a rash. . . . I’m leaving.’ ”

The social worker, Anita said, was apologetic and kind. She stayed for a while, asked a lot of questions and observed the family. Eventually, she left, telling the Branches she was sorry, these things happen, and that although the suspicions of abuse were unfounded, by law, she was required to file a report.

A report? What kind of report? Where would this report go? Who would know about it? Would it be permanent? Would the Branches receive copies of it? What would happen if Christie fell and hurt herself? Would this incident come back to haunt them?

Already rocked by the earthquake--Dale had been on the Golden State Freeway bridge that collapsed, and the family’s home sustained $85,000 in damage--the Branches felt their happy, suburban life coming unglued.

Panicked, they took Christie to two doctors the next day to document the rash. Then they went to Christie’s school to talk to the principal about how a rash could be misconstrued as abuse. Why didn’t someone check the child’s school medical records, where the rash was mentioned in a history Anita had filled out?

But the principal, the Branches said, was not able to offer much help. And no one seemed to be able to tell the Branches what would happen with the social worker’s report.

Dale, 38, who works for a cold storage company and aspires to be a firefighter, wondered if the report would show up somehow in background checks.

And what if years from now someone asks the Branches, “Have you ever been investigated for child abuse?”

The only honest answer is yes.

*

Several forces were at work to turn what some saw as an obvious medical condition into an ominous sign of abuse.

Anyone who works at a school is a “mandated reporter,” required by law to report suspicions of child abuse to the authorities. Failure to do so can result in criminal charges. This mandate can create a hyper-vigilance on the part of some school employees.

“If I were a parent,” said Howard Friedman, Los Angeles Unified School District assistant general counsel, “I would be absolutely incensed that this happened to me. But if you stand back objectively, I guess you say we look for the best interest of the child. . . . (But) there is a pretty fair paranoia level (on the part of district personnel).”

From talking with Christie and the social worker, the Branches were able to piece together what probably had occurred. On Feb. 2, Christie fell while jumping rope at her Granada Hills school, scraping her knee and her head. In the office, someone must have noticed the rash on the back of her legs.

Christie told her parents that someone asked, “Does your Daddy spank you here?”

The Branches think she dredged up a memory: A year ago, after Christie poked her little sister, Taylor, in the eye with a straw, her dad had smacked her on the bottom with the back of his hand and sent her to her room for a time out.

“Yes,” she must have replied.

Which is probably how the deputy and the social worker came to be on the Branch’s porch that night.

*

These are some of the things the Branches said they have been told by a variety of authorities:

* You cannot see the DCFS report.

* The record stays in DCFS computers indefinitely.

* You cannot have anything in writing that says the suspicion of abuse was unfounded.

* There is a school district registry where abuse allegations are listed.

* You are protected from anyone learning about this information by confidentiality laws.

This is what I learned by making a few calls:

A social worker who answered the phone in the Santa Clarita office of the DCFS (where Anita Branch went to ask questions) told me that “if a report is unfounded, there is nothing to give the parents.” (She suggested parents should try to get the police report, which, she added, “would be easier to get” than anything from DCFS.)

Not so, said Bill Garcia, the DCFS deputy regional administrator who runs the Child Abuse Hot Line. Parents have the right to know what was reported about their children.

And according to DCFS spokesman Schuyler Sprowles, parents have the right to submit a request in writing to their social worker for a form letter called “Notice of Case Closure” stating that a case has been closed because “the allegation of child abuse or neglect was either unsubstantiated or unfounded.”

Garcia said that the DCFS, which investigates 7,000 families a month, is required by law to keep case records on file for five years. He said cases deemed “unfounded” are officially closed soon after the paperwork is complete and then put into storage.

Friedman, the LAUSD attorney, said the district does not maintain any registry of abuse cases. But there is a child abuse office that deals with training employees and advising schools on their legal responsibilities. He said mandated reporters are encouraged--but not required--to provide copies of suspected abuse reports to that office. (An employee in that office told me that the reports are not followed up, and that they are confidential and can be released only if they are subpoenaed.)

Promises of confidentiality, though, are hard to keep. This is what keeps the Branches up nights.

Indeed, said Sprowles of the DCFS: “These things are confidential and we realize that . . . things leak out.”

Friedman said he has seen cases where the identities of mandated reporters, who are legally entitled to anonymity, have been inadvertently revealed.

“It is a tremendous dilemma,” Friedman said. “You err on the side of protection of kids, but it creates enormous amounts of stress and pressure for everyone involved.”

In any case, no one offered the Branches any of this information. They have hired an attorney and are contemplating a lawsuit against the district.

*

The Branches are coping. Sort of.

They are in therapy.

Anita is afraid to brush 3-year-old Taylor’s hair because Taylor screams and Anita is afraid someone will hear. (Could tangled hair signal neglect?)

A couple of weeks ago, Taylor pushed Christie into a wall while they were playing and Christie got a bruise on her head. The Branches were terrified. Should they keep her home from school? Anita ended up writing notes for Christie to give to her teacher, her principal and the after-school day-care workers.

These days, the Branches are less inclined to let Christie’s friends play at their house.

“What if they fell and got bruised?” Anita asks. “Can you imagine? Every little bump and bruise I am so paranoid. But that is what I think I need to do. I think the laws need to be changed. It’s not common sense to report a rash. The law protects people from using their common sense.”

It is true that, in cases such as this, the reporting system errs on the side of protecting children. But in the case of unfounded suspicions, there ought to be some centralized place--a pamphlet, maybe?--disclosing to parents where the information goes, which agencies get the information, which offices receive the reports, how parents can get copies and how they can prove they were exonerated.

That’s not such a huge request. Surely, it is possible to protect children while treating their parents with dignity and respect.