Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, January 18, 1994 TAG: 9401180159
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: MIKE HUDSON STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
They contend that the appeals process in child-abuse investigations - where the initial finding of abuse in their case was overturned - is too secretive and unfairly leaves parents out of the loop.
Ann Austin and Joy Parrish plan to appear before the state board in Richmond on Wednesday.
The board's chairman, Ray Albanowski of Rocky Mount, said he wants the state Department of Social Services to look at the procedures used in the case and others like it.
"I only know what I have heard from the parents' side," Albanowski said. But "from what I've heard, I have some questions."
Parrish and her husband, Mike, who are former neighbors of Albanowski's, said they contacted him after hitting roadblocks in trying to get information.
At least three families have complained that preschoolers with cerebral palsy and other disabilities were punished in a harsh and demeaning way by a teacher and a teacher's aide at Breckinridge Elementary School.
Lawsuits filed by the Parrishes and Ann and Kendall Austin claim that children were verbally abused, slapped in the mouth, pulled by the ear, threatened with a ruler and held down during nap time with a foot on the back.
School officials say the children never were abused.
Last summer, the Botetourt County Department of Social Services ruled that the Parrishes' and Austins' children and two others had been victimized by child abuse - "bizarre discipline."
Teacher Cindy Higgins and aide Margaret H. Garrison appealed the local agency's finding.
A state hearing officer, Mary Arthur, heard their appeal Oct. 6. Higgins, Garrison and their attorney, state Sen. Malfourd "Bo" Trumbo of Fincastle, were there, along with Botetourt welfare officials.
According to Arthur's written opinion, Higgins, Garrison and Trumbo contended that the accusations may have been "a matter of perception" and that the children's handicaps had to be taken into account.
They said, for example, that a child who was unsteady on her feet had been led by her arm and firmly put down in a chair, but never in a mean or hurtful way. Garrison said the child's mother was "very sensitive and overprotective."
Higgins said she never treated the children "any differently from the other children in her classes, or [from] the way she treats her own children."
Garrison "said she had raised six children and knew how important the years between 2 and 5 were in a child's development," Arthur wrote.
A month after the hearing, Arthur ruled that she couldn't find "clear and convincing evidence" of abuse.
Arthur said the discipline techniques Higgins and Garrison were accused of using "do not rise to the level of eccentric, irrational or grossly inappropriate." And, she said, there was no clear-cut evidence that the children had suffered physical or mental harm.
The parents did not discover that the abuse finding had been overturned - or even that it had been appealed - until school officials told the news media.
"Why were we excluded from the process?" Joy Parrish asks. "You can't doubt the sincerity of any of the people involved in this. But there's something wrong [with the system], and changes need to be made."
"It's really scary," Ann Austin said. "We were told we didn't have any right to be there."
Both said they would like to get a rehearing. However, state regulations allow only the accused to appeal.
They at least would like to get the Board of Social Services to change the rules for future cases.
State officials say child-abuse allegations must be handled in a confidential way - in order to protect the children and the accused and to encourage witnesses to come forward in such emotional, difficult situations.
Austin and Parrish say, however, that parents shouldn't be completely shut out of the process.
For example, after the local agency's ruling, they were told only that there was a finding of "bizarre discipline." They were not told exactly what the investigators determined had been done to their children.
Not knowing the details in such a case makes it hard for parents or a counselor to do anything to undo the damage, Parrish and Austin said.
They said they have spent countless hours talking with state and local welfare officials trying to get that information and - more recently - to find out why the abuse finding was overturned.
This month, state officials released a copy of the hearing officer's ruling, with most of the pages blacked out. Parrish and Austin also tracked down the hearing officer and talked with her.
From what they've been able to learn, they said, they are worried that Arthur didn't get a complete picture of the parents' case. For example, Austin said, the hearing officer never heard testimony from her daughter's psychologist.
In her ruling, Arthur noted that the children have difficulty communicating because of their ages and handicaps.
She said the information gathered by the local agency "came basically from the parents and foster mother of the four children named, as well as two preschool staff members. Parents of other children in the preschool program were contacted and responded in a generally favorable manner toward Mrs. Higgins, Mrs. Garrison and the preschool program."
by CNB