NY Professional family sues ACS taking infant unjustly

The Queens family expended close to 100K in lawyers fees, but ACS refused to
consider even the family physician's recommendations.

CPS has way too much immunity, and too much unrestrained power.








Home - News - News - Top Stories Tuesday 18 May, 2004



NEWS SEARCH



Advanced search





News
Top Stories

QueensWide
Mayor's Message
Editorial
Letters To The Editor
25th Anniversary Celebration
Community Calendar
Banking and Finance
Joiner's Journal
Sports Beat
Dateline
National News
Weather
Past Issues
I Have Often Walked
Record Review
Movie Review
Book Review

PrimeTimes
Queens Spotlight
Caribbean America
Business Directory
Lifestyles
Personal Finance
Consumer Guide
Sports Wire!
Fun and Games
Community
Links
Our Newspapers
Shopping
Home Entertainment
Books
Other




Top Stories




Bayside Couple Sues City For Erroneous Child Abuse Charges




by Keach Hagey, Chronicle Reporter May 13, 2004





After three years of fighting a false child abuse claim in Family Court, (l-r)
Jo-Ellen Kosack, Kortney Coburn and Paul Coburn were reunited last year. (photo
by Sarah Casey)

Kortney Coburn’s parents watch her very, very closely when she goes
outside their Bayside co-op to play. It’s been a year since they won their
three-year battle against a false child abuse charge by the city, but they
still fear that even the smallest bump or bruise could result in their daughter
being taken away from them again.
The nightmare, as her father Paul Coburn describes it, happened on November
17, 1999, when the now-five-year-old Kortney was seven months old.
The morning started out as a typical Friday. Kortney’s mother, Jo-Ellen
Kosack, left early to go to her job as a district manager for the Board of
Education. Her husband spent an hour with the baby, between 7:30 and 8:30 a.m.,
before handing her over to the babysitter and going to work.
The babysitter, a young woman who had studied child care in her native
Trinidad, spent the day giving the child a bath, overseeing a nap and taking
her upstairs to visit neighbors around 1:30 p.m. At 2:30 p.m., she called
Kosack to say that the child was crying inconsolably.
The babysitter maintained that nothing had happened, but when the parents
took the baby to the doctor, it was discovered that she had a spiral fracture,
cutting her leg bone in two and requiring a full-body cast. Because there was
no explanation for the injury, the hospital suspected child abuse and called
the city’s Administration for Children’s Services.
On Monday morning, the parents were charged with child abuse in Family Court
and their daughter was taken away from them.
“They knew the babysitter was lying, and yet they intentionally, falsely
charged us in order to take the baby away,� Coburn said.
Eventually Kosack was given custody, despite the fact that she had also been
charged with abuse. Because Coburn was the parent to see the child last before
her injury, he was not allowed to sleep in the same apartment. He spent many
months between court cases sleeping on his wife’s parents’ couch in
Flushing.
“I would go to the house, eat dinner, put her to bed and leave,� Coburn
said. “It was the worst thing I can imagine, short of being put in jail.�
The couple estimates that they spent about $100,000 in legal fees over the
next two years trying to win their daughter back. Kosack, whose professional
responsibilities included training teachers to spot and report the signs of
child abuse, went on a leave of absence while being charged with the crime
herself.
Coburn found he was too distracted to do the creative writing work his
marketing job required, and went through several jobs before finding something
rote enough to allow him to spend hours after work scouring the Internet for
medical experts who would testify on his behalf.
He finally found one who testified that the spiral fracture could indeed
have occurred from the babysitter accidentally dropping the child straight down
on her leg. This contradicted the testimony of the child abuse liaison from
North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System, who said that the wound had been
inflicted.
After three years, the judge threw out the case against the parents and
charged the babysitter, who received no penalty. Now the parents are suing the
city to get some answers, as well as compensation for their legal fees and lost
wages.
“The biggest question is, why did they do this? What did anybody gain by
doing this?� Coburn asked. The only answer he can come up with is that the
city agency needs cases to justify its budget. “They are just trying to get
kids, any kids they can get.�
According to ACS spokeswoman Lisi de Bourbon, Queens has 288 child
protective specialists, who act as the investigators and civil prosecutors in
abuse cases. Citywide, there are 1,577 case workers, who investigate 55,000
cases a year. Of these, approximately 30 percent result in abuse charges
against parents or guardians. De Bourbon could not comment on Kortney
Coburn’s case for confidentiality reasons.
Steve Marcellos, the lawyer who Coburn and Kosack have retained in their
case against the ACS, said that the child protection laws that allow hospital
workers, teachers and police officers to call for an investigation of child
abuse are good and right, but that the ACS’s process of investigation is
flawed.
He pointed to the fact that the case worker prosecuting the parents had only
been working at the agency for six months, and failed to contact Coburn’s
ex-wife, grown children or neighbors to determine what kind of parent he was.
“It was staring them right in the face that this was clearly an accident,
and ACS didn’t bother to follow up,� Marcellos said. “The real sadness
is, if you don’t have the money to fight, ACS is not going to willingly
acknowledge that.�

DESCRIPTORS; FOSTER CARE, ADMINISTRATION OF CHILDRENS SERVICES, CPS, CHILD
PROTECTIVE, NEW YORK, QUEENS, FAMILY LAW, FALSE ACCUSATIONS, SPANKING, MEDICAL
NEGLECT, IMMUNITY, CAPTA, ASFA, CASEWORK, DHS, DSS, MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, PARENTAL
RIGHTS, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Fern,

So what is your solution? You post rant after rant about the evils of
CPS. What is your solution?

LaVonne

Fern5827 wrote:

The Queens family expended close to 100K in lawyers fees, but ACS refused to
consider even the family physician's recommendations.

CPS has way too much immunity, and too much unrestrained power.








Home - News - News - Top Stories Tuesday 18 May, 2004



NEWS SEARCH



Advanced search





News
Top Stories

QueensWide
Mayor's Message
Editorial
Letters To The Editor
25th Anniversary Celebration
Community Calendar
Banking and Finance
Joiner's Journal
Sports Beat
Dateline
National News
Weather
Past Issues
I Have Often Walked
Record Review
Movie Review
Book Review

PrimeTimes
Queens Spotlight
Caribbean America
Business Directory
Lifestyles
Personal Finance
Consumer Guide
Sports Wire!
Fun and Games
Community
Links
Our Newspapers
Shopping
Home Entertainment
Books
Other




Top Stories




Bayside Couple Sues City For Erroneous Child Abuse Charges




by Keach Hagey, Chronicle Reporter May 13, 2004





After three years of fighting a false child abuse claim in Family Court, (l-r)
Jo-Ellen Kosack, Kortney Coburn and Paul Coburn were reunited last year. (photo
by Sarah Casey)

Kortney Coburn’s parents watch her very, very closely when she goes
outside their Bayside co-op to play. It’s been a year since they won their
three-year battle against a false child abuse charge by the city, but they
still fear that even the smallest bump or bruise could result in their daughter
being taken away from them again.
The nightmare, as her father Paul Coburn describes it, happened on November
17, 1999, when the now-five-year-old Kortney was seven months old.
The morning started out as a typical Friday. Kortney’s mother, Jo-Ellen
Kosack, left early to go to her job as a district manager for the Board of
Education. Her husband spent an hour with the baby, between 7:30 and 8:30 a.m.,
before handing her over to the babysitter and going to work.
The babysitter, a young woman who had studied child care in her native
Trinidad, spent the day giving the child a bath, overseeing a nap and taking
her upstairs to visit neighbors around 1:30 p.m. At 2:30 p.m., she called
Kosack to say that the child was crying inconsolably.
The babysitter maintained that nothing had happened, but when the parents
took the baby to the doctor, it was discovered that she had a spiral fracture,
cutting her leg bone in two and requiring a full-body cast. Because there was
no explanation for the injury, the hospital suspected child abuse and called
the city’s Administration for Children’s Services.
On Monday morning, the parents were charged with child abuse in Family Court
and their daughter was taken away from them.
“They knew the babysitter was lying, and yet they intentionally, falsely
charged us in order to take the baby away,� Coburn said.
Eventually Kosack was given custody, despite the fact that she had also been
charged with abuse. Because Coburn was the parent to see the child last before
her injury, he was not allowed to sleep in the same apartment. He spent many
months between court cases sleeping on his wife’s parents’ couch in
Flushing.
“I would go to the house, eat dinner, put her to bed and leave,� Coburn
said. “It was the worst thing I can imagine, short of being put in jail.�
The couple estimates that they spent about $100,000 in legal fees over the
next two years trying to win their daughter back. Kosack, whose professional
responsibilities included training teachers to spot and report the signs of
child abuse, went on a leave of absence while being charged with the crime
herself.
Coburn found he was too distracted to do the creative writing work his
marketing job required, and went through several jobs before finding something
rote enough to allow him to spend hours after work scouring the Internet for
medical experts who would testify on his behalf.
He finally found one who testified that the spiral fracture could indeed
have occurred from the babysitter accidentally dropping the child straight down
on her leg. This contradicted the testimony of the child abuse liaison from
North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System, who said that the wound had been
inflicted.
After three years, the judge threw out the case against the parents and
charged the babysitter, who received no penalty. Now the parents are suing the
city to get some answers, as well as compensation for their legal fees and lost
wages.
“The biggest question is, why did they do this? What did anybody gain by
doing this?� Coburn asked. The only answer he can come up with is that the
city agency needs cases to justify its budget. “They are just trying to get
kids, any kids they can get.�
According to ACS spokeswoman Lisi de Bourbon, Queens has 288 child
protective specialists, who act as the investigators and civil prosecutors in
abuse cases. Citywide, there are 1,577 case workers, who investigate 55,000
cases a year. Of these, approximately 30 percent result in abuse charges
against parents or guardians. De Bourbon could not comment on Kortney
Coburn’s case for confidentiality reasons.
Steve Marcellos, the lawyer who Coburn and Kosack have retained in their
case against the ACS, said that the child protection laws that allow hospital
workers, teachers and police officers to call for an investigation of child
abuse are good and right, but that the ACS’s process of investigation is
flawed.
He pointed to the fact that the case worker prosecuting the parents had only
been working at the agency for six months, and failed to contact Coburn’s
ex-wife, grown children or neighbors to determine what kind of parent he was.
“It was staring them right in the face that this was clearly an accident,
and ACS didn’t bother to follow up,� Marcellos said. “The real sadness
is, if you don’t have the money to fight, ACS is not going to willingly
acknowledge that.�

DESCRIPTORS; FOSTER CARE, ADMINISTRATION OF CHILDRENS SERVICES, CPS, CHILD
PROTECTIVE, NEW YORK, QUEENS, FAMILY LAW, FALSE ACCUSATIONS, SPANKING, MEDICAL
NEGLECT, IMMUNITY, CAPTA, ASFA, CASEWORK, DHS, DSS, MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, PARENTAL
RIGHTS, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

On Tue, 18 May 2004 17:18:13 -0500, Carlson LaVonne
wrote:

Fern,

So what is your solution? You post rant after rant about the evils
of
CPS. What is your solution?

Well, it seems It's solution would include crippling by lack of
funding, and an endless string of marching lawyers suing CPS, plus
using someone who It has not disclosed as yet (in response to a
suggestion of some thug of a judge that thinks CPS has too much power)
to do child protection investigations instead of CPS.

It's all so logical, given that child abuse, and especially sexual
abuse has REDUCED under the last few decades of this CPS watch.

Cute, idnit? Sooo very logical.

It's support of abusive, even infanticidal parents comes out so
clearly in these little diatribes of cut and past posting.

This One is a fit Grafting for Droany and his logic.

And finally. No one forced these folks to sue and spend all that
money. So the money really isn't an object. And if you read the case
carefully, CPS made a mistake, not an attack.

LaVonne

Kane



Fern5827 wrote:

The Queens family expended close to 100K in lawyers fees, but ACS
refused to
consider even the family physician's recommendations.

CPS has way too much immunity, and too much unrestrained power.








Home - News - News - Top Stories Tuesday 18 May, 2004



NEWS SEARCH



Advanced search





News
Top Stories

QueensWide
Mayor's Message
Editorial
Letters To The Editor
25th Anniversary Celebration
Community Calendar
Banking and Finance
Joiner's Journal
Sports Beat
Dateline
National News
Weather
Past Issues
I Have Often Walked
Record Review
Movie Review
Book Review

PrimeTimes
Queens Spotlight
Caribbean America
Business Directory
Lifestyles
Personal Finance
Consumer Guide
Sports Wire!
Fun and Games
Community
Links
Our Newspapers
Shopping
Home Entertainment
Books
Other




Top Stories




Bayside Couple Sues City For Erroneous Child Abuse Charges




by Keach Hagey, Chronicle Reporter May 13, 2004





After three years of fighting a false child abuse claim in Family
Court, (l-r)
Jo-Ellen Kosack, Kortney Coburn and Paul Coburn were reunited last
year. (photo
by Sarah Casey)

Kortney Coburn’s parents watch her very, very closely when she
goes
outside their Bayside co-op to play. It’s been a year since they
won their
three-year battle against a false child abuse charge by the city,
but they
still fear that even the smallest bump or bruise could result in
their daughter
being taken away from them again.
The nightmare, as her father Paul Coburn describes it, happened
on November
17, 1999, when the now-five-year-old Kortney was seven months old.
The morning started out as a typical Friday. Kortney’s mother,
Jo-Ellen
Kosack, left early to go to her job as a district manager for the
Board of
Education. Her husband spent an hour with the baby, between 7:30
and 8:30 a.m.,
before handing her over to the babysitter and going to work.
The babysitter, a young woman who had studied child care in her
native
Trinidad, spent the day giving the child a bath, overseeing a nap
and taking
her upstairs to visit neighbors around 1:30 p.m. At 2:30 p.m., she
called
Kosack to say that the child was crying inconsolably.
The babysitter maintained that nothing had happened, but when
the parents
took the baby to the doctor, it was discovered that she had a
spiral fracture,
cutting her leg bone in two and requiring a full-body cast. Because
there was
no explanation for the injury, the hospital suspected child abuse
and called
the city’s Administration for Children’s Services.
On Monday morning, the parents were charged with child abuse in
Family Court
and their daughter was taken away from them.
“They knew the babysitter was lying, and yet they intentionally,
falsely
charged us in order to take the baby away,� Coburn said.
Eventually Kosack was given custody, despite the fact that she
had also been
charged with abuse. Because Coburn was the parent to see the child
last before
her injury, he was not allowed to sleep in the same apartment. He
spent many
months between court cases sleeping on his wife’s parents’ couch in
Flushing.
“I would go to the house, eat dinner, put her to bed and leave,�
Coburn
said. “It was the worst thing I can imagine, short of being put in
jail.�
The couple estimates that they spent about $100,000 in legal
fees over the
next two years trying to win their daughter back. Kosack, whose
professional
responsibilities included training teachers to spot and report the
signs of
child abuse, went on a leave of absence while being charged with
the crime
herself.
Coburn found he was too distracted to do the creative writing
work his
marketing job required, and went through several jobs before
finding something
rote enough to allow him to spend hours after work scouring the
Internet for
medical experts who would testify on his behalf.
He finally found one who testified that the spiral fracture
could indeed
have occurred from the babysitter accidentally dropping the child
straight down
on her leg. This contradicted the testimony of the child abuse
liaison from
North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System, who said that the
wound had been
inflicted.
After three years, the judge threw out the case against the
parents and
charged the babysitter, who received no penalty. Now the parents
are suing the
city to get some answers, as well as compensation for their legal
fees and lost
wages.
“The biggest question is, why did they do this? What did anybody
gain by
doing this?� Coburn asked. The only answer he can come up with is
that the
city agency needs cases to justify its budget. “They are just
trying to get
kids, any kids they can get.�
According to ACS spokeswoman Lisi de Bourbon, Queens has 288
child
protective specialists, who act as the investigators and civil
prosecutors in
abuse cases. Citywide, there are 1,577 case workers, who
investigate 55,000
cases a year. Of these, approximately 30 percent result in abuse
charges
against parents or guardians. De Bourbon could not comment on
Kortney
Coburn’s case for confidentiality reasons.
Steve Marcellos, the lawyer who Coburn and Kosack have retained
in their
case against the ACS, said that the child protection laws that
allow hospital
workers, teachers and police officers to call for an investigation
of child
abuse are good and right, but that the ACS’s process of
investigation is
flawed.
He pointed to the fact that the case worker prosecuting the
parents had only
been working at the agency for six months, and failed to contact
Coburn’s
ex-wife, grown children or neighbors to determine what kind of
parent he was.
“It was staring them right in the face that this was clearly an
accident,
and ACS didn’t bother to follow up,� Marcellos said. “The real
sadness
is, if you don’t have the money to fight, ACS is not going to
willingly
acknowledge that.�

DESCRIPTORS; FOSTER CARE, ADMINISTRATION OF CHILDRENS SERVICES,
CPS, CHILD
PROTECTIVE, NEW YORK, QUEENS, FAMILY LAW, FALSE ACCUSATIONS,
SPANKING, MEDICAL
NEGLECT, IMMUNITY, CAPTA, ASFA, CASEWORK, DHS, DSS, MICHAEL
BLOOMBERG, PARENTAL
RIGHTS, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

So much for wanting to debate! Are you avoiding me, LaVonne?

Doan

On Tue, 18 May 2004, Carlson LaVonne wrote:

Fern,

So what is your solution? You post rant after rant about the evils of
CPS. What is your solution?

LaVonne

Fern5827 wrote:

The Queens family expended close to 100K in lawyers fees, but ACS refus=
ed to
consider even the family physician's recommendations.

CPS has way too much immunity, and too much unrestrained power.








Home - News - News - Top Stories Tuesday 18 May, 2004



NEWS SEARCH



Advanced search





News
Top Stories

QueensWide
Mayor's Message
Editorial
Letters To The Editor
25th Anniversary Celebration
Community Calendar
Banking and Finance
Joiner's Journal
Sports Beat
Dateline
National News
Weather
Past Issues
I Have Often Walked
Record Review
Movie Review
Book Review

PrimeTimes
Queens Spotlight
Caribbean America
Business Directory
Lifestyles
Personal Finance
Consumer Guide
Sports Wire!
Fun and Games
Community
Links
Our Newspapers
Shopping
Home Entertainment
Books
Other




Top Stories




Bayside Couple Sues City For Erroneous Child Abuse Charges




by Keach Hagey, Chronicle Reporter May 13, 2004





After three years of fighting a false child abuse claim in Family Court=
, (l-r)
Jo-Ellen Kosack, Kortney Coburn and Paul Coburn were reunited last year=
=2E (photo
by Sarah Casey)

Kortney Coburn=E2=80=99s parents watch her very, very closely when s=
he goes
outside their Bayside co-op to play. It=E2=80=99s been a year since the=
y won their
three-year battle against a false child abuse charge by the city, but t=
hey
still fear that even the smallest bump or bruise could result in their =
daughter
being taken away from them again.
The nightmare, as her father Paul Coburn describes it, happened on N=
ovember
17, 1999, when the now-five-year-old Kortney was seven months old.
The morning started out as a typical Friday. Kortney=E2=80=99s mothe=
r, Jo-Ellen
Kosack, left early to go to her job as a district manager for the Board=
of
Education. Her husband spent an hour with the baby, between 7:30 and 8:=
30 a.m.,
before handing her over to the babysitter and going to work.
The babysitter, a young woman who had studied child care in her nati=
ve
Trinidad, spent the day giving the child a bath, overseeing a nap and t=
aking
her upstairs to visit neighbors around 1:30 p.m. At 2:30 p.m., she call=
ed
Kosack to say that the child was crying inconsolably.
The babysitter maintained that nothing had happened, but when the pa=
rents
took the baby to the doctor, it was discovered that she had a spiral fr=
acture,
cutting her leg bone in two and requiring a full-body cast. Because the=
re was
no explanation for the injury, the hospital suspected child abuse and c=
alled
the city=E2=80=99s Administration for Children=E2=80=99s Services.
On Monday morning, the parents were charged with child abuse in Fami=
ly Court
and their daughter was taken away from them.
=E2=80=9CThey knew the babysitter was lying, and yet they intentiona=
lly, falsely
charged us in order to take the baby away,=E2=80=9D Coburn said.
Eventually Kosack was given custody, despite the fact that she had a=
lso been
charged with abuse. Because Coburn was the parent to see the child last=
before
her injury, he was not allowed to sleep in the same apartment. He spent=
many
months between court cases sleeping on his wife=E2=80=99s parents=E2=80=
=99 couch in
Flushing.
=E2=80=9CI would go to the house, eat dinner, put her to bed and lea=
ve,=E2=80=9D Coburn
said. =E2=80=9CIt was the worst thing I can imagine, short of being put=
in jail.=E2=80=9D
The couple estimates that they spent about $100,000 in legal fees ov=
er the
next two years trying to win their daughter back. Kosack, whose profess=
ional
responsibilities included training teachers to spot and report the sign=
s of
child abuse, went on a leave of absence while being charged with the cr=
ime
herself.
Coburn found he was too distracted to do the creative writing work h=
is
marketing job required, and went through several jobs before finding so=
mething
rote enough to allow him to spend hours after work scouring the Interne=
t for
medical experts who would testify on his behalf.
He finally found one who testified that the spiral fracture could in=
deed
have occurred from the babysitter accidentally dropping the child strai=
ght down
on her leg. This contradicted the testimony of the child abuse liaison =
from
North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System, who said that the wound h=
ad been
inflicted.
After three years, the judge threw out the case against the parents =
and
charged the babysitter, who received no penalty. Now the parents are su=
ing the
city to get some answers, as well as compensation for their legal fees =
and lost
wages.
=E2=80=9CThe biggest question is, why did they do this? What did any=
body gain by
doing this?=E2=80=9D Coburn asked. The only answer he can come up with =
is that the
city agency needs cases to justify its budget. =E2=80=9CThey are just t=
rying to get
kids, any kids they can get.=E2=80=9D
According to ACS spokeswoman Lisi de Bourbon, Queens has 288 child
protective specialists, who act as the investigators and civil prosecut=
ors in
abuse cases. Citywide, there are 1,577 case workers, who investigate 55=
,000
cases a year. Of these, approximately 30 percent result in abuse charge=
s
against parents or guardians. De Bourbon could not comment on Kortney
Coburn=E2=80=99s case for confidentiality reasons.
Steve Marcellos, the lawyer who Coburn and Kosack have retained in t=
heir
case against the ACS, said that the child protection laws that allow ho=
spital
workers, teachers and police officers to call for an investigation of c=
hild
abuse are good and right, but that the ACS=E2=80=99s process of investi=
gation is
flawed.
He pointed to the fact that the case worker prosecuting the parents =
had only
been working at the agency for six months, and failed to contact Coburn=
=E2=80=99s
ex-wife, grown children or neighbors to determine what kind of parent h=
e was.
=E2=80=9CIt was staring them right in the face that this was clearly=
an accident,
and ACS didn=E2=80=99t bother to follow up,=E2=80=9D Marcellos said. =
=E2=80=9CThe real sadness
is, if you don=E2=80=99t have the money to fight, ACS is not going to w=
illingly
acknowledge that.=E2=80=9D

DESCRIPTORS; FOSTER CARE, ADMINISTRATION OF CHILDRENS SERVICES, CPS, CH=
ILD
PROTECTIVE, NEW YORK, QUEENS, FAMILY LAW, FALSE ACCUSATIONS, SPANKING, =
MEDICAL
NEGLECT, IMMUNITY, CAPTA, ASFA, CASEWORK, DHS, DSS, MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, =
PARENTAL
RIGHTS, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

On 18 May 2004, Kane wrote:

On Tue, 18 May 2004 17:18:13 -0500, Carlson LaVonne
wrote:

Fern,

So what is your solution? You post rant after rant about the evils
of
CPS. What is your solution?

Well, it seems It's solution would include crippling by lack of
funding, and an endless string of marching lawyers suing CPS, plus
using someone who It has not disclosed as yet (in response to a
suggestion of some thug of a judge that thinks CPS has too much power)
to do child protection investigations instead of CPS.

It's all so logical, given that child abuse, and especially sexual
abuse has REDUCED under the last few decades of this CPS watch.

Really?

Cute, idnit? Sooo very logical.

You meant the logic of the anti-spanking zealotS? ;-)

It's support of abusive, even infanticidal parents comes out so
clearly in these little diatribes of cut and past posting.

The only one who supported infanticide in this newsgroup is
another foul-mouth "never-spanked" kid by the name of Steve.

This One is a fit Grafting for Droany and his logic.

Or the stupidity of a Kane0! :-)

And finally. No one forced these folks to sue and spend all that
money. So the money really isn't an object. And if you read the case
carefully, CPS made a mistake, not an attack.

mistake? :-0

Doan

LaVonne

Kane



Fern5827 wrote:

The Queens family expended close to 100K in lawyers fees, but ACS
refused to
consider even the family physician's recommendations.

CPS has way too much immunity, and too much unrestrained power.








Home - News - News - Top Stories Tuesday 18 May, 2004



NEWS SEARCH



Advanced search





News
Top Stories

QueensWide
Mayor's Message
Editorial
Letters To The Editor
25th Anniversary Celebration
Community Calendar
Banking and Finance
Joiner's Journal
Sports Beat
Dateline
National News
Weather
Past Issues
I Have Often Walked
Record Review
Movie Review
Book Review

PrimeTimes
Queens Spotlight
Caribbean America
Business Directory
Lifestyles
Personal Finance
Consumer Guide
Sports Wire!
Fun and Games
Community
Links
Our Newspapers
Shopping
Home Entertainment
Books
Other




Top Stories




Bayside Couple Sues City For Erroneous Child Abuse Charges




by Keach Hagey, Chronicle Reporter May 13, 2004





After three years of fighting a false child abuse claim in Family
Court, (l-r)
Jo-Ellen Kosack, Kortney Coburn and Paul Coburn were reunited last
year. (photo
by Sarah Casey)

Kortney Coburn=E2=80=99s parents watch her very, very closely when =
she
goes
outside their Bayside co-op to play. It=E2=80=99s been a year since th=
ey
won their
three-year battle against a false child abuse charge by the city,
but they
still fear that even the smallest bump or bruise could result in
their daughter
being taken away from them again.
The nightmare, as her father Paul Coburn describes it, happened
on November
17, 1999, when the now-five-year-old Kortney was seven months old.
The morning started out as a typical Friday. Kortney=E2=80=99s moth=
er,
Jo-Ellen
Kosack, left early to go to her job as a district manager for the
Board of
Education. Her husband spent an hour with the baby, between 7:30
and 8:30 a.m.,
before handing her over to the babysitter and going to work.
The babysitter, a young woman who had studied child care in her
native
Trinidad, spent the day giving the child a bath, overseeing a nap
and taking
her upstairs to visit neighbors around 1:30 p.m. At 2:30 p.m., she
called
Kosack to say that the child was crying inconsolably.
The babysitter maintained that nothing had happened, but when
the parents
took the baby to the doctor, it was discovered that she had a
spiral fracture,
cutting her leg bone in two and requiring a full-body cast. Because
there was
no explanation for the injury, the hospital suspected child abuse
and called
the city=E2=80=99s Administration for Children=E2=80=99s Services.
On Monday morning, the parents were charged with child abuse in
Family Court
and their daughter was taken away from them.
=E2=80=9CThey knew the babysitter was lying, and yet they intention=
ally,
falsely
charged us in order to take the baby away,=E2=80=9D Coburn said.
Eventually Kosack was given custody, despite the fact that she
had also been
charged with abuse. Because Coburn was the parent to see the child
last before
her injury, he was not allowed to sleep in the same apartment. He
spent many
months between court cases sleeping on his wife=E2=80=99s parents=E2=
=80=99 couch in
Flushing.
=E2=80=9CI would go to the house, eat dinner, put her to bed and le=
ave,=E2=80=9D
Coburn
said. =E2=80=9CIt was the worst thing I can imagine, short of being pu=
t in
jail.=E2=80=9D
The couple estimates that they spent about $100,000 in legal
fees over the
next two years trying to win their daughter back. Kosack, whose
professional
responsibilities included training teachers to spot and report the
signs of
child abuse, went on a leave of absence while being charged with
the crime
herself.
Coburn found he was too distracted to do the creative writing
work his
marketing job required, and went through several jobs before
finding something
rote enough to allow him to spend hours after work scouring the
Internet for
medical experts who would testify on his behalf.
He finally found one who testified that the spiral fracture
could indeed
have occurred from the babysitter accidentally dropping the child
straight down
on her leg. This contradicted the testimony of the child abuse
liaison from
North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System, who said that the
wound had been
inflicted.
After three years, the judge threw out the case against the
parents and
charged the babysitter, who received no penalty. Now the parents
are suing the
city to get some answers, as well as compensation for their legal
fees and lost
wages.
=E2=80=9CThe biggest question is, why did they do this? What did an=
ybody
gain by
doing this?=E2=80=9D Coburn asked. The only answer he can come up with=
is
that the
city agency needs cases to justify its budget. =E2=80=9CThey are just
trying to get
kids, any kids they can get.=E2=80=9D
According to ACS spokeswoman Lisi de Bourbon, Queens has 288
child
protective specialists, who act as the investigators and civil
prosecutors in
abuse cases. Citywide, there are 1,577 case workers, who
investigate 55,000
cases a year. Of these, approximately 30 percent result in abuse
charges
against parents or guardians. De Bourbon could not comment on
Kortney
Coburn=E2=80=99s case for confidentiality reasons.
Steve Marcellos, the lawyer who Coburn and Kosack have retained
in their
case against the ACS, said that the child protection laws that
allow hospital
workers, teachers and police officers to call for an investigation
of child
abuse are good and right, but that the ACS=E2=80=99s process of
investigation is
flawed.
He pointed to the fact that the case worker prosecuting the
parents had only
been working at the agency for six months, and failed to contact
Coburn=E2=80=99s
ex-wife, grown children or neighbors to determine what kind of
parent he was.
=E2=80=9CIt was staring them right in the face that this was clearl=
y an
accident,
and ACS didn=E2=80=99t bother to follow up,=E2=80=9D Marcellos said. =
=E2=80=9CThe real
sadness
is, if you don=E2=80=99t have the money to fight, ACS is not going to
willingly
acknowledge that.=E2=80=9D

DESCRIPTORS; FOSTER CARE, ADMINISTRATION OF CHILDRENS SERVICES,
CPS, CHILD
PROTECTIVE, NEW YORK, QUEENS, FAMILY LAW, FALSE ACCUSATIONS,
SPANKING, MEDICAL
NEGLECT, IMMUNITY, CAPTA, ASFA, CASEWORK, DHS, DSS, MICHAEL
BLOOMBERG, PARENTAL
RIGHTS, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

No, I'm not avoiding you. I'm waiting for you to get a copy of the
study and read it. It makes no sense to attempt to debate merits of a
study with someone who hasn't read the study. And it baffles me that
someone who wants to debate a particular study refuses to take the
initiative to locate and read the study. I did provide you with a
complete reference.


LaVonne



Doan wrote:
So much for wanting to debate! Are you avoiding me, LaVonne?

Doan

Already have! I have even given you the data from the study - The data
which you refused to give when I ASKED! The problem with this study
is the small sample size and the age of the subjects - 14 months.
Do you want to debate or not?

Doan

On Wed, 19 May 2004, Carlson LaVonne wrote:

No, I'm not avoiding you. I'm waiting for you to get a copy of the
study and read it. It makes no sense to attempt to debate merits of a
study with someone who hasn't read the study. And it baffles me that
someone who wants to debate a particular study refuses to take the
initiative to locate and read the study. I did provide you with a
complete reference.


LaVonne



Doan wrote:
So much for wanting to debate! Are you avoiding me, LaVonne?

Doan

Doan wrote:

Already have! I have even given you the data from the study - The data
which you refused to give when I ASKED! The problem with this study
is the small sample size and the age of the subjects - 14 months.
Do you want to debate or not?

Eighteen children and families were studied. The children's ages were
between 12 and 14 months. Since this was a study involving
infants/toddlers, this is entirely appropriate. Refer back to Ivan's
post that started this thread.

Yes, the sample size is small. Small sample sizes limit the ability to
generalize. Small sample sizes support larger, ongoing studies that
yield similar results.

Large sample suizes yield false positives. This is one reason why
replication is important.

LaVonne

Doan

On Wed, 19 May 2004, Carlson LaVonne wrote:


No, I'm not avoiding you. I'm waiting for you to get a copy of the
study and read it. It makes no sense to attempt to debate merits of a
study with someone who hasn't read the study. And it baffles me that
someone who wants to debate a particular study refuses to take the
initiative to locate and read the study. I did provide you with a
complete reference.


LaVonne



Doan wrote:

So much for wanting to debate! Are you avoiding me, LaVonne?

Doan

On Thu, 20 May 2004, Carlson LaVonne wrote:

Doan wrote:

Already have! I have even given you the data from the study - The data
which you refused to give when I ASKED! The problem with this study
is the small sample size and the age of the subjects - 14 months.
Do you want to debate or not?

Eighteen children and families were studied. The children's ages were
between 12 and 14 months. Since this was a study involving
infants/toddlers, this is entirely appropriate. Refer back to Ivan's
post that started this thread.

And 7 were spanked while 11 were not! Am I right? The problem is noone
is saying 12 and 14 month olds are appropriate age for spanking or any
punishment period. I've already said even the EVIL DODSON wouldn't
recommend spanking children this young. Besides, if you read p 274,
the authors said that it is not physical punishment but the RELIANCE
on physical punishment and they found no signicanes between the
occasional-punishment and no-punishment grou.

Yes, the sample size is small. Small sample sizes limit the ability to
generalize. Small sample sizes support larger, ongoing studies that
yield similar results.

So name a larger sizes study that study 12 and 14 month olds!

Large sample suizes yield false positives. This is one reason why
replication is important.

Large sample size yield false positives???? I don't get you.
Can you clarify?

Doan

LaVonne

Doan

On Wed, 19 May 2004, Carlson LaVonne wrote:


No, I'm not avoiding you. I'm waiting for you to get a copy of the
study and read it. It makes no sense to attempt to debate merits of a
study with someone who hasn't read the study. And it baffles me that
someone who wants to debate a particular study refuses to take the
initiative to locate and read the study. I did provide you with a
complete reference.


LaVonne



Doan wrote:

So much for wanting to debate! Are you avoiding me, LaVonne?

Doan