Do child protection workers deserve immunity when they misrepresent or fabricate evidence?
The critics and plaintiffs’ attorneys are out there. They seethe with frustration in their assertion that there are child protection workers who are as dysfunctional and flawed as some of the abusive and neglectful parents they investigate. They feel mistreated, ambushed, without recourse to a neutral oversight authority, and fume that the courts will believe the word of child protection workers over their clients. And yet, when there is a credible allegation that a child protection worker has knowingly made misleading or false statements which resulted in the wrongful removal of a child, their criticism and anger seem justified. Such misrepresentations may involve highly contested issues of material fact that more properly should be examined by an agency supervisor or in court on the merits. The supervisor or court, inadvertently giving credence to the worker’s misrepresentation, may thereby be swayed in favor of the worker’s recommendations.
They don't deserve immunity, period. Police officers have to abide by the rules and are overseen and governed by checks and balances and have no immunity, why should the social worker have it?
ReplyDeleteThey shouldn't.
The system is out of control.
The article fails to mention Beltran v Santa Clara which overruled Doe v. Lebbos
ReplyDeleteand The 9th Circuit said
Furthermore, as prosecutors and others investigating criminal matters have no absolute immunity for their investigatory conduct, a fortiori, social workers conducting investigations have no such immunity