Ohio Revised Code Juvenile Court


OHIO REVISED CODE
TITLE XXI COURTS – PROBATE – JUVENILE
CHAPTER 2151 JUVENILE COURT
[§ 2151.42.1] § 2151.421. Duty to report child abuse or neglect; investigation and followup procedures.
(A) (1) (a) No person described in division (A)(1)(b) of this section who is acting in an official or professional capacity and knows or suspects that a child under eighteen years of age or a mentally retarded, developmentally disabled, or physically impaired child under twenty-one years of age has suffered or faces a threat of suffering any physical or mental wound, injury, disability, or condition of a nature that reasonably indicates abuse or neglect of the child, shall fail to immediately report that knowledge or suspicion to the entity or persons specified in this division. Except as provided in section 5120.173 [5120.17.3] of the Revised Code, the person making the report shall make it to the public children services agency or a municipal or county peace officer in the county in which the child resides or in which the abuse or neglect is occurring or has occurred. In the circumstances described in section 5120.173 [5120.17.3] of the Revised Code, the person making the report shall make it to the entity specified in that section.

(b) Division (A)(1)(a) of this section applies to any person who is an attorney; physician, including a hospital intern or resident; dentist; podiatrist; practitioner of a limited branch of medicine as specified in section 4731.15 of the Revised Code; registered nurse; licensed practical nurse; visiting nurse; other health care professional; licensed psychologist; licensed school psychologist; independent marriage and family therapist or marriage and family therapist; speech pathologist or audiologist; coroner; administrator or employee of a child day-care center; administrator or employee of a residential camp or child day camp; administrator or employee of a certified child care agency or other public or private children services agency; school teacher; school employee; school authority; person engaged in social work or the practice of professional counseling; agent of a county humane society; person rendering spiritual treatment through prayer in accordance with the tenets of a well-recognized religion; superintendent, board member, or employee of a county board of mental retardation; investigative agent contracted with by a county board of mental retardation; or employee of the department of mental retardation and developmental disabilities.

(2) An attorney or a physician is not required to make a report pursuant to division (A)(1) of this section concerning any communication the attorney or physician receives from a client or patient in an attorney-client or physician-patient relationship, if, in accordance with division (A) or (B) of section 2317.02 of the Revised Code, the attorney or physician could not testify with respect to that communication in a civil or criminal proceeding, except that the client or patient is deemed to have waived any testimonial privilege under division (A) or (B) of section 2317.02 of the Revised Code with respect to that communication and the attorney or physician shall make a report pursuant to division (A)(1) of this section with respect to that communication, if all of the following apply:

(a) The client or patient, at the time of the communication, is either a child under eighteen years of age or a mentally retarded, developmentally disabled, or physically impaired person under twenty-one years of age.

(b) The attorney or physician knows or suspects, as a result of the communication or any observations made during that communication, that the client or patient has suffered or faces a threat of suffering any physical or mental wound, injury, disability, or condition of a nature that reasonably indicates abuse or neglect of the client or patient.

(c) The attorney-client or physician-patient relationship does not arise out of the client’s or patient’s attempt to have an abortion without the notification of her parents, guardian, or custodian in accordance with section 2151.85 of the Revised Code.

(B) Anyone, who knows or suspects that a child under eighteen years of age or a mentally retarded, developmentally disabled, or physically impaired person under twenty-one years of age has suffered or faces a threat of suffering any physical or mental wound, injury, disability, or other condition of a nature that reasonably indicates abuse or neglect of the child may report or cause reports to be made of that knowledge or suspicion to the entity or persons specified in this division. Except as provided in section 5120.173 [5120.17.3] of the Revised Code, a person making a report or causing a report to be made under this division shall make it or cause it to be made to the public children services agency or to a municipal or county peace officer. In the circumstances described in section 5120.173 [5120.17.3] of the Revised Code, a person making a report or causing a report to be made under this division shall make it or cause it to be made to the entity specified in that section.

(C) Any report made pursuant to division (A) or (B) of this section shall be made forthwith either by telephone or in person and shall be followed by a written report, if requested by the receiving agency or officer. The written report shall contain:

(1) The names and addresses of the child and the child’s parents or the person or persons having custody of the child, if known;

(2) The child’s age and the nature and extent of the child’s known or suspected injuries, abuse, or neglect or of the known or suspected threat of injury, abuse, or neglect, including any evidence of previous injuries, abuse, or neglect;

(3) Any other information that might be helpful in establishing the cause of the known or suspected injury, abuse, or neglect or of the known or suspected threat of injury, abuse, or neglect.

Any person, who is required by division (A) of this section to report known or suspected child abuse or child neglect, may take or cause to be taken color photographs of areas of trauma visible on a child and, if medically indicated, cause to be performed radiological examinations of the child.

(D) (1) When a municipal or county peace officer receives a report concerning the possible abuse or neglect of a child or the possible threat of abuse or neglect of a child, upon receipt of the report, the municipal or county peace officer who receives the report shall refer the report to the appropriate public children services agency.

(2) When a public children services agency receives a report pursuant to this division or division (A) or (B) of this section, upon receipt of the report, the public children services agency shall comply with section 2151.422 [2151.42.2] of the Revised Code.

(E) No township, municipal, or county peace officer shall remove a child about whom a report is made pursuant to this section from the child’s parents, stepparents, or guardian or any other persons having custody of the child without consultation with the public children services agency, unless, in the judgment of the officer, and, if the report was made by physician, the physician, immediate removal is considered essential to protect the child from further abuse or neglect. The agency that must be consulted shall be the agency conducting the investigation of the report as determined pursuant to section 2151.422 [2151.42.2] of the Revised Code.

(F) (1) Except as provided in section 2151.422 [2151.42.2] of the Revised Code, the public children services agency shall investigate, within twenty-four hours, each report of known or suspected child abuse or child neglect and of a known or suspected threat of child abuse or child neglect that is referred to it under this section to determine the circumstances surrounding the injuries, abuse, or neglect or the threat of injury, abuse, or neglect, the cause of the injuries, abuse, neglect, or threat, and the person or persons responsible. The investigation shall be made in cooperation with the law enforcement agency and in accordance with the memorandum of understanding prepared under division (J) of this section. A failure to make the investigation in accordance with the memorandum is not grounds for, and shall not result in, the dismissal of any charges or complaint arising from the report or the suppression of any evidence obtained as a result of the report and does not give, and shall not be construed as giving, any rights or any grounds for appeal or post-conviction relief to any person. The public children services agency shall report each case to a central registry which the department of job and family services shall maintain in order to determine whether prior reports have been made in other counties concerning the child or other principals in the case. The public children services agency shall submit a report of its investigation, in writing, to the law enforcement agency.

(2) The public children services agency shall make any recommendations to the county prosecuting attorney or city director of law that it considers necessary to protect any children that are brought to its attention.

(G) (1) (a) Except as provided in division (H)(3) of this section, anyone or any hospital, institution, school, health department, or agency participating in the making of reports under division (A) of this section, anyone or any hospital, institution, school, health department, or agency participating in good faith in the making of reports under division (B) of this section, and anyone participating in good faith in a judicial proceeding resulting from the reports, shall be immune from any civil or criminal liability for injury, death, or loss to person or property that otherwise might be incurred or imposed as a result of the making of the reports or the participation in the judicial proceeding.

(b) Notwithstanding section 4731.22 of the Revised Code, the physician-patient privilege shall not be a ground for excluding evidence regarding a child’s injuries, abuse, or neglect, or the cause of the injuries, abuse, or neglect in any judicial proceeding resulting from a report submitted pursuant to this section.

(2) In any civil or criminal action or proceeding in which it is alleged and proved that participation in the making of a report under this section was not in good faith or participation in a judicial proceeding resulting from a report made under this section was not in good faith, the court shall award the prevailing party reasonable attorney’s fees and costs and, if a civil action or proceeding is voluntarily dismissed, may award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to the party against whom the civil action or proceeding is brought.

(H) (1) Except as provided in divisions (H)(4) and (M) of this section, a report made under this section is confidential. The information provided in a report made pursuant to this section and the name of the person who made the report shall not be released for use, and shall not be used, as evidence in any civil action or proceeding brought against the person who made the report. In a criminal proceeding, the report is admissible in evidence in accordance with the Rules of Evidence and is subject to discovery in accordance with the Rules of Criminal Procedure.

(2) No person shall permit or encourage the unauthorized dissemination of the contents of any report made under this section.

(3) A person who knowingly makes or causes another person to make a false report under division (B) of this section that alleges that any person has committed an act or omission that resulted in a child being an abused child or a neglected child is guilty of a violation of section 2921.14 of the Revised Code.

(4) If a report is made pursuant to division (A) or (B) of this section and the child who is the subject of the report dies for any reason at any time after the report is made, but before the child attains eighteen years of age, the public children services agency or municipal or county peace officer to which the report was made or referred, on the request of the child fatality review board, shall submit a summary sheet of information providing a summary of the report to the review board of the county in which the deceased child resided at the time of death. On the request of the review board, the agency or peace officer may, at its discretion, make the report available to the review board.

(5) A public children services agency shall advise a person alleged to have inflicted abuse or neglect on a child who is the subject of a report made pursuant to this section in writing of the disposition of the investigation. The agency shall not provide to the person any information that identifies the person who made the report, statements of witnesses, or police or other investigative reports.

(I) Any report that is required by this section, other than a report that is made to the state highway patrol as described in section 5120.173 [5120.17.3] of the Revised Code, shall result in protective services and emergency supportive services being made available by the public children services agency on behalf of the children about whom the report is made, in an effort to prevent further neglect or abuse, to enhance their welfare, and, whenever possible, to preserve the family unit intact. The agency required to provide the services shall be the agency conducting the investigation of the report pursuant to section 2151.422 [2151.42.2] of the Revised Code.

(J) (1) Each public children services agency shall prepare a memorandum of understanding that is signed by all of the following:

(a) If there is only one juvenile judge in the county, the juvenile judge of the county or the juvenile judge’s representative;

(b) If there is more than one juvenile judge in the county, a juvenile judge or the juvenile judges’ representative selected by the juvenile judges or, if they are unable to do so for any reason, the juvenile judge who is senior in point of service or the senior juvenile judge’s representative;

(c) The county peace officer;

(d) All chief municipal peace officers within the county;

(e) Other law enforcement officers handling child abuse and neglect cases in the county;

(f) The prosecuting attorney of the county;

(g) If the public children services agency is not the county department of job and family services, the county department of job and family services;

(h) The county humane society.

(2) A memorandum of understanding shall set forth the normal operating procedure to be employed by all concerned officials in the execution of their respective responsibilities under this section and division (C) of section 2919.21, division (B)(1) of section 2919.22, division (B) of section 2919.23, and section 2919.24 of the Revised Code and shall have as two of its primary goals the elimination of all unnecessary interviews of children who are the subject of reports made pursuant to division (A) or (B) of this section and, when feasible, providing for only one interview of a child who is the subject of any report made pursuant to division (A) or (B) of this section. A failure to follow the procedure set forth in the memorandum by the concerned officials is not grounds for, and shall not result in, the dismissal of any charges or complaint arising from any reported case of abuse or neglect or the suppression of any evidence obtained as a result of any reported child abuse or child neglect and does not give, and shall not be construed as giving, any rights or any grounds for appeal or post-conviction relief to any person.

(3) A memorandum of understanding shall include all of the following:

(a) The roles and responsibilities for handling emergency and nonemergency cases of abuse and neglect;

(b) Standards and procedures to be used in handling and coordinating investigations of reported cases of child abuse and reported cases of child neglect, methods to be used in interviewing the child who is the subject of the report and who allegedly was abused or neglected, and standards and procedures addressing the categories of persons who may interview the child who is the subject of the report and who allegedly was abused or neglected.

(K) (1) Except as provided in division (K)(4) of this section, a person who is required to make a report pursuant to division (A) of this section may make a reasonable number of requests of the public children services agency that receives or is referred the report to be provided with the following information:

(a) Whether the agency has initiated an investigation of the report;

(b) Whether the agency is continuing to investigate the report;

(c) Whether the agency is otherwise involved with the child who is the subject of the report;

(d) The general status of the health and safety of the child who is the subject of the report;

(e) Whether the report has resulted in the filing of a complaint in juvenile court or of criminal charges in another court.

(2) A person may request the information specified in division (K)(1) of this section only if, at the time the report is made, the person’s name, address, and telephone number are provided to the person who receives the report.

When a municipal or county peace officer or employee of a public children services agency receives a report pursuant to division (A) or (B) of this section the recipient of the report shall inform the person of the right to request the information described in division (K)(1) of this section. The recipient of the report shall include in the initial child abuse or child neglect report that the person making the report was so informed and, if provided at the time of the making of the report, shall include the person’s name, address, and telephone number in the report.

Each request is subject to verification of the identity of the person making the report. If that person’s identity is verified, the agency shall provide the person with the information described in division (K)(1) of this section a reasonable number of times, except that the agency shall not disclose any confidential information regarding the child who is the subject of the report other than the information described in those divisions.

(3) A request made pursuant to division (K)(1) of this section is not a substitute for any report required to be made pursuant to division (A) of this section.

(4) If an agency other than the agency that received or was referred the report is conducting the investigation of the report pursuant to section 2151.422 [2151.42.2] of the Revised Code, the agency conducting the investigation shall comply with the requirements of division (K) of this section.

(L) The director of job and family services shall adopt rules in accordance with Chapter 119. of the Revised Code to implement this section. The department of job and family services may enter into a plan of cooperation with any other governmental entity to aid in ensuring that children are protected from abuse and neglect. The department shall make recommendations to the attorney general that the department determines are necessary to protect children from child abuse and child neglect.

(M) (1) As used in this division:

(a) “Out-of-home care” includes a nonchartered nonpublic school if the alleged child abuse or child neglect, or alleged threat of child abuse or child neglect, described in a report received by a public children services agency allegedly occurred in or involved the nonchartered nonpublic school and the alleged perpetrator named in the report holds a certificate, permit, or license issued by the state board of education under section 3301.071 [3301.07.1] or Chapter 3319. of the Revised Code.

(b) “Administrator, director, or other chief administrative officer” means the superintendent of the school district if the out-of-home care entity subject to a report made pursuant to this section is a school operated by the district.

(2) No later than the end of the day following the day on which a public children services agency receives a report of alleged child abuse or child neglect, or a report of an alleged threat of child abuse or child neglect, that allegedly occurred in or involved an out-of-home care entity, the agency shall provide written notice of the allegations contained in and the person named as the alleged perpetrator in the report to the administrator, director, or other chief administrative officer of the out-of-home care entity that is the subject of the report unless the administrator, director, or other chief administrative officer is named as an alleged perpetrator in the report. If the administrator, director, or other chief administrative officer of an out-of-home care entity is named as an alleged perpetrator in a report of alleged child abuse or child neglect, or a report of an alleged threat of child abuse or child neglect, that allegedly occurred in or involved the out-of-home care entity, the agency shall provide the written notice to the owner or governing board of the out-of-home care entity that is the subject of the report. The agency shall not provide witness statements or police or other investigative reports.

(3) No later than three days after the day on which a public children services agency that conducted the investigation as determined pursuant to section 2151.422 [2151.42.2] of the Revised Code makes a disposition of an investigation involving a report of alleged child abuse or child neglect, or a report of an alleged threat of child abuse or child neglect, that allegedly occurred in or involved an out-of-home care entity, the agency shall send written notice of the disposition of the investigation to the administrator, director, or other chief administrative officer and the owner or governing board of the out-of-home care entity. The agency shall not provide witness statements or police or other investigative reports.

HISTORY: 130 v 625 (Eff 10-10-63); 131 v 632 (Eff 11-11-65); 133 v S 49 (Eff 8-13-69); 133 v H 338 (Eff 11-25-69); 136 v H 85 (Eff 11-28-75); 137 v H 219 (Eff 11-1-77); 140 v S 321 (Eff 4-9-85); 141 v H 349 (Eff 3-6-86); 141 v H 528 (Eff 7-9-86); 141 v H 529 (Eff 3-11-87); 143 v H 257 (Eff 8-3-89); 143 v H 44 (Eff 7-24-90); 143 v S 3 (Eff 4-11-91); 144 v H 154 (Eff 7-31-92); 146 v S 269 (Eff 7-1-96); 146 v H 274 (Eff 8-8-96); 146 v S 223 (Eff 3-18-97); 147 v H 215 (6-30-97); 147 v H 408 (Eff 10-1-97); 147 v S 212 (Eff 9-30-98); 147 v H 606 (Eff 3-9-99); 148 v H 471 (Eff 7-1-2000); 148 v H 448 (Eff 10-5-2000); 149 v H 510 (Eff 3-31-2003); 149 v H 374 (Eff 4-7-2003); 149 v S 221. Eff 4-9-2003; 150 v S 178, § 1, eff. 1-30-04; 150 v H 106, § 1, eff. 9-16-04.

The provisions of § 4 of S.B. 178 (150 v – ) read as follows:

Section 4. Section 2151.421 of the Revised Code is presented in this act as a composite of the section as amended by Am. Sub. H.B. 374, Sub. H.B. 510, and Am. Sub. S.B. 221 all of the 124th General Assembly. Section 5126.28 of the Revised Code is presented in this act as a composite of the section as amended by both Sub. H.B. 538 and Sub. S.B. 171 of the 123rd General Assembly. The General Assembly, applying the principle stated in division (B) of section 1.52 of the Revised Code that amendments are to be harmonized if reasonably capable of simultaneous operation, finds that the composites are the resulting versions of the sections in effect prior to the effective date of the sections as presented in this act.

Effect of Amendments

150 v H 106, effective September 16, 2004, added (M)(1) and redesignated former (M) and (N) as (M)(2) and (3), and corrected internal references.

S.B. 178, Acts 2004, effective January 30, 2004, added “superintendent, board member … developmental disabilities” to the end of (A)(1)(b), and made related changes.

Cross-References to Related Sections

Penalties, RC § 2151.99.

Child abuse and child neglect prevention programs, RC § 3109.13 et seq.

Child fatality review board access to confidential information, RC § 307.62.7.

Community schools, terms of contract between sponsor and governing authority of school, RC § 3314.03.

Confidentiality of residential addresses of public children services agency or private child placing agency personnel, RC § 2151.14.2.

Confidential mental health outpatient services for minors; duty to report, RC § 5122.04.

Court control of child following commitment to department, RC § 2152.22.

Definitions, RC § 2151.01.1.

Abused child, RC § 2151.03.1.

Child without proper parental care, RC § 2151.05.

Dependent child, RC § 2151.04.

Neglected child, RC § 2151.03.

Domestic violence, filing of proceedings report, RC § 3113.31

Duration of dispositional order, RC § 2151.38.

Duties to children in need of public care or protective services, RC § 5153.16.

Guardian ad litem for abused child; civil action against person required to file report of known abuse, RC § 2151.28.1.

Information to be disclosed concerning deceased child, RC § 5153.17.2.

Making or causing false report of child abuse or neglect, RC § 2921.14.

Petition for protection order to protect victim of menacing by stalking, RC § 2903.21.4.

Privileged communications, RC § 2317.02.

Procedure where child is living in domestic violence or homeless shelter, RC § 2151.42.2.

Review of report of abuse, neglect or misappropriation by employee, RC § 5123.51.

Summary removal of abused child by humane society agent, RC § 1717.14.

Ohio Rules

Immediate temporary care and medical treatment, JuvR 13(A)-(D).

Notifying physicians of affidavits alleging abuse under RC § 2919.12, SupR 24.

Ohio Adminstrative Code

Department of job and family services, division of social services –

Alleged child abuse and neglect; those mandated to report. OAC ch. 5101:2-34.

Central registry reports on child abuse and neglect; referral procedures for children’s protective services. OAC ch. 5101:2-35.

Children services definition of terms: mandated reporter. OAC 5101:2-1-01.

Documentation of comprehensive health care for children in custody. OAC 5101:2-42-662.

Family and children services information system (FACSIS) reporting requirements. OAC 5101:2-33-05.

Supportive services. OAC ch. 5101:2-39.

Incident reporting, complaint resolution, and documentation procedures –

Alcohol and drug addiction programs. OAC 3793:2-1-05.

Child day camps. OAC 5101:2-18-07.

Child day-care centers. OAC 5101:2-12-45.

Childrens residential centers, group homes, etc. OAC 5101:2-9-23.

Community residential centers of department of youth services. OAC 5139-35-11.

Programs and services of department of MR/DD. OAC 5123:2-17-01 et seq.

Residential facilities of department of mental health. OAC 5122-30-16.

Type A family day-care homes. OAC 5101:2-13-43.

Type B family day-care homes. OAC 5101:2-14-62.

Training in child abuse recognition for personnel –

Child day camps. OAC 5101:2-18-11.

Child day-care centers. OAC 5101:2-12-30, 5101:2-12-32.

School child day-care centers. OAC 5101:2-17-262.

Type A family day-care homes. OAC 5101:2-13-29, 5101:2-13-31.

Type B family day-care homes. OAC 5101:2-14-13.

Comparative Legislation

Child abuse statutes:

42 USC § 5101 et seq

CA – Penal Code §§ 270 et seq, 11164 et seq

FL – Stat Ann §§ 39.001 et seq, 827.01 et seq

IL – Comp Stat Ann ch 325 § 5/1 et seq

IN – Code §§ 31-33-1-1 et seq, 35-46-1-3 et seq

KY – Rev Stat Ann § 508.100 et seq

MI – Comp Laws Ann §§ 722.601 et seq, 750.135 et seq

NY – Fam Ct Act §§ 812 et seq, 1011 et seq; Soc Serv Law § 411 et seq

PA – CSA tit 23 § 6301 et seq, tit 55 § 3490.1 et seq

Reporting child abuse:

CA – Penal Code § 11164 et seq

FL – Stat Ann § 39.201

IL – Comp Stat Ann ch 325 § 5/4; ch 735 § 5/8-802

IN – Code § 35-46-1-14

KY – Rev Stat Ann §§ 620.030-620.050

MI – Comp Laws Ann §§ 722.623-722.625

NY – Soc Serv Law § 413 et seq

PA – CSA tit 23 § 6311 et seq

Text Discussion

Age of majority. 1 Anderson Fam. L. § 5.1

Child abuse prevention and reporting. Ohio Sch. Law § 9.55.1

Complaint: who may file. 2 Anderson Fam. L. § 13.4

Contents of report. 1 Anderson Fam. L. § 4.3

Criminal charges against adults under the Juvenile Code. 2 Anderson Fam. L. § 9.10

Exceptions to confidentiality. Ohio Prof. Resp. § 9.5

Immunity from liability. 1 Anderson Fam. L. § 4.5

Lack of proper care or immediate danger. 2 Anderson Fam. L. § 12.8

Missing child law. Ohio Sch. Law § 9.55.3

Procedure and investigation. 1 Anderson Fam. L. § 4.4

Reporting statute: RC § 2151.42.1. 2 Anderson Fam. L. § 12.1

Victims of abuse or neglect. 1 Anderson Fam. L. § 4.1

Who must make a report. 1 Anderson Fam. L. § 4.2

Research Aids

Official report of abuse or neglect:

O-Jur3d: Fam L §§ 1474-1479, 1736

Physician-patient privilege:

O-Jur3d: Evid & Witn § 809

ALR

Validity, construction, and application of state statute requiring doctor or other person to report child abuse. 73 ALR4th 782.

Validity, construction, and application of statute limiting physician-patient privilege in judicial proceedings relating to child abuse or neglect. 44 ALR4th 649.

Law Review

Between a rock and a hard place: Michigan social worker liability for child abuse investigations after Achterhof v. Selvaggio. Note. 22 ToledoLRev 455 (1991).

Brodie v. Summit County Children Services Board: A statutory duty exception to the public duty rule for children service agencies. Casenote. 17 Ohio N.U.L. Rev. 711 (1991).

Caseworker liability for the negligent handling of child abuse reports. Comment. 60 CinLRev 191 (1991).

Child abuse: civil liability of physicians and hospitals for failure to report – Landeros v. Flood [551 P2d 389 (1976)]. Note. 2 UDayLRev 93 (1977).

Confidentiality and privilege: the status of social workers in Ohio. Gary W. Paquin. 19 Ohio N.U.L. Rev. 199 (1992).

Creating therapist-incest offender exception to mandatory child abuse reporting statutes – when psychiatrist knows best. Phyllis Coleman. 54 CinLRev 1113 (1986).

Faith-healing and religious treatment exemptions to child-endangerment laws: should parental religious practices excuse the failing to provide necessary medical care to children? Comment. 13 UDayLRev 79 (1987).

In re Barzak: access to children services board files. David Hagelkorn. 19 Akron L. Rev. 237 (1985).

Major evidentiary issues in prosecution of family abuse cases. Susan P. Mele. 11 Ohio N.U.L. Rev. 245 (1984).

The medical diagnosis and treatment exception to hearsay – the use of the child protection team in child sexual abuse prosecutions. Sally A. Moore. 13 NoKyLRev 51 (1986).

Ohio homeowners beware: your homeowner’s insurance premium may be subsidizing child sexual abuse. Comment. 20 UDayLRev 341 (1994).

Ohio’s mandatory reporting statute for cases of child abuse. Mario C. Ciano. 18 WestResLRev 1405 (1967).

The outer limits of parental autonomy: withholding medical treatment from children. Comment. 42 Ohio St. L.J. 813 (1981).

The parent-child dilemma in the courts. James W. Carpenter. 30 Ohio St. L.J. 292 (1969).

Protecting children from abuse: should it be a legal duty? Douglas J. Besharov. 11 UDayLRev 509 (1986).

Representing the interests of the abused and neglected child: the guardian ad litem and access to confidential information. Dayle D. Deardurff. 11 UDayLRev 649 (1986).

The use of juvenile court jurisdiction and restraining authority to address the problem of maternal drug abuse in Ohio. Deborah A. Wainey. 17 Ohio N.U.L. Rev. 611 (1991).

When the abused child fatally says “No more!”: can parricide be self-defense in Ohio? Comment. 18 UDayLRev 447 (1993).

CASE NOTES AND OAG

Analysis

Adequate state remedy.

Children services agencies.

Children services board.

Conduct of investigation.

Confidentiality.

Construction.

Due process.

Duty generally.

Duty investigate child abuse.

Duty of agencies to investigate child abuse.

Duty of state.

Duty to investigate child abuse.

Duty to report child abuse.

Evidence.

Failure to investigate reports of child abuse.

Immunity.

Malicious prosecution.

Priority of investigation.

Privilege.

Reasonable and necessary force.

Records.

School officials.

Self incrimination.

Support.

Time limits.

Adequate state remedy

A father who alleges that he has been denied reasonable visitation rights with his children due to the county welfare department’s failure to complete within 30 days an investigation of a report of child abuse by the father cannot maintain a § 1983 action, since his complaint alleges, at the most, a procedural due process violation, and, for that, there is an adequate state remedy available to the plaintiff: Haag v. Cuyahoga County, 619 F. Supp. 262, (N.D. Ohio 1985).

Children services agencies

Public children services agencies are local agencies for purposes of RC Chapter 1347., which governs the maintenance of personal information systems: OAG No. 89-084 (1989).

Public children services agencies are authorized to investigate reports of alleged child abuse or neglect or threats of child abuse or neglect at detention homes established pursuant to RC § 2151.34, at the Ohio Veterans’ Children’s Home operated pursuant to RC Chapter 5909., and at public schools operating under standards set by the State Board of Education pursuant to RC Chapter 3301.: OAG No. 89-108 (1989).

Public children services agencies are authorized to investigate reports of alleged child abuse or neglect or threats of child abuse or neglect at facilities operated by the Department of Mental Health pursuant to RC Chapter 5122., at facilities operated by the Department of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities pursuant to RC Chapter 5123., and at facilities operated by the Department of Youth Services pursuant to RC Chapter 5139.: OAG No. 89-108 (1989).

Public children services agencies have authority to investigate all reports of known or suspected child abuse or neglect or threats of child abuse or neglect within their respective counties of jurisdiction unless there is some provision of law restricting that authority with respect to particular persons or locations: OAG No. 89-108 (1989).

Children services board

A children services board and its agents have a duty to investigate and report their findings as required by RC § 2151.42.1 when a specific child is identified as abused or neglected, and the public duty doctrine may not be raised as a defense for agency failure to comply with such statutory requirements: Brodie v. Summit Cty. Children Services Bd., 51 Ohio St. 3d 112, 554 N.E.2d 1301 (1990).

Conduct of investigation

A board of education may require by rule, adopted pursuant to RC § 3313.20, that an investigator from a county children services board obtain parental consent or permit a school official to be present before allowing such investigator to interview a child on school property in the course of an investigation required to be conducted under RC § 2151.42.1. The reasonableness of any such rule is, however, subject to judicial review: OAG No. 82-029 (1982).

Confidentiality

A court may conduct an in camera inspection of child abuse records and has inherent power to order disclosure in appropriate circumstances: Johnson v. Johnson, 134 Ohio App. 3d 579, 731 N.E.2d 1144 (1999).

The Cuyahoga county ombudsman office is a “public office” whose records are subject to disclosure. RC § 2151.42.1 does not exempt its child abuse and neglect reports: State ex rel. Strothers v. Wertheim, 80 Ohio St. 3d 155, 684 N.E.2d 1239 (1997).

Records of a county children services board investigation made pursuant to RC §§ 5153.17 and 2151.42.1 are “official records” within the ambit of the sealing provisions of RC § 2953.52. The trial court should weigh the privacy interests of the person seeking to seal the official records against the legitimate needs of the agency in maintaining those records: State v. S.R., 63 Ohio St. 3d 590, 589 N.E.2d 1319 (1992).

Child abuse investigation reports are confidential and not subject to inspection: State ex rel. Renfro v. Cuyahoga Cty. Dept. of Human Serv., 54 Ohio St. 3d 25, 560 N.E.2d 230 (1990).

Each report and investigation of alleged child abuse or neglect made under RC § 2151.42.1 is confidential and, pursuant to OAC 5101:2-34-38, the dissemination of such confidential information to an agency or organization is permitted only if the agency or organization has rules or policies governing the dissemination of confidential information that are consistent with those of rule 5101:2-34-38: OAG No. 92-046 (1992).

A public children services agency may, pursuant to :1991-1992 Monthly Record, vol. 1] OAC 5101:2-34-71, at 280, include the Air Force Office of Special Investigations as a voluntary subscriber to a county plan of cooperation prepared pursuant to RC § 2151.42.1(J), if the Office wishes to be a voluntary subscriber and if the agency determines that the participation of the Office would be appropriate. If the Office has suitable rules or policies governing the use and dissemination of confidential information, the Office may receive investigatory materials as provided in the county plan of cooperation and in OAC 5101:2-34-38(D)(4): OAG No. 92-046 (1992).

A public children services agency may disclose child abuse and neglect investigation materials to the Air Force Office of Special Investigations when such disclosure is in compliance with RC §§ 2151.42.1, 5153.17, and OAC 5101:2-34-38 and is for purposes authorized by those provisions; the agency is not required to obtain assurance that the Office will not use the materials for purposes other than criminal prosecution: OAG No. 92-046 (1992).

Child abuse and neglect investigation records maintained by public children services agencies do not constitute “public records” within the meaning of RC § 149.43 to which the right of public access attaches. Records of child abuse or neglect investigations under RC §§ 2151.42.1(H)(1) and 5153.17 are “records the release of which is prohibited by state law” under RC § 149.43(A)(1): OAG No. 91-003 (1991).

Construction

Revised Code § 2151.42(H)(1) references only the “reports” which are required to be made by certain categories of persons designated in subsections (A) and (B) of that section. Thus, “reports” as used there is very limited in its scope and is not so inclusive as to encompass any report made by anyone regarding the subject child. On the other hand, RC § 5153.17 is very broad: Sharpe v. Sharpe, 85 Ohio App. 3d 638, 620 N.E.2d 916 (1993).

For purposes of RC § 2901.13(F), the corpus delicti of crimes involving child abuse or neglect is discovered when a responsible adult, as listed in RC § 2151.42.1, has knowledge of both the act and the criminal nature of the act: State v. Hensley, 59 Ohio St. 3d 136, 571 N.E.2d 711 (1991).

The possible infringement upon minor plaintiff’s right to anonymity concerning requirement that attorneys and other professionals report incidents of child abuse or neglect discovered during the course of their professional responsibilities has been cured by amendment: Akron Center for Reproductive Health v. Slaby, 854 F.2d 852, (6th Cir. 1988).

The powers of the State Highway Patrol or special police officers designated by the Superintendent of the State Highway Patrol to investigate and to enforce laws on state properties and in state institutions do not restrict the authority of public children services agencies to investigate reports of alleged child abuse or neglect or threats of child abuse or neglect pertaining to such locations: OAG No. 89-108 (1989).

Revised Code § 2151.42.1 sets forth a comprehensive scheme for the reporting of allegations of child abuse and neglect and threats of child abuse and neglect and for the investigation of such reports by public children services agencies: OAG No. 89-108 (1989).

The phrase “having reason to believe,” as used in RC § 2151.42.1, is equivalent to “known or suspected” as used in 45 CFR 1340.3-3(d). The term “child neglect,” as used in RC § 2151.42.1, applies to children without proper parental care or guardianship as defined by RC § 2151.05: OAG No. 78-038 (1978).

Due process

Revised Code § 2151.42.1(G) does not violate the equal protection or due process rights of persons accused of child abuse: Cudlin v. Cudlin, 64 Ohio App. 3d 249, 580 N.E.2d 1170 (1990).

Procedural due process does not require a county agency to provide a family reunification plan after a child has been removed from the family but before a final adjudication of abuse or dependency has been made; thus, RC § 2151.42.1 is not unconstitutional on its face: Lesher v. Lavrich, 632 F. Supp. 77, (N.D. Ohio 1984).

Duty generally

The hospital did not have a statutory duty to report an employee when he quit his employment. At that time the hospital had no reason to know or suspect that any particular child was being abused or in danger of being abused by the employee: Douglass v. Salem Community Hosp., 153 Ohio App. 3d 350 (2003).

Duty investigate child abuse

A claim that a children services board and its employees failed to properly investigate an instance of alleged child abuse pursuant to duties imposed by RC § 2151.42.1 is not subject to the general immunity granted to political subdivisions by RC § 2744.02(A), or to the immunity granted to employees by RC § 2744.03(A)(6): Crago v. Lorain Cty. Commrs., 69 Ohio App. 3d 24, 590 N.E.2d 15 (1990).

Duty of agencies to investigate child abuse

The provisions of RC § 2151.42.1 impose the duties of investigation and disposition of reported cases of child abuse and neglect solely on children services boards and county welfare departments which have assumed the functions of a children services board, and, therefore, prohibit delegation of these duties to private entities: OAG No. 79-067 (1979).

Duty of state

When a state voluntarily undertakes to protect neglected children from harm, it may also acquire a duty under state tort law to provide the child with adequate protection and may be liable for doing so in a negligent fashion: Rich v. Erie Cty. Dept. of Human Resources, 106 Ohio App. 3d 88, 665 N.E.2d 278 (1995).

Duty to investigate child abuse

In investigating a report of child abuse pursuant to RC § 2151.42.1, a public children services agency is required to consider the circumstances surrounding the injuries, abuse, or neglect or the threat of injury, abuse, or neglect; the cause of the injuries, abuse, neglect, or threat; and the person or persons responsible for the injuries, abuse, neglect, or threat. Thus, a public children services agency must consider whether, in accordance with RC § 3319.41(G), a school teacher, principal, administrator, nonlicensed employee, or bus driver has used reasonable and necessary force and restraint to quell a disturbance threatening physical injury to others, to obtain possession of weapons or other dangerous objects upon the person or within the control of the pupil, for the purpose of self-defense, or for the protection of persons or property: OAG No. 2002-019 (2002).

A public children services agency is required, pursuant to RC § 2151.42.1(F)(1), to investigate as alleged child abuse a report received by it of an incident in which a sixteen year old female has been assaulted by her husband: OAG No. 92-073 (1992).

Duty to report child abuse

Generally, in order to maintain a claim of negligence per se based on violation of a statute, the plaintiff must show that he is among the class of individuals that the statute is designed to protect. RC § 2151.42.1 imposes a duty which is owed solely to the minor child of whom reports have been received concerning abuse or neglect: Curran v. Walsh Jesuit High School, 99 Ohio App. 3d 696, 651 N.E.2d 1028 (1995).

Revised Code § 2151.42.1 is not an exclusive listing of those persons who must report knowledge or suspicion of child abuse. A duty to report abuse can arise from a special relationship at law, irrespective of a statutory duty. Since a parent has a special relationship to the child, the duty of care, protection and support under RC § 2921.22(A) would create a duty to stop the alleged acts of abuse: Hite v. Brown, 100 Ohio App. 3d 606, 654 N.E.2d 452 (1995).

Revised Code § 2151.42.1 imposes a duty to investigate owed to a minor child who has allegedly been abused or neglected. It does not impose a duty to that child’s grandparents or to any other member of the public who files a charge with a children services board: Neuenschwander v. Wayne Cty. Children Serv. Bd., 92 Ohio App. 3d 767, 637 N.E.2d 102 (1994).

The corpus delicti of a crime involving sexual abuse of children is discovered when an employee of a children services agency or other “responsible adult” as that term is defined in RC § 2151.42.1 had knowledge of both the act itself and the criminal nature of the act: State v. Ritchie, 95 Ohio App. 3d 569, 642 N.E.2d 1168 (1994).

Revised Code § 2919.24(A) is a strict liability offense. Concealing the child from a parent to prevent alleged abuse does not constitute an affirmative defense: State v. Thompson, 97 Ohio App. 3d 629, 647 N.E.2d 226 (1994).

Because an administrator of a child day-care center has a duty under RC § 2151.42.1(A)(1) to report suspected child abuse and immunity under RC § 2151.42.1(G) for doing so, the administrator cannot be liable for defamation in making such a report: Lail v. Madisonville Child Care Project, Inc., 55 Ohio App. 3d 37, 561 N.E.2d 1063 (1989).

Revised Code § 2151.42.1(A) does not impose upon a professional counselor or social worker licensed under RC Chapter 4757. the duty to report knowledge or suspicion of child abuse of an individual if, when the professional counselor or social worker learns of the child abuse, the individual no longer is a child under eighteen years of age or a mentally retarded, developmentally disabled, or physically impaired child under twenty-one years of age. However, if information provided to a professional counselor or social worker who is acting in an official or professional capacity gives that person reason to know or suspect that an individual who currently is a child is at risk of child abuse, RC § 2151.42.1(A) requires that such knowledge or suspicion be reported: OAG No. 2001-035 (2001).

A Big Brother or Big Sister is not subject to the child abuse or neglect reporting requirements of RC § 2151.42.1(A)(1), but a Big Brother or Big Sister who, during the course of his or her activities as a Big Brother or Big Sister, learns of or suspects child abuse or neglect, may, in accordance with RC § 2151.42.1(B), report such knowledge or suspicion to one of the agencies or authorities described therein: OAG No. 97-031 (1997).

Revised Code § 2151.42.1 does not require that a public children services agency routinely share child abuse and neglect investigation materials with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, an agency of the federal government: OAG No. 92-046 (1992).

Evidence

Reports of suspected child abuse otherwise admissible under RC § 2151.42.1 may be excluded if they are not adequately authenticated and contain hearsay: State v. Humphries, 79 Ohio App. 3d 589, 607 N.E.2d 921 (1992).

Failure to investigate reports of child abuse

Within the meaning of RC §§ 2744.02(B)(5) and 2744.03(A)(6)(c), RC § 2151.42.1 expressly imposes liability for failure to perform the duty to report known or suspected child abuse. Pursuant to RC § 2744.02(B)(5), a political subdivision may be held liable for failure to perform a duty expressly imposed by RC § 2151.42.1. Pursuant to RC § 2744.03(A)(6)(c), an employee of a political subdivision may be held liable for failure to perform a duty expressly imposed by RC § 2151.42.1: Campbell v. Burton, 92 Ohio St. 3d 336, 750 N.E.2d 539 (2001).

Within the meaning of RC §§ 2744.02(B)(5) and 2744.03(A)(6)(c), RC § 2151.42.1 does not expressly impose liability for failure to investigate reports of child abuse: Marshall v. Montgomery Cty. Children Serv. Bd., 92 Ohio St. 3d 348, 750 N.E.2d 549 (2001).

Immunity

Revised Code § 2151.42.1 creates a duty only to a specific child. Where a school employee sexually assaulted a student, the school’s failure to report a prior alleged incident between the employee and a different student did not qualify as an exception to immunity under RC § 2744.02(B)(5): Yates v. Mansfield Bd. of Edn., 150 Ohio App. 3d 241, 2002-Ohio-6311, 780 N.E.2d 608 (2002).

Where RC § 2151.42.1 provides immunity, summary judgment may be granted as a matter of law: Liedtke v. Carrington, 145 Ohio App. 3d 396, 763 N.E.2d 213 (2001).

Entries denying a subdivision’s motion for judgment on the pleadings based on immunity were not final appealable orders. Orders regarding protective orders were not appealable absent compliance with CivR 54(B): Chambers v. Chambers, 137 Ohio App. 3d 355, 738 N.E.2d 834 (2000).

Revised Code § 2151.42.1 provides absolute immunity to medical professionals who are asked to provide assistance to law enforcement agencies and social services providers: Casbohm v. Metrohealth Med. Ctr., 140 Ohio App. 3d 58, 746 N.E.2d 661 (2000).

A report of suspected child abuse by a day-care center administrator or employee is entitled to immunity and is exempt from discovery, regardless of whether it was filed in good faith: Walters v. The Enrichment Ctr. of Wishing Well, Inc., 133 Ohio App. 3d 66, 726 N.E.2d 1058 (1999).

Anyone who participates in a mandatory report under RC § 2151.42.1(A) or who participates in good faith in a permissive report under RC § 2151.42.1(B) is entitled to immunity. Immunity is not limited to the initial reporter: Surdel v. MetroHealth Med. Ctr., 135 Ohio App. 3d 141, 733 N.E.2d 281 (1999).

“School employee” and “school authority” were included in occupations listed in RC § 2151.42.1(A)(1) and a referral made to a “county department of human services exercising the children services function”s described by RC § 2151.42.1(A)(1) provided absolute immunity pursuant to RC § 2151.42.1(G)(1): Merk v. Watts, No. 2340-M 1994 Ohio App. LEXIS 3999 (9th Dist. 1994).

Former RC § 2151.42.1(G) confers immunity upon those who, as a result of a report of a known or suspected incident of child abuse and/or neglect, participate in a judicial proceeding: Gersper v. Ashtabula Cty. Children Services Bd., 59 Ohio St. 3d 127, 570 N.E.2d 1120 (1991).

Division (G) of RC § 2151.42.1 does not confer immunity upon those who fail to carry out the mandate of the statute: Brodie v. Summit Cty. Children Services Bd., 51 Ohio St. 3d 112, 554 N.E.2d 1301 (1990).

Anyone participating in a judicial proceeding involving a child abuse complaint is absolutely immune from civil liability. This immunity protects the judge, the juvenile court employees, the county department of human services and its employees, and the attorneys representing the person accused of abuse: Scarso v. Cuyahoga County Dept. of Human Services, 747 F. Supp. 381, (N.D. Ohio 1989).

A former wife who files a false report that her former husband has sexually abused the parties’ child is absolutely immune from liability in a civil action filed against her. The grant of immunity pursuant to RC § 2151.42.1(G) extends to anyone making reports of child abuse whether in good faith or not: Hartley v. Hartley, 42 Ohio App. 3d 160, 537 N.E.2d 706 (1988).

A hospital and medical center’s report to child welfare authorities that a minor child has a sexually transmitted disease is immune from liability under RC § 2151.42.1 even though (1) the diagnosis is mistaken, and (2) the child presents no evidence of a wound, injury, trauma, disability, or condition of a nature that reasonably indicates child abuse: Criswell v. Brentwood Hosp., 49 Ohio App. 3d 163, 551 N.E.2d 1315 (1988).

A licensed psychologist who met with a child and her mother and subsequently made a report to the county welfare department about possible child abuse by the child’s father is immune from any civil or criminal liability that might otherwise be incurred or imposed as a result of such report: Haag v. Cuyahoga County, 619 F. Supp. 262, (N.D. Ohio 1985).

Malicious prosecution

The father’s claim that county employees maliciously pursued a false allegation of child abuse against him was not subject to dismissal under CivR 12(B)(6): Roe v. Franklin Cty., 109 Ohio App. 3d 772, 673 N.E.2d 172 (1996).

Priority of investigation

When a public children services agency receives a report of the spanking of a student by a school administrator, the agency must assign the report a priority rating in accordance with OAC 5101:2-34-08. A report that is rated Priority I, II, or III must be investigated as required by RC § 2151.42.1, in accordance with the procedures prescribed in OAC 5101:2-34-32, 5101:2-34-33, and 5101:2-34-34. A report that is rated Priority IV may be resolved by termination pursuant to OAC 5101:2-34-08 if it is determined that the report alleges only action that is permitted under RC §§ 3319.31 and 2919.22, for then the report does not constitute an allegation of abuse or neglect: OAG No. 92-082 (1992).

Privilege

Court admitted testimony from the nurse of appellant’s physician in child neglect action. The exception of RC § 2151.42.1 does not apply to the challenged testimony because the nurse’s statements went beyond whether appellant kept her appointments to appellant’s diagnosis, treatment and medication: In re Riddle, No. 96 CA 03 1996 Ohio App. LEXIS 2054 (5th Dist. 1996).

Any privilege under RC § 2317.02 or RC § 4732.19 is automatically waived under RC § 2151.42.1(A)(3) in certain child abuse cases: State v. Stewart, 111 Ohio App. 3d 525, 676 N.E.2d 912 (1996).

Under RC § 2151.42.1, there is no exception for communications by a penitent to a clergy member as there is for communications from patient to physician or client to attorney: Niemann v. Cooley, 93 Ohio App. 3d 81, 637 N.E.2d 943 (1994).

Reasonable and necessary force

If, in investigating a report of child abuse pursuant to RC § 2151.42.1, a public children services agency finds that action consisting of reasonable and necessary force and restraint was used by a school teacher, principal, administrator, nonlicensed employee, or bus driver in accordance with RC § 3319.41(G) to quell a disturbance threatening physical injury to others, to obtain possession of weapons or other dangerous objects upon the person or within the control of the pupil, for the purpose of self-defense, or for the protection of persons or property, the public children services agency is precluded from finding that such action constituted child abuse for purposes of RC § 2151.42.1: OAG No. 2002-019 (2002).

Records

CCDCFS records are not absolutely privileged. Where records are necessary and relevant to a proceeding and good cause for disclosure has been shown, access to those records may be warranted: State v. Sahady, – Ohio App. 3d – , – N.E.2d – 2004 Ohio App. LEXIS 3120 (July 1, 2004).

Child abuse and neglect investigatory records maintained by public children services agencies constitute “investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes” within the meaning of RC § 1347.04(A)(1)(e). Personal information systems that are comprised of such records are, pursuant to RC § 1347.04(A)(1)(e), exempt from the provisions of RC Chapter 1347.: OAG No. 89-084 (1989).

School officials

Pursuant to former RC § 2744.02(B)(5), a board of education may be held liable when its failure to report the sexual abuse of a minor student by a teacher in violation of RC § 2151.421 proximately results in the sexual abuse of another minor by the same teacher: Yates v. Mansfield Bd. of Edn., 102 Ohio St. 3d 205 (2004).

Self incrimination

The privilege against compulsory self-incrimination is self-executing and applied in a proceeding for termination of parental rights. Where the parents were given a choice of admitting the father’s abuse of the child or of permanently losing custody, they had to be afforded protection against use of the admission in a subsequent prosecution: In re Amanda W., 124 Ohio App. 3d 136, 705 N.E.2d 724 (1997).

Support

Compliance with a common pleas court order fixing the amount of support payments for a minor child of divorced parents is a bar to prosecution for nonsupport in a juvenile court: State v. Holl, 25 Ohio App. 2d 75, 75 Ohio Op. 2d 406, 266 N.E.2d 587 (1971).

Time limits

A parent’s knowledge of child sexual abuse does not trigger the running of the statute of limitations. The limitation period begins to run when a responsible adult, as defined in RC § 2151.42.1, acquires the requisite knowledge while acting in his or her official or professional capacity: State v. Rosenberger, 90 Ohio App. 3d 735, 630 N.E.2d 435 (1993).

———-

Browse Previous Page | Table of Contents | Browse Next Page

About yvonnemason

Background:  The eldest of five children, Yvonne was born May 17, 1951 in Atlanta, Georgia. Raised in East Point, Georgia, she moved to Jackson County, Ga. until 2006 then moved to Port St. Lucie, Florida where she currently makes her home.  Licensed bounty hunter for the state of Georgia. Education:  After a 34 year absence, returned to college in 2004. Graduated with honors in Criminal Justice with an Associate’s degree from Lanier Technical College in 2006. Awards:  Nominated for the prestigious GOAL award in 2005 which encompasses all of the technical colleges. This award is based not only on excellence in academics but also leadership, positive attitude and the willingness to excel in one’s major. Affiliations:  Beta Sigma Phi Sorority  Member of The Florida Writer’s Association – Group Leader for St Lucie County The Dream:  Since learning to write at the age of five, Yvonne has wanted to be an author. She wrote her first novel Stan’s Story beginning in 1974 and completed it in 2006. Publication seemed impossible as rejections grew to 10 years. Determined, she continued adding to the story until her dream came true in 2006. The Inspiration:  Yvonne’s brother Stan has been her inspiration and hero in every facet of her life. He was stricken with Encephalitis at the tender age of nine months. He has defied every roadblock placed in his way and has been the driving force in every one of her accomplishments. He is the one who taught her never to give up The Author: Yvonne is currently the author of several novels, including:  Stan’s Story- the true story of her brother’s accomplishments, it has been compared to the style of Capote, and is currently being rewritten with new information for re-release.  Tangled Minds - a riveting story about a young girl’s bad decision and how it taints everyone’s life around her yet still manages to show that hope is always possible. This novel has been compared to the writing of Steinbeck and is currently being written as a screenplay. This novel will be re-released by Kerlak Publishing in 2009  Brilliant Insanity – released by Kerlak Publishing October 2008  Silent Scream – Released by Lulu.com October 2008- Slated to be made into a movie Yvonne’s Philosophy in Life - “Pay it Forward”: “In this life we all have been helped by others to attain our dreams and goals. We cannot pay it back but what we can do is ‘pay it forward’. It is a simple
This entry was posted in 4th Amendment and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Ohio Revised Code Juvenile Court

  1. Pingback: Cuyahoga County Court Records

  2. Pingback: Lorain County Ohio Public Records

  3. Pingback: Cuyahoga County Criminal Court

  4. Pingback: Cuyahoga County Criminal Court

  5. Pingback: Summit County Ohio Public Records

  6. Monica Hoskins says:

    I am a grandparent trying to get permanent custody of my ten month old grandson in Lorain County. At time of birth 07/2011 his mother tested positive for drug abuse and was placed on a case plan by protective services, I didn’t fight for him then but at the end of December 2011 after being around these people I decided to ask for joint custody and notified the protective service worker and ask what is it I need to do. Now it was until October or November that I started asking question to what was really going on with this family that my grandson was born into, I was shocked to find out alot of what the mother and her mother was telling me about the involvement of protective services was all a lie. So I was able to visit the child when I was in town and on several occasions I was able to bring him to my home which is 3 and a half hours away. Every since I started a relationship with protective services I have not seen my grandson since, I was ordered by the worker to hand him over to a great-aunt on 03/09/2012, he was with me all of February but at his mother’s request’ she wanted her aunt to have custody and not me. Now his paternal grandmother was giving temporary custody for a short time in 2011 but she refused to comply with the case plan. Now I was being considered until a week ago when protective services got a police report from a domestic dispute August 2011 between me and my husband, no charges where filed and no one went to court or jail but protective services are saying this is the basis for that decision saying it was domestic violence, not a domestic dispute. There is no history of child or spousal abuse in our home but that incident, I feel that protective services have given every person on the mother’s side a chance to correct their behavior and past convictions some include child endangering on more then one occasion by the great-aunt my grandson has been living with since March of this year. His mother, grandmother, and great-aunt have all been giving the chance to comply with a case plan and get custody but not me and my husband. Now the police report my husband stated I had a knife but none was viewed by police, this all started when I became aware that he had been having an affair for two years and he didn’t want to address that accusation. Help I have done everything protective services have asked and still after 10 months of complying to protective services demands, I am no closer to gaining any access to my grandson and now they are trying to close the door completely. I have a meeting with someone in their agency this week but I know that government agencies usually stick by their own and not viewing all the facts at hand. If that police report was so vital to this case it was public record and could of been accessed way back in December 2011, instead of May 2012 when there is least then 60 days before my grandson is placed with his great-aunt. I have since started to see a therapist to address the police report and even knowing that protective services refuses to acknowledge anything but that police report.

    Like

    • yvonnemason says:

      Let me tell you why. They are already planning to put this child up for adoption. I and guarantee you someone out there has already requested him. You will never get him no matter how many case plans you compelete. This is how they operate. It is all about the money.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s