Nicholson v. Scoppetta
3 N.Y.3d 357, 820 N.E.2d 840, 787 N.Y.S.2d 196 (2004)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A finding of child neglect under New York law cannot be based solely on the fact that a parent is a victim of domestic violence and the child has witnessed that violence. The state must prove both that the child suffered impairment or is in imminent danger of impairment, and that this harm is a direct result of the parent's failure to exercise a minimum degree of care under the totality of the circumstances.
Facts:
- Sharwline Nicholson, Sharlene Tillet, and Ekaete Udoh were mothers and victims of domestic violence perpetrated by their partners.
- Their children were exposed to this domestic violence, witnessing the abuse against their mothers.
- The New York City Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) had a policy of removing children from mothers who were victims of domestic violence.
- The basis for these removals was the allegation that by being a victim of domestic violence that their children witnessed, the mothers had neglected their children by failing to protect them from exposure to the violence.
- As part of this policy, ACS separated these mothers from their children.
Procedural Posture:
- Sharwline Nicholson and other mothers filed a class action lawsuit against the NYC Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
- The District Court certified the plaintiffs as a class and granted a preliminary injunction against ACS, prohibiting removals based solely on a mother's status as a domestic violence victim.
- ACS appealed the injunction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
- The Second Circuit determined that the case involved unresolved issues of New York state law and certified three questions to the New York Court of Appeals for clarification.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the definition of a ‘neglected child’ under N.Y. Family Ct. Act § 1012(f) include instances in which the sole allegation of neglect is that the parent or other person legally responsible for the child’s care allows the child to witness domestic abuse against the caretaker?
Opinions:
Majority - Chief Judge Kaye
No. The definition of a 'neglected child' under N.Y. Family Ct. Act § 1012(f) requires more than the sole allegation that a parent allowed a child to witness domestic abuse against them. A finding of neglect requires a two-part showing: first, that the child's physical, mental, or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of impairment, and second, that this harm is a consequence of the parent's failure to exercise a 'minimum degree of care.' The court reasoned that automatically equating a parent's status as a domestic violence victim with a failure to exercise minimum care would be an 'unacceptable presumption.' The standard for 'minimum degree of care' is objective and must be evaluated based on what a reasonable and prudent parent would do in the same circumstances. For a domestic violence victim, this inquiry must consider the complex and dangerous choices she faces, including the risks of leaving versus staying. Therefore, a fact-specific inquiry into both actual or imminent harm to the child and the parent's actions under the circumstances is required, and the mother's status as a victim cannot, by itself, constitute neglect.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the standard for child neglect in the context of domestic violence, rejecting a victim-blaming framework. It mandates that child protective agencies and courts conduct a nuanced, individualized inquiry rather than applying a per se rule that penalizes victims. By requiring proof of both imminent harm to the child and a failure of parental care judged by a 'reasonable person in similar circumstances' standard, the ruling protects the due process rights of parents and the integrity of the family unit against unwarranted state intervention. The decision forces agencies to consider the parent's difficult circumstances and available options, shifting the focus from the parent's status as a victim to their actual conduct in protecting their child.
Unlock the full brief for Nicholson v. Scoppetta