Family courts in Virginia are committed to preserving and promoting the well-being of children. One of the key ways they do this is by ensuring that children are not left in situations where they are vulnerable to abuse. Child protective services in Virginia investigates such allegations, and their findings are often turned over to law enforcement and family courts. While there is never an excuse for intentional child abuse, our Fairfax family law attorneys recognize that some parents may not perceive their actions as abusive, particularly if they were raised with corporal punishment.
Changing Views on Discipline
The legal landscape surrounding corporal punishment has changed dramatically in recent decades. What may have been considered acceptable in the past may no longer be tolerated. The consequences of corporal punishment deemed abusive can be severe, including the loss of child custody. An experienced attorney can help mitigate the situation by suggesting alternatives, such as parenting courses and anger management therapy.
Case Example: In re: A.E.
A recent case that illustrates the changing attitudes towards discipline is In re: A.E., heard before the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District.
In this case, a couple married in Texas in 2009, and had a daughter in 2011. They later moved to California. One afternoon, a neighbor called the police after hearing a child being hit. Investigators found the child, a 3-year-old girl, with 5-to-6-inch welts on her leg and buttocks. The father explained that he had disciplined his daughter with a belt because she was misbehaving.
Legal Consequences
The father was arrested for child abuse. After being read his Miranda rights, he explained to police that his daughter had disobeyed him multiple times in less than an hour, and he felt it was his duty to discipline her. He stated that he did not intend to hurt her and was aiming for her behind, but the child moved and he mistakenly struck her on the side.
A child protective services caseworker was assigned to the case and determined that the father’s actions were excessive, causing unreasonable pain and suffering. As a result, the father was ordered out of the family home, allowed only twice-weekly supervised visits with the child, who remained in the care of her mother.
Petition for Reinstatement
Later, the father petitioned to be allowed back into the home, expressing a willingness to take any necessary steps to reunite with his family. The court heard testimony from the mother, who stated that she did not agree with the father’s form of discipline and would intervene if it happened again. She also testified that the father was remorseful and that parenting courses were helping him learn alternative methods of discipline.
Despite this, child protective services argued that the father should complete a full year of parenting courses before being allowed to return home. The father contested this, and the appellate court ultimately ruled in his favor. The court found that there was not sufficient evidence to support the juvenile court’s finding that the father’s presence posed a substantial danger to the child’s physical or mental well-being.
The Importance of Legal Representation
While courts must take child welfare seriously, it is also essential to consider the individual circumstances of each case. In cases like these, having an experienced legal advocate is crucial to ensure that the rights of parents are respected and the family bond is preserved.