In the United States of America, all Parental Rights are guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Your rights as a parent are yours, you have been born with these fundamental parental rights, that are basic to the fabric of our society, which no man has given, and no court has the right to deny, unless you have been proven unfit, or a clear and present danger to the child, or children involved.
Also under the U.S. Constitution, every person should be considered innocent until proven guilty, beyond any reasonable doubt, and all laws governing the Family and Civil Courts are made so, that they protect individual, Constitutional and Human Rights.
This being said, how is it that these courts can violate or take away, one’s fundamental rights?
This is a question that Florentina Rusanovschi – a mother from New Jersey often asks.
I have interviewed Rusanovschi today June 30, 2013, and the following is her case summary.
Rusanovschi and her child’s father – Martin Peter Wilwert The Third – are divorced. Up until May of 2011, Rusanovschi and Wilwert The Third, shared custody of their then, 11-years-old son.
When the child was 5-years-old, there was an incident on the school bus where Rusaschi’s son was pulling other children’s pants down, but then, the report was not clear, as other children were involved. However, Rusanovschi believes that some inappropriate sexual behavior started around when the child was five, and continued on and off, until he was nine.
In February of 2011, Rusanovschi received reports from people witnessing her son acting out in a sexual way, doing things that would be considered highly abnormal for an 11-years-old. As any responsible parent, she started monitoring her son’s behavior, and after noticing that those behaviors occurred upon the child’s return from visiting his father, she reported it to authorities, and simultaneously, sought psychological help for her child.
Slowly, the child began to open up and reveal to his mother, other family members, as well as to his doctors, and therapists at New Beginnings Counseling Center, disturbing stories of how his father was making him do things that were of a sexual nature, including oral sex. According to the child’s revelations, the abuse had started as far back as when he was 5 years old.
Moreover, the child disclosed of enduring, verbal and physical abuse from both – his father, and his paternal grandmother – with whom Wilwert The Third, lives. The child has also reported that his grandmother is well aware of what his father is doing to him, but she has never done anything to help the child. A police report also revealed the same allegations made by the child.
After the Division of Youth and Family Services, of Burlington County New Jersey was contacted by Rusanovschi, DYFS assigned a caseworker – Traline Bacon – and her supervisor –Ms.Crawford – to the case, while they were conducting an investigation.
Rusanovsky was advised by the child’s doctor, to home-school the child, for the time being.
Multiple other parties – including the child’s therapist, June Nuehouse – also informed DYFS of their own documented findings about the child’s reports of being forced by his father to perform sexual activities, and to watch pornographic movies and tapes.
According to Rusanovschi, neither Bacon, nor Crawford, have submitted any written finding about the outcome, of their investigation.
In May of 2011, her 11-years-old son – who has a slight speech impediment – was removed by DYFS from his mother’s care, and placed in a foster home, where he remained for the next four months.
DYFS’s rationale behind that decision – The mother had voluntarily taken the child out of his school environment. However, that was not true; the mother had documentation from her doctor, which clearly proved that she was home-schooling her son, at the advice of her doctor, yet both – DYFS, and the Family Court, chose to ignore that evidence.
Rusanovschi was also told that her child will be returned to her care, if she agrees to cooperate.
“I have done all that caseworker Traline Bacon, and Ms.Crawford asked of me.
I have done the psychological/psychiatric evaluation, I have completed parenting classes
I’ve attended counseling. The results of those evaluations attest to my parental fitness, and clearly show that I am in no way, shape, or form, a danger to my own child, yet DYFS has failed to honor our agreement to work with me towards the return of my child, as well as their own mandated procedures.” Rusanovschi said.
Rusanovschi said that, when her caseworker insisted that she [Rusanovschi] takes responsibility for the allegations against her ex-husband, she refused to do so, simply because she felt that she was not responsible for her ex-husband’s horrific acts, and because she had not influenced her son to accuse his father. She was just as shocked about the finding.
“I will never concede to being at fault for what my son say about his sexual abuser, as DYFS caseworker wants me to.” Said Rusanovschi.
For that reason, the DYFS listed Rusanovschi as non-compliant, and asked the court to close the case, release DYFS-Burlington County from the case, and place the child in the sole custody of his father.
Judge Hains – the presiding judge – agreed, and vacated all prior decision(s).
“From the inception, DYFS had no grounds, to remove my son from my care, and place him in an abusive environment. They never brought any type of proof to demonstrate, my son is doing well in school; they have failed to submit how they have come to the conclusion that my son was not sexually and physically abused by his father, and paternal grandmother. Martin Peter Wilwert The Third, pleaded the “fifth” when he, was speaking to the police about the sexual abuse allegations.” Rusanovschi said.
According to Rusanovschi, D.Y.F.S. and the lower family court in Burlington County, NJ have violated her son’s Constitutional and Human right to live in a safe environment, and by failing to protect him from harm.
They have violated her Parental and Human Rights, by failing to properly investigate the allegations against her ex-husband, and prematurely closing the case, ignoring important evidence that was brought before them, and also from unlawfully removing her child from her care.
On top of that, her attorney – Mindy Snyder – had failed to collect significant evidence, interview witnesses, and conduct a proper cross-examination. The attorney also failed to inform Rusanovschi about her parental and constitutional rights, and failed to file an appeal on her behalf, forcing her to represent herself in court.
“I have found out through my own research, that they had absolutely no legal right, to bar me from my son. I am entitled to a proper, full hearing where all evidence has to be taken in consideration.
Rusanovschi’s case is still under appeal. Meanwhile, she is not allowed to see her child, alone and/or unsupervised, and when she sees him, she has to pay for the supervised visits – which she simply can’t afford, as she was ordered to pay child support to her son’s abuser.