On spotting legal issues…..

Posted on by K

One thing I’ve learned to do pretty well as a paralegal is a spot a legal issue. I don’t necessarily know how to rectify the issue but, hey, identifying a problem is the first step to solving it, right? This skill has turned out to be a huge asset for me in my work with clients. It’s been really shocking for me to realize just how often people unaware of the law are taken advantage of. In my work at an organization providing free legal assistance, the clients are aware there is something a lawyer can do for them. That is why they call in the first place. At my field placement, this is not the case. My clients are often completely oblivious to any legal remedies available to them. One client that I have been working with for the past month presented with issues paying her bills. After speaking with her at length, I’ve come to realize that her current problems stem from an eviction that took place two years ago, an eviction that the client could have fought in court. While she may not have been able to retain her apartment, she could have bought herself time and that time would likely have made a world of difference for her. Unfortunately, my client wasn’t aware at the time that she could fight the eviction in court and no one told her. That fact got me thinking just how much better social workers might be able to serve their clients if they are trained to spot legal issues and have appropriate referrals for services.

I once attended a webinar taught by the Victim’s Right Law Center about issue spotting with victims of sexual assault during intake (thats a mouth full). The thing that the presenters really stressed was just how many facets there are to a client’s story, to their presenting problem. A young woman sexually assaulted on her college campus may present asking for assistance processing her attack and its effects on her life but when probed so many other issues, ones with legal remedies might present themselves.  She might say she feels horribly unsafe because she keeps getting messages from her perpetrator on Facebook. It might turn out she has an order of protection against her abuser from criminal court but she doesn’t understand it. It might not contain any provisions prohibiting him from contact via social media. It could though, she should contact the DA on the case. Maybe her perpetrator was her boyfriend. She might be eligible for a Family Court Order of Protection. She needs a family law attorney.  Does the client feel safe in her apartment? Maybe she wants to break her lease but can’t afford the fines. She needs a housing attorney.  Did she lose her job after she was assaulted because she was afraid to be there or because she was suffering psychological repercussions from the attack? She should speak with an attorney familiar with worker’s rights or one who knows the provisions of the VAWA act. What about school? What about her immigration status? You see where I am going with this.

I think it can be very easy for social workers to focus on their clinical work and miss other ways they can assist their clients. When you are working with clients that have no involvement in the court system, it can be difficult to recognize when a client should, in fact, get involved. Now, I’m not suggesting we all go out and study the law but I am suggesting we learn to notice more when our client’s rights are being violated. Sometimes we might be wrong, sometimes we/our clients might consult an attorney and learn there is absolutely nothing that can be done to assist them with their problem. There will be other times though; other times when our clients will be able to use the courts to their advantage and be all the better for it. If my client had known housing law remedies available to her, she never would have had to walk through the door to meet with me and, while I’m happy that I had the occasion to meet her, I would much happier if she had the financial security she deserves.

On being a social worker in the court system….

Posted on by K

Through an elective course I’m taking this semester, I’ve had the opportunity to hear a number of  guest lectures by social workers and other professionals working within the court system. Though their roles in the court and clientele varied, I noted a few common trends in their work experiences that I thought I might pass along to y’all, in case anyone was thinking about getting into the field.

  • Working in a court is very fast-paced job.  You are likely to see many clients in a day and for short periods of time.

  • Being good at completing quick and thorough assessments is a must. Sharpen up on those biopsychosocial skills.

  • Be prepared to go to bat for your client. Many of the speakers described being strong advocates for  their clients in the face of a, sometimes, unsympathetic court. If they believed their client would benefit substantially from, say, a supervised release or a certain treatment program,  they had to be able to make their client’s case for such to the defense attorney, to the DA, sometimes even to the judge.

  • Along the same vein, many of the speakers described how difficult it can be to admit to the court when their client is not meeting their mandated responsibilities. If their client isn’t attending their treatment program, for example, they have to be honest and report that to the judge knowing that there may be consequences for their client. Its hard to tattle (for lack of a better term) on a client, especially if the social worker may have grown to like them but, ultimately, it may lead to better outcomes for their client. It also retains a social worker’s professional credibility in front of the court. Losing your credibility can be harmful for one’s other clients as well as the program one works for.

  • One former public defender who spoke to us noted the importance of a social worker upholding their own professional ethics in the court environment. We aren’t lawyers, we don’t need to act like one.

I got the impression for our speakers that working in a criminal justice setting is an incredibly challenging, yet rewarding endeavor. A lot like most social work positions, huh? I guess, in the end, the lesson I took away from all our speakers is just how valuable an ally a social worker can be for an individual who is court involved. If that’s a role you might be interested in taking, you can find job listings, here and here.

Posted on by K

Something to keep our eyes on….

A couple of recent incidents at Riker’s Island involving seriously mentally ill inmates (specifically this one and this one), have resulted in firings and criminal charges against correction officers as well as loud calls for change from NYC government officials and advocates….

Here’s another interesting case involving the discharge process for the seriously mentally ill on Riker’s Island….

.. On the DREAM act….

Posted on by K

One of my absolute favorite things about living in New York City is going to see live music in small venues. Its not what you think; its not the intimate setting or the hipster status that comes from attending more “underground” shows. What I love about these shows is how excited the people/person on stage typically is to be playing in NYC. Playing a packed show to a NYC crowd is a huge deal and I love when bands can’t hide  their excitement about it. I love watching people have their “I’m going to make it” moment, ya know, living out their dreams. (This is also the reason that I cry while watching sporting events involving a championship of any sort, one shining moment anyone?).

Its on account of this “living the dream” fetish of mine, perhaps, that I was so saddened during a presentation I attended on Silver’s Common Day given by the DREAM team at NYU. The presentation centered on the NY State DREAM act. The passing of the DREAM act in NY would mean that undocumented students would be eligible for financial assistance with college tuition from the state, like financial aid and scholarships from a DREAM fund. When I think of undocumented immigrants, I typically think of people who made the choice to move here themselves. The presentation by the DREAM Team at NYU made me think of a different type of undocumented immigrant ; Children of undocumented immigrants who came here as a child, some of which may be unaware of their undocumented status. These children grew up here in the States just like myself. They attended elementary, middle and high school here. They made plans to go to college. The only difference between them and I, in that regard, is that I have a piece of paper that declares me a US citizen, and that makes my eligible for all kinds of financial assistance to enact my college plans. Undocumented students are not afforded that assistance. With the price of a college education what it is today, this creates a barrer for these students to higher education and, in turn, many career paths.

This week, the NY Senate had a chance to remove this barrier and offer, at least, some state assistance. They  failed to do so. In a 30-29 vote, the NY DREAM act was rejected.  This surprised many immigrants and advocates. While its certainly discouraging, it hasn’t stopped immigration reform groups from advocating for the passage of the bill the next time around and in a larger sense federal immigration reform. Perhaps those of us who weren’t involved in the advocacy efforts up to now, should consider joining them. After all, this is a bill that will likely offer opportunity to many of our clients. In this economy, a college degree could mean the difference between poverty or a middle-class lifestyle. It could bring that “I’m going to make it” moment that I love  to the faces of many undocumented students (I might cry now). If you are interested in getting involved you could start here or here….

Taking a break from solving the mystery of the missing plane…..

Posted on by K

I’ve become so consumed with the missing Malaysian airplane that I have had no time to read any other news or even think of something else to write about here (priorities?), so I figured that I would write what I know. Through the course of my employment, I’ve learned a thing or two about filing Family Offense Petitions (FOP) in the Family Court of our state, some things that I feel might be useful for social workers working with domestic violence survivors and their families.

Why file an FOP?

Family Offense Petitions ask the Family Court to issue an Order of Protection (OP). They allege that the Petitioner has been a victim of family offenses. These offensesmust be perpetrated by anyone related by blood or marriage, a person the petitioner was or is married to or with whom they share a child or someone the petitioner is involved in an intimate relationship with, like dating. Family offenses in the state of New York include varying degrees of assault, harassment, stalking and sexual assault.

Why an Order of Protection from the Family Court instead of Criminal Court?

A person may have both an order of protection from the Criminal Court and the Family Court. A criminal OP comes as a result of criminal charges and a case brought by the District Attorney’s Office. The police would have to be involved to make the report the DA’s office. The case is not in control of the victim, it is the DA’s case. Many such cases (particularly first offenses) will get pled out and while an OP is usually part of that plea, it’s not always the case. In Family Court the victim has more control. It is their case. One does not have to have called the police during incidents, though police reports can be good evidence.  In Family Court, the petitioner has more control over the types of relief granted by the OP but it will require more court appearances.

What goes in an FOP?

An FOP should contain VERY detailed accounts of the family offenses perpetrated against the survivor. A good jumping off point often mentioned is “First, Worst and Most Recent.”  Mention the place the incident occurred and the date (at the very least a month/season and year). Victims should include any injuries sustained in the incident, emotional and physical.

Here’s an example:

On or about January 8, 2014, Respondent and I were in the marital home when Respondent became very angry that I left the door open. Respondent lunged across the room and grabbed me by the  arm. He was screaming words to the effect of “Close this door right now or I will punch you in the face’  I felt very fearful of Respondent. When he released me,  I had bruises on my right arm. The bruises were present for a week and were so visible that I had to wear long sleeves to cover them. I felt very ashamed and embarrassed.From experience, I can say that it may be very helpful for a social worker to spend some time with your client (if they have it) creating this list of incidents. Your clients may have trouble recalling incidents or time frames, particularly in a long abusive marriage. They may also feel compelled to include things that aren’t necessarily family offenses that would dilute the strength of the petition, for example, they may want to include that their partner is cheating on them.  Thats terrible and certainly distressing but infidelity is not in and of itself an offense punishable in the Family Court.

An FOP can ask for various forms of relief. It can order the Respondent to stay away from Petitioner, to refrain for committing family offenses against them or contacting them even through third parties. It can order them out of the home the parties share. It can grant temporary custody and child support.  The Petitioner should indicate what relief they are looking for exactly to the clerk when they file.

How does one file an FOP?

To file an FOP, one must go to the petition room of the Family Court in their borough. The clerk will type up the FOP for them.  There is no filing fee.

What happens after it is filed?

The petitioner will be called before a judge. If the petition is filed in the morning, this will likely happen in the same day. If one files later in the day, one may have to return the following day to see the Judge. When before the judge, the judge may ask them to speak about the incidents alleged in their petition. One should answer the questions completely and truthfully. If the judge deems the petition sufficient cause to issue an OP, they will issue a temporary one. This TOP must be served on the Respondent for it to be in effect. Service must be carried out by a party that is over 18 and not involved in the action. One can ask a mutual friend or can go to their local police precinct to effectuate service.  The TOP will come with a summons, summoning the Respondent to the court at a future date. At the next court date, both parties, if they are low income, may request a court appointed attorney.

 

 Filing an FOP can be a very daunting process for our clients, one they are very reluctant to undertake  alone. Offering to accompany a client to court for this filing process can be the difference between them obtaining an OP or not. You can find out more information here. Another way our clients can get assistance with filing an FOP is by visiting the Family Justice Center of their borough. (Manhattan just opened theirs)

Posted on by K

Some articles you might find interesting if you found some past posts interesting at all:

Judges, prosecutors and wardens go to bat for Michigan’s juvenile lifers   (You’ll have to forgive my frequent passing on of MI news but I am a Michigander after all)

Supreme Court Justices question strict IQ standards for Florida’s death row. 

From over on Tri-Borough Trek, Kendra’s Law and Social Work

Nagging, as a Force for Good …  “A few months ago, the probation commissioner in New York City, Vincent N. Schiraldi, decided the agency could formally connect its younger clients — generally 16 to 24 — with school or vocational training…..”

On an agreement for reform…

Posted on by K

Something happened the other morning aboard the F train that was pretty unusual. As the doors began to close on the Delancy/Essex street station, the conductor came over the loudspeaker, which of course, is not unusual in and of itself but  it was what she said that gave my fellow passengers and I pause  “This is a Coney Island Bound F Train, Sit back and enjoy your ride.”  …. Sit back and enjoy the ride? Wait, did I hear her correctly,  aren’t we supposed to stand clear of the closing doors?  The rest of the individuals in my car seemed just as amused by this break from convention as I. We looked around made eye contact (GASP), smiled and all collectively chuckled before returning to looking down, playing candy crush, reading a book, ya know, business as usual. A group of strangers having a laugh together; its the sort of thing that happens here in New York City as you go about your daily life in such close proximity to so many others. You socialize quite by accident on occasion and think nothing of it. Only this time, I did take a moment to think something of it. What I thought of, in particular, was what it would be like to not be able to socialize, even in such a small way. I thought about what it might be like to sit in a cell about the size of a parking space alone without any stimuli for 23 hours a day for months at a time. Now, I’m not usually prone to imagining myself in solitary confinement (although truth be told I probably think about it more than most), it just so happens that on this occasion solitary confinement was on my mind for good cause. New York State reached an agreement this month in a lawsuit filed by the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), Peoples v. Fisher. The suit  alleged that the State’s Department of Correction and Community Supervision’s (DCCS) “use and length of confinement sanctions and conditions in DCCS’ “Special Housing Units” create an unconstitutional risk of harm”. The agreement provides that the state will immediately take steps to remove minors, pregnant women and developmentally disabled individuals from solitary confinement in these “Special Housing Units”. Minors and pregnant women will now be prohibited from receiving such sanctions. The developmentally disabled will have a time limit of 30 days of solitary confinement, which is huge given that the NYCLU found that the average stay in these “Special Housing Units” is 150 days.   The agreement appoints experts in the field to devise a plan for reform for the state’s prison system, expected to be issued this spring. It also holds DCCS accountable for the use of this type of punishment by forcing them to provide NYCLU with monthly reports on the “use and condition of the cells”. Quarterly reports will also be generated  “analyzing trends and outcomes for those individuals in the prison isolation system”.

The agreement is a large step toward prison reform in our state, the biggest prison system to take on this sort of reform in the country.  I don’t think I need to labor on about just how big it is. I’ll assume you as social workers can surmise the effects of solitary confinement on individuals, particularly those that are seriously mentally ill. I don’t think I need to tell you, social workers, how jarring it is for an individual to be released from solitary right into our community. I’m guessing you already know how this might affect one’s chances for success post-release. Nahh, instead of using statistics, studies and case examples as I usually do, I’ve decided to try a different method of inciting the advocate in you: the comment section.  In reading an exorbitant  amount of articles on this subject, I came across some gems of public commentary that I’d like to share:

NYC Taxpayer says: People forget that these prisoners are convicted 
FELONS and are in prison for good reason. I feel no sympathy for 
rapists, burglars, robbers, car thieves and the like. I think we pamper prisoners in New York.
Steve says: Actually it is the victims and what they suffered at the hands of 
these convicts who are the forgotten ones -And I wish that an equal amount of ACLU time and effort was spent ensuring their rights and protection. These convicts 
are in SHU units for good reason-it is their action(s) that put them in that unit. You do the crime-you should do the time-and that time should be done in the SHU 
unit if a convict's actions in prison warrant that placement.
PMAC says: Why aren't we talking about the reason why a prisoner is put in 
solitary confinement??? Prisons are not country clubs - you act out of line, you 
pay the consequences. Prisons should be a place that instill fear -- a fear that 
'prevents' someone from committing a crime! The slogan used by the CLU (who put 
more criminals back on the streets to kill/main people) should be: "You never want to end up in prison".
Endless War says: "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time…" Solitary 
confinement is punishment for people removed from society for criminal behaviour 
who, subsequently, could not even interact with like-minded criminals in a civil 
manner.The recidivism rate for NY State inmates is already 40-60% (Governor 
Cuomo's office). Will making prison more homey and less-confining really improve 
that number? Solitary confinement can be used to protect the prison population 
from out of control individuals as well as protect those individuals (including 
the mentally ill) from retaliation and abuse by the general prison population. To do away with it will put guards and prisoners at risk as well as remove one of the methods to deter repeat offenders. NY prisoners are not wayward children, they 
are for the most part career murderers and rapists who show a wanton disregard for the rights of free-living citizens of the United States. Pardon me if I can't 
lose any sleep about how accommodating their punitive atmosphere may be.
Kurt says: "The most common infraction was failure to obey an order, which 
resulted in 35,000 such punishments, the data showed." That's exactly why they're in prison in the first place because they can't follow the rules of a civilized 
society. Learning to obey the rules is the first step in integrating an inmate 
back into society. If they can't do that then they belong right where they are.

 

I chose these comments because I think they demonstrate just how vulnerable a population our country’s prison inmates are. Mr. Endless War and Mrs. NYC Taxpayer clearly do not care if some “FELON” spends 150 days locked in a concrete parking space and I think that demonstrates why we should. As so many of these commentators so cleverly pointed out “you do the crime, you pay the time” and though not terribly astute, I can see their point. Yes, do the time but I don’t believe the time needs to be done in a “Special Housing Unit”.  Prisoners are not “for the most part career murderers and rapists.”   While they might be “rapists, burglars, robbers, car thieves and the like” (and don’t forget stealers, we are looking for synonyms right?), they could also be seriously mentally ill or a first time offender with a drug addiction or just a person who made a terrible mistake in their life. Whomever they are and whatever they have done, they might be our clients at one point or another; and on account of that, I think its our duty to stand up against the Kurts and the Steves and demand for prison reform,  even if it comes one agreement at time.

More articles: Here and Here

And just because I think its funny:

Cleo says: If I was in prison, I would prefer to spend the entire time in 
solitary, preferably with my own bathroom and shower. Also, a lock from the 
inside.

On trying a different solution….

Posted on by K

About a year ago, I read this article in the New York Times. The article discussed sex offenders in Suffolk County who were forced (because of restrictive conditions placed upon them after release from prison) to live in two trailers on the edge of town. About 40 men all told split between 2 trailers, only one of which had a shower. Men from unlucky trailer #2 would be bussed to shower every few days in trailer #1. The men reported conditions were exactly as one might imagine them to be when 20 frustrated, angry men are living in bunk beds in a tiny trailer.  What struck me (and the reason that I remember the article vividly over a year after I initially reading it) was how very much it sounded like even though the men had served their time in prison, they were still prisoners of the system (yes, I’m talking about this again).  Sex offenders, I would venture to say, are among the most hated members of our society. They are pariah, modern day lepers.  Believe me, I get it. I’m sure there are many who believe  that these deplorable living conditions are more than those who have committed sexual assault deserve, and I can’t fault them for thinking that.

The idea that I’ve most connected to as I become indoctrinated as a social worker is that in order to understand  a person’s presenting issue, one must step back and take a look at the person in the context of their environment (past and present).  I thought about this when I read this article published on CNN’s website as a part of their Change the List project. The article was one in a series attempting to find an explanation for Alaska’s high rate of sexual assault and highlighting efforts to change that statistic in the state. The author, John D. Sutter, was able to sit in on a group session held at a treatment program for sex offenders that seemed to embody this doctrine of social work. In this particular treatment program, participants are assigned a “safety net” of 5 volunteers from the community to assist them with their rehabilitation. It keep the participants engaged in the community and near the support and counseling that they very much need. Its the antithesis of hulling the offenders up in a trailer outside of town. It holds the offenders accountable for their actions, their “safety net” is watching after all and places their struggles front and center. By doing this, the program addresses the underlying issues that may have lead to the assault in the first place. Many sex offenders were themselves victims of sexual abuse or violence at sometime in their life. Others struggle with feelings of unworthiness, helplessness, lack of control. Working at all these underlying issues seems to give the offenders hope and motivation for change. Being cast off from society and sent to the outer edges of town where your neighbors hate you and protest your presence probably doesn’t do that.  I would guess it adds an additional dimension to an already uphill battle.

Sometimes I get it in my head to write about  topic, like this one, and everything seems to align to promote my agenda. I came across this article by the grace of the universe earlier this week. The author, a survivor of incest,  says it much more eloquently. She calls on us (among other professions) to promote the creation of programs, like the one in Alaska, aimed at addressing the issue of sexual assault in a family WITH the family.  She rejects the shunning of offenders (even the perpetrator of her assault) and calls for more group work, more family therapy, saying   “We know where to begin to heal our families and our country. We know what to do. And yet, we’re not doing it. We’re giving in to fear and looking for a quick fix.”

I agree. I don’t think trailers and isolation are the answer …..  what about you?

in the spirit of catching up….

Posted on by K

Maybe its that I’ve overextended myself, maybe its the weather and seasonal affective disorder or maybe it is the fact that House of Cards exists; whatever it is, lately, I just can’t seem to catch up with my life. The anxiety of lagging has been a constant companion this past month; playing catch up has become the general theme of my days.  In the spirit of this, I thought I might take the some time to catch up here on the blog, a lot of the topics we explored last semester have had some developments I haven’t bothered to point out (blame Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright).

  • Stop and Frisk: As I pointed out in my initial post on the subject, the issue of Stop and Frisk was a big one in NYC’s mayoral election. Mayor De Blasio (as promised) didn’t waste anytime settling the case. Read about it here.

  • I mentioned  immigration reform in a post or two (didn’t I?).  There has been a bit of back and forth between the GOP and Obama’s administration this new year.  This article sums it up.

  • Detroit’s bankruptcy, a lot going on there. More foundations donating funds. Gov. Snyder has proposed a state bailout.  A bankruptcy restructuring plan is set to be filed. Retirees are signing up for new healthcare plans while lawyers and accountants in the city are profiting from their struggle. Follow this link to Detroit’s Free Press’ coverage.

  • I can’t do a post like this without mentioning my favorite cause, exonerate the wrongfully convicted. Newly elected District Attorney in Brooklyn, Kenneth Thompson has been working on overturning some such cases. Read about the first.

I think that about catches us up… Let’s hope this is the beginning of a new trend for me, though the forecast and the release of season 2 of House of Cards make that seem unlikely.

On My Least Favorite Sandwich…..

Posted on by K

Last week, I had the opportunity to attend a webinar (watch a webinar? … you know what I’m getting at) offered by the Battered Women’s Justice Project entitled the “The Child Custody/Child Protective Service Sandwich”.  The timing of such an offering was pretty amazing given that this issue has been on my mind a bit as of late (go figure). A couple of weeks ago, at my job, I received a call from a man stating that his sister was in an abusive relationship. This sister wanted to begin seeking services from a prominent domestic violence agency in the city but had some concerns. The caller’s friend, who is a social worker, had informed his sister about a licensed social worker’s mandated reporter status. The caller lamented that his sister was considering not seeking services (that ultimately might save her life…cough cough) because her children had witnessed one incident of abuse and, therefore, in speaking about this incident, she might trigger a mandated report. This is essentially the sandwich de jour; a sandwich, I must admit, I find incredibly hard to swallow. Its not an uncommon place for domestic violence victims to find themselves – sandwiched there in between Child Protective Services (CPS) and Family or Civil Court.

Domestic violence is a beast of a thing; its a dyad that only a survivor can understand. The decision to leave an abusive relationship is not an easy one. That decision, and research will back me up, increases the risk of death or serious injury exponentially; leaving is the most dangerous time for a victim and their children. Its not a decision to be entered in lightly.  Let’s just assume, for the sake of time, that a victim safely leaves their abuser and relocates to a shelter with the children. A clever abuser then heads to the family court and files for custody, or visitation, for an order of protection or to the civil court to file for divorce. Now the victim finds themself in a battle for the children, a battle they may not win without alleging that their abuser is, in fact, an abuser. The courts are inclined to believe that it is in the best interest of a child to have “parenting time” with both parents. If its not safe for a victim’s children and they believe that “parenting time” needs to be supervised, its their burden to prove why. As soon as one does that, they open themselves up to becoming pastrami, honey roasted turkey, the meat in an CPS and Court sandwich. The same thing would occur if their therapist at the shelter is mandated to make a report about your children witnessing abuse.

An investigation may be launched by CPS (or ACS in NYC… acronyms, ughh) and a victim may find themselves with an “indicated” report for neglect in failing to protect their children from witnessing abuse by leaving their abuser. This becomes much more complicated if victims end up reconciling with their abuser; on average it takes seven to nine attempts to leave an abusive relationship. As an advocate for domestic violence victims, I’ve seen this occur numerous times and, frankly, I find it troublesome.  To me, its a MASSIVE barrier to service for victims and services are what victims need as they exit an abusive relationship. This occurrence bothered advocates in West Virginia as well, I learned from my webinar. So much so, in fact, that they advocated for change; working together, lawyers, social workers and other interested parties were able to create CPS policy change in their state. Now CPS workers are no longer obligated to make an “indicated” report if they note that the non-abusive parent took reasonable steps to protect their children. This allows them to take into account plans and preparations made by the victim in assessing safety concerns. For a victim about to find themselves salami-ed, I think that’s a huge change. As social workers, it shows what we can do when we hear our clients and collaborate with other organizations and professions to advocate on their behalf.