Name: Clara
Allegation: Environment Injurious
Penalty Avoided: 5 Years on State Registry, Impact on Custody
In February 2014, Clara lived with her boyfriend J.J., their toddler, Daniella, Clara’s mother, and Clara’s sister. On February 26, J.J. and Clara got into an argument. J.J. kicked Clara, resulting in a bruise and shoe-mark on Clara’s thigh, and then came towards Clara in an attempt to further attack her. Clara pushed J.J. out of the way in order to escape his attack. J.J. suffered no injuries. Clara’s mother, witnessing the entire event and worried for her daughter’s safety, called the police. When the police arrived, Clara admitted to pushing J.J. in self-defense, but J.J. denied assaulting Clara in any way.
Because only Clara admitted to physical contact, she was arrested and charged with domestic battery. In March 2014, Clara, on the advice of her counsel at the time, agreed to an order of protection for J.J. and Daniella, allowing J.J. to retain primary custody of Daniella, while Clara would have supervised contact with Daniella three days per week. Clara’s order of protection expired on its own terms in July 2014. On June 22, 2015, Clara was found not guilty of domestic battery.
DCFS indicated Clara under Allegation #60 “Environment Injurious to Health and Welfare by Neglect,” stating that Clara subjected Daniella to an environment injurious when she engaged in violence against J.J. while Daniella was in the home. But this is not the standard for indicating Allegation 60; a showing of “blatant disregard” for “obvious dangers” is required under the revised and updated language of Allegation 60. The standards for Clara’s order of protection and the DCFS’ Allegation 60 were different, yet her appeal of the indicated finding was dismissed due to her having agreed to the order of protection and despite her having been found not guilty in the criminal case.
After being indicated, Clara was denied the right to a hearing based on the agreement she had made when the order of protection was issued against her the year before. That’s when the Family Defense Center stepped in and filed an appeal with the Circuit Court. The Center argued successfully that she was a domestic violence victim and not a perpetrator of child neglect, and that she deserved her day in court. With the assistance of The Center and pro bono counsel, Clara successfully appealed the indicated findings. DCFS voluntarily unfounded case and removed Clara’s name from the State Central Register.