CHILD ABUSE

CHILD ABUSE

Physical, sexual, or emotional mistreatment or neglect of a child.

CHILD ABUSE has been defined as an act, or
failure to act, on the part of a parent or caretaker
that results in the death, serious physical or
emotional harm, SEXUAL ABUSE, or exploitation
of a child, or which places the child in an immi-
nent risk of serious harm (42 U.S.C.A. § 5106g).
Child-abuse laws raise difficult legal and politi-
cal issues, pitting the right of children to be free
from harm, on the one hand, against the right of
families to privacy and the rights of parents to
raise and discipline their children without gov-
ernment interference, on the other.

The mistreatment of children at the hands of
parents or caretakers has a long history. For cen-
turies, this behavior was shielded by a system of
laws that gave children few, if any, rights. Under
English COMMON LAW, children were treated as
property owned by the parents. Parents, particu-
larly fathers, had great latitude over the treat-
ment and discipline of children. This outlook
was carried to the American colonies and incor-
porated into early laws in the United States.
One of the first cases to bring national atten-
tion to child abuse arose in the early 1870s. An
eight-year-old New York orphan named Mary
Ellen Wilson complained of being whipped and
beaten nearly every day by her foster family. Her
case captured the attention of the American
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
(ASPCA). An attorney for the ASPCA took Wilson’s case, arguing that as members of the animal kingdom, children are entitled to the same
legal protections from cruelty as are animals. A
judge heard evidence that Wilson’s foster family,
the Connollys, routinely beat her, locked her in a
bedroom, and made her sleep on the floor.
Charged with ASSAULT AND BATTERY, Wilson’s
foster mother was convicted and sentenced to
one year of hard labor. Even more significantly,
publicity surrounding Wilson’s case led to the
establishment, in 1874, of the New York Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. The
following year, the New York Legislature passed
a statute that authorized such societies to file
complaints of child abuse with law enforcement
agencies.

In 1962, an article in a major medical jour-
nal again brought national attention to the
issue by identifying the symptoms that can
indicate child abuse. The article, by Dr. Henry
Kempe, appeared in the Journal of the American
Medical Association (JAMA) and discussed a
diagnosis for child abuse. The article resulted in
widespread awareness of child abuse and
prompted further public discussion on ways to
address the problem. By 1970, every state had
enacted laws requiring certain professionals,
such as teachers and doctors, to report inci-
dents of suspected child abuse to law enforce-
ment agencies. In 1974, the Federal Child
Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42
U.S.C.A. §§ 5105 – 5106) became law, authoriz-
ing federal funding for states to identify child
abuse and to offer protective services for
abused children.

Statutes make up one component of a state’s
child-protective services; another component,
the child-protective services agency, implements
the statutes. Reporting statutes, which vary from
state to state, require that certain professionals
report suspected child abuse, whereas others,
such as neighbors, are entitled but not required
to do so. Other statutes define child abuse. For
example, in some states, officially recognized
physical abuse occurs only when a child suffers a
specified type of injury, whereas in other states, any serious injury that is not accidental in
nature is considered abuse. Sexual abuse of chil-
dren generally need not cause injury; any sexual
act performed on a child can be considered
abuse. Similarly, state statutes categorize as child
abuse any neglect of a child that places the child
at risk, regardless of whether the child is actually
injured. Before substantiating a report of emo-
tional abuse of a child, state statutes generally
require a finding of actual harm. Still other
statutes specify procedures for investigating
child abuse, determining whether a report of
abuse is substantiated, intervening to protect an
abused child from further harm, and maintain-
ing records of child abuse reports.

When allegations of abuse meet the statu-
tory definitions, the state’s child-protective serv-
ices agency or a law enforcement agency steps in
to investigate. Child-protective services agencies
generally investigate allegations only when the
child’s parent or guardian is suspected of caus-
ing the abuse or of allowing it to occur. FAMILY
LAW presumes that the parent or guardian will
protect the child from abuse by other parties
and that he or she will contact law enforcement
agencies to investigate incidents of abuse by
other parties when the parent is not causing or
allowing the abuse.

Caseworkers for child-protective services
investigate abuse allegations most commonly by
interviewing or visiting with the child, the
child’s parents or guardians, and other sources
such as physicians and teachers. If an agent finds
evidence that supports a conclusion that the
child has been abused, the agency deems the
allegations substantiated. The next step is inter-
vention.

Intervention can mean many different
things. Frequently, when the risk of further
abuse is immediate and significant, child-pro-
tective services agents will place the child tem-
porarily in a foster home. Alternatively, agents
may monitor the family or may provide coun-
seling in order to curb the threat of abuse. If a
family does not cooperate with the intervention
efforts of child-protective services, the agency
may take the case before a judge, who may deter-
mine that abuse or neglect has occurred. He or
she may issue a court order mandating the
agency’s intervention. In extreme cases, agents
may remove the child from the home perma-
nently; following a judicial termination of parental rights, the child is then placed for
ADOPTION.

Another function of state child-protective
services is record keeping, which is accomplished
through a system known as the central
registry. The central registry contains information
about child abuse reports—both substantiated
and unsubstantiated—such as the names of
the child and of the suspected abuser and the
final determination made by the child-protective
services worker. This system helps agents in
investigating current reports of abuse because it
allows them to compare any previous accusations,
particularly within the same family. The
registry also supplies statistics about child abuse,
which help the agency and the state legislature to
enact appropriate laws and policies and to provide
adequate funding for child-protective services.
In some states, other parties may have
access to the registry. For example, a day-care
center may check the registry before hiring
employees, or an adoption agency may check the
registry before placing an infant with a family.

Few doubt that state child-protective services
agencies provide a valuable service by
responding to allegations of child abuse. But
such agencies also have their critics. Many people
who have been accused of child abuse, particularly
parents, object to the way in which
these agencies routinely remove children from
their homes when child abuse is suspected. Children
are traumatized by being taken from their
parents, and allegations of abuse are frequently unfounded, these critics claim. Contentious
CHILD CUSTODY battles sometimes prompt false
accusations of physical or sexual abuse, costing
the accused time and money in the fight to
reclaim their children and their reputations.
Others object to the names of the accused being
included on the central registry even when the
accusations are unsubstantiated. The backlash
against child-protective services spurred the
establishment, in 1984, of an information and
support group known as Victims of Child Abuse
Laws (VOCAL). VOCAL claims to have thousands
of members nationwide, and its members
lobby for new laws that protect not only children
but also parents who are falsely accused of being
abusive or negligent.

Despite increased legislation and penalties
for child abuse, extreme cases continue to
appear and to sustain the debates over child
abuse laws. Such cases include the Schoo case in
suburban Chicago, which received widespread
media coverage. In December 1992, David
Schoo, a 45-year-old electrical engineer, and his
35-year-old wife, Sharon Schoo, a homemaker,
flew to Acapulco, Mexico, for a Christmas vacation,
leaving their daughters, nine-year-old
Nicole Schoo and four-year-old Diana Schoo,
home alone. The Schoos provided their daughters
only with cereal and frozen dinners to eat
and a note telling them when to go to bed. One
day during their parents’ absence, the girls left
the house when a smoke alarm sounded. As they
stood barefoot in the snow, a neighbor found
them, learned of their situation, and called the
police.

The Schoos were arrested while still on the
plane that returned them from Mexico nine days
after they had left their children. Following their
indictment on various state charges of child
endangerment and cruelty, a GRAND JURY also
found evidence that the Schoos had beaten,
kicked, and choked their children in order to
discipline them. In April 1993, the Schoos pleabargained,
agreeing to serve two years of PROBATION
and 30 days of house arrest while the girls
remained in foster care. In August 1993, the
Schoos agreed to give up their parental rights
and placed their daughters up for permanent
adoption.

Another nationally publicized case raised
questions regarding the effectiveness of childprotective
services and implicated social workers
charged with protecting the victim. Two-yearold
Bradley McGee, of Lakeland, Florida, died in
July 1989 from massive head injuries after his
stepfather, 23-year-old Thomas E. Coe, repeatedly
plunged him head-first into a toilet. Coe
later testified that he had become angry when
the child had soiled his pants. McGee’s 21-yearold
mother, Sheryl McGee Coe, pleaded no contest
to second-degree murder and aggravated
child abuse for allowing her husband to abuse
McGee, and received a 30-year prison sentence.
Thomas Coe, convicted of first-degree murder
and aggravated child abuse, received a sentence
of life in prison.

The McGee case alarmed the public not
only because of the harsh physical abuse that
caused the toddler’s death but also because of
what many perceived to be a failure in the system
that is designed to protect children like
Bradley McGee. Two months before his death,
Bradley had been living with foster parents
owing to allegations of abuse at the hands of the
Coes. Despite strong objections by the foster
parents, caseworkers for Florida’s Health and
Rehabilitative Services returned McGee to his
mother and stepfather, determining them to be
fit parents.

Public reaction was strong following the
news of Bradley’s death. Four social workers
were prosecuted for negligently handling the
case, but only the main caseworker, Margaret Barber, was convicted, for disregarding a report from a psychologist who had warned that the
Coes were unfit parents. The publicity shed light
on problems within Florida’s child-protective
services agency, including severe understaffing,
and led to new laws that emphasize keeping children
safe over keeping families together and that
also increase funding for more social workers. A
Florida appellate court later overturned Barber’s
felony conviction but left standing a misdemeanor
conviction for failing to report child
abuse.

In 1997, a controversial court decision led to
a new legal concept: abuse of an unborn child.
Traditionally, courts have refused to hold a
woman who causes injuries to her own fetus
criminally liable for the injuries. But in August
1977, the Supreme Court of South Carolina
affirmed the criminal conviction of a woman
whose crack cocaine usage while pregnant
caused the fetus to be born with cocaine in its
system, (Whitner v. State, 328 S.C. 1, 492 S.E. 2d
777 [1997]). By regarding the fetus as a person,
the 3–2 majority concluded that the mother was
guilty of criminal child neglect. In January 2003,
the state court revisited its holding in Whitner
when it voted 3–2 to uphold the 12-year sentence
of a woman who had been convicted
under the state’s homicide-by-child-abuse law
after her cocaine use had resulted in a stillbirth.
(State v. McKnight, 353 S.C. 238, 577 S.E. 2d 456
[2003]).

In early 2002, a major child-abuse scandal
involving priests shook the Catholic Church.
Although child-abuse litigation against priests is
hardly new, the public was shocked by the revelation
that senior church officials had covered
up the facts about widespread abuse. Beginning
with allegations against church officials in Massachusetts,
the scandal swiftly became national in
scope. By year’s end, 432 U.S. priests had
resigned; at least 1,205 more had been accused
of child sex abuse; church officials paid hundreds
of millions of dollars to settle victims’ lawsuits;
and seven grand jury probes continued
nationwide.

At the epicenter of the scandal was Bostonbased
Cardinal Bernard F. Law. Following the
molestation conviction of former priest John
Geoghan in January 2002, it emerged that Law
had known of Geoghan’s abuse during the 1980s
yet had merely reassigned him to a new parish.
More abuse ensued and ultimately led to over
$10 million in settlements with victims.
As fresh allegations emerged throughout the
year, Law came under bitter public rebuke for
allegedly shielding abusive priests from scrutiny,
footing their legal bills, and either allowing them
to remain on the job or reassigning them to new,
unsuspecting parishes. Critics charged that such
policies failed to protect children. With church
attendance and donations reportedly in decline,
the U.S. Conference of Bishops responded by
instituting a policy requiring bishops to report
abuse allegations to civil authorities. The church
also began cleaning house: Following a meeting
with the Pope, Law resigned in December 2002.
With most investigations continuing in
2003, grand juries probed possible criminal
actions by church officials in Massachusetts,
New York, Philadelphia, Phoenix, St. Louis, Los
Angeles, and Cincinnati. Even with Law and
seven bishops under subpoena, and with evidence
of what was called an elaborate cover-up,
Massachusetts attorney general Thomas Reilly
dampened expectations for a criminal prosecution,
due to barriers under state law to holding a
superior liable for the actions of a subordinate.
In New York, which concluded its probe in February
2003, no charges were brought because the
five-year STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS had expired.
But grand jurors there issued a blistering 181-
page report alleging that church officials had
protected 58 sexually abusive priests and that
they had intimidated victims in order to prevent legal action. The New York archdiocese denied
the allegations.

Legislation at the state and federal levels
continues to change to meet the goal of protecting
children from abuse and neglect while protecting
families from the damage of false
accusations.

FURTHER READINGS
Ahearn, James. 2003. “Quantifying Priestly Abuse.” The
Record (January 15).
Bayles, Fred. 2002. “Seven Grand Juries Examine Bishops.”
USA Today (June 20).
Cooperman, Alan. 2003. “N.Y. Grand Jury Faults Diocese on
Handling of Sexual Abuse.” Washington Post (February
11).
Ferdinand, Pamela. 2002. “Archdiocese Agrees to Report Past
Sex Abuse Allegations.”Washington Post (January 25).
Lavoie, Denise. 2002. “Boston Cardinal Bernard Law, Other
Bishops Subpoenaed to Testify by Grand Jury.” AP
Worldstream (December 13).
Moore, Jill D. 1995. “Charting a Course between Scylla and
Charybdis: Child Abuse Registries and Procedural Due
Process.” North Carolina Law Review 73.
Simpson, Victor L. 2002. “Boston’s Cardinal Law Resigns
After Months of Public Outrage That He Failed to Protect
Children.” AP Worldstream (December 13).
Zoll, Rachel. 2002. “Boston Scandal Leads Other U.S. Catholic
Dioceses to Open up About Sex Abuse.” AP Worldstream
(March 6).

CROSS-REFERENCES
Parent and Child.