Because there is a statute making the proceedings in Kentucky juvenile cases confidential I am not at liberty to discuss any particular case or reveal anything that could identify a child or the proceedings in a Family Court case. In otherwords, the public is prevented from seeing what is going on.
But I'd like to ask you this: suppose a Kentucky judge has, behind these closed doors, made these ruling:
Based solely upon the claim by a social worker that an anonymous caller accused two Kentucky parents of smoking marijuana in the presence of their children suppose the judge ordered both parents to submit to a blood test within 24 hours and to give statements to the government about their home life.
It is quite clear in the law that a blood test is a search and a seizure. It is also quite clear that before a search can be conducted there must be presented probable cause that a crime is being committed. And it is also quite clear that an anonymous tip cannot alone form the requisite probable cause to order a search.
It is also the right of every citizen to remain silent, that is no person can be compelled to become a witness against himself, in other words be forced to give a statement to a government official.
But suppose a Kentucky judge ordered two citizens to submit to a blood test and give statements to government officials in a juvenile case behind closed doors in which the officials admitted under oath that the results of the blood test and/or the statments could expose the parents to criminal charges.
By what power would this judge be acting? The answer is simply this: the power to punish the citizens for contempt if they do not comply, putting them in jail for up to six months, all behind the closed doors and out of view of the public under the protective cloak of the juvenile court confidentiality statutes.
The Kentucky Child Protective Services has been under close scrutiny for some time and has been the subject of at least one heated legislative hearing earlier this year.
And as a lawyer I can tell you that this agency of the government feels quite at ease intruding into the lives of ordinary citizens under the guise of "protecting children" when in fact these agencies themselves all around the country, and in Kentucky have had some serious questions raised about their ability to protect children in the past.
It should be of concern to every liberty loving Kentuckian that the rights of citizens not be violated and that the Kentucky Cabinet For Health and Family Services operating as a government agency be constrained by the Constitution rather than be permitted to engage in their intrusive behavior by judges operating behind closed doors and out of public view.
My clients are advised to maintain their right to remain silent, sign nothing, I Mirandize them because the Cabinet won't. And when the worker shows up with law enforcement they're advised to not let them enter the home - tell all they have an attorney and they'll not speak to them. The threat that "if you won't cooperate we'll take your kids" is powerful, at least as threatening as depriving one of freedom. The failure to protect those individuals' rights in the same fashion is offensive.
Posted by: Bill Adkins | November 13, 2013 at 05:47 AM