New York Family Law Blog
In New York, parents may discipline their children, including using reasonable corporal punishment. However, when that discipline becomes excessive or causes harm, it can cross the line into child neglect or abuse under the Family Court Act. When the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) receives a report of suspected child neglect involving physical force, it can file a petition under Article 10 of the Family Court Act. In Matter of Z.V., the court was asked to decide whether a father accused of using excessive force against his child should be permitted to have a professional evaluate whether visitation should occur.
Background Facts
On May 31, 2024, ACS filed a neglect petition against the respondent father, J.V., on behalf of his 12-year-old daughter, Z.V. The allegations centered on an incident that occurred on May 22, 2024. According to the petition, the father entered the bathroom and told the child to “square up.” He then took her laptop and encouraged her to try to take it back. When she attempted to retrieve it, the father allegedly placed her in a chokehold.
The child reported that the father choked her again in the kitchen and wrestled her to the floor in the living room. She said she struggled to breathe and feared she might die. After the incident, she fled the home, went to her former school, and refused to return to her father’s care. At the Manhattan Child Advocacy Center the next day, she disclosed that her father had used similar force against her in the past when she was disrespectful or misbehaved. Observers noted bruises and scratches on her face and arms.
Z.V. received medical attention and was later released. The court granted ACS’s request to remove the child from her father’s custody. She was temporarily placed with her adult half-sister. A stay-away order of protection was issued against the father, allowing only supervised visits if the child agreed. Despite several court appearances, Z.V. consistently expressed that she did not want to visit her father. When a supervised phone call eventually took place, Z.V. reported that it did not go well and made her uncomfortable.
Question Before the Court
The father asked the court to allow a social worker to conduct a visitation assessment. He wanted the social worker to determine whether any kind of parental visitation or contact should occur and under what conditions. The court had to decide whether such an assessment was appropriate in this type of proceeding and whether it would be in the best interests of the child.
Court’s Decision
The court denied the father’s request for a visitation assessment. It found that such an assessment, typically used in custody cases, was not appropriate in a neglect case. The court also concluded that the additional evaluation would be burdensome and intrusive to the child. The court emphasized that it had enough information to determine the current visitation arrangement and did not need to rely on a third-party evaluator.
Discussion
New York law gives parents the right to visitation with their children during a pending neglect case unless the court limits that right for safety or welfare reasons. In this case, the court acknowledged that there is a presumption that visitation is generally in the best interests of the child. However, this presumption may be set aside when the evidence shows that visitation would harm the child.
Z.V. was consistent and clear that she did not want to visit her father. The court also considered her age and maturity. She was 13 years old and able to clearly explain her feelings. The court noted that although she loved her father, she was not ready to engage with him due to the trauma from the incident. She had tried to speak with him by phone but found the conversation upsetting. The court did not base its decision solely on the child’s reluctance. It also considered the father’s conduct throughout the case.
For months, Z.V. had requested therapy, but the father had not provided the required insurance information to enable ACS to arrange mental health services. Although ACS made repeated requests, the father failed to give valid insurance details. The court found that this failure showed a lack of cooperation and concern for the child’s well-being.
In addition, the court found that the father had refused to return the child’s personal belongings, despite multiple requests and a court order. It was not until January 2025—nearly eight months after the petition was filed—that the father complied. The court noted that this refusal appeared to be connected to the child’s decision not to visit him, suggesting that the father was trying to use the belongings as leverage. This behavior raised concerns about the father’s understanding of his child’s needs and his willingness to follow court orders.
The father argued that the court should not let the child make visitation decisions. He cited a case, Matter of Michael B. v. Patricia S. is 233 A.D.3d 403, 223 N.Y.S.3d 44 (App. Div. 1st Dept. 2024), where an appellate court held that judges cannot delegate visitation decisions to children or other individuals. The court rejected that argument, explaining that it was not delegating its authority. Instead, it had made its own judgment, based on evidence, that visitation at the child’s discretion was appropriate. The court had already been evaluating visitation arrangements and found that, at this time, supervised visits at the child’s discretion were in her best interests.
Conclusion
If ACS has accused you of neglect or if you are involved in a child protection investigation, it is important to understand your rights and responsibilities. Cases involving allegations of excessive discipline can have serious consequences. Contact an experienced New York child abuse and neglect lawyer at Stephen Bilkis & Associates to learn how we can help protect your parental rights and your child’s well-being.