The New York City's Administration for Children Services filed a petition of neglect against Tanyan Mc. for hitting her son in the face with the heel of her shoe, giving him a bloody nose. They also removed him from her custody. Due to this incident, ACS said that she had also derivatively neglected her other child.
Now what is surprising is that Child Protective Services failed to confront that sometimes children endanger their parents. This is particularly, although not exclusively, true of women who feel or who are threatened by overgrown teen sons.
The Queens Family Court Judge, Edwina G. Richardson-Mendelson, agreed with ACS.
Tanya however believed that what she did was not neglectful, so she appealed to the Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department.
The court described the incident between Tanya and her son in the following words:
"The finding of neglect in this case is based on a single physical confrontation between the mother and her adolescent son, Corey Mc. (hereinafter the son), who at that time was 15 years old and 5 feet 10 inches tall. The evidence in the record established that the mother and the son had a troubled relationship. In this particular incident, the mother confronted the son over what she believed to be a specific instance of inconsiderate behavior, after which she left his room and closed the door. The son came out of his room and directed a stream of profanity-laced invective at the mother, who attempted several times to withdraw from the confrontation. When the son continued his verbal abuse, the mother either punched or slapped him in the face. The incident escalated further, and the son knocked his mother down and continued to curse at her; she got up and hit him on the face with the heel of her shoe, bloodying his nose. The mother then immediately called the police to seek medical attention for the son."
The Supreme Court sided with Tanya on November 24, 2009, declaring that the neglect finding was not supported by the preponderance of the evidence.
The court stated, "Given the age and size of the son, the provocation, and the dynamics of the incident, the mother's acts, which, as she readily acknowledged, were not an appropriate response to her son's conduct, did not constitute neglect."
Just a old fashion beat down, by any means necessary!
To see more of Child support the things you never hear click here