It is an accepted principle that a parent has a constitutionally protected interest in the custody and care of his or her child. Â This interest does have exceptions, especially when the child may be in immediate or apparent danger. This is when child protection services gets involved. Crucial to every child protection investigation is to establish the facts and circumstances of the case. When these are presented to the court at a dependency hearing, the evidence may become proof.
The best professional judgment of child protection workers may, in hindsight, be wrong. Â For this and other reasons, child protection workers usually have some level of immunity from prosecution.1 Â When individual government officials are sued for monetary damages they generally are granted either absolute or qualified immunity. The United States Supreme Court has stated that qualified immunity is the norm, absolute immunity is the exception.2
Should that immunity disappear when, in their official capacities as child protection workers, they make knowingly inaccurate or false statements which result in the wrongful removal of a child? Â California law provides for public employee immunity from liability for an injury caused by the employee instituting or prosecuting any judicial or administrative proceeding within … Read More... “Is There Legal Immunity for Social Workers Who Lie?”