ILNews

Child Advocates has been the voice of children for 30 years

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

“In that court hearing you’ll have a mother and her attorney, you’ll have a father and his attorney, you’ll have a DCS (Department of Child Services) caseworker and their attorney. The child is rarely ever in court. Without a guardian ad litem or CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocate) there’s nobody in that courtroom speaking for that child.”

It is thus that Barry Chambers, chief counsel for Child Advocates, describes the role his organization plays in cases of child abuse and neglect. As CASA for Marion County, Child Advocates is celebrating its 30th anniversary, having assisted more than 75,000 children since its inception. Today, the organization advocates for every child involved in a Marion County abuse or neglect case – more than 5,000 annually – with the help of more than 400 volunteers.

il-child-advocates03-15col.jpg Child Advocates is celebrating its 30th anniversary in 2012. Staff members include, left to right: Cynthia Dean, attorney; LaDonna Wattley, volunteer director; Cynthia Booth, executive director; and Barry Chambers, chief legal counsel. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Long time coming

In 1982, the Indianapolis chapter of the National Council of Jewish Women saw a need for greater community involvement in and information about children involved in cases of abuse and neglect. Using a model created by a judge in Seattle, the group trained volunteers from the Junior League of Indianapolis to become the “eyes and ears of the court” so more informed decisions could be made about children in these cases.

In the beginning, the organization only could handle a limited number of cases, yet word spread and Child Advocates and the CASA program continued to grow. In 2005, the Indiana Legislature changed an earlier statute that said every child should have a guardian ad litem or CASA to say every child shall have a guardian ad litem or CASA.

“At that point we were supposed to represent all children, but there was no new funding attached to that,” said Cynthia K. Booth, executive director of Child Advocates. “In 2010, there was a Court of Appeals case that said the county should be filling that gap, so since that time through a bipartisan effort … the county came up with a way to support our services in Children in Need of Services cases.”

Other programs have been introduced by the organization, including a custody program to advocate for children involved in paternity, divorce or custody cases. In these instances, judges will call on Child Advocates if they feel the child needs an advocate.

CASA connection

Recruiting and training CASA volunteers is a key role Child Advocates plays in assisting at-risk kids. Word-of-mouth is the organization’s primary means of enlisting new volunteers.

“Our volunteers come from all walks of life,” said LaDonna Wattley, volunteer program director. “It’s a really nice mix of people. You can have a therapist, you can have an attorney, somebody else might be the cake decorator at Kroger or a teacher. In class you’re all volunteers. You’re finding out from the child what they really would like to have happen.”

The organization is in need of 300 additional volunteers to help with abuse and neglect cases in Marion County. Training covers the professional and emotional side of being a CASA.

children“My standard quote is that ‘Being a CASA is heartwork,’” Wattley said. “We don’t sugar-coat. It’s being really sure that people understand their role. Our volunteers really are advocating, they’re monitoring and they’re reporting to the judge. We talk a lot about the realities of the system … and we try to make them understand there’s only so much you can do.”

A child’s eyes and ears

Nancy Englert, a project attorney for Ice Miller, has been a volunteer CASA since 2008. She’s advocated for 30 children from all races, backgrounds and circumstances. Case results are as varied as the kids for which she advocates.

“The best kinds of cases are when parents take responsibility for what happens and are motivated to do what the judge tells them to do,” Englert said. “On the other hand, I’ve worked in situations where the parents just don’t seem to do what they’re supposed to do for a variety of reasons.”

She cited mental illness and drug abuse – which often go hand in hand – as well as alcohol abuse, domestic violence, lack of education and poverty as reasons why parents don’t cooperate with a judge’s orders.

“Not all of those things are prevalent in all cases,” she said.

Englert, like all CASA volunteers, works closely with a guardian ad litem from Child Advocates. She meets with the child as well as the caregiver, the DCS caseworker, therapists, teachers, social workers and physicians to discuss their thoughts on what’s best for the child. From these meetings, she compiles advocacy reports on the child’s behalf. These, along with reports from others involved in the case, are submitted to the judge, who takes each into consideration when making decisions about the child’s future.

“It’s the children who have the least control, because they’re children,” Englert said. “They may be the most vulnerable people in the world because not only are they children but they don’t have their parents with them to be their advocates. It’s a really big responsibility, but I can’t think of any volunteer role that would ever be more meaningful.”•
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT