Cleared of child abuse, but unable to clear name

[alp227]

It has been nine years since Craig and Wendy Humphries were arrested by a Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy and listed as child abusers on California's state index, based on a false report filed by Craig Humphries' teenage daughter.

The charges were soon dropped, and a judge said the couple were innocent. Nearly two years ago, they won a landmark victory in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals declaring California's child-abuse reporting system unconstitutional because it offered no process for wrongly accused people to clear their names.

Yet, remarkably little has changed. The Humphrieses remain listed as reported child abusers, along with more than 800,000 others, on California's central index. The state has established no appeal procedure.

Get breaking news alerts delivered to your mobile phone. Text BREAKING to 52669.

Next month the U.S. Supreme Court will hear L.A. County's appeal of the 9th Circuit decision that it must pay $58,000 to the couple's lawyers, though the outcome is not likely to help solve the their predicament because the index is maintained by the state.

But the case will shine a spotlight on what advocates for falsely accused parents say is a nationwide problem. Though California is said to be the most difficult state for such people to deal with, experts say it is costly and time-consuming to have a name removed in many others as well.

"This is a national issue," said Diane Redleaf, a lawyer in Chicago. She said millions of people are listed in state systems. "It has become a nightmare because" abuse reports "are used for employment screening, but the information is often not accurate. But at least in Illinois, you have a right to challenge it."

Full story: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-child-abuse-court-20100930,0,7965560.story

[tsuki]

1. I thought they were confidential if proven false. nt

[happyslug]

2. The key is who DOES have access to that information

Right now that is anyone who deals with children. If part of your job is to deal with children, the employer MUST ask the state to clear you i.e. not on the list. If the state says you are on the list, than WHY you are on the list MUST be provided to see if the alleged crimes can happen at your new employment. The employer has to have that information to even think about hiring the person. The alternative is even worse, if you are on the list for any reason you can NOT be hired for such jobs.

Think about it, people who have gone to school to be teachers, what else can they do with their degree? If the person has a medical training (Doctor, Nurse etc), what jobs such people can do absolutely keeps them out of contact with children? Yes some of the testing positions can be arranged to NOT have contact with children, but not many,.

Remember the people charged with Child Abuse almost always related to some form of child care. Merely being on the list is enough to prevent them from getting any jobs. Now, this is NOT a bad situation when the person being so treated actually did the crime, but we are talking of people who NEVER did the crime but on the list for mere being accused of such crime (And often in cases where no one believed the accuser, but such accusation MUST be added anyway).

My point is that such information, to be of any value, MUST be available to those people who make decisions regarding hiring people who deal with children. That is the case in every state including California. The problem is what can be done to protect those people who did NOT commit the crime but end up on the list anyway? California has no way to remove such people from the list and that is the problem with California and any such lists.