Travesty of justice
The
state of Florida against Rafael Izquierdo
By
Max J. Castro
Florida’s
Department of Children and Families (DCF) is better known for its
lethargy than its fierceness. Yet, when it comes to fighting Rafael
Izquierdo, a Cuban father who came to the United States to regain
custody of his 5-year-old daughter, DCF is suddenly displaying a zeal
and determination that the agency has lacked when performing such
basic duties as keeping track of children under its own care. What
explains this novel ferocity?
Unfortunately,
what has been transpiring in a Miami court room in recent weeks is
not evidence of a new and improved DCF but of something much more
troubling, the spectacle of a state agency concocting a case against
a parent on the basis of political and ideological considerations.
This
is a strong assertion, but the nature of the arguments DCF lawyers
have used to impugn the father’s fitness as a parent and their
stated intention to keep fighting to keep the little girl in the
custody of the Miami-based foster parents even
if the judge rules Izquierdo is fit to have custody
of his daughter, support it.
Indeed,
lawyers for DCF have laid out such a far-fetched case that the
presiding judge, Jeri B. Cohen, has at times been unable to contain…
The
state of Florida against Rafael Izquierdo
By
Max J. Castro Read Spanish Version
majcastro@gmail.com
Florida’s
Department of Children and Families (DCF) is better known for its
lethargy than its fierceness. Yet, when it comes to fighting Rafael
Izquierdo, a Cuban father who came to the United States to regain
custody of his 5-year-old daughter, DCF is suddenly displaying a zeal
and determination that the agency has lacked when performing such
basic duties as keeping track of children under its own care. What
explains this novel ferocity?
Unfortunately,
what has been transpiring in a Miami court room in recent weeks is
not evidence of a new and improved DCF but of something much more
troubling, the spectacle of a state agency concocting a case against
a parent on the basis of political and ideological considerations.
This
is a strong assertion, but the nature of the arguments DCF lawyers
have used to impugn the father’s fitness as a parent and their
stated intention to keep fighting to keep the little girl in the
custody of the Miami-based foster parents even
if the judge rules Izquierdo is fit to have custody
of his daughter, support it.
Indeed,
lawyers for DCF have laid out such a far-fetched case that the
presiding judge, Jeri B. Cohen, has at times been unable to contain
her disbelief and dismay at the state’s arguments, most of which
she dismissed in the course of shredding the state’s case.
Cohen’s
statements in court make plain the unfair nature of DCF’s treatment
of Izquierdo. According to a Miami
Herald account, at one
point in the trial, “Cohen said in nearly 10 years of presiding
over child-welfare cases she had never seen DCF attorneys request
that a parent forever lose his or her right to raise a child unless
the parent had failed, again and again, to meet the requirements of a
court-ordered parenting plan.” In fact, far from wanting to abandon
his child, the record indicates Izquierdo conducted about 50 phone
calls and made 43 visits with his daughter after arriving in Miami to
fight for custody.
The
state seemed to spare no effort to besmirch Izquierdo, a Cuban pig
and malanga farmer who wants to take the child to live with his
family in Cuba, including grilling him about his sexual history. It
was one of many parts of the DCF case that failed to persuade Judge
Cohen, who asked regarding the sexual interrogation: “Is there a
point in all this?”
As
this is being written, the case has not been decided. Cohen has said
she will rule by the end of this week. But, incredibly, that may not
be the end. The Miami Herald
reports that “even if the judge rules that Izquierdo is a fit
parent, DCF attorneys said they will ask her to order that the girl
remain permanently with the Coral Gables foster family that has
raised her the past 18 months.”
This
is the final proof that this is a case of such brazen misuse of state
power that it deserves a thorough legal and journalistic
investigation. How did this travesty come about? Who made the
decisions and why?
If
anyone emerges as a hero from this entire sad, sorry affair, it may
be Judge Cohen, who has spoken the truth bluntly and who has seen
through the state’s many obfuscations. Could there be a more
damning indictment of the conduct of the state of Florida in this
case than the judge’s own statement uttered toward the end of the
trial? This is the Miami
Herald’ account:
“The
United States is reluctant to repatriate a child to a communist
country,” Cohen said, adding that she believes state workers might
have acted differently had her father lived anywhere but Cuba. “We
don’t need to mince words here.”
She
also suggested the state was being “disingenuous” by claiming DCF
was not trying to strip Izquierdo of his right to raise the little
girl. DCF has said it doesn’t want to terminate Izquierdo’s parental
rights but simply to have the foster family maintain guardianship
over her. The judge said that given the state of relations between
the United States and Cuba, the father was unlikely to see his
daughter again if he returns to Cuba without her. “Just because you
are asking for a permanent guardianship and not a [termination of
parental rights] doesn’t mean, in fact and in theory, that it is not
equivalent to a termination,” Cohen said. “You’re wrong if you
think I don’t know that.”
