The Avery Statute

Immutable Circumstance. The creation of a “tag” added to a criminal charge much like a special circumstance. “Special circumstance being an action of the accused or conditions under which the crime was committed.” The immutable circumstance would be unchangeable over time or unable to be changed when a criminal charge pertains to a victim under the age of 13. It is actionable when the accused committed a crime of abuse, malice, endangerment, and or neglect that was either felonious in nature or a secondary charge of similarity. The immutable circumstance tag would adhere to that criminal charge. This tag’s immutable construct would define that the accused be prohibited from reunifying to the said victim through legal interaction by any entity designed to do such.

Protocol modification via C.P.S. & Local Court Systems

    1. Part A: Periodic Medical Assessments post-reunification. P.M.A. Consists of random forensic, radiology, medical, & all other necessary assessments be performed once reunification has taken place. The minimum testing period being 24 months post-reunification with one assessment performed within each 6 months of that period. All P.M.A. will include any & all individuals who have had historical markers of abuse by way of criminal convictions, charges, and or under investigations at any time throughout reunification or its preparations. Child protection workers, legal guardians, and custodial parents must concede to this inclusion. The contracted examination would be mandated and governed by the State, with testing concluded by authorized medical personnel only. Any findings will then be reported by the medical personnel directly to local authorities pending criminal investigations. Upon written notice, all involved will have a 48-hour window to submit the child(ren) for testing. If there is a failure to appear, CPS & or law enforcement will extract the child for testing.
  1. Part B: The Right to Immediate Medical Response Testing. This newly created Rule could prevent ongoing maltreatment when there are signs of suspicious, reoccurring injuries, and or mental declines in a child—byways authorize and mandate placement parents to have the child evaluated if there are any indicators of abuse. During assessments, the parental party would lose their visitations until the allegations are confirmed or denied. Under this new Rule, placement parents would be seen as mandated reporters and would have the right to I.M.R.T. screenings without permission from any case party. However, case parties shall be given all findings via health professionals. This screening would be non-negotiable by any case party. If these parties negotiated such testing, it could taint the results. Like any rape case, these examinations are imperative where the collection of evidence is essential for people’s welfare while identifying the person(s) who violated them. Therefore, this testing would play a vital role in a child’s safety when integrated with investigations of a party already suspected of abuse. As long as there are substantiated findings supporting accusations, placement parents will not adhere to scrutiny.

A Notation to C.A.S.A. It would be of great importance to include a program dedicated to placement parents on a volunteer basis. It would allow these participants to become legal mandated reporters observed by the courts as it would also teach them how to identify and advocate for abused children.