In previous appearances, Daddy Justice has presented the Commissioners with complaints regarding the use of protection from abuse orders (PFAs), which are imposed twice as often in Lancaster County than in York County; and regarding the staffing of the County’s Domestic Relations Office, which is 92% female.

Following the group’s presentation at the previous Commissioners Meeting, Martin requested that speakers who described personal grievances with Lancaster’s Domestic Relations Office provide him with their complaints in written form. Vonderheide, during the August 26 meeting, indicated suspicion regarding Martin’s request: “It is my understanding, in my experience, that while the Commissioners and government officials will look out to defend all the action of their employees and agencies, if we make one misstatement on there, that’s what they’re looking for.”

Commissioner Dennis Stuckey sought to rebut Vonderheide’s implication—that, in Stuckey’s words, “Commissioner Martin asked for information so that we could circle the wagons.” Stuckey asserted that Martin’s interest, first and foremost, is in the well-being of the County’s citizens: “Believe me, no one is more passionate about working with things and seeing that people are treated fairly than Commissioner Martin.”

In his comments, Martin was careful to recognize the sensitive balance of power in County Government. For instance, Martin asserted, the Commissioners would not hold the authority to enter a Domestic Relations office and demand the release of documents and confront their staff. “They aren’t our employees,” he said.

As a model for the Commissioners’ potential for influence in these matters, Martin looked to their recent efforts to reduce the prison budget by adjusting corrections policies and procedures. The Commissioners had no authority to order the introduction of reforms such as on-site hearings, work release expansions, and an expedited judicial process; however, Martin explained, the Commissioners did bring together the DA and the President Judge to discuss the potential of such practices.

Martin will take a similar approach with the issues discussed by Daddy Justice: “I’d like to take that same type of relationship that we’ve had looking at changes in the criminal side of things…and having those same kinds of dialogues with those same entities in regard to the issues that have been brought to us regarding PFAs and Domestic Relations.”

Martin said that he has already been compiling a file of citizen complaints for discussion and will arrange a meeting when Stedman returns from vacation.

Looking at a predominantly female roster of case workers and arbitrators, the group “demanded” that the office implement affirmative action hiring practices to bring more men into the process.

Noting that 94% of DR employees are female, Vonderheide identified this as a root cause for a variety of alleged inequities set forth by this office, including free attorneys for women only and unreasonable child support requirements based upon a broadly estimated “earning potential.” Vonderheide cited the story of one man whose support payments were based on a $400,000 earning potential, even after his yearly income had dropped to around $60,000. Vonderheide said that, if this man were to fall behind in payments, he could have his driver’s license suspended, his bank account frozen, or even be put in jail.

Vonderheide presented an affirmative action program as the solution to problems within DR: “I demand…that the Domestic Relations office engage in affirmative action and, under the basis of established case law, hire only men for any present or future employment positions until the employee base in the Domestic Relations office properly represents the local community demographics.”

A man named Paul Roland also spoke to the Commissioners about his experience with the DR office. According to Roland, after being told by an old girlfriend that she had given birth to his child, he approached the DR to request a paternity test, acting as the plaintiff. However, Roland claimed, once the mother entered in the process, he found himself switched into the role of defendant—largely due to what Roland described as a misleading round of paperwork: “In one swift move, they got me to cancel my complaint, and now I was the defendant,” Roland said.

Another man, Michael Kane, also addressed the Commissioners, and emphasized the legal and financial threat that these DR actions could bring to the County: “Can you imagine the possibility of class action liability? And can you imagine the possibility of qui tam recovery of moneys to this County that’s going to make this [office] building look like child’s play in terms of cash. This is not an issue that can just be brushed aside, because this is a mounting class action liability. You guys have to address this for the good of the taxpayers.”

Bonnie Miller, a member of the public who often attends the Commissioners Meetings, recounted a recent visit to a Lancaster family courtroom. Miller said, in her observation, misplaced priorities led to negligence and inequities similar to what Vonderheide and other men described: “Nobody cared about the children. It was about the husband and the wife; the husband was the bad guy, the husband caused all the problems.”

Commissioner Scott Martin expressed interest in the complaints, and asked that the men who spoke of particular grievances to submit them to him in written form for further consideration.

_______________________

Also at the meeting, the Commissioners approved a grant application for additional State funding for operations of the County’s future Mental Health Court. Teri Miller-Landon, Program Director for Lancaster’s Special Offenders Services, explained that the $195,726 would be used to cover personnel costs, psychiatric evaluations for program eligibility, and housing support staff.

The Court, which is expected to open around January, will provide specialized judicial services for offenders with mental illness. Commissioner and Prison Board Chair Scott Martin commended the program: “Lancaster County has done a great job, and is known state-wide for its specialty courts. Looking at alternatives to dealing with recidivism to lessen the impact on our prison. If anyone’s had a chance to see Drug Court, and the momentum it’s built, it’s truly something that is moving in the right direction. And we all know that drug and alcohol addiction and mental health issues play a tremendous role in criminality in many cases.”

Commissioner Craig Lehman also praised the treatment-oriented approach: “For many of the folks with mental illness that end up in the criminal justice system, that’s the last place they need. They don’t need incarceration. They need treatment. Having a mental health court really puts the emphasis where it needs to be…”

PFAs are frequently submitted by women alleging spousal abuse; the orders can effectively remove the alleged abuser from the home, demand financial support, and cut off communication between the alleged abuser and children. According to Ben Vonderheide, the leading voice of Daddy Justice, “There is such widespread abuse of PFA system in Lancaster County that legitimate victims are left in limbo….”

Vonderheide contended that, due to an excessively flexible reporting process, PFAs are frequently abused by women as a means to easily obtain custody rights to children without providing sufficient opportunity for the father to plead his case. According to Vonderheide, “Police officers I’ve spoken with have admitted off the record that, in their field experience, as much as 80-90% of these PFAs are unwarranted.”

Lancaster County, in particular, surpasses other areas in its frequency of PFA submissions. According to Vonderheide, Lancaster County reported 1,300 PFAs in 2008, while York County reported only 671: “Would you content that your constituency is twice as violent and dangerous as the citizens of York?,” he asserted.

Manor Township resident Jesse Storm also spoke during the presentation. Storm told the story of a recent PFA, issued against a father on the basis of claims that largely dissipated under later investigation. The man in this case was removed from his home and separated from his three-year-old daughter until a new custody order could be formed. The woman—who was automatically granted custody and financial support—later admitted to having been planning a divorce prior to filing the PFA.

Vonderheide requested that the Commissioners “initiate a survey to explore efficiencies and best practices by others in the judicial court system in the state of PA, beginning with York, Pennsylvania.” Storm recommended that the County adopt an emergency protection order (EPO) process for cases of abuse. Such a process, already implemented in other states and counties, would involve police and hospital officials in the early stages of filing a protection order.

Commissioner Scott Martin acknowledged the group’s concerns, referring to their claims as “information that I was not aware of.” “I think we always should be willing to look into things,” Martin said.

For more information about Daddy Justice, click here.