Connect with us

Vermont

Vermont ACLU claims state conducts 'surveillance and brazen intervention' into Vermonters’ pregnancies – VTDigger

Published

on

Vermont ACLU claims state conducts 'surveillance and brazen intervention' into Vermonters’ pregnancies – VTDigger


Updated at 9:34 a.m.

The Vermont Department for Children and Families went to extraordinary and illegal lengths to remove a child from its mother’s custody, aided by an internal program that monitors the pregnancies of multiple Vermonters, a new lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont alleges.

The 30-page complaint, which was filed Wednesday afternoon in the Lamoille County Superior Court’s civil division, accuses the department of secretly tracking the pregnancies of multiple Vermonters that it deems “high-risk” with an internal calendar, without their knowledge or consent. 

The ACLU’s suit focuses on the case of one mother, identified only as A.V., in which the Department for Children and Families — citing concerns about A.V.’s mental health — allegedly used confidential medical information to secure custody of her daughter before she had even given birth. The department also allegedly sought a court order for the hospital to perform a caesarean section while the mother was in labor, all without A.V.’s knowledge.

Advertisement

DCF removed the infant from her mother’s custody immediately after she was born, according to the suit, only to have the child returned by court order months later.

“No court ever found that A.V. lacked parental capacity,” the suit reads, alleging that DCF did not cite any formal mental health evaluation of A.V. to support its actions.

In an interview, ACLU senior staff attorney Harrison Stark said the case was extremely concerning. 

“This case is so egregious in so many ways that it should really shock the conscience of any Vermonter who cares about personal autonomy or reproductive liberty,” he said. 

Harrison Stark, an attorney for the ACLU of Vermont. File photo by Glenn Russell/VTDigger

Two New York legal entities, the nonprofit Pregnancy Justice and the law firm Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel, as well as Middlebury attorney Sarah Star, are also representing the plaintiff with the ACLU.

Advertisement

The complaint names DCF as a defendant, as well as Morrisville’s Copley Hospital and Lund, a family services nonprofit based in South Burlington. The latter entities, according to the suit, improperly provided DCF with confidential information about A.V.

Chris Winters, the commissioner of DCF, said in a text message Thursday morning that he had not reviewed the suit and had no comment.

Wayne Stockbridge, the chief administrative officer of Copley Hospital, said in a brief interview Thursday morning that he had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment on it. Ken Schatz, Lund’s interim CEO, said in a text Thursday morning that Lund had not received the suit.  

‘No legal mechanism’

A.V., now 36, became pregnant with her first child in 2021, according to the ACLU’s lawsuit. The ACLU declined VTDigger’s request to speak with A.V.

Around the beginning of her third trimester, the suit reads, A.V. temporarily moved from her Elmore apartment to Charter House, a homeless shelter in Middlebury.

Advertisement

In January 2022, Charter House’s executive director spoke with DCF staffers about A.V. and expressed concerns about her mental health, according to the suit. Based on that conversation, the complaint said, a DCF caseworker conducted an “assessment” of A.V., interviewing and collecting confidential records from staff at Copley Hospital, where A.V. planned to deliver her baby, and Lund, where she had received prenatal counseling. 

Contrary to Vermont law, that assessment was done without A.V.’s knowledge or participation, according to the lawsuit. DCF allegedly collected confidential medical information during that assessment and concluded that there were “significant concerns” with A.V.’s mental health.

Crucially, that conclusion did not draw on a professional mental health evaluation, according to the lawsuit.

Having identified A.V. as a concern, DCF was keeping tabs on her pregnancy without her knowledge or consent, the suit alleges.

Advertisement

According to DCF policy, the department may intervene in cases of illegal substance use or a “lack of parental capacity” even before the birth of a child. The policy states that the department may conduct assessments in “situations where a woman is pregnant and either parent or caretaker has a substantial history with DCF.” That assessment can take place one month before an individual’s due date or sooner if they are expected to deliver the infant earlier, per the policy. 

That policy, the ACLU argues, has no basis in law.

“There is no legal mechanism — to my knowledge, and I can’t imagine one — that allows DCF to intervene while a fetus remains in somebody’s body,” Stark said in an interview.  

How exactly DCF could know the status of someone’s pregnancy is not spelled out in its policy. But according to the ACLU’s lawsuit, DCF maintains an internal “high-risk pregnancy docket,” a calendar that it uses to track pregnancies in individuals “because DCF speculates they will be unfit parents.”

It’s unclear how many people that alleged calendar tracks.

Advertisement

“Tragically, A.V.’s experience is not unique,” the suit reads. “She is only one of many expectant Vermonters who have been ensnared in DCF’s speculative surveillance and brazen intervention into their pregnancy and birthing plans.” 

‘It just doesn’t make any sense’

On Feb. 11, 2022, when DCF learned that A.V. was in labor, the department moved swiftly to obtain custody of her child, according to the lawsuit.

While A.V. was at Copley, DCF allegedly petitioned Lamoille Superior Court’s family division for an emergency order transferring custody of the still unborn baby to the department.

The DCF caseworker argued that the order was necessary “given the significant concerns regarding A.V.’s mental state, and her ability to provide safe care for an infant,” according to a DCF affidavit cited by the ACLU’s lawsuit. That affidavit said, falsely, that the baby had already been born on February 11, according to the suit.

Copley Hospital in Morrisville on Oct. 19, 2023. Photo by Carly Berlin/VTDigger and Vermont Public

The department learned about A.V.’s labor — something that should have been confidential medical information — from medical practitioners and staff at Copley Hospital, according to the lawsuit.

Advertisement

DCF’s affidavit also allegedly argued that the department should take custody of the child because of A.V.’s history with DCF. That history, the suit said, amounted to an incident — when A.V. was 16 — of “a physical altercation” with A.V.’s father and allegations that she herself was abused by a parent.

“The logic of that is, essentially, that if you are involved in the DCF system as a teenager, as a kid, as a victim — that somehow justifies the agency’s intrusion into your choices and your parenting as an adult,” Stark said. “It just doesn’t make any sense.”

The family court granted DCF’s emergency order, transferring custody of the still-unborn child to the department, according to the lawsuit.  

The department and Copley Hospital, apparently concerned about complications from the delivery, even allegedly took the unusual step of asking the court to order A.V. to undergo emergency medical procedures — a caesarean section or a “vacuum procedure,” a practice that employs suction to help deliver an infant.

In a legal flurry that took place while A.V. was in labor, and entirely without her knowledge, DCF allegedly sought the authority, first from the Department of Mental Health and then from Lamoille Superior Court’s civil division, to force A.V. to undergo the procedure. DCF argued that she was experiencing “delusions and paranoia” — an assessment that the court expressed skepticism about, according to the ACLU’s lawsuit. 

Advertisement

But during a court hearing on the matter, according to the suit, Copley staff learned that A.V. had already agreed voluntarily to the medical procedures.

‘Violates the right to personal reproductive autonomy’

On February 12, A.V. gave birth to a healthy baby girl, named in the suit as S.V., according to the complaint. But immediately after the infant’s birth, DCF separated her from her mother and subsequently placed her in a foster home, the suit alleges. 

“A.V. was not allowed to hold — or even touch — her baby,” the lawsuit reads.

James Lyall, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont, speaks at a press conference in Montpelier on October 8, 2019. File photo by Glenn Russell/VTDigger

A.V. received a mental health screening from Lamoille County Mental Health the day she gave birth — her first professional evaluation during this whole process, according to the lawsuit. Other than a flat affect, A.V.’s mental health was judged to be normal, per the ACLU’s suit.

Five months later, after a prolonged legal tussle, a family court ordered the baby to be reunited with her mother, the complaint said.

Advertisement

The 13-count lawsuit alleges that DCF, Lund and Copley Hospital violated a raft of laws and Vermont’s constitution. 

Additionally, “DCF’s ongoing pattern and practice of unlawfully surveilling pregnant Vermonters through the ‘high-risk pregnancy docket’ or ‘calendar’ systemically violates the right to personal reproductive autonomy” that Vermonters enshrined in the state constitution in 2022, the suit alleges.  

The suit asks a judge to declare that “high-risk pregnancy docket” illegal and to halt monitoring the pregnancies of Vermonters that DCF deems risky. It also seeks an unspecified amount of damages and attorney’s fees. 





Source link

Advertisement

Vermont

Vermont postal worker allegedly threw away mail she was supposed to deliver for months

Published

on

Vermont postal worker allegedly threw away mail she was supposed to deliver for months


Crime

During a search of a dumpster where the worker allegedly discarded the mail, police found several packages and holiday cards.

A Vermont postal worker was cited and suspended for allegedly throwing away mail that was supposed to be delivered to other people, according to police.

Natasha Morisseau, 34, of North Troy, was cited on nine counts of petty larceny and five counts of unlawful mischief, Vermont State Police said in a statement. She works as a mail carrier for the town’s United States Postal Service (USPS) office.

Advertisement

Officers were first alerted to the discarded mail on the afternoon of Jan. 23, according to police. Upon finding the mail in a dumpster on Elm Street in North Troy, they determined that none of it was for that address.

Police identified Morisseau as a person of interest and learned that she was a postal employee. They confirmed that she had regularly been throwing away a small amount of mail under her care since at least October 2025, according to the statement.

After searching the dumpster and Morisseau’s mail vehicle, officers found opened and unopened packages, along with several holiday cards, one of which contained money. Morisseau was later cited Feb. 14 and is due to appear March 17 in Vermont Superior Court, police said.

Since Jan. 23, Morisseau has been suspended by USPS, and all recovered mail has been given back to them for delivery, according to the statement. The case has been forwarded to the USPS’ Inspector General for further review.

Sign up for the Today newsletter

Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Vermont

Vermont Air National Guard joins Iran campaign – The Boston Globe

Published

on

Vermont Air National Guard joins Iran campaign – The Boston Globe


On a typical day, some of the 20 stealth fighter jets based in South Burlington, Vt., take off from tiny Burlington International Airport for training runs near the northern border. In recent months, they’ve flown much farther afield.

The Vermont Air National Guard’s 158th Fighter Wing was deployed in December to the Caribbean, where it took part in the US campaign to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Shortly thereafter, the squadron joined a military buildup in and around the Middle East to prepare for US and Israeli airstrikes against Iran.

Though both deployments had been widely reported, the military remained mum about the whereabouts of Vermont’s F-35A Lightning II jets. Even Governor Phil Scott, technically the commander of the Vermont Guard, said he only knew what he’d read in the news, given that US military leaders were directing the missions.

On Monday, General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the deployments at a Pentagon press conference about the war on Iran. Caine praised National Guard members from Vermont, Wisconsin, and elsewhere.

Advertisement

“In the case of the Vermont Air National Guard and the 158th Fighter Wing, they were mobilized for Operation Absolute Resolve,” Caine said, referring to the Venezuela campaign. “And then were tasked to take their F-35As across the Atlantic instead of going home, to be prepared to support this operation” in the Middle East.

Much remains unknown about the Vermont Guard’s recent missions, including the precise role they played in Venezuela and Iran, where the jets are currently based, and how long they’ll remain.

The Guard did not immediately respond to requests for comment., Its recently elected leader, General Henry “Hank” Harder, said in a statement that the force was “proud of the dedicated and professional service of our Airmen” and pledged to support their families in the meantime.

“We will continue to carry out our commitment to these Vermont Service Members until, and long after, they return from this mission,” Harder said.

Vermont’s three-member congressional delegation, meanwhile, has praised Vermont Guard members for their service in Venezuela but has criticized President Trump’s campaigns there and in Iran, particularly absent congressional authorization.

Advertisement

“The people of our country, no matter what their political persuasion, do not want endless war,” said Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent, echoing similar remarks from Senator Peter Welch and Representative Becca Balint, both Democrats. “We must not allow Trump to force us into another senseless war. No war with Iran.”


Paul Heintz can be reached at paul.heintz@globe.com. Follow him on X @paulheintz.





Source link

Continue Reading

Vermont

In Vermont, small town meetings grapple with debate on big issues

Published

on

In Vermont, small town meetings grapple with debate on big issues


Tuesday is town meeting day in Vermont. Municipalities in New England and elsewhere are increasingly grappling with major national and international issues at the local level.

JOSEPH PREZIOSO/Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

JOSEPH PREZIOSO/Getty Images

If you haven’t lived in certain New England towns, it can be hard to fathom their centuries-old direct democracy-style Town Meetings, where everyday residents vote on mundane town business such as funding for schools, snow plows and road repairs.

These days, voters are also being asked to weigh in on national and international issues, for example, demanding the de-funding of ICE, and condemning “the unprovoked attack and start of an illegal and immoral war against Iran.” It’s all fueling a separate – and fierce– debate on what towns ought to be debating.

Advertisement

“When you have people sleepwalking into an authoritarian regime, it’s up to us to sound the alarm,” insists Dan Dewalt, an activist in Newfane, Vermont, one of several communities where residents scrambled to draft a resolution against the Iran war in time for their annual Town Meeting on Tuesday.

Local resolutions are a uniquely effective tactic, activists and experts say, and they’re being used increasingly around New England and beyond, especially as national politics have become so polarized.

“People feel isolated, helpless and hopeless. And when you hear about other people who are just like you taking a stand and representing something that you believe, that gives you not only hope, but it gives you power,” said Dewalt.

Several other Vermont towns will be considering resolutions Tuesday calling for the removal of the president and vice president “for crimes against the U.S. Constitution,” while many others will vote on a pledge to ” to end all support of Israel’s apartheid policies, settler colonialism, and military occupation and aggression.”

A similar divestment resolution passed 46 -15 in Newfane last year, following hours of heated argument over the plight of Palestinians, the security of Israelis, the “inflammatory” language of the resolution – and whether such problems half-a-world away even belong on the agenda of the tiny town of just about 1,650.

Advertisement

“It’s a Town Meeting for town issues,” Newfane resident Walter Hagadorn declared at a recent Select Board meeting, where residents pressed board members to block any future resolutions not directly related to town business.

“You shouldn’t be subject to hours and hours of people virtue signaling” and trying to “hijack Town Meeting,” Hagadorn said.

Others agreed, suggesting activists host a debate on their issues at another time and place, or stage a rally or protest instead.

But Select Board member Katy Johnson-Aplin pushed back, saying that would not have the same impact.

“It doesn’t work the same way,” Johnson-Aplin said. It’s only when the issue is formally taken up at a Town Meeting that “it goes in the newspaper and it’s recorded that the town of Newfane has agreed to have this conversation.”

Advertisement

University of Pennsylvania political science professor Daniel Hopkins has been watching the growing movement of local communities taking a stand on issues far beyond town lines.

“This is a trend we’re seeing increasingly across the 50 states and in a variety of ways but I think it has taken on a new and potentially more concerning edge,” Hopkins said. “I worry that we are in an attention-grabbing, sensation-rewarding media environment in which the kinds of issues that engage us at a national level may further polarize states and localities and make it harder for them to build meaningful coalitions on other issues.”

Indeed, in Newfane, the resolution regarding Israel became so divisive that some residents decided not to even come to last year’s Town Meeting, according to Select Board vice-chair Marion Dowling.

In Burlington, where a similar resolution was proposed, City Council President Ben Traverse says things got so heated, he and his family were getting harassing phone calls and even death threats. Burlington city councilors voted in January to block the question from going to a popular vote.Vermont has a history of “big issue” resolutions, from the push for a Nuclear Arms Freeze in the 1980’s, to calls to ban genetically modified foods in 2003. Dewalt, the Newfane activist, was behind several of them, including calls to impeach then-president George W. Bush in 2006, which got him invited to talk about it on network TV shows, and quoted in The New York Times.

“I can guarantee you if I stood up on my soap box and made a declaration of the exact same wording, I wouldn’t have had anybody asking me questions about it, he said. “We’re not pie-in-the-sky here about the power of our Newfane Town Meetings, but our actions have consistently had an impact.”

Advertisement

But opponents say activists overstate the impact of their resolutions, and their victory. They say it’s disingenuous, for example, to claim the town of Newfane supported the resolution against Israel, when the winning majority of 46 people was less than 3% of town residents.

“I feel like they’re using the town as a vehicle for their personal messages and that bothers me,” says Newfane resident Cris White. “It’s so junior high.”

Traverse, the Burlington City Council president, also takes issue with what he calls the “inflammatory” language of that resolution.

“The question, as presented, approaches this issue in a one-sided and leading way,” Traverse says.

In Vermont, any registered voter can get a resolution on the Town Meeting agenda by collecting signatures from 5% of their town’s voters. While elected city or town officials have the authority to allow or block the resolution, there is no process in place to vet or edit language.

Advertisement

Traverse says it would behoove city leaders and voters to require an official review to ensure that language is fair and neutral, just as many states do with ballot questions. Traverse says he’s not opposed to contentious, big issue resolutions being put to local voters, but the language must be clear and even-handed.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending