## Facts

- A child-protective agency filed a neglect petition under the New York Family Court Act against Mr. and Mrs. Blaine concerning their children, Robert (age 11) and Anne (age 9).
- After a fact-finding hearing, the Family Court determined that the children were neglected and the matter moved to the dispositional stage, where the court would decide what order would best provide for the children’s care.
- For disposition, a psychiatrist associated with the court examined the parents and the children and prepared a written psychiatric report for the court’s use.
- The psychiatrist was a member of the court staff who regularly prepared such reports, and the judge was familiar with the psychiatrist and his qualifications from other proceedings.
- The psychiatrist did not appear at the dispositional hearing and did not testify.
- The judge questioned Mr. and Mrs. Blaine about their meetings with the psychiatrist and the psychiatrist’s interactions with the children, placing the subject matter of the report into the hearing record.
- The court received the written psychiatric report as part of the dispositional record.
- Mr. Blaine objected, arguing the report should not be considered because the psychiatrist was not present for cross-examination.
- The parents did not present rebuttal proof addressing the report’s substance.

## Issues

1. Whether, at the dispositional stage of a neglect proceeding, the Family Court may admit and consider a written psychiatric report prepared by a court-staff psychiatrist who does not testify and is not available for cross-examination.

## Decision

- The court overruled Mr. Blaine’s objection.
- The court admitted the psychiatrist’s written report and considered it in deciding disposition.
- The court proceeded on the view that disposition permits consideration of professional reports, so long as they are disclosed and the parents have a fair chance to answer them.

## Legal Principles

- Neglect proceedings separate (1) fact-finding on whether neglect occurred from (2) disposition on what order will best serve the children’s welfare; the dispositional inquiry is directed to planning for the child’s care rather than proving the neglect charge.
- At disposition, the court may receive and weigh relevant information that may not fit strict trial evidentiary rules, including written evaluations prepared for the court’s use.
- A written psychiatric report may be considered at disposition when it is made part of the record and not kept from the parties, and when the parents have notice of its contents and a meaningful chance to explain, contradict, or counter it with their own proof.
- The absence of cross-examination of the report’s author does not automatically bar the report’s use at disposition; the fairness inquiry focuses on disclosure and the chance to respond.
- The court must not treat the report as conclusive; it remains the judge’s responsibility to decide disposition based on the full record, including testimony and any other available information.
- Familiarity with the preparer’s role and qualifications—such as where the psychiatrist is a court-staff professional who routinely prepares reports—supports the court’s decision to receive the report as a tool for disposition.

## Conclusion

In *In re Blaine*, the Family Court held that during the dispositional phase of a neglect case it may admit and consider a written psychiatric report prepared by a court-staff psychiatrist even though the psychiatrist does not testify, because disposition is aimed at determining an appropriate plan for the children’s care and the process is fair where the report is placed on the record and the parents have a real chance to answer it.


In re Blaine, 54 Misc. 2d 248, 282 N.Y.S.2d 359 (1969)