## Facts

- The Commissioner of Social Services filed Article 10 petitions in Family Court alleging that two children, Josephine G. (born 1985) and Glenn G. (born 1987), were abused and, in the alternative, neglected by their parents.
- The father, Glenn G., was accused of sexually abusing the children by improperly touching their genitals and rectums, conduct charged as “sex abuse” under Family Court Act § 1012(e)(iii) by reference to Penal Law § 130.55 (sexual abuse in the third degree).
- The petitions also alleged that pornographic photographs of the children were taken, charged as sexual abuse under Family Court Act § 1012(e)(iii) by reference to Penal Law § 263.05 (use of a child in a sexual performance), and alleged the mother’s participation and/or permission.
- The mother, Patsy C.G., was charged with allowing the abuse to occur, including allegations that some acts occurred in her presence and that she failed to protect the children.
- The record described a long history of domestic violence and coercive control by the father beginning after Josephine’s birth, including isolation, verbal abuse, and physical assaults against the mother.
- After one incident in which the mother returned home and found the father inappropriately touching Josephine, the father struck the mother; the mother later moved with the child to Florida, where the second child was born.
- The father located the mother in Florida, apologized, and promised counseling; the mother returned with the children to New York in June 1987, but the father did not attend counseling and the violence escalated.
- The mother attempted limited intervention and sought advice from her mother-in-law, who urged endurance; the father’s sexual abuse of both children continued.
- The case came to authorities’ attention on April 12, 1991, when the mother went to the 68th Police Precinct seeking help after a domestic-violence incident and spoke with a Victim Services Agency worker.
- During that intake, the mother asked if it was normal for a father to grab children in the groin area, dance naked with them, and take nude photos; she was then relocated to a battered-women’s shelter.
- The children were medically examined at Bellevue Hospital on April 19, 1991, and a report of suspected child abuse/maltreatment was made.
- At fact-finding, the mother asserted that she suffered from battered-woman syndrome, and two witnesses testified that, in their opinions, she was a battered woman.

## Issues

1. Whether the father’s alleged acts—sexual touching and photographing the children nude—constituted “sex abuse” under Family Court Act § 1012(e)(iii) through the Penal Law cross-references.
2. Whether the mother could be found to have abused and/or neglected the children based on permitting the abuse or failing to protect them from the father’s sexual abuse.
3. Whether battered-woman syndrome evidence negates or excuses the mother’s legal responsibility under Article 10 for failure to protect the children.

## Decision

- The court sustained findings that the father sexually abused the children within the meaning of Family Court Act § 1012(e)(iii), including conduct corresponding to Penal Law § 130.55 and Penal Law § 263.05.
- The court sustained findings against the mother for abuse and/or neglect based on her allowing the abuse and failing to protect the children from ongoing sexual abuse.
- The court received and considered battered-woman syndrome testimony in assessing the mother’s circumstances, but held it did not bar an abuse/neglect finding where the statutory elements were proven.

## Legal Principles

- Family Court Act § 1012(e)(iii) defines “sex abuse” by cross-reference to specified Penal Law offenses; proof of conduct meeting those Penal Law definitions may support an Article 10 sex-abuse finding.
- Sexual contact with young children, including improper touching of the genitals or rectum, may constitute “sex abuse” under Article 10 when it corresponds to Penal Law § 130.55.
- Using a child in pornographic or sexualized photography may constitute “sex abuse” under Article 10 when it corresponds to Penal Law § 263.05.
- A parent may be found to have abused and/or neglected a child not only by direct acts, but also by permitting sexual abuse or failing to protect a child from known or apparent abuse.
- Neglect under Family Court Act § 1012(f) focuses on whether a parent failed to exercise a minimum degree of care in supervision or guardianship, causing impairment or imminent risk of impairment.
- Evidence that a parent is a victim of domestic violence, including battered-woman syndrome testimony, may be considered in evaluating the parent’s conduct and circumstances, but it is not a complete defense to Article 10 abuse/neglect findings when the proof establishes a failure to protect children from sexual abuse.

## Conclusion

In *In the Matter of Glenn G.*, the Family Court (Kings County) sustained Article 10 findings that the father sexually abused Josephine and Glenn through sexual touching and pornographic photographing, and that the mother abused and/or neglected the children by allowing the conduct and failing to protect them, ruling that battered-woman syndrome evidence could be considered but did not excuse the mother’s legal duty to protect her children from sexual abuse.


In the Matter of Glenn G., 587 N.Y.S.2d 464 (1992)