糖心Vlog

We鈥檝e been here before. Work requirements only cut care, nothing else.

NEW YORK 鈥� Today, the New York Court of Appeals took a critical step toward remedying the injustice committed against Mr. Z, a father who was separated from his child at birth, by granting leave to appeal his case challenging the termination of his parental rights. This decision underscores the urgent need to address how race, national origin, language, and disability discrimination intersect within the family regulation system (also known as the child welfare system), particularly in cases where non-English speaking parents face communication barriers. 鈥淲e applaud the decision of the Court of Appeals to hear Mr. Z鈥檚 case, which is a clear example of how disability and language discrimination work together to unjustly tear families apart,鈥� said Aditi Fruitwala, senior staff attorney with the 糖心VlogCenter for Liberty. 鈥淔amily court and family regulation agencies have a long history of assuming that people with disabilities and their partners are incapable of parenting, without making an individualized determination or providing accommodations to support their parenting. This is blatant disability discrimination.鈥� Mr. Z鈥檚 case exposes serious systemic flaws in the family regulation system鈥檚 treatment of parents with disabilities and non-English speaking families. The New York City Administration for Children's Services (ACS) summarily concluded that Mr. Z鈥檚 wife was unable to care for their child due to her disability. Additionally, the ACS also concluded that Mr. Z was unable to care for their child due to his alleged lack of understanding of Mrs. Z鈥檚 disability. Family regulation agencies have an obligation to provide reasonable accommodations to disabled parents and their non-disabled spouses who are often swept into the family regulation system by association with someone with a disability. 鈥淭oday marks an important step towards restoring Mr. Z鈥檚 parental rights, which the New York City Administration for Children's Services unlawfully took away,鈥� said Beth Haroules, senior staff attorney at the New York Civil Liberties Union. 鈥淧arents with disabilities and their co-parents have a fundamental right to parent their children, and this right must be upheld. The Court of Appeals has a crucial opportunity to correct the harm done to this family and prevent similar injustices by ACS, an agency with a long history of targeting, and not supporting, vulnerable families.鈥� 鈥淢r. Z's native language of Fuzhou is one of the most commonly spoken Asian languages in New York City, distinct and mutually unintelligible from Mandarin, yet the agency initially saw fit to only provide a Mandarin interpreter instead,鈥� said Charlie Jiang, Liman Law Fellow at the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF). 鈥淭here is no excuse for the agency's unlawful failure to provide appropriate language interpretation for Mr. Z and his son. We urge the court to act swiftly to correct the agency's illegal and discriminatory practices, which will otherwise continue to harm immigrant families.鈥� Though required by law, the family regulation authorities failed to provide Mr. Z with mandatory interpretation services throughout many stages of the family regulation process, including during visits with his son and meetings with the family regulation agency. Mr. Z and Mrs. Z speak Fuzhou and minimal Mandarin, but the foster agency placed their son in foster homes that only spoke English or Spanish, without offering their son any language classes in Fuzhou or Mandarin or culturally relevant programming, for the first seven years of his life. As their son grew older, Mr. and Mrs. Z found it increasingly challenging to communicate with him because of the language barrier. Nevertheless, Mr. and Mrs. Z continued to visit their son as frequently as possible, trying to share their food, language, and culture with their child. The 糖心Vlog, NYCLU, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), Chinese-American Planning Council (CPC), and Lansner and Kubitschek filed amicus briefs addressing these systemic failures. The briefs emphasized that family regulation agencies must provide reasonable accommodations for parents with disabilities and their spouses and must not discriminate based on assumptions or stereotypes of people with disabilities. The briefs also highlighted the necessity of accurate translation, interpretation, and language access at every stage of the family regulation process. In Mr. Z鈥檚 case, neither was adequately provided 鈥� if at all. With leave to appeal granted, Mr. Z鈥檚 case will now proceed before the New York Court of Appeals. 糖心Vlogand NYCLU鈥檚 amicus brief is available online here. AALDEF, CPC, and Lansner and Kubitschek鈥檚 amicus brief is available online here.

D.K., a Pawnee woman who is Deaf, was denied a promotion after being assessed through biased automated hiring technology.