Decision limits liability of DSHS

By Jonathan Martin
Seattle Times staff reporter

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

State social workers have no responsibility to warn the public even if they suspect their wards could commit a crime, the state appeals court has ruled in a precedent-setting opinion.

The ruling, issued this week and likely to be appealed, limits liability for the state's most-sued agency, the Department of Social and Health Services.

The King County case was filed on behalf of a woman, identified only as Terrell C., who claimed that two neighbor boys in DSHS custody repeatedly molested her 6-year-old son.

The lawsuit accused the boys' social worker of failing to control their behavior and failing to warn the community about the boys' history of sexual aggression.

But the state social worker had no such duties under the laws governing Child Protective Services, wrote the three-judge appeals panel.

"Any 'ongoing' relationship between the social worker and the child is to prevent future harm to that child, not to protect members of the community from harm," wrote Judge Kenneth Grosse.

DSHS's attorneys made that exact argument last year in an unrelated King County Superior Court case, but lost. In that suit, a jury awarded $8.3 million to a 20-year-old immigrant, Said Aba Sheikh, finding that DSHS social workers negligently supervised two foster children who beat the Somali man into a coma.

It was the largest verdict against DSHS in three years and was cited by DSHS as an example of why it needed immunity from such lawsuits.

Jeff Freimund, the assistant attorney general in the Aba Sheikh case, said this week's ruling in the Terrell C. case is the first of its kind. DSHS has since appealed the Aba Sheikh verdict to the same appeals court that ruled on Terrell C.'s case.

"This opinion is encouraging to us," said Freimund. "It should help in our appeal."
But Jo-Hanna Read, Terrell C.'s attorney, said the new ruling shields DSHS from a duty to warn the public — even if it involves specific threats made by foster kids.

"If the social worker were to know for a certainty the kid was threatening a specific person, they would have no duty to warn," said Read. She said she is likely to appeal the opinion to the state Supreme Court.

Much of the background in the Terrell C. case is sealed to protect the minors involved.

The boys accused of molestation — identified as D.T. and C.M. — were living with their mother at the time but were legally in the custody of DSHS. Neither was prosecuted because of their young age, Read said.

In her lawsuit, Terrell C. said she had complained to CPS about potential sexual abuse in the boys' home and learned only after her son's alleged molestation that D.T. and C.M. were in DSHS custody for allegedly sexually abusing their sister.

The DSHS social worker had no duty to pass on that information to Terrell C., the judges wrote.

"The statutes governing social workers are not based on a statutory duty to protect the general community," they wrote.

Jonathan Martin: 206-464-2605 or jmartin@seattletimes.com

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company