 | |
| Collette DiVitto & Rosemary Alfredo |
RIDGEFIELD -- Following an acrimonious divorce, Rosemary Alfredo and her ex-husband couldn't agree whether their then-23-year-old daughter, Collette, who has Down syndrome, should move with her to Boston.
Alfredo felt her daughter, who holds a job and graduated from a
special college for students with intellectual disabilities, could live
independently there, with help from more comprehensive Massachusetts
social services.
Her father disagreed, arguing Collette should be placed in a group home in Ridgefield.
So the couple went to Probate Court, where Judge Joseph Egan appointed a guardian ad litem, Danbury attorney Sharon Dornfeld, to represent Collette's interests and make recommendations to the judge about the move.
Alfredo at first welcomed the appointment.
"I thought it was better than dealing with my ex-husband," she said.
In May, Alfredo found a place in Boston, hoping to move there permanently with Collette. In July, the court allowed Collette to stay there temporarily, with a final decision pending an assessment by state-appointed experts.
But on Oct. 10, the judge gave Alfredo 10 days to return Collette to Connecticut to live with her father, Daniel DiVitto, in Ridgefield.
"The court is trying to take my daughter away against her will and put her somewhere where she doesn't want to be," Alfredo said.
Dornfeld refused to comment on the case, as did Elizabeth Sharpe, a Greenwich attorney appointed as Collette's limited guardian. Egan also declined to comment.
Alfredo has decided to disobey the court order. And she is fighting the guardians, who she believes are no longer acting in her daughter's best interests. She has racked up more than $50,000 in legal bills in a system she says is violating her daughter's civil liberties.
Collette is thriving in her new environment, her mother said. She works as a teacher's aide in an elementary school, goes to Zumba classes, takes self-defense lessons and has many friends.
Alfredo said Collette does not want to return to Connecticut, and she believes her daughter's wishes should be respected.
Besides, she said, the court already has access to three psychological evaluations that prove Collette's competency.
In one of those evaluations, she is described as "an articulate and sociable young woman who demonstrates a broad range of skills and resourcefulness which far exceed what one might expect on the basis of her tested IQ."
Alfredo said Collette even asked Egan in an earlier court appearance to replace Sharpe because she doesn't like her, but the judge refused.
"This is not about a mother's fight for her child," Alfredo said. "This has to do with a young girl with Down syndrome whose civil rights are being violated. She has the right to live the life that she wants and nobody is letting her do that."
Barbara Jackins, an attorney with the Special Needs Law Group of Massachusetts who is familiar with the case and with Collette, characterized Sharpe's approach to the case as "overly legalistic."
"This seems like a runaway guardianship case," Jackins said. "It's just bewildering how anyone would make (Collette) move back to Connecticut, away from a package of services in Massachusetts, and go live with her father, who she doesn't get along with."
Alfredo said she is willing to take whatever risks come from defying the court order, because she feels it's what Collette wants.
"My daughter won't go," Alfredo said. "And I'm not going to physically force her."
Her father disagreed, arguing Collette should be placed in a group home in Ridgefield.
So the couple went to Probate Court, where Judge Joseph Egan appointed a guardian ad litem, Danbury attorney Sharon Dornfeld, to represent Collette's interests and make recommendations to the judge about the move.
Alfredo at first welcomed the appointment.
"I thought it was better than dealing with my ex-husband," she said.
In May, Alfredo found a place in Boston, hoping to move there permanently with Collette. In July, the court allowed Collette to stay there temporarily, with a final decision pending an assessment by state-appointed experts.
But on Oct. 10, the judge gave Alfredo 10 days to return Collette to Connecticut to live with her father, Daniel DiVitto, in Ridgefield.
"The court is trying to take my daughter away against her will and put her somewhere where she doesn't want to be," Alfredo said.
Dornfeld refused to comment on the case, as did Elizabeth Sharpe, a Greenwich attorney appointed as Collette's limited guardian. Egan also declined to comment.
Alfredo has decided to disobey the court order. And she is fighting the guardians, who she believes are no longer acting in her daughter's best interests. She has racked up more than $50,000 in legal bills in a system she says is violating her daughter's civil liberties.
Collette is thriving in her new environment, her mother said. She works as a teacher's aide in an elementary school, goes to Zumba classes, takes self-defense lessons and has many friends.
Alfredo said Collette does not want to return to Connecticut, and she believes her daughter's wishes should be respected.
Besides, she said, the court already has access to three psychological evaluations that prove Collette's competency.
In one of those evaluations, she is described as "an articulate and sociable young woman who demonstrates a broad range of skills and resourcefulness which far exceed what one might expect on the basis of her tested IQ."
Alfredo said Collette even asked Egan in an earlier court appearance to replace Sharpe because she doesn't like her, but the judge refused.
"This is not about a mother's fight for her child," Alfredo said. "This has to do with a young girl with Down syndrome whose civil rights are being violated. She has the right to live the life that she wants and nobody is letting her do that."
Barbara Jackins, an attorney with the Special Needs Law Group of Massachusetts who is familiar with the case and with Collette, characterized Sharpe's approach to the case as "overly legalistic."
"This seems like a runaway guardianship case," Jackins said. "It's just bewildering how anyone would make (Collette) move back to Connecticut, away from a package of services in Massachusetts, and go live with her father, who she doesn't get along with."
Alfredo said she is willing to take whatever risks come from defying the court order, because she feels it's what Collette wants.
"My daughter won't go," Alfredo said. "And I'm not going to physically force her."
Full Article & Source:
Ridgefield mother claims abuse in court-appointed guardianship
12 comments:
These cases are growing and I am so thankful for media attention.
good for you mom! your daughter definitely has rights and not only that but how could they think she would thrive in this artificial, strained, and less than optimal scenario they are trying to force her into? SUE or something.... best of luck for your daughter, God bless her.
Has Collette expressed her wishes to her father? Both the mother and father need to stand together in opposing the guardian.
The best interest of Collette includes her specific wishes of where she wants to live. As long as the father can visit unfettered, he should support her living with her mother.
Does Collette have her own attorney? She can't count on the GAL.....
Praying for this Mother and Daughter...
Sorry Ms Alfredo, but she has no rights, not even civil. A probate judge will affirm that the Constitution does not apply to his court. The only chance Collette has to live a free, happy, and productive life is to have all her rights restored, and terminate guardianship. Additionally, if placed in a group home, her destiny will be relegated to the staff who are considered as "professionals". She will be subject to being over medicated, under cared for, and cast aside as another "ward of the state" she is. You are being denied the ability to care for and protect your daughter, because her life is controlled by the syndicate and cartels of guardianship abuse. Our daughter has lived this nightmare because it was "in her best interest".
When all is said and done, and the thousands of dollars have slid down the rathole of guardianship, just imagine the good that could have been done for your family, community, the world.
She can make her own decisions. Let her make them.
Thank heavens for this reporter telling this horrific story. No longer can wrongdoing be hidden. I feel especially sorry for this mother who is only trying to do what is best for her daughter. Her daughter needs to live as independently as possible.
Another family in the cross hairs of guardianship abuse. I pray they will come through this and Colette will get to stay with her mother.
The love this mother/daughter has shows in the picture.
This whole thing makes no sense.
Post a Comment