Child Abuse or Nanny Nightmare!

    By Steve Irsay
    Court TV

    (Court TV) -- Danica Cordell-Reeh thought she was getting a nanny with an impressive professional history to care for
    her 5-year-old twins. Michelle Padilla had many years of child care experience, had written a book about finding a
    nanny, was an online consultant, and had been placed by the respected London-based agency, Nannies of St. James.

    What Cordell-Reeh actually got, according to a $20 million suit against the nanny and the agency filed last month in
    Manhattan state Supreme Court, was very different.

    In just 48 hours Cordell-Reeh went from having joint custody of her twins -- a boy and a girl -- to losing all parental
    rights and being investigated for child abuse.

    According to court papers, on October 24, 2001, a little more than two weeks after Padilla started, Cordell-Reeh
    intended to fire her because, she said, the nanny refused to do any housework. It is unclear whether Padilla knew of her
    impending dismissal, but that same day the nanny abruptly moved out of the family's Central Park West apartment
    without notice. She was hardly out of Cordell-Reeh's life, however.

    The next day Padilla allegedly went to Cordell-Reeh's estranged husband, investment banker Henry Owsley III, claiming
    that Cordell-Reeh had been sexually abusing one of the children and wasn't feeding them properly. The nanny's sworn
    testimony led to an immediate suspension of Cordell-Reeh's custody rights. Padilla made similar allegations to the
    Administration for Child Services, which prompted a formal child abuse investigation, and to the children's teachers and
    Cordell-Reeh's therapist, the suit says.

    To some, Padilla's actions appeared to be the work of a dedicated, conscientious nanny seeking to protect the children.

    "Michelle has always demonstrated good character and there has never been a complaint against her from any of my
    clients," said Janet Cook, president of New York nanny agency My Child's Best Friend, which has employed Padilla as a
    temporary caregiver over the last year and a half. "If anything, people were saying she was too committed to her job
    and put the needs of the family before her own needs."

    Padilla also claims to have experience in the area of detecting child abuse. One chapter in her book, "The Official Guide
    to Finding a Great Nanny and Keeping Her," is titled "Safety & Child Abuse (And how to spot an abusive caregiver)."

    It was Padilla's sworn affidavit alleging abuse and neglect that was the main evidence at the emergency hearing in which
    Cordell-Reeh lost her custody rights. The mental health professional assigned to the review the case said Padilla was a
    "reliable reporter" and was "reporting in good faith," according to Cordell-Reeh's lawyer Bernard Clair.

    Any references?
    Cordell-Reeh, however, denies any abuse and says Padilla was merely getting revenge for her firing, according to the
    suit. The lawsuit describes Padilla as a disturbed woman with a checkered personal and professional past, referring to
    her as "a time bomb ready to go off" with a "prior history of lies, deceit and mental illness."

    That history, according to court papers, includes psychiatric treatment at New Hope Counseling Center in Queens, New
    York, in 1994. Padilla allegedly told therapists that she was a former prostitute who was sexually abused and raped by a
    family member and had suffered from anorexia. In 1997 Padilla brought a suit against the center claiming that it had
    illegally released her medical records to her abusive family member, but the suit was quickly dropped.

    This history alone might cause concern, but not necessarily disqualify Padilla. "I personally don't know anyone who has
    not been in counseling," said Cook, who claims Padilla disclosed her therapy when she applied to My Child's Best
    Friend. "Plus, taking care of other people's children can be very stressful."

    But the suit also attacks the validity of Padilla's references, in particular one from a man identified as Christopher R. of
    Westbury, New York. Clair, Cordell-Reeh's lawyer, claims that when he contacted Christopher R. about a letter of
    reference written for Padilla the man was stunned, saying the signature was not his and that he would never have
    recommended her.

    Christopher R. fired Padilla in 1995, and shortly afterward, she allegedly contacted his therapist, claiming that the man
    had sexually abused and neglected his children. The therapist was suspicious of Padilla and never reported the claims,
    the suit says.

    "The terrible irony of this case is that the system did what it was supposed to do," Clair said. "It was faced with heinous
    allegations and took the children away based on those allegations."

    It is unclear whether Padilla's claims of child abuse in the Cordell-Reeh's home are true, but the mother's suit claims
    that, had the agency performed adequate personal, professional and legal background checks on Padilla, they would
    have uncovered, at the least, a shaky past.

    "This case is about the obligation the agency has to do a background check on someone with access to your home and
    access to the most cherished possession in the home, namely children," said Clair. "In a society that does background
    checks on bus drivers and teachers, the nanny industry seems to have slipped behind some dark corner."

    Different states, different rules
    The suit could hinge on how much the agency was required to know. In an industry that is regulated loosely in some
    states and not at all in others, the type and scope of checking performed by nanny agencies can vary drastically.

    In New York, where Nannies of St. James was operating in this case, only some agencies are licensed by the
    Department of Consumer Affairs and the guidelines on background checks only stipulate what cannot be asked of
    applicants, not what must be asked.

    "The questions I ask I am not really supposed to ask," said Cook, whose application includes questions about physical
    conditions and psychological counseling. "But I would rather be fined for asking too much rather than too little and then
    have something happen to someone's child."

    California has the strictest regulations, requiring all childcare givers to be registered on a database called TrustLine
    that uses state and federal criminal records and other personal information to screen applicants.

    In most states, a background check typically involves a criminal history check and Social Security trace to determine the
    prospective nanny's listed addresses, according to Kathleen Webb, managing partner of nannynetwork.com, a Virginia-
    based resource and networking site for parents and nannies.

    Such a search on Padilla would not have yielded any red flags, however, because there were never any criminal
    charges filed against her and her residence history was consistent. Even a plaintiff search, to identify court cases
    involving the applicant, would have been clean because most agencies do not check civil cases, like the one Padilla
    filed against New Hope Counseling Center.

    Reference checks, however, are a separate process. Typically, a nanny is required to give a list of past employers and
    personal references for a certain number of years to be verified by the agency. But these checks may not often been
    done, or done thoroughly enough.

    In the opening pages of their best-selling novel "The Nanny Diaries" about a nanny's experiences working for wealthy
    families, authors and former New York nannies Emma McLaughlin and Nicola Kraus note: "Nanny fact: in every one of
    my interviews, references are never checked. I am white. I speak French. My parents are college educated. I have no
    visible piercings and have been to Lincoln Center in the last two months. I'm hired."

    Clair plans to build his case against Nannies of St. James on the agency's responsibility to ensure the well-being of its
    clients through proper background and reference checks. He compares it to the way singer Connie Francis won a
    famous 1974 lawsuit against Howard Johnson Motor Lodges claiming that the hotel was negligent in providing proper
    security when an assailant entered Francis' room through a broken door latch and attacked her.

    In Cordell-Reeh's case, the broken latch was the inadequate background check that let Padilla into her house to care
    for her children.

    "It is human nature for people to seek to sanitize their references," said Webb. "It is not specific to nannies. However, if
    parents engage an agency then an agency should be able to find those inconsistencies in the background."

    Cordell-Reeh declined to comment on the case. Padilla was unable to be reached by Court TV and at press time she
    had not yet been served with court papers, but she told the Sunday Times of London, "None of the allegations against
    me is true. I am a credentialed nanny with excellent references and the agency carried out background checks on me. If
    I am so crazy, why did the mother hire me?"

    And on her Web site, Padilla wrote, "I've heard a lot [of] Nanny horror stories and I'm sure you have too."
Internet-Reviews.org
Public Record Websites Review
2009 Edition
Copyright 2009 Internet-Reviews.org. All rights reserved.
Web Hosting by Yahoo!