Cocktail Reception and Award Ceremony

4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Reception in the Cocktail Lounge and Ballroom Cocktails and hors d’oeuvres

Ra!e and silent auction with original pieces by painter and muralist Alejandro Romero

Entertainment by guitarist José Tito Cornier in Cocktail Lounge

5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. Program Musical Interlude and Welcome Guitarist: José Tito Cornier Board President: Michael O’Connor Mistress of Ceremonies: Laura S. Washington

Message from Executive Director Diane L. Redleaf

Special Recognition Individual Recognition: Michael Otto (Jenner & Block) Team Recognition: McDermott, Will & Emery Firm Recognition: Sidley Austin LLP

Slide Show: Defending Children and Families in the Supreme Court

2011 Family Defender Award Presentation by Carolyn Shapiro and Michael T. Brody Honoring Carolyn Kubitschek

Brief Address by Carolyn Kubitschek “Why Children and Families Need Legal Defense”

6:00 p.m. – 6:15 p.m. Live Auction Auctioneer: Co-chair Salvador Cicero

“Fund a Special Need”: $e Chaitanya Maddali Family Legal Support Fund

Program Conclusion

6:15 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. Ra"e, Silent Auction and Dessert Ra!e drawing in the cocktail lounge at 6:30 p.m. Silent Auction closes at 6:45 p.m.

Entertainment by José Tito Cornier in Ballroom 1 W ecome to the Family Defense Center’s $ird Annual Bene%t Event honoring our dear friend, colleague, mentor, and child welfare reform leader Carolyn Kubitschek. On behalf of many wonderful clients, volunteers, committee members, our board and our sta*, we are here to thank you and to celebrate with you tonight. We’re often asked, “How old is the Family Defense Center?” Last year, in my program book message, I raised the question, “Which birthday is the Family Defense Center celebrating this year?” In 2010, I claimed that we were having our 5th birthday (we formed in 2005) but arguments could be made for either more recent or more distant start dates for Family Defense Center activities. I’m sorry that, as a lawyer, I make the simplest of questions complex and %nd it hard to give straightforward answers! But isn’t that what lawyers are good for? We’re also often asked, “Are you a local, state, or national organization?” Here again, I %nd myself arguing with the question as I struggle to give a direct answer. $is year’s celebration — honoring Carolyn Kubitschek for her heroic e*orts in the Supreme Court and her decades of precedent- setting work — is a truly national event. $e work we did to coordinate amicus brie%ngs in the Supreme Court established the Family Defense Center, once and for all, as a national leader — possibly THE national leader advocating justice for families in the child welfare system. We fended o* a challenge from 41 state attorneys general and the U.S. Solicitor General! If that doesn’t make us a national organization, I’m not sure what would. But I can’t claim we are truly a national organization just yet. We’re too small — just three full-time lawyers on sta*. $e clients we help directly live in the Chicago metropolitan area, most in the city itself. We do advise downstate clients, but we do not act as their lead attorneys. So we are de%nitely Chicago-based, with some claim to being state-wide. I would term us a “locally-based model organization with a national impact.” And you can believe that I do refer to the Family Defense Center in just this way! You can see I don’t like to be pinned down or boxed into categories. And that goes for our legal work, too: we provide direct services, systemic law reform advocacy, policy advocacy, community legal education and wonderful community programs like National Reuni%cation Day. So, I ask you, “Is the Family Defense Center a direct services provider or a policy group?” You tell me, but I believe we are both! Are we stretched too thin? De%nitely! Could our impact be signi%cantly greater if we had more resources? Absolutely! But our strength, I believe, is in coming up with varied solutions to the great problem of families being mistreated by the child welfare system — a system that has the power to destroy families, but one that can help heal them, if its power is used correctly. Since the struggle of the families we serve can’t be con%ned by zip code or by any one solution, we need to be /exible and use as many strategies to help them as we can. All of this is why honoring Carolyn Kubitschek this year is such a special honor for me. $ere is no one in the United States who has done more to create legal remedies for families or develop more brilliant and e*ective legal strategies than she has done. As her biography (p. 12) reveals, she has an astounding record of creating important precedents for children and families throughout the country. I’m forever in her debt and our client community is too! $e Family Defense Center is indebted to you, too! Without our friends, supporters, allies, and volunteers who do everything from handling pro bono cases to helping us get the word out, we couldn’t begin to be an e*ective local, state, or national organization, however old we are! $ank you again, and please enjoy yourself as you join us in celebrating our e*orts to bring justice to families all across America.

Yours in the struggleug gl for justice,ju

DianeDi an e L. RedleafR ed le af Executive Director 2 Event Co-Chairs

M789;<= B>@QV joined Jenner & Block in 1984 and was named a partner in 1991. He has represented clients at all levels of the state and federal courts. His commercial litigation practice has included the defense of class actions, as well as securities, commercial tort, and contract disputes. He is Secretary of the Seventh Circuit Bar Association. He previously chaired its Representation of Indigents Committee and was a member of its Board of Governors. He is on the board of the Family Defense Center and the Evanston Community Foundation.

Mr. Brody received a bachelor’s degree from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1980. He received his law degree with honors from the University of Chicago Law School in 1983. He was selected a member of Order of the Coif and was a Comment Editor on the Law Review. After graduating from law school, Mr. Brody clerked for the Hon. Antonin Scalia on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Mr. Brody and his wife, Libby Ester, have two sons — one is a recent college graduate and the other is in college. $ey live in Evanston with their occasionally ill-behaved but very loyal dog.

S;=[;Q@> C78<>@ is the principal of Cicero Law Firm, P.C., where he handles a wide range of legal matters in the state and federal courts. He is the 2011-2012 President of the Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois. Prior to forming his %rm, he directed the American Bar Association’s Ecuador project on tra\cking in persons and prior to that position, he was Chief Legal Counsel at the Mexican Consulate General in Chicago, in which capacity he directed major policy initiatives on behalf of families involved in child welfare matters. In that position, he worked with DCFS to achieve an important Memorandum of Understanding concerning consular noti%cation requirements. He published an article and did trainings concerning the Vienna convention and other consular notice issues as these a*ect both child welfare and criminal proceedings. From 2006-2009, he served on the Family Defense Center’s board of Directors. Mr. Cicero is a graduate of the Matias Romero Institute for Diplomatic Studies, received his law degree from the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University and received his B.A. in Latin American Studies from the University of New Mexico. He has one daughter — Maya Aurora — and lives in Chicago.

Mr. Cicero is also the Center’s on-demand live auctioneer (and when he is not advocating for the public interest, he is known to both write and perform his own repetoire of songs after a few drinks!).

3 Honorary Co-Chairs

D>. C9>7^_@`9<> S{==7[;| is a board-certi%ed orthopedic surgeon who directs the Pediatric Orthopedics and Scoliosis Program at the University of Chicago Comer Children’s Hospital. He joined the surgery faculty at the University of Chicago in 1989, following residencies and further training in internal medicine, pediatric orthopedics and general orthopedics in Texas, Illinois and California.

Dr. Sullivan attended college at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and attended medical school at UCLA while remaining on active duty. While at UCLA, he also earned a Master’s Degree in public health, focusing on epidemiology.

An outstanding teacher and clinician, Dr. Sullivan has developed an expertise in child abuse and bone fractures through research, writing, and expert testimony in juvenile court and DCFS proceedings. Courts have frequently relied on his testimony, %nding his opinions more persuasive than the contrary testimony of other child abuse specialists in several Center cases.

Dr. Sullivan was the Family Defense Center’s honoree for the 2010 Family Defender Award.

D@>@_9V R@}<>_^ holds the Kirkland & Ellis Chair at Northwestern University Law School where she is also a faculty fellow at the Institute for Policy Research.

A proli%c writer and researcher, she is the author or co-author of several books and has published over seventy articles and essays in books and journals including the Harvard Law Review , the Yale Law Journal and the Stanford Law Review .

Professor Roberts has done pioneering research in the areas of race, class and gender, highlighting especially the ways in which social policy is biased against poor, minority, and pregnant women and mothers. She is one of the nation’s foremost academic legal scholars on issues regarding the child welfare system and is the award-winning author of Shattered Bonds, "e Color of Child Welfare .

Professor Roberts is a graduate of Yale College (where she graduated Phi Beta Kappa) and Harvard Law School. She serves as one of the Family Defense Center’s National Honorary Advisors. She is also the academic sponsor for the Family Defense Center’s Mothers’ Defense Project and was the honoree for the Center’s 2009 Family Defender Award.

4 Mistress of Ceremonies

L;{>; W;^97|~_@| Ms. Washington has been quoted in Time and has been an award- Newsweek magazines, "e New York Times , and winning columnist appeared on NBC Nightly News and $e Lehrer for the Chicago News Hour. She has received more than two dozen Sun-Times since local and national awards for her work, including 2001. She is also two Chicago Emmys, the Peter Lisagor Award, the a political analyst Studs Terkel Award for Community Journalism for WLS-TV, the and the Ohio State Award for broadcast journalism. ABC-owned station Newsweek magazine named her one of the nation’s in Chicago. She is a “100 People to Watch” in the 21st Century. Newsweek regular commentator said: “her style of investigative journalism has made on National Public (the Reporter ) a powerful and award-winning voice.” In Radio and Chicago Public Radio and previously wrote 1999, the Chicago Community Trust awarded her a a column for the Chicago Tribune . Community Service Fellowship “for exemplary service, commitment and leadership in individuals from In 2010, she served as President of the Woods the nonpro%t sector.” In addition to her community Fund following many years of service on the board service for the Woods Fund of Chicago, she has of the Fund. From 2003 to 2009, she served as been the board secretary for $e Field Museum and the Ida B. Wells-Barnett University Professor at has chaired the board of the Neighborhood Writing DePaul University. She edited "e Chicago Reporter , Alliance. a nationally recognized investigative monthly specializing in racial issues and urban a*airs, from Ms. Washington earned bachelor and master degrees 1990 to 2001, and also served as its publisher from in journalism from the Medill School of Journalism 1994 to 2001. From 1987 to 1990, she was a producer at Northwestern University, where she has also taught for the investigative unit at CBS-2/Chicago. In 1985, and lectured. Ms. Washington was appointed deputy press secretary to Mayor Harold Washington (no relation), Chicago’s $e Center is delighted that Ms. Washington has %rst black mayor. agreed to be our Mistress of Ceremonies again in 2011 and is very grateful for her e*orts to make the program meaningful and memorable.

5 Meet this Evening’s Artists

José Tito Cornier Chicago-born musician J@^ T7_@ C@>|7<>, of Puerto Rican and French descent, is a man whose vision includes sharing his love through music. He picked up his %rst guitar at the age of 8 and is now able to play nearly any instrument placed in front of him. Cornier served in the U.S. Navy, Marines, and the Coast Guard. After being retired during the %rst Persian Gulf War, he returned to his guitar and released his debut album Esperanza . Tracks from Cornier’s Esperanza are piped in at Chicago’s O’Hare and Midway airports and played on radio stations worldwide. José has performed at a fundraiser for Barack Obama and entertained at many major events locally, nationally, and internationally.

Alejandro Romero

No artist captures human emotion better than A=<‚;|Q>@ R@ƒ<>@, whose vibrant artwork graces our invitation. Mr. Romero has generously donated his work for our invitation and for tonight’s auction.

Alejandro Romero, one of the best-known Hispanic visual artists in the United States, was born and educated in Mexico. He moved to Chicago in 1975 and has adorned our city with murals, posters, and conventional paintings. Mr. Romero’s work can also be found in the permanent collections of the Museum of Contemporary Art, the National Museum of Mexican Art, and the Art Institute in Chicago, as well as the Museum of Modern Latin American Art in Washington, D.C., the Museum of the Print in Mexico City, and the Hermitage in Leningrad, Russia.

6 Special Individual Attorney Recognition: Michael Otto

M7„< O__@, an associate with Jenner & Block, is a authority for this rare kind of attorney: he excels in on-your-feet trial charge through original advocacy, writing appellate briefs with detailed textual legislative analysis analyses, and appellate oral arguments. Luckily for the they had conducted. Family Defense Center, Mike has been willing to bring Mike developed their each of these outstanding skills to bear in %ghting arguments further. In for justice for the Center’s clients. He has represented Liz’s case though, she Center clients in administrative hearings and in the won on other grounds. Illinois Appellate court to exonerate wrongly accused clients, taking on the special challenge of bringing a As a former law clerk broad-based policy challenge to a DCFS rule that is with the Illinois hurting thousands of families each year. appellate court, Mike was eager to take In April of 2010, Mike read a description of one of on an interesting the Center’s pro bono cases circulated at Jenner & appellate case with a signi%cant impact. Even though Block and volunteered to represent Liz S. at a DCFS Mike was able to secure an exoneration of Liz on the administrative hearing. Liz was a dedicated single factual merits of her case alone, her case had piqued mother who had been “indicated” for creating an his interest in handling another case in which the “environment injurious” to her son’s well-being merely question of whether the “environment injurious” because she had permitted her son to stay at his father’s allegation’s validity would arise. Mike quickly jumped home — always while supervised by Liz — and the on board when we told him that our client, Julie Q., home was found to have marijuana seeds present. needed excellent representation in a state court appeal When the DCFS investigator unexpectedly changed challenging her indicated %nding of “environment his testimony at hearing by suddenly claiming that injurious.” $e match between Julie’s case and Mike’s the one-year-old child could reach the container interests and abilities was perfect. And so, with a little with the seeds, Mike activated his masterly litigation help from our Pro Bono Program and Jenner & Block, instincts on the spot. He impeached the investigator Mike took on a DCFS allegation that has become with the investigator’s own notes, which included the entrenched in DCFS practice and ubiquitous in investigator’s observation that the child could not have DCFS investigations. reached the bowl due to his small size and inability to walk. Mike delivered a clear victory for Liz when the Oral argument for Julie’s case was held on July 21, administrative law judge ultimately concluded that 2011. Mike’s presentation was masterful, and his DCFS had “failed to provide any facts that would argument appeared to be very well received by the prove a substantial risk of injury” to Liz’s son. appellate judges. As this booklet goes to print, we are cautiously optimistic that Mike’s hard work and skilled $e work Mike did for Liz included arguing that advocacy will result in a decision that will not only the Illinois legislature explicitly removed the speci%c clear Julie’s name, but will also prevent DCFS from allegation of “environment injurious” from the continuing to make invalid %ndings that are not in enabling statute’s de%nition of “neglect” more than keeping with Illinois statute and that hurt thousands thirty years ago. $is allegation has been used by of families throughout Illinois. J DCFS for twenty years and presently represents one-third of all DCFS indicated %ndings. Attorneys at Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago had been challenging the lack of legislative

7 2011 Team Recognition: McDermott Will & Emery for Work on Behalf of Asia Slater, Culminating in Major Appellate Victory

$e pencils Asia had been using for the project were not particularly sharp, and in fact, witnesses later described them as “dull.” And no one disputed Asia’s claim that the injury happened while she was working on her school project and was watching her daughter in the same room. No one claimed Asia was generally inattentive; to the contrary, witnesses all praised Asia’s care and concern for her daughter. None of this mattered, however, since the accident occurred while Asia was watching N. $us, Asia was labeled guilty of neglecting her daughter.

At %rst DCFS would not even let Asia continue to care for her daughter. Without seeking or obtaining a court order, DCFS changed N.’s custody, requiring N. to live Asia Slater was just 17 years old when her life was with her father under a so-called Safety Plan that Asia turned upside-down by a misplaced accusation against neither signed nor agreed to. Moreover, N.’s father was her concerning an injury to her toddler, N., who was abusive to Asia and she had di\culty seeing N. while seven months old at the time. Asia lived with her own she was placed with him. Finally, with help from the mother and was doing well in school, all while trying Family Defense Center, Asia regained custody of N., to be the best mother she could be. Teachers and but a “neglect %nding” remained on her record — a friends all attested to Asia’s dedication to her child and black mark that could be used against her in a custody her attentiveness to her needs but a 10-second episode battle or if she sought a position working with children — a freak accident while Asia’s head was turned — in the future. changed Asia and N.’s life and threatened to derail their hopes for the future. $e Family Defense Center thought the neglect label was unfair: accidents can happen to any child and Asia was doing her homework, an art project, on the to the best of parents. $at is why they are called afternoon of November 30, 2008. $e art project accidents! We believe that an accident, even one that is required her to use some colored pencils, which she as serious as N.’s accident was, should not be enough had in front of her on a table while N. was crawling to put the name of a good and reasonably attentive some feet away. Suddenly, in a moment when Asia had parent into the State Central Register for child abusers turned her head away, N. was able to grab a pencil and and child neglectors. Unfortunately, the FDC was then fell on it, causing the pencil to pierce through the short-sta*ed. $e Center knew that the battle to clear skin on her neck. Asia’s name from the register wouldn’t be simple given the commonplace reaction to N.’s injury — i.e., that Asia became hysterical and called her mother for help; a parent must be at fault and, with 20-20 hindsight, Asia and her mother raced N. to the nearest emergency she should have known not to allow her baby to grab room. While the pencil had broken through skin and an object that could hurt her. Indeed, the FDC has had been lodged in N.’s neck, fortunately it did not had a number of cases in which DCFS has treated a cause any internal damage. Nevertheless, DCFS was severe or unusual injury as necessarily due to neglect or called to investigate the circumstances of the injury. abuse and has treated parents more harshly depending 8 At that point, FDC sta* were not able to take up the %ght to exonerate Asia and were uncertain if the e*ort would pay dividends that justi%ed the time and energy that a further appeal would take. If McDermott attorneys had not been willing to continue to battle for justice in a higher court, the Center would have had to tell Asia they were sorry but “limited resources meant we could not provide further assistance” — a common way cases get closed or not taken in the %rst place. But the McDermott lawyers were so Aron Frakes, Michael Weaver, Elizabeth Lewis, and Todd Solomon (co-chair, Pro convinced of the unfairness of Bono Committee). Not pictured: Lisa Loesel. Asia’s indicated %nding that they readily agreed to take the case on how serious the injuries are, even if the evidence of up to the Circuit Court in an wrongdoing by the parents is very weak. Administrative Review Action and to do all the brie%ng required. At this stage, McDermott lawyer Michael Knowing that the case might be a tough one, the Weaver joined forces with Lewis and Loesel and he FDC reached out to its seasoned pro bono lawyers for began to lead the charge for higher court review. help. Two attorneys from McDermott Will & Emery stepped forward: Elizabeth Lewis and Lisa Loesel, who Not surprisingly, the seriousness of N.’s injuries had taken on prior pro bono cases with the program. continued to pose a roadblock. On August 12, 2010, Little did they know that they were embarking on a after extensive brie%ng and oral argument, Circuit more than two-year-long project to exonerate Asia. Court Judge Martin Agran ruled against Asia and sustained the %nding that she had neglected N., Lewis and Loesel represented Asia at a full trial in the %nding that she had failed to exercise necessary DCFS Administrative Hearings Unit. $e lawyers precautionary measures to protect N. from injury. presented a strong case that DCFS had not met its burden of proving abuse or neglect. Indeed, they After one level of review, many lawyers and clients established that no one was claiming Asia abused her would decide that continuing to battle for justice is not daughter; rather, that she had turned her head for worth the time, money, and emotional turmoil that only a few seconds and that she had gotten immediate comes with any prolonged litigation. Nevertheless, attention for N.’s injury as soon as it happened. $ey the indefatigable McDermott team continued to established that Asia was a very good mother and a believe that the decision that Asia had neglected her good student who was doing her homework at the daughter was unjust and wrong as a matter of law. time the injury occurred and was keeping her eye $ey continued to believe that they should press for on N. to the best of her ability. Despite this detailed exoneration for Asia. presentation of the evidence, however, the DCFS Administrative Law Judge ruled against Asia, %nding $e stakes were getting higher: An appeals court a “blatant disregard for [Asia’s] parental responsibilities decision against Asia might not only continue to was demonstrated” because Asia had left out “sharp haunt her but could cause other parents to face an objects” (the colored pencils) when she knew N. was uphill battle to exonerate themselves in the future. able to “cruise around.” If the Appellate Court ruled that Asia had not been 9 neglectful, that ruling might help other parents decision that Asia neglected N. is, “clearly erroneous. to clear themselves of wrongdoing when they are $ere is no doubt that N. was seriously injured by one not at fault in an accidental injury. After careful of Asia’s colored pencils, however, it cannot be the case consideration, the McDermott team and the FDC, that the existence of the injury itself automatically in consultation with Asia, decided the appeal strategy results in a %nding of neglect. Instead, the A L J was was worth the risks because the legal arguments were required to determine whether N.S.’s injury was the strong and the facts had established Asia’s excellent result of Asia’s neglectful conduct.” Here, the Court parenting abilities and care. $ese facts made the went on to %nd no evidence that N. lacked “care case a good one to test the /awed DCFS premise that necessary for her well-being” given that the incident injuries alone can be held against a parent, e*ectively was “isolated” and “could happen to anyone” and holding Asia was “generally attentive to N.” and her “history parents of being a good mother was not refuted.” $e Court “strictly stated it could not accept the DCFS judge’s conclusion liable” when that “merely having pencils in the same room as an their children infant, when the child was otherwise being supervised, are injured on is neglectful conduct.” $erefore, the Court stated it their watch. had the “de%nite and %rm impression that a mistake had been committed.” After the decision to Sometimes it does take two years or more to right appeal to the a wrong. Sometimes it is far too easy to blame First District parents when children are injured without carefully Appellate considering what the parent did wrong. And court was sometimes it just takes a very special group of lawyers made, the with a commitment to seeing a case through to the McDermott end and making the arguments that hit their mark. team, led Luckily for Asia and N., their bad luck turned when by Michael they found the outstanding legal team of pro bono Weaver, now lawyers at McDermott Will & Emery. And luckily for joined by the Center, our pro bono partners are helping us to Aron Frakes, set very important precedents for families, making it wrote two clear for all of us that it isn’t fair to blame good parents excellent legal briefs laying out all the arguments why when their children have accidental injuries. Asia could not be considered neglectful in causing the injuries her daughter sustained. Congratulations to Michael Weaver, Aron Frakes, Elizabeth Lewis, Lisa Loesel, and to Todd On June 17, 2011, fully two years after the initial Solomon, co-chair of McDermott’s Pro Bono & hearing that went against Asia, in a decision by Justice Community Service Committee who has very ably Robert Gordon, the Illinois Appellate Court declared served as the coordinator of the Firm’s pro bono that the accident to N. was just that: an accident, not work for the Center. J child neglect. In so ruling, the Court held that the

10 Special Law Firm Recognition: Sidley Austin LLP

S7Q=

Most recently, Sidley attorneys represented “Ellen” T., a victim-survivor of domestic violence who had Front row (l-r): Susan Brehm, Joseph Dosch, Maria Post, John been wrongfully indicated for neglect based on an Levi, Julie Weber, Ben Frey; Back row (l-r): Kees Vandenberg, incident in which her estranged husband threw a Richard O’Malley (Sidley Austin LLP Chicago Pro Bono remote control at her, even though: (1) her children Chair), Erin Kelly, Gerald Angst, Brett Myrick. were in another room at the time; (2) she immediately obtained an order of protection against him; and rolled o* of a bed when Mary momentarily looked (3) she %led for divorce. Ellen’s career was seriously away while she was changing her diaper. For Mary’s damaged by the unfair accusation against her. As part hearing, Sidley retained and presented the testimony of the FDC’s Mother’s Defense Project, Sidley Austin of well-known forensic pathologist Dr. John Plunkett, attorneys successfully advocated to clear Ellen’s name, who testi%ed that the child’s injuries were entirely and the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) concluded consistent with the explanation o*ered by Mary, in that “Ellen was very credible and her children appear part because her child was predisposed to sustain to be her whole world.” She was thrilled with the head injuries more easily due to a pre-existing Sidley team’s success on her behalf so that she could medical condition. Ultimately, the ALJ found that move on with her life and support her family by Mary did not cause her child’s head injuries and did continuing to work in her chosen career. not place her at risk of harm, so the indicated %nding was expunged. $e skilled litigators at Sidley were also able to exonerate “Lewis” B., a caring father to two children, Earlier cases in which Sidley Austin attorneys provided who was indicated after his young daughter took an pro bono representation include a case on behalf of accidental fall and got a scrape and bruise on her face “Fiona” W. and “Paul” J., loving parents to their own while Lewis was watching her at their home. Doctors child and relative foster parents to several nieces and and the DCFS investigator agreed that the marks on nephews. Sidley successfully appealed a neglect %nding her face were consistent with the accident described by based on an argument between Fiona and Paul, in the family and that the injury was not suspicious, but which no one was harmed and the children were not DCFS “indicated” Lewis for abuse anyway. $anks to even present at the time. In addition, Sidley exonerated the diligent advocacy of Sidley attorneys, Lewis was “Sandra” W., a caring, hard-working mother who was exonerated following his hearing. at work when her son sustained burns on his legs due to Sandra’s then-boyfriend placing the child into bath In a case involving complex medical issues, “Mary” water that was too hot. Sandra was “indicated” even C. was wrongfully accused of shaking her baby and though she took her son to the hospital as soon as she indicated for abuse after her 8-month-old daughter became aware of the burns. 11 In each and every Sidley Austin case, the attorneys $e growth of the Sidley Pro Bono Program would have been diligent, prepared, thorough and not have been possible without the strong support, consummate professionals. $ey have completely commitment and encouragement of Richard satis%ed clients who would not have been able to O’Malley, the Firm’s Pro Bono Committee Chair access justice but for the hard work and support these and its Pro Bono Coordinator, Angelyn (“Angie”) dedicated individuals provided through the Center’s Chester. Richard and Angie do a wonderful job to Pro Bono Program. Sidley Austin attorneys are now facilitate placement of FDC Pro Bono Program cases at the forefront of legal advocacy for wrongly accused with Sidley attorneys, and promote Center attorney parents, having seen up close how DCFS often errs trainings among associates and partners at the %rm. J in targeting parents who are doing their best to raise their children.

Meet My Personal Hero, 2011 Family Defender Carolyn Kubitschek

By Diane L. Redleaf

Civil rights, child protection, and social security in the Illinois lawyer Carolyn Kubitschek has more legal class action achievements to her credit than many legal suit Dupuy departments, %rms, and agencies with dozens, even v. Samuels . hundreds, of lawyers. She can be considered the Dupuy , a case leading appellate lawyer in America arguing on I initiated with behalf of children and families in the child welfare Bob Lehrer system. Most importantly, she is the only lawyer to in 1997, took argue before the Supreme Court on behalf of children 13 years to and family rights in a child abuse investigation conclude in the past 21 years, as she did this past March in and resulted Camreta/Alford v. Greene . Her depth of experience, in sweeping coupled with her encyclopedic knowledge of the law changes in in the child and family rights area, combine to make the child Carolyn a “one-person national legal support center.” protection investigations For more than a decade, she has been just that for and appeal me and for the Family Defense Center since its system in birth in 2005. Most fortunately, she has dedicated Illinois. her prodigious talents to advocacy for the legal Further, the rights of children and families in the child welfare victory in Dupuy gave me both the impetus and the system, the area in which the Family Defense funding to start the Family Defense Center, so it’s Center works exclusively. fair to say that many clients of the Center owe their legal representation to %ght for their own careers In fact, if it weren’t for Carolyn Kubitschek, there and their ability to protect their families to Carolyn probably wouldn’t even be a Family Defense Center. Kubitschek. Her brilliant and winning legal theories in the case Valmonte v. Bane were instrumental to our victory

12 Carolyn Kubitschek is an old-school legal services lawyer who came of age in the heyday of civil rights law and poverty law. $e seminal case, In re Gault , which declared that the “Bill of Rights is not for adults alone” was decided in 1967 while Carolyn was still an undergraduate student at Oberlin College. In 1970, the year Carolyn entered law school, the case that became the fountainhead of due process challenges to arbitrary operation of public bene%ts programs, Goldberg v. Kelly , was decided. $e late 1960’s and early 1970’s were Back row, (l-r): Troy Phifer, Sta*; Carolyn Kubitschek, Partner; David Lansner, heady times for aspiring lawyers, and Partner; Michelle Huey, Paralegal; Front row, (l-r): Rosa Vargas, Sta*; Barbara Carolyn was part of the generation of Scha*er, Partner; Santosh Prakash, Paralegal. activists who saw becoming a lawyer as a way to “make a di*erence” and make the world a better place. In 1973, Carolyn %nished law school, the same year President Nixon signed the Legal Services Corporation Carolyn had been a music major at Oberlin and Act into law. In those early years, many /edging is still an accomplished pianist. Yet she followed lawyers believed that they could make the law work her budding passion for justice to the University of for poor people. So, Carolyn moved on from Chicago’s Chicago Law School. $ere she took advantage of Hyde Park and headed to work for the poorest of the a very rigorous legal education and made her own poor in New York City. Carolyn soon steeped herself opportunities in public interest law, including projects not only in vast areas of family law and public bene%ts involving juvenile rights. She spent a summer working law, but she witnessed up close the impact of poverty, at Business and Professional People for the Public discrimination, violence, and government misfeasance Interest, with Marshall Patner as her lead supervisor. on her clients’ lives. Despite the discouraging She spent another summer with the ACLU and with circumstances, she was sustained by her desire to %nd her eventual employer, MFY Legal Services (originally legal remedies to make her poor clients’ lives better. part of Mobilization for Youth, an early anti-poverty project in New York City). Carolyn practiced family law and general poverty law at MFY — areas that intersect with, but are not Carolyn was one of only 15 women in her class in quite the same area as, child welfare law. Carolyn the male-dominated law school world of the early told me about the case that %rst got her interested in '70’s. Many of her law school classmates have become child welfare law. $is dramatic story demonstrates renowned judges and scholars; Carolyn made a the intersection between child welfare and more memorable impression among this distinguished group traditional areas of legal services practice: a family with her razor-sharp legal mind. (I told her that I she represented had moved to New York City seeking suspected many of her classmates would remember her medical assistance for their child. $e care was denied even if she didn’t remember them. It would surprise and the City’s child protective services agency was me if someone who is a very tall, model-thin, green- called. $e child who had needed medical attention eyed blonde, and who resembles Gwyneth Paltrow, was taken from her parents. $e child protection didn’t turn more than a few of her classmates’ heads!) investigator later explained the removal of the child to

13 the white mother simply: “$at’s what you get for marrying a black man!” Carolyn then %led her %rst federal child welfare suit, Warren v. City of New York . As she recalls, the case was settled in the mother’s favor: the child was returned, and monetary damages of approximately $8,000 were awarded. Carolyn has been hooked on righting the wrongs of the child welfare system ever since. She also has not been fooled by the commonplace child protection rhetoric that dresses up gross Carolyn Kubitschek and David Lansner on the Supreme Court steps after agency misconduct as acting in Carolyn’s argument of the Camreta case on March 1. “the child’s best interests.” law as well as child welfare law and has authored %ve During her %rst years at MFY, Carolyn made another editions of the treatise: Social Security Disability Law career and life connection that has endured over and Procedure in Federal Court ($ompson Reuters decades. It was there that she met her now-husband publisher; %rst published by West Publishing in 1994). and law partner David Lansner. Carolyn and David were married in 1975.

Carolyn stayed in legal services until 1985, when she $e Family Defense Center chose to honor Carolyn became a clinical law professor at Hofstra University. for the same reasons that California child protection/ She was attracted to clinical teaching because she civil rights lawyers Donnie Cox and Dennis Atchley thought it had both the advantages of academia and sought her out when the United States Supreme Court the bene%ts of legal practice. She continued to pursue granted review in Camreta/Alford v. Greene in October civil rights litigation while at Hofstra, but she found 12, 2010. Cox and Atchley (in consultation with that the simultaneous demands of academic teaching me, too) realized that a case of such national import and clinical practice made it di\cult to continue to required a person steeped in child welfare law. $ey pursue her federal civil rights practice. knew the case required an advocate who has worked on shaping constitutional arguments on behalf of Carolyn and David formed their own law %rm 15 children and families for decades. $ey knew Carolyn, years later: in 1991, Lansner & Kubitschek (now thanks to an argument she had done before the entire Lansner Kubitschek Scha*er) began its formal legal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and concluded that collaboration. By then, David was well-established as she was the right person to argue the case. Cox and a leading family lawyer in New York City and he also Atchley consulted Mikel Miller, the lawyer who had served as Counsel to the Committee on Children and handled the Camreta case in the Court of Appeals. Families of the New York State Assembly. $e %rm $ey convinced Miller that Carolyn was the best quickly began to %le case after case against the New person to brief and argue the case. By October 15, York Administration for Children’s Services. Carolyn %led her appearance in the United States Supreme Court as the lawyer who would argue on Carolyn has continued to teach law students and behalf of the child plainti* in the case. interns throughout most of her career. She has also been an adjunct professor at Cardozo Law School since It was the right decision. Even Supreme Court 2003. She is an authority on Social Security Disability Justice Samuel Alito, during the oral argument in 14 Camreta , prefaced one of his questions to her with the Ferguson v. City of Charleston , was argued in the observation, “You are very knowledgeable” in this area United States Supreme Court, Carolyn wrote an of law. Indeed, she is. important friend-of-the-court brief in support of the mother’s rights under the Fourth Amendment. One doesn’t get to the position of arguing the %rst (Ferguson later became the key precedent for the constitutional child protection case before the United Ninth Circuit’s decision in Camreta .) Most recently States Supreme Court in 21 years, however, without for the Family Defense Center, Carolyn contributed a many years of hard work. “No one, bar none, works winning line of argument to the brie%ng in Hernandez harder than Carolyn,” notes her husband David. Many v. Foster , a case that the Seventh Circuit Court of people who helped Carolyn prepare in moot court Appeals decided on August 26, 2011, just as this arguments would agree: I personally came away from biography was being completed. several of these two-hour sessions exhausted, while Carolyn never seemed to tire and stayed on her feet, Unfortunately, Carolyn has experienced her share answering question after question. of heartbreaking stories too. A mother Carolyn represented had her parental rights terminated based on inaccurate %ndings made by the juvenile court judge. $e juvenile court had adopted the Persistence and willingness to %ght to the %nish, prevailing view that the child’s foster parents were his along with superb research and analytical skills, have “psychological parents” (following the publication of enabled Carolyn to become an accomplished appellate Goldstein, Freud and Solnit’s treatise Beyond the Best advocate. Carolyn’s fearlessness, and her uncanny Interests of the Child , which made the case against ability to spot and develop legal theories and to apply parents and in favor of foster parents popular). $e those ideas to the real life problems of children and mother went on to successfully raise another child, families, has enabled her to establish numerous leading who eventually became a teacher. $e child whom the precedents in her own cases and set the stage for other mother had lost to the foster care system was adopted, advocates, including the Family Defense Center, to but the adoptive mother died and the adoptive father build on her successes in cases of their own. showed no interest in continuing to care for him. Carolyn has had more than 30 federal appeals court By age 21, the child had become a drug addict and arguments, an astonishingly high tally for any public a thief. At that point, he came back to live with interest lawyer, let alone for a legal services or small Carolyn’s client and stole everything the client owned. %rm lawyer. Some of her appellate arguments have Carolyn’s client gave the child a second chance, but been particularly challenging for the most seasoned he stole from her again. Finally, the client had to advocate. Carolyn once had so many cases pending make the heartbreaking decision to say “no” when her in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (the federal son tried to come back a third time. Carolyn kept in circuit for New York) that four of her cases were touch with her client through this tragedy, o*ering consolidated to be argued together. Similarly, when emotional support when legal support was unavailing. she argued the relatively rare “rehearsing en banc” Sometimes, sadly, that is all even the best of lawyers before the Federal Court of Appeals in a Nevada case like Carolyn can do when the courts make mistakes concerning the question of whether child welfare and deny relief to deserving clients. caseworkers have absolute immunity from suit ( Miller v. Gammie ), she had to convince the full circuit to change the prior panel’s opinion. She succeeded. For Carolyn, what is perhaps her biggest accomplish- ment as a lawyer isn’t even in an area of law that I Carolyn has also prepared briefs and consulted on usually attribute to her leadership: it does not concern many important cases that she hasn’t argued. When the rights of the family, but, rather, the rights of the a case concerning whether hospitals could release children who are already in foster care. $e 1981 case, mothers’ positive toxicology tests to prosecutors, Doe v. New York City Department of Social Services ,

15 is the very %rst of a long line of cases that established included). Similar cases are being %led in Texas and that children have a constitutional right to safety Michigan as this article goes to press. in foster care. Carolyn is particularly proud of Doe because every federal circuit court of appeals that has Carolyn is probably best known for her role as lead considered the issue has adopted it, making it the law appellate counsel in Nicholson v. Scoppetta . In a of the land. 2004 decision in Nicholson , the New York Court of Appeals declared that domestic violence victims Beyond a doubt, Doe establishes that Carolyn is a child possess constitutional rights to care for their children, advocate %rst and foremost, whose ability to speak and that these rights are violated by child protection for the rights of children is unparalleled. $at’s a key authorities who label them as neglectful solely because point, because child advocates know that claiming to they “allowed” themselves to be abused and “engaged speak on behalf of the rights and interests of children in domestic violence.” $e court orders in Nicholson is a contentious matter. $is has brought Carolyn required child welfare authorities to stop seizing the strongest of allies and friends, but also generated children from domestic violence victims in New York powerful detractors. City and also required the payment of monetary damages to the named plainti*s. $e federal trial Another one of Carolyn’s important legal victories court also ordered a raise in the rate of pay for parents’ was in Valmonte v. Bane in 1994. $e suit sought counsel in dependency court proceedings, which an order to stop the State of New York from set the stage for a sweeping reform of the appointed keeping Ms. Valmonte’s name on New York’s counsel system for families in New York City. child abuse registry. Carolyn argued that the State used an unconstitutionally low burden of proof $e Nicholson victory was big news in the child in its registry. Carolyn devised an ingenious and advocacy world, and the news spread around the original argument that proved to be the linchpin world. Carolyn was invited to speak about the case for the very strongly worded opinion of the Federal in Australia and across the United States. $e case Court of Appeals in New York. $e Second Circuit has been heralded and cited by domestic violence excoriated the child protection agency for sweeping advocates, as well as women’s and civil rights groups errors in registering innocent people and ruining as a model for successful litigation on behalf of low- careers. $e Court proclaimed, income families.

To argue that the extraordinarily high percentage of reversals supports the fairness of the system, as a desirable feature of that system, is a curious Carolyn’s reputation, along with that of her %rm, is defense of administrative procedures. One does that she engages in “take-no-prisoners” legal advocacy. not normally purchase a car from a dealer who Her adversaries have taken heed. Child welfare stresses that his repair sta* routinely services and authorities have learned the hard way that they will repairs the model after frequent and habitual not catch a break if they violate children and parents’ breakdowns. If 75% of those challenging their rights. Lansner, Kubitschek Scha*er’s web site quotes inclusion on the list are successful, we cannot an anonymous supervising attorney for the New York help but be skeptical of the fairness of the original City Administration for Children’s Services as saying: determination. . . . We hold that the high risk “[Lansner & Kubitschek] has been the nemesis of of error produced by the procedural protections this agency for about twenty years. And I know from established by New York is unacceptable. personal experience that if every ‘i’ is not dotted, every ‘t’ not crossed and everything not done precisely Carolyn’s victory in Valmonte set the stage for major within the time allotted by the decision they will sue challenges that have been brought against child abuse us.” Carolyn Kubitschek, David Lansner, and their registries in Illinois, California and North Carolina for partner Barbara Scha*er wear their reputations as legal violations of due process (our own Dupuy case sticklers with evident pride. 16 Child savers cringe when they hear Carolyn’s name. In the world of child advocacy, there are many “child savers” — a term elaborated upon by Richard Wexler, the outspoken Executive Director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform (NCCPR). Child savers are people who believe that children, especially children who are alleged to have been abused or neglected by a parent, need to be “saved” from their presumptively bad parents. $ey believe that the best way to do this is to take them from their parents and put them into foster care. $e history of child saving is full of movements that ran roughshod over the Blythe and Carolyn. rights of poor, minority and immigrant parents in the name of the “best interests of After Carolyn and David married in 1975, they settled the children.” in Park Slope, Brooklyn, where they raised their own two sons, Jesse and Noah. Both sons remain close to I %rst met Carolyn when she called me in the late their parents in New York City: both are married and 1990’s with an invitation to serve on the board of pursuing successful careers — Jesse is a web designer/ the NCCPR. Neither Richard, Carolyn, nor I will technical consultant and Noah, following in his ever be called a “child saver.” Child savers tend to grandparents’ interest in hard sciences, was a chemistry minimize children’s ties to their families of origin and teacher and is now a high school principal. Jesse’s wife, their communities. We %ght instead for the rights of Liz Call, is a librarian. children to remain in their own homes, and for the rights of the parents to raise their own children. $at Carolyn is a very protective mother and an adoring has made us unpopular with quite a number of other grandmother. She is also a loyal daughter, sister, wife child advocates, who see children’s interests as more and friend. David once told me that they generally allied with the interests of the State. work on every day of the week that ends in “y,” yet they have managed to lead an active out-of-work life. Even if the phrase “work-life balance” isn’t the %rst thing that pops into mind when describing their Carolyn spent her early years in Chicago’s Oakdale lives, it isn’t the last either. Annual trips to Europe, neighborhood on the far south side, the oldest of four most often to Italy, have helped Carolyn and David children of Herbert and Jenny Kubitschek, who met stay relatively sane. at the University of Chicago. Herbert Kubitschek, a geneticist at Argonne National Laboratory, previously On May 23, 2010, Noah and his wife, Devon Martin, worked with Enrico Fermi on the %rst atomic reactor. an attorney and running coach, became parents and Jenny Kubitschek trained and worked as a chemist made Carolyn and David %rst-time grandparents. until Carolyn was born in 1949, after which she If you ask Carolyn what she does for fun now, she primarily cared for the family and was an active proudly displays pictures of her very photogenic community volunteer. Carolyn has three younger granddaughter, Blythe. Despite her over-the-top busy siblings, Craig, Warren, and Wendy. When Carolyn litigation schedule, Carolyn %nds plenty of afternoons was ready to start junior high, the family moved to the and weekends to give Blythe her full attention, just as western suburb of Hinsdale, where Carolyn graduated she managed to %nd time to raise two healthy, happy, from Hinsdale Central High School. and successful sons. 17 She also has a very wry sense of humor. In this she Carolyn and David have worked as such inseparable is more than a little encouraged by David who, if collaborators in law and life that our decision to he hadn’t developed an exemplary career in the law, honor Carolyn alone caused their long-time friend might have had — in my own humble opinion — a and colleague, the Honorable Louise Gruner Gans, very successful career as a stand-up comedian. $ey to object that “you just can’t honor Carolyn and not entertain a close circle of friends each year at their David. $ey are a team.” annual Super Bowl Party. Despite working nearly every day of the year, both Carolyn and David are able Carolyn absolutely agrees: she %rst and foremost to manufacture time and energy for friends and family credits David both for her ability to bring the cases she whenever they are in need. As if a full home and work has won and for enabling her to lead a full, productive, life weren’t enough, Carolyn continues to play the and happy life at work and at home. And she is the piano as her congregation’s volunteer substitute pianist. %rst to praise David’s impressive legal skills, including She excels at this, as with everything else she does. his excellent on-your-feet trial skills, and an instinct for understanding judges’ thought processes and bringing Carolyn and David’s family life has not been entirely them around to his point of view. “David is simply the joyful of late, however. On January 17, the day best lawyer I have ever seen at arguing motions before before the briefs in Camreta v. Alford were due in the trial judges,” Carolyn says. She also credits David’s Supreme Court, Carolyn’s younger brother Warren superb trial skills for enabling them to settle many of was diagnosed with an aggressive brain cancer. their cases. $eir opponents just don’t want to face Carolyn kept to her legal tasks, but in the weeks David in the courtroom or face Carolyn in the court before the Supreme Court argument, her moot court of appeals. preparations were punctuated with trips to Indiana to visit her brother. Warren passed away at age 56 When Carolyn accepted lead responsibility to argue on April 3, 2011, survived by his wife Catherine, his Camreta v. Greene , however, I knew we didn’t have to mother Jenny, his siblings and his four nieces and look further for our 2011 honoree. Even if she had not nephews. Carolyn and David now make a special point done a superb job in brie%ng and arguing the Camreta to visit Carolyn’s mother in Downers Grove whenever case, even if she hadn’t worked tirelessly under extreme they can, so the weekend festivities of the Family pressure from all sides, and even if she hadn’t put all Defense Center provide a special opportunity for the of her other work on hold, the fact that she took on family to gather and celebrate. We only wish Warren the job without a penny of compensation would have could be here to celebrate with us today. earned her our own highest award. But Carolyn’s excellence presents a challenge to all of us, too: the challenge is how to build and strengthen Carolyn Kubitschek is both hard to keep up with and a our advocacy for children and families. $ere are hard act to follow. She’s a consummate legal researcher, simply too few heroes like Carolyn in the world of an ingenious legal tactician, and a prodigious worker. child and family advocacy. Carolyn can produce lines of legal citations on arcane aspects of civil rights law at the drop of a hat. And to anyone who ever wondered if one person can Unfailingly generous with her time and talent, she make a di*erence in that world, we have an answer: seems always willing and able to do more. At age 62, One person can de%nitely make a huge di*erence, if she seems to have the energy of a person in her 20’s or that person happens to be Carolyn Kubitschek. J 30’s. If she feels any need to slow down, she doesn’t show it.

18 The Family Defense Center Announces A Very Special New Memorial Fund: The Chaitanya Maddali Family Legal Support Fund

$e Family Defense Center works with many talented at the major Chicago law %rm of Winston & Strawn. pro bono lawyers, but one who stood out both for his In August of 2007, he married Anita Ortiz in a commitment to the mission of the FDC and for his combined Catholic and Hindu wedding ceremony and celebration. $ree years later, the Maddali’s beautiful daughter Amelia was born on December 20, 2010.

An exuberant and fun-loving man, Chaitanya was known for his keen sense of humor and his intensity. An avid reader, he loved poetry, philosophy, and crime %ction. $oughtful and contemplative, he was a fountain of good advice and a great source of support to his friends.

No wonder, then, that Chaitanya was so passionate about the legal and factual issues in the two civil rights cases he worked on with the Center. $e %rst case was Evans v. Richardson and the second was Hernandez v. Foster . In both of these cases, DCFS investigators had seized an infant from the parents. DCFS then demanded that the parents agree to an onerous safety plan, even though DCFS lacked evidence to support their claim that these children needed to be kept away from their parents. $e Family Defense Center has long been challenging these sorts of abuses, but with these two cases it had a special new opportunity to secure precedents that would help to put a stop to such unconstitutional and anti-family practices.

Chaitanya conducted a substantial share of the Chaitanya Maddali holds his newborn daughter, Amelia. legal research and legal analysis in both cases, and worked with a team led by Julie Bauer to develop the facts for both. $e Evans case settled, thanks intelligence was Chaitanya Maddali. As an attorney at in part to his work opposing DCFS e*orts simply Winston & Strawn, Chaitanya worked on two major to dismiss the case. Chaitanya was a lead drafter civil rights cases — the %rst such cases the Center %led of several legal memoranda %led with the court after it started its Pro Bono Program. and played a major role in the brie%ng before the Seventh Circuit in Hernandez . Chaitanya was born in Mumbai, India to parents Vijayalaxmi and Krishna Maddali. At fourteen, In all of these endeavors, Chaitanya was both Chaitanya moved to Brooklyn with his parents, passionate and sharply analytical in his approach. He attending the prestigious Bronx Science Academy. He was strongly committed to justice for families in the attended Washington University in St. Louis for both child welfare system and he worked at 150% capacity college and law school, eventually taking a position to make that commitment a reality. Chaitanya and

19 his wife Anita, a public interest lawyer herself, were and his friends, but for the entire Chicago legal both strong supporters of the Family Defense Center community. His loss is also keenly felt by the Center’s as well. Chaitanya served on the Center’s Bene%t Host client community which lost a shining young legal Committee in 2010 even as his illness prevented him light far too soon. from enjoying the festivities. Chaitanya was an inspiration to us all. To recognize On February 5, 2011, Chaitanya Maddali passed away, this, and his contribution to the cause of justice for just seven weeks after his daughter was born and just families, the Center has decided to name a new special three days before the federal Seventh Circuit Court of litigation fund in his honor. $e fund meets a very Appeals heard oral argument in Hernandez v. Foster , important need at the Center, as many of our clients, the case that Chaitanya had helped to develop from its like the Evanses and the Hernandezes, cannot a*ord inception. $e argument before the Seventh Circuit the costs of litigation to vindicate their rights. Court of Appeals went very well, but Chaitanya’s co-counsel on the case missed the delight he normally $e new Chaitanya Maddali Family Legal Support would have taken in hearing the Court’s pointed Fund will help pay for the costs of cases the Center questions of opposing counsel. $e Seventh Circuit’s seeks to bring on behalf of clients who otherwise favorable decision set important new precedents that cannot pay for %ling fees, litigation costs, traveling the Center will rely on to protect hundreds of Illinois expenses, and expert witness fees. Given Chaitanya’s families: Chaitanya’s contribution to this success will commitment to access to justice for all, the Center continue as a legacy to his personal passion for justice. believes it is %tting to create a lasting memorial fund in his name, so that families for years to come will Chaitanya’s death is a huge loss, not just for his family continue to bene%t from Chaitanya’s inspirational and friends, his colleagues at Winston & Strawn service to our community. J

Tributes

“I am honored and humbled by the invitation to join the community in The University of Chicago Law School’s celebrating the Family Defense Center’s third annual bene"t honoring Attorney Carolyn Kubitschek. The Family Defense Center has been Edwin F. Mandel Legal Aid Clinic and continues to be a strong advocate for the children and families involved in the child welfare system here in Illinois and throughout is proud that its alumna our nation. As the Presiding Judge of the Child Protection Division of — Carolyn Kubitschek — Cook County I am extremely proud of the legal representation and advocacy that the Family Defense Center provides. The Center has is receiving this been instrumental in shaping what child and parent representation well-deserved award. requires in child welfare matters. I, along with all the judges assigned to the Child Protection Division, congratulate the Center on achieving  this important milestone. ... I wish you and the Center continued success.”

Sincerely,

Patricia M. Martin Presiding Judge Child Protection Division of Cook County

20 The Redleaf Family and the Libgober Family Are Proud to Recognize Our Friends Congratulations Carolyn! We are

Carolyn Kubitschek and David Lansner so happy to see you receive long deserved recognition for your undying As Outstanding Advocates for Justice commitment to the rights of families for Childrenand Families across the country. You are a brilliant

And thank you for all you have done to support legal mind and a fierce advocate, the Family Defense Center and we feel very fortunate to have worked with and learned from you. Rhoda and Paul Redleaf Diane Redleaf and Anatoly Libgober Andrew Redleaf and Lynne Singer Redleaf Joy Mele R Brett Ward Brian Libgober Jonathan Libgober

Congratulations to Carolyn Kubitschek Best Wishes from from Goldfarb Abrandt Salzman Mary Halliwell & Kutzin LLP and 350 Fifth Ave. Suite 1100 Marc, Sarah & New York, NY 10118 Aaron Tenenbaum 212-387-8400 Visit our web site at www.seniorlaw.com

21 Congratulations to

Carolyn Kubitschek

on receiving the 2011 Family Defender Award

Helen Lansner Ruth Lansner Dan Lansner

My clients Craig and Wendy Humphries only by the accused, “but by their children and I, and many thousands of other and extended families, their neighbors and Californians, owe an enormous debt of their employers.” $e Humphries court relied gratitude to Carolyn Kubitschek. $e amicus on a case that Carolyn successfully argued brief she wrote for the National Coalition years earlier, Valmonte v. Bane , 18 F.3d 992 for Child Protection Reform in Humphries (2d Cir. 1994), which held New York’s child v. County of Los Angeles , 554 F.3d 1170 (9th abuse registry system unconstitutional. Cir. 2009) contributed immeasurably to A New York Times story on the Valmonte the Humphries’ success in that appeal: the decision prompted my %rst phone call to Ninth Circuit held California’s maintenance Carolyn, back in 1994. I’ll always remember of the Child Abuse Central Index violates something she told me that day: during the federal procedural due process because Valmonte argument, a judge on the panel people are not given a fair opportunity to asked, “You mean I could be on that list?” challenge the allegations against them. Making an unpopular cause relatable to the Carolyn’s brief made clear that the goals of court is one of Carolyn’s extraordinary skills. protecting children and preserving liberty Fortunately for all of us, Carolyn has devoted are not mutually exclusive. Her arguments those skills to the improvement of child were crucial to the court’s understanding and protection policies across the country. %nding that the “great human cost” of being falsely accused of child abuse is borne not Esther Boynton San Diego, September 13, 2011

22 BARBARA SCHAFFER and DAVID LANSNER

Congratulate our Partner

CAROLYN KUBITSCHEK

On her selection as 2011 FAMILY DEFENDER

Her Brilliance, Tenacity, Energy, and Compassion have been a guiding light for all of us through the years.

LANSNER KUBITSCHEK SCHAFFER 325 Broadway Suite 201 New York, NY 10007

Q 212-349-0900

Q www.lanskub.com

23 efore there were good, institutional B providers of family defense in New York City, before there was a well-organized grassroots advocacy community in New York, there was Carolyn Kubitschek. With her partner in life and in law, David Lansner, Carolyn was DPRQJWKH¿UVWWRVWDQGXSIRUWKRVHZKR otherwise would be, literally, defense-less.

Through individual representation and groundbreaking impact litigation that’s had an impact around the world (Carolyn has been invited to lecture in Australia and copies of Judge Weinstein’s decision in Nicholson have circulated worldwide) and, of course, through her work as President and Vice President of NCCPR, Carolyn has spared thousands of children from the trauma of needless separation from everyone they know and love.

Richard Wexler Executive Director National Coalition for Child Protection Reform

24 The Efroymson Family Fund is a proud supporter of the Family Defense Center and their work to advocate for and protect the rights of children and families.

25 26 27 Cardozo Law School Congratulates Adjunct Professor Carolyn Kubitschek

Thank you for your years of helping Cardozo students understand the practice of family law in the Family Law Clinic

Celebrating 35 Years

28 Investing In Communities º applauds the hard work and dedicated advocacy of the Family Defense Center!

IIC ® Member MAP Real Estate delivered a great solution to the FDC’s RI¿FH OHDVLQJ SUREOHP DQG WKH )'& UHFHLYHG XQUHVWULFWHG IXQGLQJ DV D result — with no development cost!

FAMILY DEFENSE CENTER SUPPORTERS: YOUR REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS CAN HELP THE FDC!

The FDC is now an IIC ®1RQSUR¿W3DUWQHUDQGPDNHVWKLVQHZWRRODYDLODEOH to you, too! Using any broker, all FDC supporters can make both residential DQGFRPPHUFLDOUHDOHVWDWHWUDQVDFWLRQVEHQH¿WWKH)'&DWQRSHUVRQDO cost!

Find a socially responsible real estate professional through IIC º or encourage your preferred professional to participate.

Rethink real estate. Rethink philanthropy.

Visit www.iiconline.org for more information.

29 To the Family Defense Center, #is Tribute is for J.J. Our family would like to thank the Family Defense Center for all their A child wrongly taken from his family work and continued support of our and helped by the family. Your work on behalf of our Family Defense Center. family and many others in Illinois is invaluable. $e Family Defense center continues to %ght for due process $ank you for your advocacy and parental rights. $e Family Defense for justice for families! Center is the guiding light when DCFS unfairly treats families. Eric Gleason Again, thank you for all your support and truly invaluable work. Danny J. Parker Bryan & Qing Tabiadon Sharon Muselin, Grandmother of J.J.

$ank you for the privilege of working with you as your co-counsel in Camreta/ Alford v. Greene .

And congratulations on this award for so admirably discharging your lead counsel responsibilities in that case and for your other distinguished work in the child welfare %eld.

Robert E. Lehrer Law O\ces, Robert E. Lehrer 36 S. Wabash Ave. Suite 1310 Chicago, IL 60603

312-332-2121 (phone) 312-422-0708 (fax)

www.rlehrerlaw.com

30

Annette Appell cheers Carolyn, Carolyn Kubitschek Congratulations on a well-earned award! a brilliant and fierce warrior for families! Thomas Hoffman

ŽŶŐƌĂƚƵůĂƟŽŶƐŽŶďĞŝŶŐŚŽŶŽƌĞĚ ĂƐƚŚĞϮϬϭϭ&ĂŵŝůLJĞĨĞŶĚĞƌ͕ĂƌŽůLJŶ͊ Carolyn

zŽƵĂƌĞĂďƌŝůůŝĂŶƚĂŶĚƉĂƐƐŝŽŶĂƚĞĂĚǀŽĐĂƚĞ Congratulations for this honor and ĨŽƌĨĂŵŝůŝĞƐĂŶĚƌŝĐŚůLJĚĞƐĞƌǀĞƚŚŝƐĂǁĂƌĚ͘/ the wonderful work that you do as ĂŵŐƌĂƚĞĨƵůĨŽƌĂůůLJŽƵĚŽĂŶĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƌŝǀŝůĞŐĞ an advocate for those most in need ŽĨŬŶŽǁŝŶŐLJŽƵĂƐĂĐŽůůĞĂŐƵĞĂŶĚĨƌŝĞŶĚ͘ of a voice in our legal system.

ŽƌŽƚŚLJZŽďĞƌƚƐ Stephanie Twin and Richard Smuckler

Helene Snyder, Esq. would like to congratulate The Family $ank you Carolyn for being, “very knowledgeable Defense Center in its Third Annual Benefit in [the civil rights of children and families] . . . honoring 2011 Family Defender Carolyn and working to design . . . an ideal System.” Kubitschek. Thanks to the commitment From questions by Justice Alito, page 42, and dedication of Carolyn Kubitschek Oral Argument Kubitschek and The Family Defense Center, justice CAMRETA v. GREENE for families is being achieved. From the Law O$ce of Bruce A. Young 181 Hudson Street New York, NY 10013 Congratulations to Carolyn Kubitschek 212-965-0050 and sincere best wishes and appreciation advocating the rights of chidren and to the leadership and sta* of the families for over 30 years Family Defense Center. Jonni L. Miklos Finch

31 From the tenacious parents’ Congratulations, Carolyn. You are attorneys in the trenches — DWLUHOHVV¿JKWHUIRU\RXUFOLHQWVD Carolyn, we honor you for gifted writer, a poised and articulate your courage, inspiration and friendship!! oral advocate, and a generous co-counsel. It was an honor and Kathleen Dubois a pleasure to work with you. Managing Attorney Family Court Project Carolyn Shapiro Legal Services of Eastern Missouri

/ƚŝƐŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƚŽŚŽŶŽƌĂƌŽůLJŶ<ƵďŝƚƐĐŚĞŬ ĨŽƌŚĞƌůŝĨĞƟŵĞĐŽŵŵŝƚŵĞŶƚƚŽĚĞĨĞŶĚŝŶŐĨĂŵŝůŝĞƐĂŶĚ The Child Welfare Organizing Project ĐŚŝůĚƌĞŶ ĨƌŽŵ ŽǀĞƌͲƌĞĂĐŚŝŶŐ ďLJ ƐƚĂƚĞ ŽĸĐŝĂůƐ͘ KǀĞƌ honors and thanks Carolyn Kubitschek ĂƉĞƌŝŽĚŽĨŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶϯϬLJĞĂƌƐ͕ĂƌŽůLJŶŚĂƐďĞĞŶĂ for her outstanding work ƟƌĞůĞƐƐĮŐŚƚĞƌĨŽƌƐŽĐŝĂůũƵƐƟĐĞ͘^ŚĞŚĂƐǁŽŶƚŚĞŵŽƐƚ defending the rights of families ƐŝŐŶŝĮĐĂŶƚǀŝĐƚŽƌŝĞƐŝŶĐŚŝůĚǁĞůĨĂƌĞŝŶEĞǁzŽƌŬ^ƚĂƚĞ ĂŶĚ ŚĞƌ ůŝƟŐĂƟŽŶ ĞīŽƌƚƐ ŚĂǀĞ ŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚ ƚŚĞ ĞŶƟƌĞ in the child welfare system. ĐŽƵŶƚƌLJ͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐƉĞƌŚĂƉƐŶŽůĂǁLJĞƌǁŚŽŚĂƐƐŚĂƉĞĚ ƉƌŽŐƌĞƐƐŝǀĞƌĞĨŽƌŵƚŚƌŽƵŐŚůŝƟŐĂƟŽŶŝŶĐŚŝůĚǁĞůĨĂƌĞ Mike Arsham ŵŽƌĞ ƚŚĂŶ ĂƌŽůLJŶ͘ / ĐŽŶŐƌĂƚƵůĂƚĞ ďŽƚŚ ĂƌŽůLJŶ ĂŶĚ Executive Director dŚĞ&ĂŵŝůLJĞĨĞŶƐĞĞŶƚĞƌĨŽƌĐŚŽŽƐŝŶŐƚŽŚŽŶŽƌŚĞƌ͘ Child Welfare Organizing Project DĂƌƟŶ'ƵŐŐĞŶŚĞŝŵ

Friends, Family, and Colleagues Congratulate Carolyn Kubitschek Bob Rains and Andrea Jacobsen John Cooney, Cooney and Conway Anita and Lawrence Lansner Hon. Louis Crespo Andrew Manshel Chris Gottlieb Barbara and Steve Philipson Elizabeth H. Groot Nancy Shor Steve and Jan Hartz Susan Silverstein and Kenneth Shiotani Jane and Stephen Huels Tesser Ryan & Rochman LLP 32 Kay Benson Family Defense Center 2011 Donors and Maxine Dehn and Martha Kubitschek Carolyn Kubitschek Family Defender Award Event Sponsors Lester Kushner 2011 Major Annual Campaign Support M. Barry Levy Michael and Karen Armstrong Demetria Royals Chicago Bar Foundation Illinois Bar Foundation Stephen Ajl Eugene and Geraldine Pergament Hank and Miriam Blaustein Vera Pless Luz Ciupeiu Polk Foundation

William and Lenore Dietz Andrew and Lynne Redleaf Paul and Rhoda Redleaf $e Family Advocacy Movement – Nebraska Anonymous Mary Ann Garrity (Gifts of over $1000 to the Annual Campaign are listed; the Family Defense Center gratefully acknowledges all of its annual Russell Grant campaign donors up to $1,000, many of whom are also donors to the Bene%t Event listed below). Wendy Greenhouse

Karen Guccione 2011 Family Defender Event Sponsors

Harold A. Hamer, M.D. Champions ($5,000 and up) Jenner & Block Hortense Hurwitz Vera Pless Jannette Katz Paul and Rhoda Redleaf

Ann and Jerry La*erty Defenders ($2,500 - $4,999) Michael T. Brody Judy and David Laufman Efroymson Family Fund Robert Letchinger McDermott Will & Emery Lisa and Ross Mishkin Michael Pink/Investing in Communities Sidley Austin LLP Megan Phillips Winston & Strawn LLP Deborah Rand Advocates ($1,500 - $2,499) Janet C. Singer and Edward Brozinsky Julie Bauer and Paul Greenberg Joan and Richard Zorza Bill and Donna Barrows Mary and Tom Broderick

33 Counselors ($1,000 - $1,499) Suzanne Sellers Sheldon Baskin Carolyn Shapiro and Josh Karsh Salvador Cicero/Cicero Law O\ce Richard Wexler Norman Hirsch and Ann Courter Auction Donors Kirkland & Ellis LLP American Girl David Lansner and Barbara Scha*er, $e Art Institute of Chicago Lansner Kubitschek Scha*er Biolumglass (Bryan Northup) Meg and David McDonald Daniel Biss Diane Redleaf and Anatoly Libgober Bright Olive Gallery (Jennifer Tiner) Bryan and Qing Tabiadon Elizabeth Butler and Dean Resnekov Weidner & McAulu*e, Ltd. Briggitte Carlson Sustainers ($500 - $999) Lourdes Ceballos Annette Appell and Cheryl Tadin Chicago Architecture Foundation Douglas Baird Chicago Bears Cardozo Law School Chicago Blackhawks Catherine Carpenter and David Baker Chicago Sinfonietta Eric Gleason Chicago Wolves Helen Lansner, Ruth Lansner, and Chocolat Céleste Dan Lansner Ann Courter and Norman Hirsch Miller Shakman & Beem Roger Dreher and the Honorable Nancy C. Dreher Dorothy Roberts Elissa Efroymson Ropes & Gray EPIC Restaurants Peggy Slater Farnsworth House Helene M. Snyder, Esq. Allegra Cira Fischer and Justin Fischer Friends ($300 - $499) Louis Fogel Emily Buss Fred Astaire Dance Studio – Burr Ridge Forest Printing Sarah Gatti Miriam Geraghty/Kinoy, Taren & Geraghty P.C. Gene Siskel Film Center Sandra Herman Jill Hazelbauer Van Der Ohe Troy and Laverne Horton Gary Herman Ann and Jerry La*erty Gabe Herrera TiShaunda and Michael McPherson Hotel Allegro Jonni Miklos and Ermit Finch It’s So Unique Boutique Michael O’Connor and Sara Mauk Carolyn Kubitschek and David Lansner

34 Charles and Alice Kurland Prof. Douglas Baird Brian Libgober and Jacqueline Vayntrub Dr. William and Donna Barrows Lettuce Entertain You – Big Bowl Briggitte Schmitt Bell Marco Lopez Carol Moseley Braun Mattel, Inc. Mary Kelly Broderick Meg and David McDonald Prof. Susan Brooks TiShaunda and Michael McPherson Jason Burke Brian Meister and Linda Herried Prof. Emily Buss Jonni Miklos and Ermit Finch Lourdes Ceballos Sheree Moratto Ann Courter and Norman Hirsch Music of the Baroque Louis Crespo Christine Naper Angela Cunningham Karen Nguyen Kathleen DuBois Michelle Paluch/East Bank Storage Edna Selan Epstein Panera Bread George Galland Provenance Food and Wine Miriam N. Geraghty Diane Redleaf Joyce Heneberry Rhoda Redleaf Laurene Heybach Revolution Brewing $omas Ho*man Alejandro Romero Toni Hoy Esther $oele Faith Kumar Brian and Laura Timmel David Lansner TRU Restaurant Robert E. Lehrer University of Chicago Presents Elizabeth Lewis Aida Vallecillo Nikki Lively $e Walt Disney Company Kathleen Mandell Wines for Humanity Margaret McDonald Rita McLennon Bene't/Host Committee Members, Auxiliary Board Members, and Event Volunteers Jonni Miklos Tiara Miles A special thanks to Anita Maddali for her generosity in helping to support the Family Christine Naper Defense Center through allowing us to Deborah Pergament commemorate Chaitanya Maddali at our event. Stephanie Plaisier Prof. Annette Appell Vera Pless

35 Samantha Rockwood Michael T. Brody Prof. Carolyn Shapiro Elizabeth Butler Susan Ann Silverstein Laverne Horton Todd Solomon Scott Kramer Christina Spiezia Jonni Miklos Laura Stratford Helene M. Snyder Brian and Laura Dreher Timmel Family Defense Center Sta* (Fall 2011): Prof. Michael Wald Diane L. Redleaf, Executive Director Prof. Anita Weinberg Melissa L. Staas, Sta# Attorney Brooke Whitted Allegra Cira Fischer, Sta# Attorney Adrienne Young Suzanne Sellers, Consultant for "ird Annual Bene$t Family Defense Center Board of Directors Diana Hansen, Administrator Michael O’Connor, President Eleana Lindsey, Law Graduate (Loyola Law School) Louis Fogel, Treasurer Desmond Kidney, Law Graduate (Northwestern TiShaunda McPherson, Secretary Law School)

About #e Family Defense Center Winner of the %rst “Excellent Emerging Organization” award from the Axelson Center for Nonpro%t Management.

$e mission of the Family Defense Center is to advocate for justice for families in the child welfare system. Founded in 2005, it is a groundbreaking legal representation and advocacy organization. Its primary focus is preventing irreparable harm to families through the wrongful separation of children from their parents. In 2010-2011, the Center’s credits included coordinating 18 friend-of-the-court briefs in the Supreme Court in Camreta/Alford v. Greene .

Family Defense Center 70 E Lake Street Suite 1100 Chicago, IL 60601

312-251-9800 (phone) 312-251-9801 (fax) www.familydefensecenter.org

36