A.G. v. DHS – June 6, 2018 –
unreported* memorandum decision – Pa. Cmwlth.
A.
G. (Mother) petitions for review of the Order of the Department of Human
Services denying Mother’s appeal from an indicated report identifying her as a
perpetrator of child abuse on the ChildLine and Abuse Registry (Registry) under
the Child Protective Services Law (CPSL).
The
Bureau adopted an Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) Recommendation, in which the
ALJ found that Mother did not rebut, with her testimony, the presumption of
abuse in Section 6381(d) of the CPSL, 23 Pa. C.S. § 6381(d). **
Mother
argues the ALJ’s findings are not supported by substantial evidence and that
the ALJ erred in applying the presumption.
Because
the ALJ issuing the Recommendation did not also preside over the hearings at
which the witnesses testified, and the bases for the ALJ discrediting Mother’s
testimony are unclear, our ability to perform effective appellate review to
determine whether the presumption in Section 6381(d) was properly applied is
hampered. Accordingly, we vacate the Department’s Order adopting the ALJ’s
Recommendation and remand for issuance of a new decision clearly setting forth
the reasons for crediting/discrediting the evidence and a new order based upon
those credibility determinations.
**
Section 6381(d) provides: Prima facie evidence of abuse.--Evidence that a child
has suffered child abuse of such a nature as would ordinarily not be sustained
or exist except by reason of the acts or omissions of the parent or other
person responsible for the welfare of the child shall be prima facie evidence
of child abuse by the parent or other person responsible for the welfare of the
child. 23 Pa. C.S. § 6381(d).
================================
*An unreported
Commonwealth Court case may not be cited binding precedent but can be cited for
its persuasive value. See 210 Pa.
Code § 69.414(b) and Pa. R.A.P.
3716
