Opinion ID: 1908241
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The opinions of the experts.

Text: The expert witnesses for the District and for the mother all agreed that the mother, though well-motivated, was mentally ill, and that she suffered from a delusionary disorder, but they disagreed in significant measure as to the effect of the mother's psychological condition on her ability to be an effective parent. The District's experts believed that, under all of the circumstances, the mother could not parent E.H. successfully. The mother's experts thought that, given certain safeguards, the mother would be able to do so. Although, as we have noted, E.H.'s pediatrician was favorably impressed by the mother's love for her daughter, he expressed profound concern regarding the mother's ability to deal with E.H.'s special developmental needs. He explained that one of the most critical windows for [a child's] speech development is really in [the] period between the first birthday and the ensuing year or two, and that if remedial measures were deferred until the child was four or five years old, then we've lost a tremendous opportunity to help improve [her] speech and [her] language development. Dr. Weissman stated that notwithstanding the mother's good intentions and her readiness to follow up on referrals, she insisted on seeing things solely in terms of stories and findings that don't make any medical sense. Under these circumstances, Dr. Weissman questioned whether the mother would be consistently available in an emotional and developmental way to make sure that [E.H.] got the needed services and interventions outside the home and within the home. In sum, according to Dr. Weissman, Ms. H's psychiatric state did not reassure me that she could consistently understand and follow through and provide the kind of nurturing and home stimulation that E.[H.] was definitely in need of during this developmentally sensitive window. Dr. David Missar, the clinical psychologist who testified for the District, also had severe doubts regarding G.H.'s ability to parent her daughter. Dr. Missar examined G.H. on March 6, 1996, when E.H. was a little more than two years old. It was Dr. Missar's opinion, based on the mother's mental health symptoms, that she was unable to parent at that time without the administration of anti-psychotic medication ... and psychotherapy. In fact, Dr. Missar believed that the mother's condition, which he described as delusional disorder, persecutory type, [11] could significantly impair her ability to parent and may, given some of Ms. H's past behavior, put her daughter in danger. He stated that the mother's personality testing suggested a hyper-vigilant outlook toward her environment, suspiciousness ..., considerable anger, and isolation from others. Dr. Janice Hutchinson, the medical director of the District's Child and Youth Services Administration, conducted a psychiatric evaluation of G.H. in March 1996. Dr. Hutchinson confirmed in her report that, according to available records, the mother had definitely been in a delusional state at various times in her life, but that she appears to be genuinely unaware of [her condition]. Dr. Hutchinson recommended anti-psychotic medication, individual therapy, and possibly family therapy. She stated that G.H. should be allowed visitation with her daughter but always in the presence of another adult.  (Emphasis added.) The italicized language obviously indicates that, in Dr. Hutchinson's opinion, the mother's psychological condition so impaired her parenting ability that unsupervised visitation was inadvisable. Dr. Hutchinson's position necessarily implied that G.H. could not be a successful custodial parent for E.H., especially without supervision, and that protective intervention by public authorities was in E.H.'s best interest. Dr. Spencer Johnson, a psychiatrist who was employed by the District's Commission on Mental Health Services, and who headed the Professional Network Group (PNG) at which G.H. received therapy, testified as an expert witness for the mother. Dr. Johnson agreed that G.H., whom he examined in March 1996, was suffering from a delusionary disorder, persecutory type, a diagnosis that includes paranoia but excludes schizophrenia. [12] Dr. Johnson testified, however, that, in his opinion, the mother's mental health problems did not interfere in any way with her ability to parent her daughter, and that the mother was not a danger to her child. [13] This was so, according to Dr. Johnson, because the mother's delusions are fairly well what we call circumscribed, and therefore don't interfere with the ability to parent especially a special child because they're related to people outside the immediate environment. G.H.'s belief that members of her family were conspiring against her would not affect her parenting skills because it's apples and oranges. Dr. Johnson presumed that reunification should be accompanied by therapy, [14] but he stated that she doesn't have to be in therapy before reunification. Dr. Sylvia Pierson-Ward, a psychotherapist who worked at PNG under Dr. Johnson's supervision, testified that she met with the mother on a weekly basis from December 1995 to May or June 1996 for individual therapy and parenting classes. [15] Dr. Pierson-Ward testified that, in her opinion, the mother was delusional, but that the mother's mental health problems did not interfere with her ability to parent her daughter: Not at this point. That's my opinion. On cross-examination Dr. Pierson-Ward stated that the mother's conduct in having her infant daughter sleep on the balcony could be harmful to a child, but I don't necessarily see that it would be.