Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Welfare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident alleges bias by court‑appointed evaluator and CYF during public comment
Summary
A Northampton County resident told council he believes a court‑appointed doctor and CYF workers acted unethically, blamed him for family issues, and said his daughters have missed school for nearly two years; he asked county administration to respond and meet.
During the council’s public‑comment period, Ramon Negron Walther addressed council for five minutes to raise complaints about child‑welfare and related court processes. Walther said he has pursued remedies up the chain of command, including to superior court, and described ongoing interactions with the county’s children‑and‑youth services (CYF) and with a court‑appointed doctor he named in his remarks.
Walther alleged the evaluator "was taking my children out of school, having secret meetings with their mother," and said the doctor told him he would portray Walther as a "malcontent father" and made comments Walther characterized as unethical and alarming. He told council he has received repeated contacts from CYF workers at his home — "not once, not twice, not three times, about 4 to 5 times" — and that one former CYF supervisor, Bernadette Jones, appeared shaken during a visit. Walther said his two daughters attend the Easton School District and that their absence from school has lasted nearly two years; he said teachers have been in contact but that truancy rules are being applied as the district waits for counts to trigger action.
Walther said he has sent emails to administration and to "Susan Wandelowski" seeking a meeting and requested that staff respond: "Susan, if you may, please respond to my emails. Let's set up a meeting. We can have a civil conversation." Council did not offer an on‑the‑record response during the public‑comment segment; administration did not dispute the assertion on the record that night. Walther said he had also filed for petition modification and is pursuing work in superior court.
The claim is an allegation made during public comment and was not adjudicated or answered definitively in the meeting; the record shows Walther requested administrative follow‑up. Council and administration later discussed related staffing and service delivery questions about Gracedale and county contractors but did not address Mr. Walther’s named allegations about individual professionals during the public record segment.
The council chair and administration should be asked to report back if follow‑up meetings with Mr. Walther are scheduled and whether any internal review of the specific allegations was opened.
