7Th Circuit Court Rules That A Social Worker Violated The 4th Amendment By Strip Searching Children
The gist of it is that a social worker who was investigating a suspected case of children being spanked by their parents entered a private school and ordered two children to partially disrobe to inspect them for signs of abuse:
Two children who attended a private Christian school in Wisconsin were illegally strip-searched and had their constitutional rights violated by a state social worker, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled Monday.
In Michael C. v. Gresbach, the court said state worker Dana Gresbach violated the children’s Fourth Amendment rights to freedom from unreasonable search when she entered Good Hope Christian Academy in Milwaukee, Wis., had the children pulled from the classrooms and told them to remove their clothing when she suspected the parents of spanking in February 2004.
According to an attorney representing the kids and their parents this is a common procedure among social workers:
“The social worker performed these strip searches as a matter of routine, estimating that in perhaps one-half of the 300 or so cases she handled every year she subjected kids to a partial disrobing,” he said. “In fact, she testified that she considered it so routine that she did not bother to discuss her intentions with her supervisor, even though she spoke to her on her way to the school.”
The state had several social workers file affidavits saying they would have followed the same procedure. Crampton said, “That is an alarming admission, and we suspect you would find a similar pattern in social service offices all over America.”
The social worker in question wouldn’t allow the parents to be notified beforehand, either. She claimed that she has the right, in the course of an investigation of abuse, to search a child in that manner without a warrant and thus had immunity from suit. The 7th Circuit strongly disagreed:
Gresbach claimed she was entitled to qualified immunity because her actions were reasonable under the Fourth Amendment; however, the court disagreed.
“We do not exempt child welfare workers from adhering to basic Fourth Amendment principles under non-exigent circumstances – to do so would be imprudent,” the court stated. “… we do not believe that requiring a child welfare caseworker to act in accordance with basic Fourth Amendment principles is an undue burden on the child welfare system, particularly when it is necessary to conduct an examination of a child’s body, which is undoubtedly ‘frightening, humiliating and intrusive’ to the child.”
I’ve been harping on this subject for a while. I truly understand the need for the protection of children from abuse, but there is a right way and a wrong way to go about it. Just grabbing a kid and forcing them to disrobe without court oversite and in a non-judicial or non-medical environment is the wrong way.
4th Amendment, folks, that’s all I’m saying.












