The Office of the Child Advocate (OCA) cited poor oversight and numerous miscommunications within the Department of Children and Families (DCF) that may have contributed to the beating death of a 2-year-old child found in a park in Stamford in December of 2022 after DCF returned him to his birth mother, according to a report issued today, which ultimately recommends the state and legislature take an active role in monitoring the department.
The child, Liam Rivera, had previously been removed from his parents’ care, along with his siblings, and was under DCF supervision following reports of parental drug and alcohol abuse, physical abuse and neglect that left the child with a broken arm, bruises and another fractured bone. DCF substantiated the abuse charges against the father, Edgar Ismalej-Gomez, and he was arrested.
Ismalej-Gomez claimed the child’s arm was broken when he grabbed Liam to prevent him from falling off the bed and the injury was an accident, but neither Ismalej-Gomez nor his mother, Iris Rivera, could offer clear explanations for the child’s other injuries. While DCF pinned the physical abuse on Ismalej-Gomez, OCA notes it was unclear he was the only parent involved in the abuse, and concerns about Liam’s mother were pushed aside. Liam was placed with a foster family where he began to thrive but was later returned to his mother by DCF through reunification therapy and in a manner that possibly violates state statute.
“OCA finds state law does not grant DCF discretion to place children who are under the state’s guardianship (commitment) back into the custody of the parent from whom the child was removed as the Juvenile Court has exclusive jurisdiction to address custody in child protection proceedings,” the report said.
DCF disputes this claim, however, contending that state laws allow DCF to place a child with “a suitable foster home or with a relative caregiver.”
“There are many decisions DCF can make as a guardian of a committed child that are not specifically authorized in statute,” an attorney for DCF said, according to the report.
Upon being returned to Rivera, Liam’s health began to degrade again. Reports of Rivera’s drug abuse and a report from a concerned doctor were not entered into Liam’s records and information regarding his other injuries besides the broken arm was not presented to Juvenile court. The court was also not informed when Ismalej-Gomez violated the protective order and police found him with the child, who was shoeless and wrapped in only paper towels, resulting in another arrest.
The father was subsequently released from prison and absconded from probation, but DCF said there was no concern the father had rejoined the family, despite having lost track of him between May 2022 and the child’s death in December that same year.
“Forensic interviews conducted with Liam’s siblings after Liam’s death indicate that Mr. Ismalej- Gomez was living with or frequently visiting with the family during the time period prior to Liam’s death,” the OCA report said.
The DCF caseworker who visited Liam’s home on December 20, 2022, prior to his death told police that she was not able to speak with the children alone and that Liam was observed to be tired and sleepy from not having a nap, but there were no visible injuries to the child.
The DCF record was later amended to say the caseworker spoke with one of Liam’s siblings alone and that the sibling denied Ismalej-Gomez was living at the home.
The OCA’s report also found that DCF’s visits to the home were always announced following the father’s release from prison; that DCF didn’t always use an interpreter for the primarily Spanish-speaking family; there were no in-home services to support reunification and there was inadequate follow-up regarding Liam’s wellbeing after being returned to his mother.
The report also found that critical information was not entered into Liam’s records or was updated late.
“OCA noted throughout this Report that emails or text messages authored by DCF staff reflected case activity that was not captured in the case record at critical decision points,” the report says. “There are also multiple instances of notes entered very belatedly into the case record, weeks and even months after the recorded activity. Despite the executive directive referenced above that Liam’s assigned caseworker should complete the record after Liam’s death, several gaps in the record remained.”
The report also found the guardian ad litem (GAL) – the attorney assigned to represent Liam – did not meet state, federal or Public Defender’s Office guidelines for representing the child, noting Liam was only seen twice in two years by the GAL assigned to him. The GAL also did not request or review DCF records after March 2021 and did not communicate with service providers, according to the report.
“Given Liam’s age and inability to communicate, his attorney’s lack of participation in case planning and failure to obtain records may run afoul of ethical obligations contained in the Rules of Professional Responsibility,” the report said.
DCF’s response to OCA’s findings was included in the report and the department noted that it has initiated its “Continuous Quality Improvement” process following the death of Liam and has identified areas for improvements and has contracted with an independent policy center at the University of Chicago to “complete a comprehensive overview of the Bureau of Strategic Planning.”
“This engagement began in January of 2023 and recommendations are currently being reviewed by the DCF Executive Team,” DCF wrote in their response. “The tragic passing of this young child and the circumstances surrounding his death remain under active investigation by law enforcement. The Department cannot, and will not, release any information to the public that could in any way jeopardize a full and fair investigation into the circumstances of this untimely death.”
In a press statement, Republican House Leader Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, said Liam’s case “demands deep scrutiny of the agencies and personnel who touched his life — in particular, the Department of Children and Families, which bore the primary responsibility for keeping Liam out of harm’s way.”
“Liam’s brief, tragic time on this Earth was defined by neglect and abuse, and the report from the Office of the Child Advocate makes it clear to me that the State of Connecticut failed him at every turn,” Candelora said. “There’s no question that Connecticut has some real soul-searching to do when it comes to how it manages at-risk children in its care.”
The report recommends, among many other changes, that DCF be under state and legislative supervision to examine “factors that may be contributing to the inconsistencies and/or recent decline in agency practice,” after DCF was recently released from federal oversight by the U.S. Health and Human Services Children’s Bureau.
“Given persistent findings of concern regarding practice in open cases like Liam’s, and the end of federal court oversight of DCF, meaningful state oversight of DCF operations is warranted,” the OCA wrote.
Although both parents have criminal charges pending against them, neither has been charged with Liam’s homicide.
**This article was updated with comments from Rep. Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford**
Was this article helpful?
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
I expect this in Florida, not Conneticut. That poor little person didn’t have a chance. Keep going Mr. Fitch, your doing great.
Nothing new with DCF! Same screw up with with the baby Dylan case in Groton Ct. Same screw up with my great grandsons. Made reports for over a year before boys were taken out of guardianship and put in foster care separately, even though the boys are a year and one month age difference. My heart as a great grandma was broken and also the boys great great grandma. We never got to these boys, our own flesh and blood. Social workers attitudes lacked concern for them, and there’s more, but way too much to write.
I am not at all surprised by DCFs inactions and failures. I read nowhere in the report about the foster parent being asked about her dealings with DCF and the child. Foster parents are on the frontlines. They know the most about the child and often have the most knowledge on DCFs poor decisions. I know firsthand of fighting vigorously against DCF as a foster parent. I fought to keep a child in my care safe because I vehemently disagreed with what DCF was doing. DCF, the GAL and the child’s attorney all conspired to return the child back to the bio even after a trial judge, psychiatrist and therapist said it was not in the child’s best interest. They do not care about kids. Their sole goal is reunification at all cost. Foster parents are the key to keeping children safe but they are poorly treated if they don’t agree with DCFs narrative. The agency wants foster parents who will blindly agree with whatever they do. They claim foster parents have a right to be heard in court but that is not true. I did not know until years after my foster child was in my home that I could speak at a hearing and when I expressed my concerns, DCF did not want to hear it. I took my issues to trial and DCF outright lied, minimized or omitted information to fit their agenda. This agency lacks morals and ethics and is allowed to function without oversight. They are corrupt and cannot be questioned as they hide behind confidentiality. More transparency of this agency is needed. The public would be appalled to see how they truly function.
Oh I totally agree with what you said. DCF is very corrupt, they haven’t a dang clue of what they are doing as many of these people have little experience and not enough education. Their controlling techniques and being on a power trip makes them feel VIP and obviously gives them a high. They don’t care about these children, they care about the power over others that makes them feel like kings.
I totally agree with both of you. Corruption at state levels went on for many years regarding the care and money handling of my older sister who was afflicted with Down’s Syndrome and was abused at Mansfield State Training School. That’s another story. But as a retired senior citizen I was a part time worker at U.C.F.S. with children that DCF was involved with. It seemed apparent that some DCF “workers” were more interested in collecting a paycheck than seeing that the children were protected. One DCF worker actually made life hell for a decent hard working family by harrassing them , driving by after 9:P.M., inserting herself at their private birthday party (I think there’s a name for that) and made inaccurate “reports” on her observations. She tried to have all three of the children removed from the home. The circumstances were more dire and heartbreaking involving loving grandparents as well and dealing with terminal illness. The grandfather at one point made the remark that “she probably doesn’t even have a green card”. I don’t think he was too far off. At one meeting at their home with our supervisor, she tried to make me agree to her false statement. I just looked up at her and said that I can’t agree with something that I do not know. I think my young supervisor was not surprised. Not sure but I think she may have been replaced. As far as Guardian Add Litem, um, watch closely who they are and why they want to do that. Don’t ask. I might tell you. Just saying, personally ambitious “professionals” are out there, camoulflaged among the truly caring and qualified. That’s just my one ‘drop in the bucket’ of things I need not tell, but do know.