A Hoboken father said the Wallace Primary School delayed his attempts to talk to his son about a medical emergency, and alleges that after he questioned the legitimacy of the school policy, they called a state agency to make a retaliatory report of child endangerment.
The father said that after he had a confrontation with the principal at Wallace, an official from the Division of Youth and Family Services came to the school and asked his son questions about his parents. Then the DYFS official came to his house with police, saying someone complained that his 7-year-old son crosses the street alone.
Last week, school officials met with the Reporter but could not comment on the situation. School Board Attorney Joseph Morano would not confirm that Wallace School officials were the ones who called DYFS, but he said that in general, any school representative is entitled – and encouraged – to call DYFS if they have any reason to believe in good faith that a child is in any danger.
How it unfolded
The father, Miguel, who did not want his last name used, said he called the school on Wednesday, April 8 around 10 a.m. to alert his third grader of an emergency, but was told by Wallace School officials that he had to divulge the exact nature of the emergency before they could talk to his son.
Miguel recalled a conversation with a vice principal. “He said, ‘Whatever the emergency, just give us the message and we’ll pass it on,’ but I told him this is something that needs to stay between a father and a son,” he said.
The nature of the emergency, Miguel said, is a sensitive and personal topic, and he didn’t feel the need to divulge it to school officials.
After spending over 20 minutes speaking to secretaries and the vice principal, Miguel said Principal Charles Tortorella got on the phone.
“He knows me as someone who questions his policies,” Miguel said. Although Miguel said he never cursed or screamed at the officials, he admitted, “By that time, I’m feeling irate.”
“I asked [Tortorella], ‘Do you usually block parents in the case of an emergency’?” Miguel said. He says Tortorella claimed the school had a policy of checking emergency calls, but when Miguel asked where he could see this policy in print, he was rebuffed.
“[Tortorella] used this cavalier tone that he uses with parents. He said, ‘I will not be interrogated by you,’ ” Miguel said. “They’re entitled to create a system,” Miguel said, “but this is an erosion of privacy.”
Miguel said he was incensed and verbally lashed back at the principal, telling him that this was not an interrogation, but that he does pay taxes, and therefore pays Tortorella’s salary.
After unsuccessfully attempting to contact the superintendent of schools, Miguel, who works from home, packed up his 3-year-old daughter and went to the school to speak with his son.
Miguel said when he got to the school, Tortorella tried to apologize, although Miguel thought it was backhanded.
“He said, ‘I’m sorry, I don’t know why you wouldn’t let me help you,’ ” Miguel claimed. He said he told Tortorella that he wanted a copy of the policy, but that he was told that none exists.
One school source said Miguel’s son is required to phone home when he arrives at school – but that the son did not call that day. According to the source, administrators may have suspected the “emergency” was that Miguel hadn’t heard from his son.
Miguel returned to the school on Thursday, April 9 demanding some sort of policy copy, but was repeatedly told a copy doesn’t exist, he said.
Morano agreed that no official policy exists, but said that administrators are required to make judgment calls such as this as part of their jobs.
Bringing in the state
On Monday, April 20, schools reopened after spring break. Miguel picked up his son in the afternoon, and his son looked upset. His son said he was pulled from class into a separate room and asked questions by a man he didn’t recognize.
His son told him some of the questions: Is there any violence in the household? Is there fighting between your parents? Does his father ever hit your mother?
Less than a half an hour later, two police officers knocked on the family’s door. The man who had questioned Miguel’s son was there, and said he was from the state Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS). He and the police asked to enter the apartment.
Miguel said he explained to the DYFS representative what he perceived the situation to be: an attempt at retaliation by a school official.
He said he agreed to let the DYFS official enter the apartment without the police.
The man listened to Miguel’s story, then continued with his evaluation. The DYFS representative asked Miguel and his wife to answer a list of questions, some of which Miguel said he declined to answer.
“I didn’t like the line of questioning, but I cooperated,” he said last week, commending the DYFS rep’s professionalism and respectfulness.
Miguel said the DYFS rep told him that a claim was made alleging that he endangers his almost-8-year-old son by allowing the boy to cross 11th Street at Clinton Street on the way to school.
Miguel said he worked with the son for over a year to teach him how to cross the street. He said the process was gradual and that he still waits nearby to watch his son cross the intersection, but that his son was never in danger.
He believes the call to DYFS was retaliation for his incessant questioning of school officials, but has he has no definitive evidence to substantiate the claim.
A DYFS spokesperson said last week that they are not able to discuss specific cases.
Timothy J. Carroll may be reached at tcarroll@hudsonreporter.com.