THE NOT-SO-OBVIOUS AND INCONVENIENT TRUTH: REEXAMINING A RIGHT TO COUNSEL FOR PARENTS AND CHILDREN IN ABUSE AND NEGLECT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS.

The right to counsel for parents in administrative abuse and neglect cases, as well as for the children that are the subject of these matters, is a necessity that may not be obvious. This Article seeks to elucidate the fundamental interests that are at stake and justify why the sacrosanct protections of the landmark Gideon v. Wainwright right to counsel case should be extended to an administrative proceeding involving parents who are facing inclusion on a state child abuse and neglect registry. The Article also reveals an inconvenient truth-that communities of color are disproportionately impacted by the consequence of adverse child welfare actions. Part I expounds on the dilemma, including the current state of administrative proceedings and explaining the inequities resulting from current administrative practices. Part II will detail several narrative case studies to further elucidate the problematic outcomes under the status quo model. Parts III and IV will present a comparative analysis with other areas of the law where a right to counsel has strengthened outcomes for litigants, including the criminal and civil contexts, and draw parallels to justify the extension of the right to counsel to administrative abuse and neglect proceedings. Part V will examine a contemporary state precedent where the right to counsel has been extended to parents in the administrative context in abuse and neglect cases. The Article will conclude with a call to action for states and the federal government to implement a right to counsel and avert an injustice, thus strengthening the rule of law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]