A federal judge has removed University of Chicago Medical Center from a civil rights suit filed by parents, who alleged the hospital violated their rights when doctors reported them to state child neglect investigators for refusing legally required shots for their newborns.
The judge ruled the hospital and doctors took action on their own authority, not that of the state, because the law that required the treatments no longer required medical professionals to report parents who refused.
Judge Sara Ellis, of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago, delivered the decision May 5. The ruling favored University of Chicago Medical Center (UCMC) and Dr. Stephanie Liou in an action brought by parents Cylinda and Michael Scott, Vivian Lee and Melvin Taylor, and Whitney Bright and Erik Zuma.
The parents had healthy babies born between February 2019 and February 2020 at UCMC. All three parents refused to let their newborns be injected with Vitamin K, and one set of parents also refused the application of erythromycin ointment to their child's eyes, according to court papers.
The Vitamin K shot is to prevent Vitamin K Deficiency Bleeding, which is a serious, but rare condition that can afflict newborns. There are risks to the shot, including death in extreme cases. Instead of the injection, Vitamin K drops can be added to breast milk to head off the deficiency.
The ointment is to ward off an infection that, if untreated, can cause blindness. Babies born to mothers who do not have gonorrhea or chlamydia, or are born Caesarean are immune to the infection. Side effects of the ointment are pain and temporary loss of vision.
Illinois law requires the shots and ointments be provided soon after birth. The law also directed medical professionals to report parents, who refused, to the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) for medical neglect. However, in August 2018, the law no longer considered such refusals to constitute neglect and no longer required parents be reported. In spite of these changes, UCMC continued to call for its staff to report such parents.
After the parents turned down the shots or ointment, UCMC staff threatened to take the infants into protective custody and report the parents. In the end, the parents were reported and DCFS investigated, but no further action was taken.
The parents sued in February 2021, claiming breaches of their rights against unreasonable searches and seizures, and to due process. Liou and UCMC argued the suit should be dismissed.
Judge Ellis pointed out that for the complaint to be pursued, the parents must demonstrate defendants acted under "color of state law," but they failed to do so. In this regard, Ellis quoted a 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision that said "merely private conduct, no matter how discriminatory or wrongful," cannot lead to liability under a suit alleging due process and search and seizure violations.
Ellis noted there was no evidence "UCMC jointly acted or conspired with DCFS" or DCFS "sanctioned" UCMC's policy of reporting parents or taking custody of infants.
Ellis also concluded the parents did not show defendants assumed state power when defendants spoke of taking the newborns into protective custody.
"Private physicians such as Dr. Liou merely assist the state in taking temporary protective custody of children. They do not replace the State by doing so, but instead temporarily take custody of the child and then must immediately notify and coordinate with DCFS so that DCFS can retain custody of the child pending a court hearing," Ellis stated.
Ellis added that the Illinois Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act does not delegate to private physicians the "same general powers" allowed to police and DCFS, and what power it does grant, is limited to "certain circumstances and for a very short timeframe."
Further, the parents put forth insufficient allegations UCMC conspired with DCFS in drawing up UCMC's policy for refusals. Rather, it appeared DCFS did not condone UCMC's policy, Ellis determined.
In sum, Ellis said defendants acted in accordance with a private policy, not government authorization.
Ellis did not give the parents the option of amending their complaint, which they have already done three times, saying to do so again would be "futile."
However, the suit continues against the following other defendants: B.J. Walker, former DCFS acting director; DCFS Director Marc D. Smith; Edwards-Elmhurst Health; University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System; DCFS caseworkers Julia Luke, Ernesta McVeigh, Erica Goolsby, Jacqueline Stanton and Dora Allen; and Dr. Lainie Ross.
The parents have been represented by Richard J. Dvorak and Mariam Fatima Hai, of Dvorak Law Offices, of Chicago.
The medical center and Liou have been defended by Jennifer Aronoff and Alexander J. Kritikos, of McDermott, Will & Emery, of Chicago.