Prominent New York Attorney Busted for Silly Child Endangerment

Sorry, but this is so stupid

 As a parent, this kind of case is over the edge and over protective when it comes to child endangerment laws in New York State. Not all such laws are the same among the 50 States but all are meant to prevent real harm and abuse to kids or potential harm and risk. That is the kicker: "potential". Just where does the fine line between a parent's discipline and child endangerment become blurred as it envitably does.

Here, we have a well educated woman of 49, a law partner (not just an attorney) at a well respected Manhatten firm from a wealthy area of Scarsdale, New York. She probably earns well over $300,000 a year. She has two daughters in the beginning of the torrid years, ages 10 and 12. They all live in a two million dollar home and the girls probably are so totally spoiled and have an attitude. It is probably a good guess.

The story is so simple, so basic. Most parents have maybe done it with teenage kids when all else fails, or, thought of it.  Here is the scene:

Driving along a road towards there home, about three miles away. The girls are verbally attacking and arguing between themselves. Despite the mom's requests to end it after a day's work, the volume grows like a loud boom box of chatter drowning out the radio. In anger and frustration of being ignored, the mother yells: "if you kids don't stop fighting, I'm gonna stop stop this car right now and leave you here!". This threat has been used so many times before (since the advent of the modern car) its effect on the two girls is nil. The loud incessant bickering does not even pause. Suddenly, the car stops. The girls look at one another baffled. The mom instructs, "Get out. Walk home! I have had it!" The girls in total disbelief, get out. Mom speeds away. One can just hear a comment of, "that bitch" or " WTF, I don't believe this!" coming from either girl.

It was Sunday evening. The girls were not in the middle of nowhere land. They were in a well lit shopping area where stores were open. They were three miles from the house in an area they knew well. Somehow, the older girl "caught up" with the mom, meaning the mom must not have driven far, maybe just out of sight to scare them. However, the 10 year old, was found by a "friend". She was upset and taken to the police. That is odd. Why not just take the girl home since they knew each other. Is there another motive here from the "friend"?

Oddly, the mom called the police to tell them the one daughter was missing. The police told her to come down to the station for the daughter. When she arrived, the attorney was arrested.

Madlyn Primoff, the mom, is now charged with child endangerment. A temporary protective order was issued to keep the mom away from her kids. The two girls were totally fine, nothing had happened to either except the shock of their mom losing it and forcing them to walk home. Her future is now in jeopardy over this parenting issue of how to discipline. The girls must feel "empowered" now since their own mom is being legally scolded in public, even though it is their fault. It's too late for them to say "sorry". Mom is on the legal burner now because of how a law was written and is now being interpreted.

See how a simple thing can spin way out of control when police and law become involved. Why didn't the younger girl also "catch up" with her mom, as the older one did? Did she have a tantrum against the older sister? What if they had simply walked home, three miles is not far. Would the same mess happen if we were talking about boys? Why didn't the friend just take the girl home? Why the police instead?

This is why laws must be carefully and thoroughly crafted to prevent such a waste of judicial time. Let parents be parents.

More by this Author


Comments 2 comments

Dada_Phil profile image

Dada_Phil 5 years ago from Texas

OOOh.., what sweet irony. What kind of an attorney.., family law? I would love to see any attorney fight for the rights of a father who doesn't make that $300,000 a year. The mother was alleged to have commited child endangerment. In a no fault divorce, no such fault is attributed to the respondent father yet he loses his children, loses his life's savings and winds up having to comply with the government's demands however unreasonable they are. The lady in this article doesn't even come close to what an innocent father goes through. I can express no sympathy to lawyers as none of them are willing to challenge the corruption that has been taking place in the family courts. By the way, what ever did happen to the U.S. Constitution???


inspired2excel profile image

inspired2excel 4 years ago from Midwest

What is total irony, is that well known family psychologists often give this very advice to parents dealing with out of control children. They tell them to give them a warning that they must stop or they will have to walk home and if that warning is not taken, then the parent must follow through. This mother obviously was parked only a few blocks out of site and awaiting them, but the situation went way out of control.

I hope the presiding judge was forced to make a similar decision with his/her child(ren) at some point and can relate to the forced choice.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working