Judge won't reunite boy, grandparents

Steven Brasovankin, the 5-year-old taken under court order from his elderly Northeast Philadelphia grandparents in June, will not be returning to his grandparents' home, a Family Court judge ruled yesterday.

The decision was a disappointment for the boy's grandparents, Morris Brasovankin, 89, and his wife, Mildred, 86, who had regularly cared for their grandson since his birth and hoped to have that situation formalized until their son, Steven, 54, could again care for the boy.

Instead, Family Court Judge Ann Butchart ruled that young Steven should remain in foster care until his father was again able to care for him at home.

The elderly couple did not respond to questions after the two-hour closed-door hearing, and their attorney, Marc D. Collazzo, said the judge imposed a gag order on all the parties.

Still, the Brasovankins were permitted to continue their supervised, one-hour weekly visits with their grandson, and a spokesman for Family Court Administrative Judge Kevin Dougherty said the chance for a family reunification had improved.

Court spokesman Jeff Jubelirer said the boy's father had shown progress toward meeting benchmarks set for him by the city Department of Human Services and the Department of Behavior Health/Mental Retardation Services.

Jubelirer said the judge had increased Brasovankin's visitation with his son from two hours every other week to two hours weekly.

Jubelirer said the status would be reviewed at a future, unscheduled hearing.

Brasovankin drove his elderly parents to and attended the hearing but was not available for comment afterward. He also is covered by the judge's gag order.

Jubelirer said the child's mother has also expressed interest in her son's future. Though she was not in court yesterday, Jubelirer said the judge appointed a lawyer to represent her interests.

"The court's goal remains reunification with the family," Jubelirer added. "But for the time being, the child will remain in foster care."

Young Steven was born three months premature to an unmarried mother who the family says was addicted to crack cocaine. The mother left shortly after the infant was home from the hospital.

At first, the child was placed with a foster mother through Jewish Family Services, who became close to Mildred Brasovankin and wanted to adopt the boy. After two years Steven Brasovankin obtained custody of his son and then raised him for three years.

In February, Brasovankin, facing severe financial problems, took his son to the hospital for a cold and demanded he be admitted. Hospital officials, concerned by the father's agitated behavior, contacted DHS and the matter ended up in court.

Although DHS first placed the child with the grandparents in their Oxford Circle home, Kathleen Knese, the court-appointed child advocate, argued that the father was unfit to raise the child and the grandparents too old to care for a hyperactive 5-year-old boy.

The judge gave DHS 90 days to find a new placement for the boy, and on June 6 he was removed from his school and placed in foster care.

The Brasovankins' desire to continue caring for their grandson has drawn national attention to the problems of splintered American families and the needs of more than 2.5 million U.S. grandparents raising their grandchildren.

In a statement yesterday, Dougherty, the Family Court's administrative judge, wrote that it was important to understand that young Steven was the subject of a dependency case, not a custody case.

Custody cases involve disputes between parents; dependency cases involve who can best care for the child.

"Under Pennsylvania law," the judge wrote, "grandparents are typically afforded more rights in custody cases than in dependency cases."

Some family-law experts disagree.

"That may be the case law, but it's not a hard and fast rule," said Lynne Z. Gold-Bikin, a senior partner in the family law section at WolfBlock law firm and former chair of the American Bar Association Family Law Section.

"This child has been in a close and loving relationship with these people for practically his whole life," Gold-Bikin said. "So the judge is saying better foster care than a close and loving relationship? That doesn't make sense."

Marsha Levick, cofounder and legal director of the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia, said family courts had "enormous discretion and authority to issue orders" providing for in-home auxiliary services to enable a minor to be cared for by relatives when the parents are unable to fulfill that role.

Levick in 2000 filed a federal class-action lawsuit that resulted in a settlement guaranteeing that Pennsylvania grandparents who are officially recognized as foster caregivers for their grandchildren would qualify for the same state compensation as unrelated foster parents.

"These cases always turn on the individual facts of the case, but the driving principle is the best interest of the juvenile client," Levick said.