Why Was a 3-Year-Old in South Dakota Forcibly Catheterized as He Screamed in Pain?

Imagine the Department of Social Services threatens to remove your child from your custody unless you agree to have his urine collected. Under duress, you consent— only to watch hospital staff pin your three-year-old down and forcibly catheterize him as he screams in pain. Two days later, he is still in pain. You take him back to the hospital, where he is diagnosed with a staph infection in his penis.

This is not a hypothetical situation. One day this past winter, police and officials from the Department of Social Services (DSS) in Pierre, South Dakota, arrived at a home to arrest a man on suspicion of a probation violation. Because he tested positive for drugs, his girlfriend was told by DSS that her children would be removed from the home if she did not consent to having their urine tested. Because of that threat, she agreed to the test, but since her youngest child is not toilet-trained, DSS forced him to undergo the catheterization.

The distraught mother contacted the ACLU, and we were shocked by her story. It’s hard to imagine circumstances that would lead child welfare officials to think it was a good idea to catheterize a 3-year-old, subjecting a vulnerable child to trauma and injury, because of an investigation into potential drug use by an adult. Anyone who has spent any time around young children knows there certainly are other methods available to collect a sample from the child — like, for example, giving the child water or juice and waiting an hour. Or, DSS could have rightly concluded that the risk to the very child they were purporting to protect was just not worth it.

This incident raises a multitude of practical, moral, and constitutional questions. Collecting bodily fluids from a toddler to gather evidence against an adult member of the household is simply unreasonable. Period. Second, catheterization of anyone — adults and children alike — is an incredibly invasive procedure that should only be employed when absolutely necessary. Additionally, the compelled production of bodily fluids is a search under the Fourth Amendment, which, absent consent, requires a warrant supported by probable cause. In this case, the DSS conducted the search without a warrant, without legal justification, and without judicial oversight. (To be clear, when a parent “consents” to the collection of her children’s bodily fluids under the threat of losing her children, that consent is invalid.)

The ACLU of South Dakota has written to DSS to demand that they stop catheterizing children and provide explanations. We want to know why this search was conducted, why the catheterization was permitted, and who made the decision to have this child tested. Further, we have asked the DSS to release any written policies regarding searches of children and catheterization.

Forcibly catheterizing anyone — let alone a 3-year-old — to collect evidence is barbaric at worst and unconstitutional at best. No child, let alone one suspected of being a victim of abuse or neglect, should be subjected to such trauma, indignity, and abuse.

We want answers. We have no intention of letting DSS get away with this barbaric practice without accountability.

This post has been edited to clarify that it was DSS, not the police, that ordered the catheterization.

View comments (106)
Read the Terms of Use

Nancy, RN

Why would they cath him? We DON'T cath little children for urine samples, we bag them! There's a little urine collection bag with a sticky collar made just for this. Peel off the paper, stick it on, and close up the diaper again. Give child a bottle or a sippy cup. Within an hour, you have your sample. Minimal trauma. Cathing is criminal.

Anonymous

What about the hospital staff? They sexually assaulted a child just because the cops asked them to?

Anonymous

That is simply deplorable not to mention hardly legal. If a doctor did order this he or she should be reprimanded. Disgusting our rights are evaporating at such a rapid rate

Anonymous

Comment on Shamrock Chèvre by johnson kelvin

PLEASE YOU HAVE TO READ THIS FOR THE SAKE OF YOUR HEALTH AND FOR OTHERS TOO. you have to get informed before you fall in the fake hands of those scammers who clams to have cure for HIV and herpes, i have fall victim several time before i came in contact with DR NATA through the help of my friend who he also cure. What a great man God has use to cure my deadly disease with his powerful herbal medicine,Hello, I am here to testify on how Dr NATA restored my life, i was infected with ( HIV AND HERPES SIMPLEX VIRUS) i and my my husband have this infection for years we were looking for solution every were, we visited different hospital but they gave us list of HIV drugs and herpes like Famvir, Zovirax, and Valtrex, several drugs, which is very expensive to treat the symptoms and never cured us. I concluded to search for Natural Herbal remedy on Herpes and to see if we can get cured of hiv and herpes, on the internet and i saw comment of people talking about how Dr NATA cured them. when i contacted him he gave me hope and sent a Herbal medicine to me through courier service that i and my husband took prescribed and it seriously worked for us, my Herpes result came out negative and our hiv result also came out negative, we are so happy to share this grate testimony. My advice to you all who thinks that there is no cure for HIV AND HERPES. Not true just contact him and get the cure from Dr NATA HERBAL HOME, cure all kinds of sickness you may have. Remember delay in treatment leads to death email DRNATAHERBALCURE412@YAHOO.COM or call him and chat with him on WHATSAPP +2348118186684.
Unsubscribe

Anonymous

Is this a true, true story or one made up to make people mad? As a retired ED nurse, it sounds fishy to me

Anonymous

Thank you, ACLU, for protecting children's rights, particularly when it comes to their health and their mother's parental rights.

Anonymous

I find equal fault with any medical professional that would perform this procedure. Presumably medical professionals are capable of assessing the health of a child. Performing an invasive procedure, absent medical necessities is not in the best interests of the patient.

mhenner

The letter sent by the ACLU says the incident happened February 23. ACLU letter was sent March 31.
It is now April 18.
How long does it take the ACLU to file suit?

Jeff Radol

Where was the Law Guardian?
He should havd prevented this travesty.

Sam

So we DO have Sharia law here in America! It's the family court and child protective services...

Pages

Stay Informed