LEWISTON, Maine — Data from Maine Children's Alliance show Maine has some of the highest rates of child abuse in the country, which is why one Lewiston mother was surprised to learn parents still have rights to their children even after a history of child abuse.
Bonnie Dennison said her son, Connor, was just 7 weeks old when his biological father, Allen-Michael St. Claire, severely abused him, resulting in life-threatening injuries.
Now 11 years later, St. Claire has been granted supervised visitation with Connor, despite the history of abuse.
"He had a skull fracture that went to the entire left side of his head, and it split off three ways," Dennison said. "He had bleeding to the brain. His spleen got ruptured. He had 15 rib fractures"
Court documents indicate St. Claire ran Connor's head into a doorframe May 10, 2013, causing a blood clot that nearly killed the infant.
St. Claire was convicted of aggravated assault, and he served two years in jail for abusing his son. He was released from jail in July of 2016.
Dennison said her son hadn't seen St. Claire since the night he was abused, which is why she was stunned when she was served court papers on June 6, 2022, requiring her to appear in a Lewiston court for a parental rights and responsibilities judgment.
Dennison said she did not take the matter seriously at first, explaining that she was sure there was no way St. Claire would ever be able to legally have contact with a child that he nearly killed. To Dennison's surprise, she was wrong.
"I never would have thought in my wildest dreams that it would be a part of the Maine State law would allow someone who has abused a child to still have contact," Dennison said.
In the hearing, judges granted St. Claire hourlong monthly supervised visitations with Connor. Dennison said she appealed the court's decision, escalating the issue to Maine's Superior Court.
Despite her efforts to prevent the visitation orders from proceeding, the court ruled it was in Connor's best interest to resume contact with his biological father.
"I thought that the laws would protect Connor," she said. "I thought that there would be no chance at all possible that he could gain access to Connor after he had done that."
St. Claire's attorney Jim Howaniec said this case is no different than any other family law case. Howaniec said St. Claire served his time through the criminal law system and that he is now ready to be a parent.
"It's his son. He has a right to parental rights. His rights weren't terminated by anybody," Howaniec said. "He asserted his parental rights, just like any other parent, mother or father, has a right to do."
Howaniec said St. Claire is working and has not had any incidents of violence since the abuse occurred years ago. He said St. Claire is a father figure to other children he cares for with his significant other.
He also explained St. Claire was a "model citizen on probation."
Family law attorney Matthew Lauzon said there are many times where parents are unhappy with rulings the court makes. He explained Maine state law has traditionally favored mediated resolutions between both parents and allowing a child to have consistent contact with both parents, even in cases where there may be a history of abuse.
Lauzon said Title 19-A in Maine Revised Statuses Annotated law lays out 19 priorities judges need to consider when handling family law cases where there is a history of abuse.
"The law is a blunt instrument," Lauzon said, explaining that the 14th Amendment protects the constitutional right to parent, making it difficult for states to terminate parental rights.
Lauzon said there are cases where children suffer further abuse after courts rule a child should resume contact with an abusive parent, but he said there are also some success stories.
He explained the Constitution simply prevents states from intervening to some degree, but there are protections and safeguards put in place when a child is reconnected with a parent who has abused them in the past.
Lauzon said those protections include a gradual process of introducing contact between a parent who has a history of abuse and the child.
That gradual and progressive contact often includes a parent writing letters to the child or a parent having supervised visits with the child that are limited to one hour but progressively increase over time.
"What the courts have to do is balance the rights of the parent versus the best interest of the kids," Lauzon said.
Dennison said the judge ordered Connor to start counseling in addition to the supervised visits. She said she feels like it is common sense that if her child has to begin counseling to resume contact with a parent who has abused him in the past, then the ruling can't possibly be in her child's best interest.
Dennison said she feels like the law is being used to inflict trauma on her 11-year-old son. She also explained Connor was not aware of the severity of the harm that was done to him as an infant.
Because of the visitation ruling, Dennison said she had to talk to her son in detail about what was done to him. She said it was an emotionally heavy conversation she does not think Connor was ready for.
"You can still feel the bumps on his skull. You can tell that it's been deformed," she said. " As soon as I started talking to Connor about it, his hand reached up to touch there like he instinctively knew 'that must be the reason why my head is shaped this way.'"
Dennison said Connor expressed to her that he does not want to resume contact with his father, but she said her hands are tied. She said she feels like the court's ruling prevents her from protecting her son, which is hurtful.
"He almost killed him," Dennison said. "You don't deserve to try to be a parent 10 years later after you do that."
Dennison said she wants other parents who are fighting to protect their children from abusive parents to band together.
She said she believes state laws should be changed, explaining that laws should not protect abusive parents. She also said she is hoping someone can step in provide legal help, explaining that she is hoping to find any way to end the new contact orders.
Dennison called on Gov. Janet Mills, but Lauzon explained the governor has no jurisdiction to stop a contact order approved by the court.
Lauzon said he works to help parents fight against rulings like this one every day, explaining that this case is one of many similar cases.