I am angry.
Not internet angry. Not political angry. Not looking-for-somebody-to-blame angry.
I am angry because I live here. I have watched this system. I have listened to families. I have watched children become the last people anyone seems willing to believe, while adults are handed chance after chance after chance.
And then I read the August 7 story in The Western News about a Fortine father accused of beating his daughter.
According to court documents reported by the newspaper, video showed Gary Matthew Montgomery throwing his daughter to the ground and punching her on January 1.
His daughter died by suicide on June 6.
I am not saying that assault caused her suicide.
I don’t need to say that.
Because what we already know about abused children is serious enough.
Child abuse, childhood trauma and violence victimization are recognized risk factors for suicidal thoughts and suicidal behavior.
That is not speculation.
That is established research.
The CDC identifies a history of adverse childhood experiences and violence victimization as suicide risk factors. Research involving young people has repeatedly connected childhood maltreatment, including physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse and neglect, with increased risk of suicidal thoughts and attempts.
So no, I am not going to pretend that alleged violence against a child and that child’s emotional and mental health somehow belong in completely separate conversations.
They don’t.
And there is another part of this that bothers me deeply.
People noticed her behavior.
People described bullying.
People described her as mean.
And apparently that became the explanation.
She was mean.
She was difficult.
She bullied other children.
End of story.
Except that should never have been the end of the story.
Children who are being abused do not all behave the way adults expect abused children to behave.
They do not all become quiet.
They do not all hide.
They do not all cry.
They do not all become timid little children waiting for someone to rescue them.
Some get angry.
Some become defiant.
Some lash out.
Some fight.
Some become aggressive.
Some bully other children.
Some become incredibly difficult to deal with.
Childhood maltreatment and trauma have long been associated with externalizing behaviors, including aggression, oppositional behavior and conduct problems.
That does not mean every child who bullies is being abused.
It does mean that when a child is showing serious aggression, especially repeatedly, adults should be asking more than:
“What’s wrong with her?”
They should also be asking:
“What happened to her?”
That is not excusing bullying.
If a child is hurting other children, those children deserve protection too.
Stop the behavior.
Protect the other children.
Set consequences.
And then find out why it is happening.
Those two things can exist at the same time.
A child can be behaving terribly and still desperately need someone to recognize that something is happening to her.
Behavior is communication.
Children do not always walk up to an adult and calmly explain:
“My home is unsafe.”
“My parent scares me.”
“Someone is hurting me.”
“I don’t know how to handle what is happening to me.”
Sometimes what comes out instead is rage.
Sometimes it is bullying.
Sometimes it is fighting.
Sometimes it is withdrawal.
Sometimes it is anxiety.
Sometimes it is self-harm.
Sometimes it is a child everyone has decided is simply “bad.”
And that brings me to the question I cannot get away from.
How did nobody notice?
Or maybe the more important question is:
Did people notice and simply not understand what they were seeing?
Did somebody see bruises?
Did somebody see fear?
Did somebody notice changes in her behavior?
Did teachers notice?
Did counselors?
Did relatives?
Did neighbors?
Did another parent hear something from their own child?
Did she tell anyone?
Were reports ever made to Child and Family Services?
Did law enforcement ever have contact?
Did probation know anything about what was happening in that home?
Did a doctor see her?
Were there school disciplinary records showing escalating behavior?
Was anyone asking what was happening underneath that behavior?
Or did adults see a hurting child acting out and decide:
She’s just mean.
That possibility should haunt us.
Because we now know, according to the court documents reported by The Western News, that video allegedly existed showing her father throwing her down and punching her months before her death.
The article says that video newly surfaced after her death, when the Montana Division of Criminal Investigation contacted Montgomery’s probation officer.
That raises even more questions.
Who originally had that video?
Who recorded it?
When was it first seen?
Was it shown to anyone before June 6?
Did anyone know the assault happened?
Was it reported?
And if it was not reported, why not?
Those are not accusations.
Those are questions that should be answered anytime a child dies and evidence later surfaces showing that child allegedly being assaulted in her own home.
Because “nobody knew” should never automatically become the end of an investigation.
Sometimes nobody truly knows.
But sometimes people know pieces.
One person sees the bruises.
Someone else sees the behavior.
A teacher sees the anger.
A friend hears something frightening.
A relative knows the home is unstable.
A counselor sees depression.
Police receive one call.
Child protection receives another.
And nobody ever puts the whole picture together.
That is how children disappear into systems that technically had contact with them while nobody actually saw them.
I have lived here long enough and watched enough of Montana’s child protection system to have another serious concern.
Reunification.
That word has become almost sacred.
Keep families together.
Return children home.
Give parents services.
Give them treatment plans.
Give another opportunity.
Give another extension.
Try again.
And sometimes that is exactly what should happen.
Parents make mistakes.
Parents recover.
People overcome addiction.
People change.
Families heal.
I believe in redemption.
But I do not believe an adult’s redemption should be purchased with a child’s safety.
There has to be a line.
And Montana law actually recognizes that.
Montana law requires the Department of Public Health and Human Services to make reasonable efforts to prevent unnecessary removal and to reunify families separated by the state.
But read the rest of the law.
It says the goal is safe reunification.
It says visits and trial home visits have to be consistent with the child’s health, safety and welfare.
And most importantly, Montana Code Annotated 41-3-423 says that when preservation and reunification services are being considered, the child’s health and safety are of paramount concern.
Paramount.
Not the parent’s desire to have the child back.
Not whether the parent is tired of being supervised.
Not whether another treatment plan might work eventually.
Not how uncomfortable permanent separation makes the adults in the room.
The child’s health and safety.
Montana law also recognizes situations where reunification efforts do not have to continue, including aggravated circumstances such as chronic abuse, torture, sexual abuse, chronic severe neglect and certain serious crimes against children.
There are also circumstances in Montana law where the state is required to move toward termination of parental rights rather than continuing reunification indefinitely.
So I am tired of hearing reunification discussed as though the law requires putting children back with parents no matter what.
It doesn’t.
What the law requires is reasonable effort.
And what the law explicitly says matters most is the child’s safety.
Yet too often the way our system operates seems completely backward.
The parent gets the treatment plan.
The parent gets the attorney.
The parent gets the extensions.
The parent gets another opportunity.
The parent gets another hearing.
The parent gets another chance.
And the child gets told to hang on while the adults figure it out.
At what point do we admit that some parents should lose the privilege of having their children returned to them?
Not because we hate them.
Not because people cannot change.
But because children are not rehabilitation programs for adults.
A child should not have to prove over and over again that a home is dangerous.
A child should not have to suffer one more assault because everyone wants to be absolutely certain.
A child should not have to become suicidal before we decide her trauma was serious.
A child should not have to become perfectly behaved before adults decide she deserves compassion.
And a child should certainly not have to die before everyone starts looking backward and asking what we missed.
That is where this becomes deeply personal for me.
Living here, I have watched our justice and child protection systems repeatedly struggle with the same basic question.
Whose rights are we protecting?
I understand parental rights.
I believe parental rights matter tremendously.
Government should not be able to casually take someone’s child.
Parents deserve due process.
Accusations should be investigated.
Evidence matters.
But children have rights too.
A child has a right not to be beaten.
A child has a right not to live terrified of the person who is supposed to protect her.
A child has a right to be believed when something is wrong.
A child has a right to adults who recognize that trauma sometimes looks ugly.
A child has a right to safety even when providing that safety means an adult does not get another chance.
And I am increasingly convinced that we have become so terrified of violating parental rights that sometimes we tolerate violation after violation of a child’s most basic right:
The right to be safe.
That has to change.
And after a child dies, particularly when allegations of violence surface afterward, every agency that touched that child’s life should be willing to open the books and answer questions.
Were reports made?
What did Child and Family Services know?
What did schools know?
What did probation know?
What did law enforcement know?
Were there previous concerns?
Were there behavioral warning signs?
Were there injuries?
Were mandated reports made?
Were they investigated?
Did different agencies have different pieces of information that were never connected?
Did anybody ask her what was happening?
Did anybody truly listen?
And if the answer is that nobody knew, then we need to understand how.
If people did know pieces, then we need to understand what happened to those pieces.
Because accountability is not about finding somebody to publicly flog after a tragedy.
It is about making damn sure the next child does not disappear through exactly the same cracks.
We need to stop pretending child abuse always looks obvious.
Sometimes an abused child is sad.
Sometimes she is frightened.
Sometimes she is silent.
And sometimes she is angry, abrasive, aggressive and incredibly hard to like.
She is still a child.
The adults still have to look deeper.
That does not mean every troubled child is being abused.
It means troubling behavior deserves curiosity, not just condemnation.
Ask why.
Ask what changed.
Ask what is happening at home.
Ask whether the child feels safe.
Ask more than once.
And when something does not add up, keep asking.
Because children only get one childhood.
They do not get those years returned later because adults finally figured out what was happening.
And sometimes adults only get one chance to notice what a child is trying desperately to tell them.
We need to stop missing it.
© Amberli Emery
Leave a Reply