A Father’s Fight: When Delays in the Erie County Family Court System Separate a Child from a Parent

In 2023, a family offense petition was filed in Erie County, New York. What should have been a timely legal matter has now stretched well beyond what most families could imagine. Today, nearly three years later, a 9-year-old child has not seen his father — not because of a final court ruling, but because of ongoing delays, repeated adjournments, and prolonged temporary orders that have effectively acted as long-term decisions.

At the center of this case is the child’s court-appointed Attorney for the Child, Lana V. Tupchik of Buffalo, New York. The AFC’s role under New York law is to represent the child’s expressed wishes and act as their legal voice in the case. Yet from the father’s perspective, communication with Ms. Tupchik has been extremely limited. Despite being informed that she would facilitate communication — including basic virtual contact through Zoom — those calls were never arranged. According to the 2017 New York State Unified Court System Rule 151 list, Ms. Tupchik is also involved in electing Family court judges, donating $1,125 to Family Court Judge Brenda Freedman; leaving the sour taste of systematic corruptions via campaign funding.

Recognizing the growing emotional distance and the urgency of restoring contact, the father reached out for third-party assistance. He enlisted the support of the advocacy organization New York Families for Tomorrow, asking them to serve as a neutral intermediary to assist communication and support the child’s well-being. The organization attempted to engage Ms. Tupchik directly to help move the situation toward progress. According to both the father and the organization, no responses were received.

Meanwhile, the temporary order of protection originally issued in 2023 has been extended repeatedly. Temporary orders in family court are generally intended to last approximately 90 days, giving the court time to gather information and schedule a hearing. Yet in this case, the order has remained in effect for nearly three years — without a final determination. When temporary orders continue for this length of time, they can quietly become de facto final outcomes, long before the court has ever ruled. This raises fundamental concerns about due process, parental rights, and the emotional impact on children who are left without meaningful contact with a parent. New York Families for Tomorrow Senior Policy Analysis, Summer Johnson says,

“ Our organization has been advocating for stronger protections for families, by removing family offenses from the family court act part 8- to criminal court…without the full protections afforded to us by the U.S. Constitution- due process, rigths to a speedy trial, right to an attorney, 5th amendment etc…civil courts continue to bypass these protections. The outcomes are unjust and leave a child without one of their parents for a long duration of time”

This is not a rare occurrence. Across New York State, many families and advocacy organizations report a similar pattern:
children being separated from a parent for extended periods based on unresolved civil allegations rather than any clear or convincing criminal findings. When separation stretches into years, the temporary becomes permanent, and the process itself creates the outcome.

In cases like this, what is intended as a protective measure can turn into a slow, silent, and devastating erosion of the parent-child relationship — without the court ever issuing a final ruling.

The court did hold an in-camera interview with the child in December 2025 — only for another in-camera interview to be requested again. These additional delays have now pushed the case to a projected final determination in February 2026. During this time, an entire chapter of this child’s development has passed. Childhood is not something that pauses while the court system works. Birthdays, school events, emotional growth, identity formation, and relationships continue regardless of legal timelines. A child does not get back the years spent waiting for adults and institutions to act. This is not simply about one parent’s frustration, nor is it about assigning blame to any single individual. It is about confronting a systemic issue:

When family court delays become routine, children and families pay the price.

The guiding principle in family court is supposed to be the best interest of the child. However, when delays extend into years — when communication between parent and child is not facilitated — when temporary decisions become long-term realities — it becomes fair and necessary to ask:

Is this process actually protecting the child?
Or has the process itself become the harm? Every child deserves the chance to maintain stable, loving relationships with both parents when it is safe and appropriate. Every parent deserves a fair system — one that moves with urgency, transparency, and respect for constitutional rights. This case is not an isolated story. It reflects broader systemic issues within family courts across New York and beyond: understaffing, inconsistent practices, limited oversight, and a culture in which delays are treated as normal.

But what is normal is not always what is right.

As February 2026 approaches, the hope is simple:

That this child’s voice will finally be heard.
That due process will finally occur.
That the bond between parent and child — strained by time and distance — will be given the chance to heal.

And that the system charged with protecting families remembers what is truly at stake.

We will continue to investigate this case, and provide updates as they’re presented to us.