Chapter 21 - SENTENCING
Before sentencing, Reena’s lawyer submitted evidence of progress.
Therapy attendance.
Parenting program.
No visit violations for months.
Acknowledgment of basement locking.
Acknowledgment of medical neglect.
Employment.
No prior criminal record.
No substance misuse.
Stable housing.
Her mother’s support.
Prosecutor submitted:
Age of children.
Exterior lock.
Leaving them while confined.
Delayed fracture care.
Food-withholding texts.
Using Aaron as blame.
Impact statements.
I did not write one about my own pain.
The victims were Drew and Lily.
Their therapist provided clinical impact summary without asking children to write punishment letters.
Good.
I wrote only as caregiver:
Drew is healing physically but remains hypervigilant around closed doors and food access.
Lily has improved with food security and predictable routines.
Both maintain attachment to Reena.
Any future contact should be determined by child-safety professionals, not my anger.
Then Reena spoke.
“I love my children.”
True.
“I also hurt them.”
Important.
“I locked the basement because I wanted obedience more than I wanted to understand why Drew was resisting me.”
Then:
“I used hunger as punishment.”
Then:
“I did not take Drew for medical care because I was afraid someone would ask why I had locked him downstairs.”
There.
Then Aaron.
“I blamed Aaron for too much because he was not here to argue back.”
My chest tightened.
“I was angry he died and left me with everything. I was angry people forgave him because he was dead. I put that anger into what I told the children.”
She cried.
“I am sorry.”
No:
But.
Then:
“I know being sorry does not make me safe.”
That was the best sentence she gave.
Judge imposed:
A custodial sentence of twenty-two months, with part potentially served under ordinary credits/statutory rules, followed by probation.
Parenting/anger-management treatment.
No unsupervised contact with children unless family court later authorizes after risk assessment.
No corporal punishment.
Compliance with child-protection orders.
Restitution for uncovered medical costs? Insurance handled; maybe minimal.
No decades.
No life.
Then judge clarified:
Criminal court does not terminate parental rights.
Family court decides custody.
Reena was taken into custody after sentencing.
Drew and Lily were not present.
I told them with therapist.
“Mom has to live somewhere else for a while because court decided she broke important rules.”
Drew:
“Jail?”
“Yes.”
Lily:
“Mommy jail?”
“Yes.”
“Bad?”
I answered:
“Mom did things that hurt you and the court gave consequences.”
Not:
Mom is bad.
Drew asked:
“How long?”
We gave age-appropriate.
Then:
“Can we call?”
That surprised me.
Contact allowed only through family court plan and facility rules.
Therapist recommended letters first.
Drew wrote:
Hi Mom.
My leg is better.
Lily likes purple now.
I am still mad.
Love Drew.
Perfect.
Reena replied:
I understand you are mad.
I’m glad your leg is better.
I love you.
Mom.
No case talk.
Good.
Then family court permanency.
CPS initially still legally required to consider reunification services, but incarceration, convictions, and safety concerns shifted.
Reena could participate in remote parenting programs and therapy.
Permanent guardianship with Peter became likely.
Not adoption yet.
Reena opposed termination.
She was willing to consent to guardianship if it preserved legal motherhood and structured future contact.
Interesting.
My lawyer asked:
“Would you accept permanent guardianship rather than seek termination/adoption?”
“Yes.”
Immediately.
Why?
Aaron remains father.
Reena remains mother legally.
I do not need title.
I need authority to protect.
Guardianship can give me medical, school, residence authority while court controls contact.
The children could keep their identity.
Then maternal grandmother supported.
That mattered.
Reena’s lawyer proposed:
Permanent guardianship to Peter.
Reena retains parental status.
No unsupervised contact initially.
Therapeutic contact subject to professionals.
Review after release.
No child removed from Peter without court order.
Peter controls daily decisions.
Could resolve family case without contested termination trial.
CPS considered.
Judge required findings and child advocate input.
Not instant.
Then Drew asked:
“Will you be Dad?”
“No.”
He looked relieved.
“You’re Uncle Peter.”
“Yes.”
“My dad is Dad.”
“Yes.”
“Good.”
Exactly.
May you like
I did not need to replace Aaron to save his children.
That became our family’s center.
