This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2007, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Correction: A lawsuit over the wrongful removal of a 12-year-old Davis County boy from his home was heard in U.S. District Court. A story in Tuesday's edition reported an incorrect venue.

Was the wrongful removal of a 12-year-old Davis County boy from his home the honest mistake of dedicated and well-intentioned Utah child-welfare workers or a reckless and capricious act?

Arguments for both were heard by a U.S. District Court jury Monday, the start of a six-day trial in which a Utah couple is suing Utah's Division of Child and Family Services for missteps made in the May 28, 1999, removal of their son.

The lawsuit caps a seven-year legal battle that helped drive changes to Utah law aimed at safeguarding parents' rights.

Connie and James Roska are suing caseworker Shirley Morrison and her two supervisors, Colleen Lasater and Melinda Sneddon, seeking unspecified damages for pain and suffering. A neuropsychologist who recently examined the family said Rusty Roska, now 21, and his parents display symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Connie Roska said the money would help pay mounting legal bills, but her main desire is to prevent other families from going through the "same turmoil."

Last year, a federal appeals court ruled caseworkers violated Utah law - and could be held personally liable - by taking the then-12-year-old Rusty into protective care without first offering services to his parents.

Social workers and school officials believed Rusty was a victim of Munchausen's syndrome by proxy, a condition in which the parent acts as if a child is ill, or even causes the child's illness to get attention from doctors. The boy had lost 70 pounds in a year, was in a wheelchair and had been fed through a tube. School officials expressed concern that he might die if the state did not intervene.

The Roskas said their son suffers from chronic pain syndrome caused by problems with his gallbladder and kidneys. But doctors interviewed by caseworkers could not diagnose the boy's ailment.

On the day of the removal, however, Rusty's primary care provider, Judith Gooch, corroborated the Roskas' story by phone and further warned that taking the boy would "destroy his family emotionally and Rusty may never recover."

Nevertheless, workers took custody of Rusty. He was returned to his family after seven days spent at a foster home.

"Mistakes were made," acknowledged Assistant Attorney General John P. Soltis in Monday's opening remarks. "But at issue is whether Rusty's removal was done with malice."

Soltis portrayed child-welfare workers as dedicated professionals working a tough case.

The caseworker, Morrison, is a Utah native with a master's level education; the Roska investigation was her first to involve the potential removal of a child, said Soltis. Morrison has since quit her child-welfare post and now works in child care and teaches at Weber State University, he said.

Soltis questioned the Roskas' credibility, saying evidence will show they are suing for financial gain and that both were diagnosed with mental illnesses prior to displaying signs of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Connie Roska's "own witness admits she exaggerates," said Soltis.

Roskas' lawyer, Steven Russell, contends the family's troubles stem from their son's removal, a loss of faith and feelings of helplessness.

During the removal, one caseworker yelled at the Roskas' then-14-year-old daughter, telling her to "shut the hell up and get out," said Russell.

Ignoring Gooch's warnings, caseworkers sent Rusty to a foster home hoping to build a case based on his improved health. While there, they reduced his pain medications and turned off his food pump, causing his condition to worsen, said Russell.

The case is no longer about Rusty, said Russell. "It's about circling the wagons and making sure they don't get sued."