The First to State Their Cases…
By: Deborah Schroeder
July 22, 2026
Americans react quickly and seriously to two words. Those words provoke an image that bypasses the need for more information. Two words prematurely propel us to cast judgment and spurn the guilty. The first word is Discrimination Sadly, America has a history of brutal discrimination. I recently watched a powerful movie titled Till. It is a biographical drama about Mamie Till-Mobley’s fight for justice after her 14-year-old son, Emmet Till, was lynched in Mississippi on 1955. There is no question that we need to take a strong stand against any type of discrimination in our country.
The second word is Abuse. When we hear this word, particularly when it pertains to children, we stand at full attention. If abuse is truly taking place, shining a light on the situation is imperative. Children have no protection unless adults step in to defend and protect them.
God’s Word speaks to this issue
An Old Testament proverb reminds us “The first person to state his case appears (italics are mine) to be right. Then his neighbor comes and cross-examines him” (Proverbs 18:17 EHV). Sometimes, judgment is made in haste, and we have forgotten one important process: getting the facts before assigning guilt. I have directly experienced this rush to assign guilt. But, the gathering of facts painted an entirely different picture. I am presenting two scenarios. The first involves a charge of discrimination. The second comes from an adolescent claiming abuse. Both opened my eyes. In both situations take note of the original claims of discrimination and abuse. As the facts unfold, both claims are completely unfounded. Here are the stories:
EEOC Involvement
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was involved in the first story. In case you are unfamiliar, the EEOC is an independent federal agency that enforces civil rights laws against workplace discrimination. One of the statutes the EEOC enforces is the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This is a landmark 1990 civil rights law prohibiting discrimination against individuals with disabilities. The ADA ensures equal opportunity in employment. It requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations and accessibility for disabled individuals.
If an employee believes her employer has violated such a law, she may file a claim with the EEOC. One such claim landed on my desk at a Midwest financial services corporation. At the time, I was one of four Human Resource Generalists with the company. We were each assigned particular divisions of the corporation. We recruited, screened, and onboarded new employees. We assisted managers with employee performance issues, including corrective action and termination. I enjoyed partnering with management teams to help with employee motivation to become high-performers. This job was a good fit for me. I liked the people I served, and the challenges and problem-solving opportunities that arose.
A Charge of Discrimination
Receiving a letter from the EEOC meant trouble. A claim had been filed by a female employee in one of my divisions whom I will call Lyn. Lyn claimed our company had violated ADA law by refusing to provide a reasonable accommodation for her. According to Lyn’s statement, she was seated at a desk in direct sunlight. She claimed she had a skin disease that was exacerbated by exposure to the sun. Lyn stated she spoke with her manager and requested a move to a desk out of the sunlight. According to Lyn, her manager refused her request. Lyn charged our company with failure to provide a reasonable accommodation for her skin disease. Wha-a-a-t? This company had no tolerance for discrimination. But we still had a responsibility to investigate this claim. When such a charge is received, the employer is given a window of time to respond to the allegations. If this employee’s claim proved to be true, the EEOC would consider representing her in court. If the EEOC won the case, the court could order our company to compensate the employee in an amount determined by the court. So, this was serious business, and I needed to get busy with my investigation.
I began by visiting the office area in which this employee worked. Our company was located on a campus with several buildings. Lyn worked in the Fulfillment Center. This was a recently completed structure located about a ten-minute walk from the corporate offices where I worked. On the north side, the building appeared to be one story. But on the south side, the building also had a lower-level entrance. That lower level was only exposed to daylight on the south side. All other sides were enclosed underground. Where was the sunlight? Hmmm.
In talking with the manager, I discovered the entire unit was located on this lower level at the opposite end from the windows. No desk was positioned near a window. I also learned from the manager that no employee had ever approached her with a request to move to a desk out of direct sunlight. Why would someone make such a request? No one worked in direct sunlight in the first place. Furthermore, no employee had ever mentioned a skin disease that reacted to sunlight. The manager noted that most of the employees went outside for their morning and afternoon breaks. Some employees chose to smoke on break. A “Butt Hut” was provided for such use. Lyn’s name was included in the group that gathered inside the “Butt Hut” for smoke breaks each day. It was a plexiglass enclosed hut positioned between the lower-level entrance to the building and the parking lot. If employees wanted to smoke, they had to do so in this see-through hut. Although there was a roof top, sunlight flooded this hut. And finally, Lyn showed no signs of skin damage on her face as she claimed. She had no doctor’s record to produce verification of a skin disease diagnosis brought on by sun exposure.
My investigation was revealing an entirely different picture than the one painted in Lyn’s claim. Did she conjure up this story to win a made-up case of discrimination? Was she hoping for a monetary award from the court? Did she not realize the EEOC would give us an opportunity to respond to Lyn’s claim? Her manager said Lyn performed satisfactorily. She had no grievance against Lyn.
When all was said and done, I submitted my findings to the EEOC. Based upon those findings, I contested the claim. An EEOC representative came for an on-site visit shortly thereafter. About a month later, I received notice from the EEOC that the claim was denied. This means they would not represent this employee in court. Lyn would have to hire an attorney if she chose to pursue the matter further. We never heard from another attorney on Lyn’s behalf. In the end, Lyn was terminated for falsifying information regarding our company.
An adolescent’s cry of abuse
For 14 years, I served our county as a court-appointed advocate for children of abuse and neglect. It was a volunteer position which required training and certification to become a voice in court for such children. I recall one case involving a 12-year-old boy I will call Dirk. A few years earlier, his parents divorced, and each parent went on to marry someone else. Dirk and his younger siblings lived with his mother and step-father. His father and step-mother lived in a nearby town with his step-mother’s children. I received the case shortly after Dirk claimed his step-father had abused him. The incident involved the loss of his tooth. Dirk claimed his step-father hit him in the jaw so hard that he knocked out one of Dirk’s teeth. The court ordered Dirk into temporary foster care while an investigation took place. When I first met Dirk, he was living in a clean, orderly, and peaceful foster home. But this home was filled with strangers. Dirk was unfamiliar with the neighborhood, and had to go to a different school. He was so distraught over his situation he initially refused to talk to me. This made it difficult to get his side of the story.
While I kept in touch with Dirk, I honed in on mom, step-dad, and Dirk’s siblings. If kids are living in a home where abuse is taking place, there is an unhealthy silence. Children cannot relax when they know anything might trigger anger and abuse. They also tend to stay out of sight, clustered in a bedroom, or a fort in the backyard. Dirk’s family members were relaxed and engaged with each other. They laughed freely and willingly answered my questions. I didn’t see any siblings flinching if step-dad made a quick gesture toward them. One child asked step-dad to read her a story while I was present. He told her to go pick out a book, and he would read as soon as our visit was concluded. It wasn’t adding up.
I also met with Dirk’s father and step-mother to get an idea of how he fit into their home life. Everyone was on their best behavior on my visits. Dad talked about the demands of his job and the hours he had to put into his work. But I also discovered he reserved substantial amounts of free time to pursue his own pleasures—playing Poker with his buddies, watching Nascar races on TV, and hunting. I asked what types of things they do when Dirk comes to visit. The activities were centered on whatever step-mom and her kids were doing that weekend. When I asked about the last time dad and Dirk did something together, dad drew a blank.
Dirk had no facial bruise. But his claim that his step-father’s punch caused him to lose a tooth prompted me to meet with his dentist. “Could a punch to his mouth produce the loss of this tooth?” I asked the dentist who examined Dirk. He reported Dirk had never been to a dentist prior to his recent appointment. No cleanings. No exams. No X-rays. No new toothbrush to take home. The dentist said, “Dirk’s teeth are in such bad shape you could have blown on them and they could have fallen out!” Now the picture was gaining clarity.
The facts pointed to a different story. Dirk’s family was broken. His mother and his father moved on to other marriage partners. Dirk very much wanted to live with his father. But his father did not appear to make any time for Dirk. So, Dirk came up with a plan that he assumed would force the court to place him in his father’s home. He cried “Abuse!” and he had everyone’s attention. Dirk did not anticipate being placed in a foster home. He didn’t realize how lonely he would feel away from both families.
When I told Dirk what I thought happened, he readily admitted he lied about his tooth. I then began a process whereby Dirk could find peace. Dirk confessed his wrongdoing to his step-father. His step-father understood the situation and readily forgave Dirk. He assured Dirk they could talk about anything. When Dirk missed his dad, he could talk to his step-father about that. The step-father would help find ways for Dirk to have meaningful time with his dad.
Summing it up
Discrimination and abuse. Both words have the potential to evoke strong reactions that prompt us to take swift and decisive action. In some cases that action is necessary. But we need to remember, the first to state his case has the appearance of truth. We must always gather the facts before we pass judgment on others. The truth may very well paint a very different picture!
Before retirement, I was trained and certified as a court-appointed special advocate (CASA) for our county. I served in the volunteer role for 14 years. When children were brought into the system due to abuse or neglect, the court would assign a case to me. The role of the CASA was to assist case managers (who had large caseloads) in advocating for the child, investigating the case, and providing regular, detailed reports to the court.
