Illinois Falsely Accused These Parents of Abusing Their Baby—and Now Won't Tell Them Who Actually Did It
"I never thought that this was even humanly possible," says Sabra Brucker.

Sabra Brucker works as an executive assistant. Her husband, Dagan, is a fifth-generation farmer in Cropsey, Illinois, about 100 miles south of Chicago.
After many years of infertility and miscarriages, they finally became the parents of four young children: Addison, born in 2017; Andi, born in 2019; and twins Aiden and Arie, born prematurely in March 2021.
The Brucker family had never previously endured a run-in with child protective services. A series of medical complications involving the younger twin, Aiden, suddenly changed that. After the parents sought care for their sick child, they were falsely accused of breaking Aiden's ribs and subjected to months of humiliating inequity. And when that was over, the authorities refused to disclose the identity of the actual perpetrator.
"I never thought that this was even humanly possible," says Sabra. "To be honest, I
was probably naive."
When Aiden was 5 months old, the Bruckers discovered he had genetic intestinal malrotation—the same condition that had required emergency surgery to save his older sister Addison's life back when she too was 5 months old.
On August 9, 2021, the Bruckers took Aiden to the OSF Children's Hospital Emergency Room in Peoria, Illinois. He was experiencing intense stomach pain and vomiting, just as his older sister had. Genetic intestinal malrotation can be a life-threatening condition, and it requires immediate, emergency intervention.
Aiden's condition, though serious, was not as immediately life-threatening as Addison's had been. He was given ultrasounds and X-rays for his upper GI track, abdomen, and chest. His intestinal reversal was visualized, but no skeletal concerns were noted. Nevertheless, he was held in the hospital for observation, and subjected to daily, repeated abdominal ultrasounds and chest and abdominal X-rays.
On the fourth day of his stay at the hospital, seven rib fractures became visible on the X-rays. These were all new, non-calcified fractures that had not appeared on earlier X-rays. Rib fractures are viewed by medical profession as evidence of possible abuse.
The Bruckers immediately suspected that the fractures had occurred during the hospital stay itself, possibly due to the extensive handling and exams Aiden had endured. The lack of any signs of these injuries at admission certainly suggested that they had appeared during Aiden's inpatient care. And yet as soon as the fractures were detected, a child abuse hotline call was placed to the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) naming the Bruckers as suspected abusers.
Sabra was in a meeting with her boss when she received the news.
"I immediately called my husband—he was at the hospital with Aiden—and I said, 'What is going on?'" Sabra recalls. "I just remember the sheer confusion and fear in his
voice."
Sabra and Dagan were not quick to point fingers, but they did wonder if the hospital was aware of its own potential liability when it accused them of causing the fractures.
Following the call to the child abuse hotline, a state-contracted child abuse pediatrician, Channing Petrak, assumed the role of directing Aiden's medical testing as a suspected child abuse victim. Petrak oversees child abuse cases under a subcontract her office holds with the DCFS for central Illinois. While not a hospital employee, she is viewed as the head of the hospital's child abuse team. In that capacity, she was empowered to decide which tests Aiden needed in order to confirm or rule out abuse.
She was also immediately enlisted to discuss the case with DCFS and the police and to determine whether child abuse had occurred. If she believed it had, her role would include testifying against the parents in the event the case went to court.
Petrak was responsible for testing not just Aiden but the other Brucker children as well. While parents have the right to refuse medical procedures that are not required by a court order or emergency, the fear of CPS retribution looms large.
On multiple occasions, Sabra requested a meeting with Petrak and the OSF team to ensure the timeline of the injuries was clear. She felt it necessary that everyone understand the fractures had not been present on Aiden's body upon admission, as shown by multiple X-ray examinations. Clarifying this, she thought, would allow her and Dagan to work alongside the hospital to identify their underlying cause.
Sabra even wrote on the whiteboard the team used for notes: "Can we clarify Xray finds with DCFS?" and snapped a photo of it.
"I wanted a picture with a time stamp because no one would speak to me," she says.
Sabra's requests were ignored.

Meanwhile, Petrak pushed the family to authorize an MRI, which would require Aiden to fast for eight hours and then undergo general anesthesia and be intubated. As there was no suspicion of other injuries that would have made an MRI useful, the Bruckers tried to object.
In response, the hospital threatened the family with a court order that would require Aiden to remain in the hospital's care pending a judicial order for the MRI. Since complying with the MRI demand seemed to be the only way to bring their son home quickly, Sabra comforted Aiden through the fast, and handed him over to the hospital's staff—who sedated and intubated him, and proceeded with the MRI.
The other Brucker children—ages four, two and now six months—were also subjected to observation at their home. These included visual exams of their genitals.
The state even demanded that the 4-year-old daughter, Addison, submit to a forensic interrogator. This investigator reported that Addison was very "sweet" and "polite," and no concerns were noted from her 2-hour interview.
Meanwhile, DCFS determined that the Bruckers could not take Aiden home by themselves upon his discharge. Instead, the agency demanded the family find someone else to take care of their four children. That person could do so at the Bruckers' home, and Sabra and Dagan could live there—but they would not be allowed to be alone with their children at any time. If they not did find a caregiver to watch the kids 24/7, the children would be taken into foster care and placed with strangers.
Sabra's parents, Don and Shari Boyd, lived 273 miles away. Thankfully, Shari was on hand to help out, even though she was in the middle of breast cancer treatment.
Diane Redleaf, a defense attorney who co-chairs the National Coalition to End Hidden Foster Care, says that the Bruckers' experience is commonplace. Efforts are underway to secure reforms that would allow families like the Bruckers to have some recourse when they are threatened with having their kids taken away.
This arrangement for the children was supposed to last for just two to five days, but DCFS kept extending it. The caseworker even reminded grandma Shari that she couldn't use the bathroom without taking the kids in with her. Sabra and Dagan's nighttime feedings of their baby twins also had to be supervised by Shari.
The Bruckers wanted to object, but they felt they had no choice.
This led to odd situations, such as Dagan not being able to have his kids take turns riding the combine with him—their favorite fall activity. The combine had only two seats, so if one of the children rode along, Shari and the other three children would have to somehow ride along too, or the government's plan would be violated.
As the weeks dragged on, the Bruckers worked to demonstrate that the abuse allegations against them were false. A University of Chicago pediatric orthopedic specialist, Christopher Sullivan, saw Aiden in his office and reviewed his radiology imaging and lab testing, formally concluding that the timing of the fractures' first appearance made it impossible for them to have occurred prior to the hospital admission.
Sullivan also noticed that Aiden had very low Vitamin D and high parathyroid hormone levels, which made his bones extremely fragile. He concluded that the likeliest explanation for the fractures was routine handling at the hospital.
Despite this report—and many letters from the Bruckers' pediatrician, family members, friends, and teachers—DCFS's restrictions persisted.
Meanwhile, DCFS came to suspect that the Bruckers' day care providers were Aiden's possible abuse perpetrators. For that reason, DCFS told the Bruckers they could no longer send their kids there. Everyone who had ever been in contact with Aiden before his hospital stay had suddenly become a suspect.
Sabra requested that their two older children be allowed to keep going to their day care— with their familiar friends and routines—but the caseworker said no. The caseworker also continued to demand weekly check-ins with the Bruckers. Each time, she insisted on strip-searching the twins and commenting on natural bodily features, such as inverted nipples.
As the family languished, Sabra checked the mail one day and was shocked to find a bill from the hospital for over $60,000. Her private insurance provider had denied the payment for Aiden's MRI as "medically unnecessary." The Bruckers told the hospital's billing department that they had not requested the MRI; it was done at the behest of Petrak. Soon after this, the Bruckers' billing records disappeared from their file at the hospital.
Illinois gives DCFS 60 days to complete an investigation. Knowing this, the Brucker family decided on day 60 that they had had enough of the "voluntary safety plan." They hired a lawyer with DCFS experience who confirmed their right to terminate the plan. He notified DCFS accordingly.
Three months later, in January 2022, a caseworker from a different DCFS regional office phoned Sabra to say their investigation file had been transferred. Since the children had not been seen by DCFS in several months, the new caseworker wanted to come observe them. The family declined this request. The new DCFS caseworker also informed Sabra that the Bruckers' case file was completely empty of investigative notes.
In March, and again in October, 14 months after the case had begun, the Bruckers' attorney submitted a complaint to the DCFS Inspector General. In November 2022, he received a response saying the inspector general was unable to investigate this complaint because the case was still open. The Bruckers couldn't help but wonder whether DCFS was keep the status of the investigation ambiguous in order to avoid accountability.
Finally, in November 2023, the Bruckers received a letter from DCFS stating that the case was now closed and Dagan and Sabra were cleared of any wrongdoing. Curiously, the letter claimed that "someone" had been "substantiated" as Aiden's abuser.
The Bruckers filed an inquiry as to who that person was. They were told they had no right to see these records.

Neither Petrak nor the hospital responded to a request for comment. A spokesperson for DCFS declared in a statement: "DCFS is mandated by Illinois statute to investigate any allegations of child abuse or neglect that is reported to our agency."
In situations like the Bruckers', which are far too numerous to be viewed as aberrations, concerns about children's health and well-being are cited as pretexts to legitimize witch hunts against parents and other caregivers. These investigations have lasting consequences. The Brucker children were left with extreme separation anxiety. Sabra experienced debilitating post-traumatic stress disorder. The family considered suing the caseworkers but decided that litigation would force them to relive the horror.
But they did decide to speak out about their harrowing experience. They want people to understand that the state's so-called voluntary safety plan did was neither voluntary nor safe—it was a sham.
Thankfully, Aiden's medical condition has resolved, and he's now in excellent physical shape.
"He's growing, cute, talking, very healthy now," says Sabra.
Meanwhile, Petrak recently became president of the board of directors of the National Children's Alliance. The organization oversees funding and accrediting for child advocacy centers, where allegedly abused children are interviewed and assessed across the country.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
As the weeks dragged on, the Bruckers worked to demonstrate that the abuse allegations against them were false. A University of Chicago pediatric orthopedic specialist, Christopher Sullivan, saw Aiden in his office and reviewed his radiology imaging and lab testing, formally concluding that the timing of the fractures' first appearance made it impossible for them to have occurred prior to the hospital admission.
But remember, the real evil that is so nefarious and pervasive that we need British Environmentalist Paid Liars to expose and defend against is The Heritage Foundation's members' belief that kids shouldn't have unrestricted access to free porn on the internet. Not defend them against malicious bureaucracies and individuals of all kinds of stripes who would use the internet to prey on them and their families. Nope. Just evil Chrischun Nashunalists who want to get rid of free speech and porn on the internet and are just using kids to do it.
I take it you spout this nonsense on all articles, especially when your comment has nothing to do with the article.
And another one bites the mute; so many trolls, shills, and 50 centers
I take it you closed your eyes while reading TFA and can't see the connection.
Please point out a connection in this article to a rant on porn.
Obviously your reading comprehension is limited so I'm here to help. mad.casual isn't ranting about porn one way or the other. He's simply pointing out the perverse application of government power. Possibly when the state snatches your kids for bogus reasons you'll reflect on that reality. I hope that doesn't happen only because your progeny will already have entered life with the debilitating disadvantage of having you as a parent. Having said that, off to your little grey box.
I guess I do not have the same access to drugs that some posters have. Getting that interpretation out of the mad.casual rant is truly something to behold. The "British Environmentalist Paid Liars" and "evil Chrischun Nashunalists" comments truly make it a challenge to grasp your connection.
Since the porn article was by Elizabeth Nolan Brown YESTERDAY, it did seem his rant was to the wrong article.
I guess I do not have the same access to drugs that some posters have.
Don’t worry little Kyle, child-proof caps are a bitch, but you’ll get it one day.
The “British Environmentalist Paid Liars” and “evil Chrischun Nashunalists” comments truly make it a challenge to grasp your connection.
Yup. Mental connections and basic grasping are two skills that adults have long since mastered but that infants and toddlers generally have to work to develop.
Since the porn article was by Elizabeth Nolan Brown YESTERDAY, it did seem his rant was to the wrong article.
See?! There you go! Now, little Kyle, did anyone lay out any rules to you that you *have* to have the memory of a goldfish and can’t compare things from one day to the next between two libertarian “Women’s Rights/Issues” authors at the same magazine or did you just assume that? If you assumed it, if you were actually the least bit libertarian, wouldn’t it be useful to compare and contrast actual concrete examples of longstanding and nationwide policy of how the state actually invades peoples’ lives without solicitation as opposed to foreign agents investigating the shadow of the specter of an invasion that might be waiting in the wings if one candidate wins and pays attention to the specter and it’s shadow… assuming the foreign agents are being in any way honest to begin with?
Because again, as indicated, the ability to make these connections as to how the state’s right hand acts without awareness of or even in spite of what it’s left hand is doing is a pretty core development of advanced/adult thought *and* libertarianism.
Or do you just enjoy demonstrating to everyone that you (prefer to) have the memory of a goldfish and both the mental and physical grasp of a small child? Because, again finally along the theme, you aren’t the first to play this retarded “I can’t understand how two points someone else is making don’t connect, so it must be the other person who’s crazy.” game and you probably won’t be the last. But you will all still sound like sarcasmic or JFree or mtrueman or whomever when you do it… again.
Having read a few other posts of his, I'd have to agree with you.
…The Heritage Foundation’s members’ belief that
kidsno one shouldn’thaveunrestrictedaccess tofreepornon the internet.But ^this^ was the actual point of the article yesterday.
Hopefully the Bruckers can sue Petrak (anyone surprised pronouns are They?). The Kruger case is still going on and the courts denied qualified immunity (hope for any parent falsely accused).
The x-rays on admission were clear. NO investigation of the parents should have occurred and Petrak (and any thinking person) would know that. The only investigation should have been internal at the hospital.
Odd; here you do claim to have RTFA. I guess you just don't want to see the connection or abhor the comparison.
Which comment are you replying? Which connection or comparison? Are you referring to the article about the Bruckers or some other article.
When an agency gets it teeth into something, it takes on a life of its own. Investigators and bureaucrats egos and reputations become more of a consideration than any ones well being, and the hapless object of their Javert like scrutiny is out on a limb. Pretty evident from what we're told that the hospital had its own interests to protect and obscure. Glad they eventually prevailed, but for every one who does there are countless others without the means or resources to fight them. There are of course many child abuse cases that are legit, but cases like this where a family gets wrongfully targeted and finds the weight of the government upon them.
Unfortunately it plays into a human failing. Just last night a friend was recounting his experience with an insurer whom he pursued for months for coverage, only to be told that that treatment was not covered...until he went far enough over their heads to someone who was surprised to hear of the denials and said, sure, they cover that — just like that, boom, no long discussion or investigation. The underlings just never wanted to admit they were wrong. My friend had been a bureaucrat himself, whose colleagues remarked that he was a rare one to admit mistakes he'd made.
It is common. When my daughter was deployed to the Sandbox I took her off my car insurance. 1 yr later she came back and was so excited to go up north on leave she hopped into my truck and left. It was Saturday so I thought I'd wait till Monday and call my agent to have her put back on. Sunday daughter totaled the truck. Monday call the national insurance and the most annoying lady I'd ever spoken to told me there was nothing they could do. I explained but kept getting no. I was finally fed up and demanded her supervisor. When I told him what had happened he thanked my daughter for her service and told me they would cover everything. Sometimes you just have to not take "No" for an answer.
Considering the unmitigated power of the bureaucracy and the process itself being a severe punishment, there needs to be a moratorium on investigations based on anonymous reports and the first person investigated in these cases should be the person reporting it. People who have nothing to hide will still report.
Whether they were the proximate cause or not, I can't help but observe that the hospital unmistakably was aware that the child had suffered harm during his stay at the hospital and by reporting parental abuse, managed to keep the focus entirely off of themselves.
The terrifying thing is that real people knew that innocent people were being subjected to this shit. These people could be your friends and neighbors and relatives or someone very much like them. We've spent decades trying to figure out how the Germans embraced a Holocaust and the Chinese were gung ho for the cultural revolution. We are surrounded by the very same people.
This might be a selection effect rather than an actual discrepancy, but every single case I’ve encountered where parents were seeking medical treatment and an unexplained injury popped up and a child abuse pediatrician got involved has resulted in absolutely egregious misuse of government power against the family. There are certainly plenty of issues with cases that were brought to CPS’s attention by other means, but the ratio of horrifically mishandled cases to reasonable investigations seems way higher for cases with child abuse pediatricians involved. Plus it seems like a violation of medical ethics. Easier said than done, but imo that entire board certification should be eliminated.
This one's even more extreme than what I commented on the day care photos case. Here:
Not only did the authorities examine the children's genitals, but mandated that an adult expose hers to the children! That must've been "fun", herding 4 children into the bathroom while she used the toilet, shower, or tub — probably locking the door so the children couldn't get out of her sight. Several times a day for some long period that kept getting extended.
DCFS probably didn't expect the family to comply, and just wanted one or more of the children removed, so they'd be indirectly under DCFS's watch in foster care until adulthood.
The caseworker even reminded grandma Shari that she couldn’t use the bathroom without taking the kids in with her.
I am not sure if you are always this obtuse to blindly accept a narrative, but your observations are ridiculous, as following that instruction the way you imagine is not even possible.
2 of those children were under the age of 1 and would need to be held, in carriers, or set on the floor of the bathroom, which is not sanitary. She certainly could not be expected to wake the children every time she needed to use the bathroom. But simply leaving the door open while she used the bathroom would suffice for not leaving the children unattended. It might be embarrassing to the adults, but certainly feasible.
It might make some sense if she was given that instruction for when the family was out in public where she could not hear or observe the kids if they were not in the bathroom. I suspect they didn't go out much during that time.
Well then! No doubt grandma shoved the parents outside and locked the doors when she need to use the loo.
Do you have some alternative method to Obey The Law, other than thinking The Law would accept leaving them in the hallway but in sight? The Law in this case showed no such common sense or leniency.
Do you doubt that the report faithfully reproduced what the caseworker told Grandma?
Yes. It provides zero context. How do you think she slept or showered? How could she ever put the children down for a nap? How do caregivers normally do those things? The instruction about the bathroom was directly related to not to leaving the children alone with their parents. That is much different than an impossible command to have them in your direct line of sight 100% of the time.
The family survived the ordeal without losing the kids. Clearly they were able to manage sleep and showers. There is no need to exaggerate how onerous it feels to have the boot of the government on your neck with your impossible scenarios to communicate that these people were made virtual prisoners by unelected bureaucrats without a trial.
As caregiver you'd have to sleep only when the parents slept or were away, if the object was to not leave the parents with them unwatched while conscious. But I suspect the family complied by not getting caught. That is, DCFS wanted to catch them violating the terms, but never had witnesses to prove it. And yes, I think the bathroom instruction was supposed to be taken literally.
...
Oh, it's possible, all right...it's just hell! That's why I think they didn't expect them to comply. Do you doubt that the report faithfully reproduced what the caseworker told Grandma?
Oddly Chuck felt compelled to show up and defend the state here. If they didn't expect compliance why did the subject even come up? I'm sure that barring the presence of a DCFS cop in the residence 24/7 some lines were crossed as a practical matter. I don't see how that changes the fact that the order was given or that non compliance somehow ameliorates the actions of these petty tyrants. And I don't see why Chuck felt the need to attack you for simply repeating something in the article.
IDK, seems like there's plenty of room for talking past each other with Chuck trying to defend Grandma from Roberta's interpretation of the state's "Don't move and put your hands up!" secret recipe.
In Lenore's defense, I actually do believe that the DCFS caseworker likely did say "in with her/you".
I was in no way shape or form defending the state. I am 100% that the caseworkers were exceeding their mandate, that the bathroom comment was asinine and that the genital inspections are a constitutional infringement.
What I objected to was Roberta getting into a tizzy about the stupidest thing in the article and losing the high ground. The instructions to the grandmother were that she could not leave leave the children alone with the parents. She was the sole caretaker for those kids, even when the parents were in the home. Nobody should close themself in the bathroom when they are the sole caretaker in a house with small children. Doing so would be negligent. You either take the kid in with you or leave the door open (like I said, 3 fucking times). For a public restroom, as a sole caretaker, your only option is to take all the kids in with you. Did any of you people raise kids?
Clearly the grandmother didn’t cease shitting, showering and sleeping over the course of the ordeal. She didn’t take 4 kids into the bathroom with her every time. Quit pretending she did.
I'm not pretending she did. I'm saying she said she did, or would. If they told her to stop breathing, she'd've shaken her head "yes" and resumed breathing as soon as she was out of sight.
I feel terrible for the Bruckers...and I hope they sue the living Hell out of every government agency, person, and the hospital that they can.
What really needs to happen--prosecutions.
And if that can't be arranged, lynchings.
In every state and country in the world. And the horses they rode in on.
...
I would bet there was no abuse at all, just medical accident and possibly negligence. But they want to pretend there was an abuser so the initial accusation of abuse isn't contradicted.
Just ass covering all the way down.
Except I don't really see how it's covering their ass. So the hospital has someone who's between accident prone, negligent, and violently abusive enough to break 7(!) ribs of an infant and the hospital and/or DCFS are, unless they should be passing them off to the local PD that's conducting a/the investigation, covering for them.
Searched X for Dr. Channing Petrak and while there's no account for them I did find two other instances similar to this one involving the bad Dr.
So, here's the thing about DCFS (and social services in general) - in any case, in any city, all across America:
They have to constantly justify their existence.
They are some of the least educated, least experienced, and most abusive people on the planet, and they wield disgusting amounts of power with little to no checks and balances. And they live and die by their flowcharts. Their jobs require ZERO intelligence, ZERO effort, and ZERO care.
I am not being hyperbolic or exaggerating when I say they are the single most useless employed human beings on the planet. Literally anyone - even a drooling retard digging and filling holes - does a more important job and does it far better than literally any social services/DCFS staff on the entire planet.
And they know it. Which is why they have to continuously justify their existence and funding. So they do, and they constantly - constantly - color outside the lines and screw things up for the most vulnerable people they're allegedly there to protect.
There are stories I could tell you about the DCFS/social services that make this seem tame by comparison. They take kids away from good and decent Christian parents on the barest of bases. They return kids to crackheads and violent psychopaths because said crackhead/psychopath "did his time" and "passed the tests." Now all the rage is to take them away from parents who want to protect them from literal evil, and hand them over to people who are eager to literally mutilate them.
If you don't know and fully understand that Progressivism/Marxism - especially after its display this week at the DNC - is a straight up undeniable death cult, then I'm very sorry but you are a lost cause. DCFS and social services (and, new to the party, the LGBT pedos) are this death cult's enforcers. And, oddly, despite all the irrevocable harm and destruction they cause, they're the least targeted by you ACAB types.
Think about that, as you think about what you stand for, "Libertarians."
They should reconsider a lawsuit. I would contribute to the GiveSendGo.
These people are sick. Did they/them just want an excuse to come fondle kids genitals, or what?
Finally, in November 2023, the Bruckers received a letter from DCFS stating that the case was now closed and Dagan and Sabra were cleared of any wrongdoing. Curiously, the letter claimed that “someone” had been “substantiated” as Aiden’s abuser.
The Bruckers filed an inquiry as to who that person was. They were told they had no right to see these records.
--------------------------------------------
Wait a darn minute, if they wanted to sue or press charges against the person who cause the injury ... how would they if DCFS won't turn over the evidence ?