BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA – In the heart of the 17th Judicial Circuit, Judge Mara’s family court is presiding over a crisis of silence and delay that is costing a Florida child his father, his stability, and his voice. Mr. Rubenstein—a law-abiding paralegal with an active federal security clearance—has been stripped of all meaningful contact with his son, not by evidence of abuse, but by a temporary emergency custody order that has now become a tool for permanent exclusion.
The origins of this tragedy are as shocking as the ongoing injustice. In late April, Mr. Rubenstein’s son experienced a severe psychiatric crisis, repeatedly throwing objects at Mr. Rubenstein from a distance. One of these objects—a hard dog bone—struck Mr. Rubenstein in the head, causing him to lose consciousness for over thirty minutes. His fiancée, who the GAL will not even allow the child to know about, provided life-saving CPR before paramedics arrived. Mr. Rubenstein required emergency trauma care and two metal staples in his head. Despite these circumstances—completely out of his control—the mother initiated litigation against Mr. Rubenstein while he was still in the ambulance on the way to the trauma center.
At the May 7 custody hearing, Judge Mara did not even have Mr. Rubenstein’s objection or motion for continuance at the outset. Only after her assistant brought the filings into the virtual hearing did the judge read them—live, apparently for the first time—before immediately ruling. Compounding the irregularities, Judge Mara attempted to remove Mr. Rubenstein’s daughter as well, but only backed down after Mr. Rubenstein objected that this was not included in the mother’s emergency motion.
Despite holding only a temporary custody order, the mother and her counsel, Meaghan Marro, have treated this as a permanent termination of Mr. Rubenstein’s rights. Mr. Rubenstein has been barred from even telling his son about his recent engagement. Requests for Father’s Day contact and for sharing family news have been denied or ignored. The mother also removed Mr. Rubenstein’s access to school records, only restoring them under pressure.
Judge Mara, rather than enforcing compliance or ensuring accountability, appointed a Guardian ad Litem (GAL) whose own statements betray clear bias: the GAL disclosed her own son was previously Baker Acted and opined that Mr. Rubenstein’s son should be with his mother—ignoring both the court-ordered need for psychiatric care and the ongoing DCF investigations. The maternal grandmother is now under two back-to-back DCF investigations for alleged physical abuse, yet Mr. Rubenstein’s access is further restricted and his concerns minimized.
Opposing counsel, Meaghan Marro, has consistently refused to respond to settlement offers, avoided substantive engagement, and—through procedural tactics—helped foster an environment in which the mother acts as if temporary full custody is permanent. The effect is devastating: Mr. Rubenstein is barred from his child’s school, medical, and personal life, while the GAL cites only the current “temporary” order as justification for continued exclusion, in violation of Florida law and the statutory mandate to protect the child’s best interests.
Florida law is clear. Under Fla. Stat. § 61.13, § 61.401, and § 61.403, the court and its agents are required to foster meaningful relationships with both parents and to protect children from unnecessary psychological harm. Instead, the system has rewarded stonewalling, denied transparency, and allowed uninvestigated allegations against a household member—now the subject of dual DCF cases—to persist while the child’s father is shut out.
Mr. Rubenstein’s case is now on appellate review and is being referred for public oversight. Hundreds of pages of evidence, filings, and records document a pattern of judicial passivity, procedural delay, and a chilling indifference to the child’s well-being and due process rights.
As Father’s Day arrives, one Florida child will not hear from his father—not because of any proven risk or judicial finding, but because the officials charged with protecting his interests refuse to act. The silence from the 17th Judicial Circuit is more than just bureaucracy—it is irreparable harm.
