SENIOR CHIEF JUDGE BRUCE GATTERMAN
RUSH COUNTY, KANSAS

Statement Regarding Judicial Proceedings, Child Safety, and Due Process Concerns
 
In Case No. 2018-DM-000019, presided over by Bruce Gatterman, numerous motions supported by documented medical records, law-enforcement reports, and sworn evidence of abuse, neglect, and child endangerment were repeatedly denied.
 
These proceedings occurred in Rush County, Kansas, a rural community with a population of approximately 2,000 residents. I am a Texas resident and was an outsider to the community.
 
I possess documented communications and recordings relevant to concerns about impartiality. This includes text messages from the children’s mother stating that her mother cleaned the residence of Judge Gatterman, and a recording from the mother’s former employer in which the employer stated the mother told her:
 
“He will never win in court because my family knows the judge.”
 
These statements are preserved as evidence and are presented here as part of the record of concerns raised during and after the proceedings.
 
 Documented Motions Denied Despite Supporting Evidence
 
The following motions were filed and denied while Judge Gatterman presided:
 

• Medical Neglect & Abuse

  Motions supported by Texas medical records and CPS involvement — including reports that the mother attempted to drown the children — were denied.

• Child Endangerment History

  Despite the mother’s arrest and criminal charge for providing alcohol and cigarettes to the children at ages five and six, Judge Gatterman characterized the incident as a “watershed” event and nonetheless awarded her residential custody.

• Criminal Association

  A motion documenting that the mother resided with a boyfriend listed on Indiana’s Most Wanted registry was denied.

• Leaving Children Unattended

  Evidence-supported motions establishing that the children were left home alone as toddlers were denied.

• Bruises Documented by Law Enforcement

  Motions accompanied by reports from the Leander, Texas Police Department documenting bruising on the children were denied.

• Severe Dental Neglect

  Despite urgent medical findings requiring surgery under general anesthesia and a Texas dentist’s mandatory CPS referral, the related motion was denied.

• Denial of Court-Ordered Parenting Time

  Seventeen documented instances in which the mother failed to comply with court-ordered exchanges in Norman, Oklahoma were raised by motion; all were denied.

 
Title IV-D Context and Due Process Concerns
 
Kansas child-support enforcement operates under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, a federally funded program that provides financial incentives to states based on child-support collections.
 
Under this framework:
 

• Child-support enforcement actions are federally subsidized.

• States receive incentive funding tied to collection performance.

 
In this case:
 

• I was the parent with stable income and the greatest demonstrated ability to pay child support.

• The mother had multiple child-endangerment charges and limited earning capacity.

 
Despite this, residential custody was awarded to the mother, and repeated motions concerning abuse, neglect, and safety were denied.
 
These facts raise serious due-process and structural concerns, particularly where child safety allegations supported by medical and law-enforcement evidence did not result in hearings or meaningful investigation.
 
 
Judicial Recusal
 
After repeated filings and requests, Judge Bruce Gatterman ultimately recused himself in 2021.