Proving the blind squirrel theory, Above the Law breaks the news that Madlyn Primoff, the Kaye Scholer partner who took an old parenting tactic a few steps too far, took a conditional discharge to end her prosecution for endangering the welfare of a child.
In case you missed this, Primoff’s kids were misbehaving in the back seat, and she had enough. She did what so many parents have threatened to do, kick them out and make them walk home. The difference is, she actually did it.
Madlyn Primoff apparently couldn’t bear any more squabbling between her 10- and 12-year-old daughters Sunday and booted them out of the car in White Plains, Westchester County, authorities said.
The fedup Scarsdale mom – a partner at white-shoe firm Kaye Scholer – soon relented and let her 12-year-old daughter back in when she caught up with the family car.
The younger daughter wandered around the corner to Mamaroneck Ave., where a good Samaritan spotted her in tears about 7:30 p.m., bought her ice cream and then approached a cop in a patrol car.
Next time you’re threatened by a Kaye Scholar partner, you might want to take it seriously.
There’s not a parent around who hasn’t made the same threat as Primoff. Granted, she took it farther than most of us would ever consider, but then the claim that she actually abandoned a 10 and 12 year old on the mean streets of Mamaroneck Avenue is somewhat exaggerated. She went back to get them after making the threat real. After all, don’t the experts tell us that when we threaten punishment, we have to follow through on it?
Not that I’m advocating either the threat or the conduct, but there was once a time when parents were not merely allowed to discipline their children, but expected to do so. The old axiom, spare the rod and spoil the child, held meaning. We complain bitterly about what’s become of parental discipline, yet put parents at risk of prosecution for doing the things that our parents did routinely.
So Madlyn Primoff was prosecuted, and the case ended with a conditional discharge, meaning that it will be dismissed in six months provided she doesn’t commit a crime. While it’s a favorable outcome in that it concludes the matter without a conviction, it’s not considered an outcome favorable to the accused under New York law. It’s more of a tie.
But the sentence means nothing. The image of Primoff’s mugshot will follow her forever. She is the Biglaw poster child for parental abuse and poor judgment. I assume she’s a good lawyer, or they wouldn’t have made her a partner, but that’s all forgotten now that she could be easily mistaken for one of Charles Manson’s disciples. Was her conduct that bad that she will bear the scar of shaming for the rest of her life?
Some will think that by tossing her kids out of the car, she took a terrible risk of harm to her children and deserves the shame she’s received. Maybe so. But the dividing line between acceptable parental discipline in the age of fear, and the momentary blown synapse that results in a bad call, is far too blurry to destroy a career and ruin a life over. I wouldn’t have done what Primoff did, and trust me that I’ve had the urge and the opportunity, but I similarly understand everyone makes a judgment call that, after the fact, they wish they hadn’t.
No harm came to Primoff’s kids, though her youngest was scared. This was fortuitous, in that they didn’t wander into the streets or get kidnapped by a pervert. Of course, these weren’t likely outcomes, except in the fantasies of those advocates for whom no parental act beyond a hug is deemed acceptable. There is no allowance for the fact that sometimes kids need to be taught a lesson about behavior. Hugs are great, but they aren’t always the proper response.
The point is that Primoff walked out of court with a conditional discharge, but will never be able to walk away from a moment of lapsed judgment in a twisted effort to be a parent. Before you assign moral condemnation to her choice, think about the myriad of choices a parent faces in trying to raise their children to act appropriately, and how many of us can navigate parenthood perfectly.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Simple Justice: The Shame of Parenting
Proving the blind squirrel theory, Above the Law breaks the news that Madlyn Primoff, the Kaye Scholer partner who took an old parenting tactic a few steps too far, took a conditional discharge to end her prosecution for endangering the …
Why isn’t the state (or city) being prosecuted for allowing the streets to be too dangerous for children? The true liability is theirs – streets should be safe for all persons.
I’m pretty sure that when I was 10 I used to walk home from school about half a mile every day. My parents used to send me to the store for milk when I was 8 or 9. What she did was scarier, and probably isn’t very good parenting, but “endangering” sounds a bit harsh.
Then again, the standards have changed since I was a kid. Car seat? What’s a car seat?
I go back a little farther. I walked two miles from kindergarten on, each way (often in the snow). And seat belt? What’s a seat belt?
Of course, back then there was no such thing as child molesters. Every man was Ozzie and every woman was Harriet. And the chicks were all named Donna Reed.
Jeez. She got arrested for this? What is this world coming to?
yeah, no kidding. It’s OK for sex offenders to be released to prey upon the innocent and terrorize the modern parent with their presumed presence. Our methods of parenting have had to change drastically because the law protects offenders more so than victims. This should not happen, but the state took responsibility for a big enough police presence to manage the safety of its citizens, people like madelyn primoff would be protesting the “police state”. How very Shakespearean.
You had it easy. In my day I had to crawl five miles over broken glass to get to school. Snow, how I longed for snow.