BELLEFONTE -- Debbie is tired of waiting for the courts to give her custody of her 13-year-old sister rather than allowing the child to live with their father -- a man convicted on two counts of indecent assault last year.

One of those convictions was for molesting Debbie's sister.

One out of three girls and one out of seven boys are molested in Pennsylvania each year, the majority of them by relatives or people well known to the child, according to the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape. However, no law exists prohibiting relatives convicted of abuse from retaining custody of the children.

Debbie -- whose last name has been withheld to protect her privacy -- and her three sisters were molested by their father, Ray, while growing up in Bellefonte with relatives who kept such incidents a family secret.

When Debbie discovered Ray had begun to molest her daughter and youngest sister, she and her husband, now living in the Pocono area, decided to act. They had her father arrested.

Ray pleaded guilty and received 18 months probation.

But Ray's conviction does not limit his visitation rights or prohibit him from having custody of Debbie's sister, the youngest of four children.

The courts granted Debbie's father custody of her youngest sister a few weeks ago under the Juvenile Act, which was written with two goals in mind: "To preserve the unity of the family whenever possible and to provide for care, protection and wholesome mental and physical development of children."

However, local and state coalition groups, crisis centers and some government officials agree that judges and state youth bureaus are interpreting the law, in effect since 1978, to preserve the family unit at all costs, regardless of the rights of the child.

"We live in a society where children are considered possessions of their biological parents," said Cathy Bouvia, community education specialist in the Women's Resource Center. "Children do not have recognized rights."

Bouvia said Pennsylvania's child-custody and abuse laws are among the most vague in the nation.

"The rights of parents and the rights of the child to be safe are not equally balanced," she said.

However, Jane Mendlow, a member of the state Youth and Aging Committee, said counties interpret the act differently. Mendlow said that some counties interpret the law to preserve the family unit to avoid the cost of placing a child in a foster home.

"It seems to me there is no directive to preserve the family at the expense of the child," she said.

Debbie said she tried to preserve her relationship with her family until she discovered that Ray had molested her youngest sister and daughter. She said she wanted to remember the good times rather than the bad.

"We all want to be part of a family . . . to have a home," she said.

However, Debbie said she did not want her youngest sister, already molested once, to go through the same experience as her other sisters.

State Rep. Peter Daley II, D-Washington, introduced a bill last June designed to assist people in Debbie's position. The bill would require courts to consider an individual's violent or abusive conduct or conviction before awarding custody or visitation.

The bill, now under second consideration in the state Senate, would also deny custody to a person found guilty of rape, statutory rape, indecent assault or sexual abuse.

Daley said the bill was introduced in response to a situation in Washington County -- an area south of Pittsburgh -- in which an ex-husband had visitation rights to the child and abused both the child and his former wife.

"I think that's crazy," Daley said, referring to judges who often do not take the criminal history of a parent into consideration before awarding visitation or custody rights.

But Daley said the bill cannot confine judges too much in their decisions or the bill will not pass.

Opponents of the bill maintain it deprives judges of the wide discretionary powers they require to make a balanced decision.

Lynn Gold-Bikin, chairwoman of the Family Law Section of the Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Association, said judges must consider all the factors in a custody hearing rather than be required to consider only a few.

"I am not suggesting that an abusive parent should be granted custody," Gold-Bikin said during testimony last October before a state House subcommittee on youth. "I am suggesting that our judges, who see thousands of custody cases in a given year, must be permitted to consider the abuse . . . as important factors, but not the only factors, in framing the custodial arrangement."

Another issue the bill raises is the risk of using sexual abuse allegations as a method to prevent the other parent from access to the child.

"My concern is that by codifying the factor of abuse as the only factor legislated we encourage more allegations of sexual abuse, more litigation, more lives ruined in an effort to put a Band-Aid on a major problem," Gold-Bikin said.

Gold-Bikin said in her testimony that the problem lies not with the law but with the judges who preside over such cases.

"I believe you ought to have family courts where the judges who hear these cases are committed to doing family work . . . not the new judges on the bench because no one else wants it," she said. "They ought to have some kind of special training so they know what they hear."

In a recent telephone interview, Gold-Bikin said: "Anybody with the brains of a trained seal knows you don't put the child back with an abusive parent."

Terry Watson, director of the Children and Youth Services in Bellefonte, said criticism of the courts in custodial matters occur because testimony is conducted in a closed courtroom.

"All this stuff is closed," he said, adding that nobody outside the courtroom knows what really happens during a custody or child abuse hearing.

Watson, who heads the agency engaged in Debbie's custody battle, disagreed with Bouvia. It maintained that the law's first aim to protect the child, not to preserve the family unit.

However, he said sometimes problems which present themselves at the beginning of a child's custody are worked out without having to go to court.

Although there are times when a child should be taken out of the home, "in many situations you should be working towards family unity," Watson said.

Watson said he does not oppose the bill but rather believes judges already utilize their discretionary powers. Disputes in custody cases will arise no matter what decision is handed down, he added.

Whether the bill passes or the law remains the same, Debbie said she will continue to battle within the court system, despite the financial strain.

But as time passes and her case -- one of thousands in Centre County -- becomes increasingly mired in the judicial system, Debbie said she cannot help but become frustrated at her lack of progress.

"(My parents) are going to get (her) back," she said, "and there is nothing we can do about it."