Once again, there’s been a lot of news:
● Can anyone think of a field other than child welfare in which so-called professionals go
around urging their colleagues to think LESS before taking action that could
hurt people? That’s not some kind of
inference. As this
op-ed in The Hill explains,
they’re literally telling their colleagues to think less!
● The Herald, in
Everett, Washington decided to take an approach to the Snohomish County CASA
scandal that is unusual for Washington State media: They
covered it – and the story is excellent. Up to now, only KING-TV has
reported on it. I’ve updated the latest NCCPR
Blog Post about the scandal.
● The New York Times
Upshot column has
a story with profound implications as Congress prepares to reauthorize the
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. As
I’ve written before, the CAPTA approach is all about coercing parents –
turning them in to child protective services, supposedly for “help,” but the
CPS agency gets to decide that, and we all know what that means. But the Times
reports on a new study, confirming earlier research, that this only drives
pregnant women away from prenatal care.
The researchers even quantify the harm to children’s health:
They found that
policies that defined alcohol use during pregnancy as child abuse or neglect
were associated with an increase of more than 12,000 preterm births. The cost
of these were more than $580 million in the first year of life. Policies
mandating warning signs where alcohol was sold were associated with an increase
of more than 7,000 babies born at low birth weight, at a cost of more than $150
million.
● You’re killing kids! No, YOU’RE killing kids! That’s how low the debate about child welfare
has sunk in Los Angeles County. I
have a blog post about it.
● The New York Daily
News has a
good editorial about why Gov. Andrew Cuomo should sign the Preserving
Family Bonds Act.
● Newsday has
a good story about how Nassau and Suffolk Counties, on New York’s Long
Island, have significantly reduced the number of children in foster care.
Nassau’s approach includes reducing racial bias through Blind
Removal Meetings.
● Indianz.com has a
good analysis of a good court decision – the one upholding the Indian Child
Welfare Act. The story includes a guide,
from the Native American Journalists Association, for reporting on ICWA.
●
Suppose, hypothetically, the straight teenage daughter of gay parents embraced
conservative Catholicism, causing a lot of stress within a family. The daughter’s school compounds the stress,
and then calls the Child Protective Services agency – which takes the youth
away and places her in foster care with one of her gym coaches. Anyone who is appalled by that should be
equally appalled by the reverse – as
in this actual case from Connecticut.
● It shouldn’t be necessary for the federal government to
have to issue
an entire information memorandum to explain to child welfare systems why “family
and youth voice are critical to a well-functioning child welfare system…” But remember, this is the field in which
professionals are urging less thinking (see first item above.) And the memo isn’t just a general
exhortation. It offers specific examples of ways to do this, including
investing in high-quality legal counsel for youth and families.
Jerry Milner, head of the Children’s Bureau at the federal
Administration for Children and Families, writes about the importance of
listening to youth and families – and acting on what one hears – in this column
for the Rethinking Foster Care blog.
● And in Washington State, the King County Department of
Public Defense has created a short video
to help guide parents through the first crucial days after a child has been
removed. State laws vary, so many of the
specifics may apply only to Washington State, but some parts may be useful
elsewhere as well.
