Child welfare in Georgia: What’s the difference between “Driving While Black” and “Driving While a White Prominent Lobbyist and Former Campaign Policy Advisor to the Governor”?

Quite a lot, if you happen to be the children in the car 

Perhaps you remember the story of the five children in Tennessee, torn from their parents and thrown into foster care because the parents were caught Driving While Black. 

Their car was pulled over for driving with “dark tint and traveling in the left lane while not actively passing.” Then, a police officer found five grams of marijuana in the car, a misdemeanor in Tennessee. 

It was reason enough for someone to call the Tennessee family police. They took away the children, “ages 7, 5, 3, 2 and a nursing four-month-old baby.” They were split among three foster homes before ultimately being placied with a family friend. It was nearly two months before the family was reunited. 

Let us now compare this case to one that just turned up in Georgia. In that case, if police allegations are correct, the offenses are quite different, but so is the complexion, and the political status of the driver. As this impressively thorough story in The Imprint reports: 

Jason Broce was arrested Oct. 16 north of Atlanta on six misdemeanor charges after allegedly getting into an accident with another vehicle and fleeing the scene in his F-150 truck. The charges included driving under the influence, hit and run, and two counts of child endangerment, according to a police report obtained by The Imprint. 

The child endangerment charges stem from the fact that Broce’s two children, ages 8 and 5, were in the car with him. (“Hit and run” apparently refers to hitting the car and fleeing the scene, there is no charge that Broce hit a person.) 

But Jason’s children did not spend so much as a minute in foster care. And, to be clear, that is as it should be. 

As far as we know, Jason wasn’t even ordered to stay out of the house while the case is investigated – if there is an investigation. Again, as it should be. 

Jason, as you’ve almost certainly figured out, is white. He’s also a prominent lobbyist and former campaign policy advisor to the governor. 

And what about his wife? After all, might there be “failure to protect” issues here? The Imprint story cites “Amber Walden, a Georgia attorney who specializes in child welfare cases. … 

Walden said the child welfare agency and judges often question the other parent about where they were at the time of the incident, what they knew, and why they allowed an intoxicated parent to drive with the kids. 

“It would have been like, ‘Where was the mother?’” she said. “Somebody would have had to give a really good reason as to why this happened. Judges and [the state child welfare agency] are just known for saying out of an abundance of caution, ‘We’re going to keep this case open.’” 

Again, no indication any of this happened – again, as it should be. There is no reason to harass a non-offending parent and add stress for the entire family.  So it’s a good thing they didn’t do it -in this case. 

In fact, there is no indication the police ever even called the child welfare agency. Again, from the story:

It remains unclear whether the state child welfare agency is investigating the Jason Broce incident. Law enforcement personnel are mandated reporters of suspected child abuse and neglect under state law. But Crystal Zion, a spokesperson for the arresting agency, the Georgia State Patrol, said in an email that the responding officer did not “directly” notify CPS on the scene. 

Instead, it seems someone simply called Broce’s wife and “a sergeant waited for her to arrive at the arrest scene, where she picked up her children and the truck.” 

Oh, wait. Perhaps that’s what the Georgia State Patrol spokesperson means by not calling CPS directly.  Because Broce’s wife is Candice Broce, who is both commissioner of Georgia’s Department of Human Services and director of its Division of Family and Children Services. That's the agency that's been cutting services to keep families together and dealing with a scandal over a child abuse pediatrician, and a the scandal over  false positive drug tests. 

Again, the light touch response here is correct. The odds that the children would be harmed by foster care are vastly greater than the odds that Jason is going to go out driving with the children again when, it is alleged, he’s had too much to drink or that his wife won’t be watching closely whenever he has the car keys – assuming he keeps his license. (The right punishment for Jason, if guilty, is dependent on much we don’t know, including whether this would be a first offense.) 

If only that same standard were applied to all the poor and nonwhite families who are stopped by police for the same reason, or for far, far less. 

At a minimum, I hope the experience might prompt Candice Broce to do some serious thinking about how her agency deals with issues of alleged drug or alcohol abuse by parents. 

It reminds me of that case involving the “druggie mom” who used to live in my neighborhood -- The one who was addicted to prescription opioids, and was an alcoholic and had mental illness issues, but who never faced so much as a knock at the door from child protective services.  That’s because this “druggie mom” – Betty Ford -- had the money to get help and to be sure her drug use didn’t hurt her children. 

So just as I’ve suggested we apply the Betty Ford standard to drug use by parents, let’s also apply what seems to be the Candice Broce standard to any so-called “failure to protect” case.