This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
That’s a key reason why the federal government now allows partial reimbursement for it. No, it’s not to get “bad parents” off; it’s to craft alternatives to the cookie-cutter no-real-services “service plans” often dished out by agencies like DCS. Between the reimbursement and the reduced foster care costs, this approach also pays for itself.
In fact, the control the government demands can predate conception. If anything these decisions go farther depriving children of their mothers and t heir fathers if the fathers exercise insufficient control over their partners pregnancies.
As an illustration, I am reposting my 2022 review of Roberts’ most recent book, Torn Apart: How the Child Welfare System Destroys Black Families–and How Abolition Can Build a Safer Worl d. child welfare system. ” Those who liked Shattered Bonds will likely love Torn Apart.
But Burkhammer wants to prohibit West Virginias family police agency (a more accurate term than child welfare agency) from screening out any report from a mandated reporter and they make the overwhelming majority of reports. So once again, a failure of child welfare is worsened by a failure of journalism. That is demonstrably false.
“New Federal Report Demonstrates Reduction in Child Maltreatment Victims and Underscores Need for Continued Action,” the Administration on Children and Families (ACF) of the US Department of Health and Human Services proclaimed in releasing the latest annual report on the government response to child abuse and neglect.
The International Association Of Schools Of Social
DECEMBER 2, 2024
The International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW), the International Council of Social Welfare (ICSW), and the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) have jointly announced the theme for the 2025 World Social Work Day: ‘Strengthening Intergenerational Solidarity for Enduring Wellbeing’.
Lack of adequate housing, welfare reforms and families lacking access to public funds are adding to pressures on children’s services, an Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) survey has found. Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
The government will legislate to create a new type of accommodation for children with complex needs in England who are at risk of being deprived of their liberty. Stanley also said that Ofsted was looking to make changes to its social care common inspection framework, which governs its regulation of sector providers.
States have been hard-put to devise plans for implementing the new services because the bill was designed to fix a problem that did not exist–the alleged absence of child welfare services designed to help families stay together. ” As the Child Welfare Information Gateway, an information clearinghouse of the U.S.
The federal government has released state-by-state data for the number of children taken from their parents in FFY 2021 (yes, they always run about a year late). The big national takeaway is that these data – once again – refute the racist myth about COVID-19 and “child welfare.” And NCCPR has updated our rate-of-removal index.
But it’s hard to imagine anything that more perfectly captures the banality of child welfare thinking than this waste of $20 million: Five organizations will spend this federal grant money to create a “Quality Improvement Center on Engaging Youth in Finding Permanency.” There are many such groups. Oh, don’t get me wrong.
At last: A group involved in oversight of Maine child welfare that shows a real understanding of the problems. The Maine Child Welfare Advisory Panel (MCWAP) Citizen Review Panel has produced a report with six recommendations. Note that often these programs have the full support of state or local child welfare agencies.
Have you noticed something new about the “child welfare” establishment lately? Barth, you may recall, is the one who declared that – unlike any other profession in America, child welfare is 100% free of racial bias! He begins with this: Nice to see acknowledgment of the many ways that child welfare services do help support families.
After decades of expanding the child welfare surveillance state to the point that more than one in three children and a majority of Black children will be forced to endure the trauma of a child abuse investigation by the time they turn 18, some states have noticed: Theyve been doing the same thing over and over and getting the same lousy results.
A “scholar” who insists there is little or no racial bias in child welfare writes a “predictive analytics” algorithm for the State of California. Somehow, the contract to write a so-called “independent ethics review” of the algorithm is given to another “scholar” who also insists there is little or no racial bias in child welfare.
The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) of 1978 is a federal law that recognizes tribal sovereignty and governs jurisdiction over the removal of Native American (Indian) children from their families.
Vivek Sankaran, director of the Child Advocacy Law Clinic and the Child Welfare Appellate Clinic at the University Michigan Law School summed it up perfectly: In many ways, the decision was unexceptional. None of us would want a social worker to be able to search our home based on such flimsy evidence provided by an anonymous report.
Interviews with boarding school survivors, child welfare leaders and tribal members reveal a mix of concern and cautious optimism that the work [former Interior Secretary Deb] Haaland set in motion will continue. Child welfares crimes against Native Americans arent just in the past.
They even acknowledged their own role in “contributing to racism in the legal field” in general and “within the child welfare legal field in particular…” Offhand, I can’t think of an organization that says “establishment” more than the American Bar Association. The topic is “anti-Black systemic racism within the child welfare system.”
More than just a dissent in an individual case, this opinion is a call to transform “child welfare” in Michigan – and everywhere else. is a brilliant dissection of the failings of both law and practice in “child welfare” in Michigan and pretty much everywhere else in America. Raising a child is difficult, even when there is no crisis.
Like most people in “child welfare” her intentions are good. As she has before, she embraces the Big Lie of American child welfare – that child safety, or the even broader, more amorphous and biased standard of child “wellbeing” - and family preservation are opposites that need to be “balanced.”
But it still fell into some of the traps that characterize much of the journalism of child welfare – including a crucial misunderstanding of poverty and neglect and one inflammatory claim that, as originally published, was flat wrong. ? Wednesday: The New York Times published a front-page story about the study that was, mostly, very good.
Police officers and child welfare caseworkers were ordering a woman to open her front door. ACS’ game of misdirection New York is one of 13 states in which local governments run family policing systems with some sort of state supervision. Here’s how ProPublica describes one encounter: It was 5:30 a.m.
Attention child welfare garden partiers: The skunks have arrived Every year, the Kempe Center for the Prevention and Treatment of Child Abuse holds a four-day virtual extravaganza featuring more than 100 panels and speakers from around the world. In the past, this event was essentially a garden party for the child welfare establishment.
When NCCPR released a comprehensive report on Colorado child welfare in September 2023, we included a section called Tapeworm in the System. The report makes no mention of the fact that, in other child welfare contexts, such tools have an ugly history of bias. And what, exactly, does that mean?
If you’ve followed Massachusetts child welfare at all, you know exactly who: Massachusetts’ Fearmonger-in-Chief, state “child advocate” Maria Mossaides. Unfortunately, much of child welfare operates with a pre- Gault mentality. Enter the Fearmonger-in-Chief Mass. But step one is to stop being fooled by Maria Mossaides.
Back to Blogs Community Blog Child Welfare Blog Using Evidence-Based Clearinghouses Finding the Right Program for Your Community: Why Reinvent the Wheel? Theyre like treasure troves of successful ideas created by government agencies and research institutions to help you make informed decisions. What Are Evidence-Based Clearinghouses?
And so, we are not requiring the government to come in and police them and say this is how you need to raise your children. What accounts for these results? How do we solve child neglect, how do we keep children safe in this country? We give families money. We give families money so they can keep their own family safe.
The number of ways family policing agencies (a more accurate term than “child welfare” agencies) can hurt the children they are mandated to protect is limited only by their imagination – and, unfortunately, this is the one area where they show any imagination at all. In New York, county governments (and New York City) run family policing.
The purpose of the FGDM meeting is to enable a childs family network to meet to discuss the welfare needs of the child and to make a proposal in response to concerns about the childs welfare. The duty does not apply if the local authority determines that it would not be in the childs best interests.
With CJMR there’s no way to protect your family from government agencies taking your most basic, and in some cases, most private data, and turning it against you. But for America’s giant child welfare industry of helping professionals, that spoils all the fun. There is no chance for informed consent or any kind of consent.
I am proud to be a part of this project, along with Naomi Schaefer-Riley AEI’s point person on child welfare, and eminent child welfare scholars, Emily Putnam-Hornstein of UNC-Chapel Hill and Sarah Font of Penn State. Child welfare leaders, legislators and advocates appear to have lost interest in child maltreatment fatalities.
It turns out, Paris Hilton knows more about "residential treatment facilities" than at least one self-proclaimed "child welfare scholar." By pretending that this industry has nothing to do with his sacred, beloved “child welfare” system. And apparently [if Barth is right] the entire federal government got its regulations wrong, too.
Often, when I single out for criticism particular stories about “child welfare” – or as it should be called family policing, it’s because the reporter never bothered to even speak to parents who have had their children taken, or to lawyers for such parents. It’s not like the state can’t afford to step in and provide this money.
Her new “report” on “permanency” for the American Enterprise Institute, home of Charles Murray , is so full of false premises and false promises that perhaps “permanency” is to child welfare what “creme” is to food. And adoption isn’t always the happily-ever-after that it’s often claimed to be. Font may not view that as a problem.
Year after year, states and the federal government continue to release annual data showing a decline in the number of children in foster care, congratulating themselves on keeping families together. Of course the supporters of FFPSA ignored this basic fact and claimed the legislation would revolutionize child welfare!).
Over three million families will lose an average of 1,720 per year in real terms by 2029-30, as a result of proposed changes to disability and incapacity benefits, the government has estimated. In today’s spring statement , the government said that the 50 per week rate for new claimants would also be frozen until 2029-30.
The Children’s Charities Coalition issued the message after the government indicated that “fundamental reform” of the sector would be implemented from April 2026 at the earliest, in its Budget document, published yesterday. However, this was dependent on the reforms being implemented from 2023-24.
The next government should take forward reform of the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and implementation of the Liberty Protection Safeguards (LPS) in its first 100 days in office, the incoming Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS) president has said. Labour has said it will take forward the reform, if elected.
Capitol Visitor Center, First Street and East Capitol Street, Washington, DC 20515, to explore legislative remedies should the Supreme Court overturn the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). They urged the Supreme Court to “uphold the Indian Child Welfare Act’s constitutionality in all respects.”
” Councils’ concerns over impact on care system However, the Welsh Local Government Association, while voicing support for the bill’s ambitions, raised concerns about its impact on the care system. . Under all four models, there are no dividends paid to shareholders or members and surpluses must be reinvested in services.
That mean old state government makes us do it! But sheesh, all that whining! Over and over again he offers the same response: It’s not my fault! And yet, Dannhauser ignored the obvious solution. That should make us wonder if he really just wants to keep things as they are.
The interstate compact was created primarily to govern cross-border foster care moves. Nobody in the Massachusetts child-welfare system wanted to take another potentially deadly risk involving the interstate compact. Her shadow hung over Ricardo’s case. But that climate of fear didn’t create itself.
Roberts’ essay for the Summer issue of Dissent , which begins this way: Imagine if there were an arm of the state that sent government agents to invade Black people’s homes, kept them under intense and indefinite surveillance, regulated their daily lives, and forcibly separated their families, often permanently. See also Prof.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 25,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content