When Child Protective Services Gets Child Removal Wrong: An In-Depth Analysis
Introduction
Child Protective Services (CPS) is tasked with the critical responsibility of safeguarding children from abuse and neglect. However, the system is far from perfect and, in some instances, causes more harm than good by wrongfully removing children from their families. Diane Redleaf, in her book "They Took the Kids Last Night," highlights the profound and often devastating impact of CPS errors. This blog post delves into the systemic issues within CPS, focusing on the financial incentives, procedural flaws, and real-life cases that expose the need for urgent reform.
The Scale of the Problem
The Frequency of Child Removals
CPS caseworkers separate children from their parents at an alarming rate. According to Diane Redleaf, these separations occur monthly at a rate 300 times greater than the number of separations at the Mexican border in May 2018. This staggering statistic underscores the prevalence of child removals and the potential for significant errors in judgment and process.
How It Happens
In 2015 alone, over 7.4 million children were named as suspected victims of abuse or neglect through Hotline calls. After an initial screening process, 60% of these calls were either dismissed or redirected, leaving approximately 2.96 million cases for further investigation. Of these, around 650,000 children were ultimately labeled as abused or neglected based on caseworker assessments rather than judicial determinations. In 2016, 273,539 children were placed into foster care, but an untold number of children were subject to coerced "voluntary" separations.
Children can be taken from their homes, schools, or hospitals without prior court orders. This includes situations where children are removed following a Hotline call and placed into state or local CPS agency custody. While emergency removals require timely court orders, many CPS systems use tactics to avoid presenting cases (and even evidence that goes against their narrative) to a judge. "Safety plans" are often used to circumvent the need for court orders, leading to informal separations under the guise of voluntary agreements.
The Mechanics of Coerced Voluntary Separations
The Role of Safety Plans
Safety plans, often presented as voluntary, are a widespread issue. These plans are essentially coerced agreements where parents must place their children with relatives to avoid formal foster care. These plans lack due process and operate under the unfettered authority of CPS caseworkers. The Dupuy v. Samuels case legitimized the use of safety plans based on "mere suspicion," a ruling that has faced significant criticism for its Orwellian implications.
Legal Loopholes and Informal Practices
CPS agencies have developed tactics to bypass formal legal processes, such as using voluntary placement agreements and safety plans. These practices allow CPS to remove children without presenting a case to a judge, thus circumventing due process. In more than 30 states, such separations occur regularly, contributing to what Redleaf describes as a "shadow foster care system."
Safety plans should not be used to bypass judicial oversight, and parents must be given real choices without coercion. Additionally, the Families First Prevention Services Act should be scrutinized to prevent it from inadvertently encouraging more informal separations.
The Case of Crystelle and Joshua Hernandez
A particularly troubling example of CPS overreach involves Crystelle and Joshua Hernandez. In 2009, their 15-month-old son, Jaymz, suffered a minor arm fracture from a fall. A CPS caseworker, without any solid evidence of abuse, took Jaymz into protective custody based on a misinterpreted note from a nurse. Despite medical opinions clearing the parents of abuse, CPS forced the Hernandezes to sign a "safety plan," keeping them from their son without legal justification.
Legal Battles and Constitutional Violations
The Hernandez case led to a significant legal precedent. The Seventh Circuit Court ruled that taking children without probable cause, exigent circumstances, or a court order violates the Fourth Amendment. This landmark decision highlighted the coercive nature of CPS safety plans and emphasized the need for immediate release of children when no abuse is evident. However, despite this ruling, many CPS practices remain unchanged.
The Financial Incentives Driving CPS Actions
Federal Funding and Perverse Incentives
CPS agencies receive federal funding based on the number of children placed into foster care, creating a perverse incentive to remove children from their homes. This funding model prioritizes quantity over quality, encouraging unnecessary separations to meet financial targets. The Family First Prevention Services Act aimed to address some of these issues, but unintended consequences may still incentivize informal separations.
The Broader Impact of Financial Motivations
These financial incentives can lead to systemic biases against low-income families and communities of color, who are disproportionately affected by CPS actions. The pressure to place children in foster care can overshadow the primary goal of child protection, resulting in unjust removals and long-term emotional trauma for both children and parents.
The Need for Systemic Reform
Ensuring Fairness and Accountability
There is an urgent need for systemic reform within CPS to prioritize transparency, fairness, and accountability. Policies should focus on supporting families and providing resources to address underlying issues without resorting to unnecessary removals. Ensuring judicial oversight and due process for all separations is critical to protecting family integrity.
Advocating for Change
Advocates and policymakers must work together to address the systemic issues within CPS. This includes revising funding structures that incentivize child removals, ensuring rigorous oversight of CPS actions, and implementing policies that prioritize family preservation and support.
Conclusion
The CPS system, designed to protect children, often fails in its mission by wrongfully removing them from their families. The financial incentives, procedural flaws, and coercive practices highlighted in Diane Redleaf's book call for urgent reform. By advocating for transparency, accountability, and a focus on family support, we can work towards a more equitable system that truly serves the best interests of children.
