When Does “Protection” Go Too Far? The story of Brittany Patterson.
Brittany Patterson (Brittany Patterson)
In a world where parents are increasingly being judged, monitored, and even criminalized for their parenting choices, the Brittany Patterson case raises troubling questions about the lengths to which Child Protective Services (CPS) and family courts will go in order to control families. This story isn’t just an isolated incident—it’s part of a growing trend that demands we examine the power and priorities of these institutions.
The Brittany Patterson Case: What Happened?
Brittany Patterson, a mother of four in Fannin County, Georgia, is a prime example of a mother whose rights were jeopardized under the guise of child protection. On October 30, 2024, Patterson’s 11-year-old son, Soren, decided to walk less than a mile from his home to downtown Mineral Bluff—a walk Patterson felt was safe and reasonable for her son. However, when a passerby saw him walking along the road, they contacted the police. The response was shocking: not only did police officers bring the child home, but they later returned and arrested Patterson, charging her with reckless conduct and child endangerment.
As three of her children watched, Brittany Patterson was handcuffed, taken to jail, and later released on a $500 bond. This single incident spiraled into a larger CPS investigation, where Patterson was presented with a “safety plan” by the Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS), requiring her to monitor her children’s every move and designate a third-party “safety person” whenever she left them alone. The case manager even suggested installing a tracking app on her son’s phone, effectively turning her into an around-the-clock monitor of her own family.
When “Protection” Becomes Control
The problem lies in how CPS and family courts wield their authority. In cases like Brittany’s, the system that should protect children is now being used to exert control over parents, pushing them into strict, often unreasonable, guidelines. If Brittany refused to sign the safety plan, she was threatened with prosecution and potential jail time. This situation left her with a difficult decision: comply with the state’s demands, or risk losing her children altogether.
Such extreme measures raise the question: when does child protection become an infringement on parental rights?
Child Protective Services: From Protection to Profit
While CPS has the power to investigate reports of abuse or neglect, the agency often operates under unclear guidelines that leave too much room for subjective judgment. Studies reveal that CPS and family courts disproportionately target certain parenting styles, particularly those that allow children a measure of independence. Parents are increasingly being penalized for making choices that previous generations would consider normal.
And here’s the troubling truth: each child taken into foster care becomes part of a system that financially rewards the counties responsible. On average, counties receive between $41,821 and $198,933 per child per year for every child placed in foster care. The more children in the system, the higher the financial benefit. This incentivizes prolonged cases, extensive monitoring plans, and more intervention—all of which create profits for the system but often result in trauma for families.
The Hidden Costs of Custody Disputes
The financial strain extends to families as well. Child custody disputes in family court typically cost between $15,000 and $40,000, placing a heavy burden on parents who just want to be present in their children’s lives. The extended legal processes, attorney fees, and mandatory evaluations all funnel money into a system that benefits from keeping families locked in conflict. Instead of using resources to reunite families or offer support, the system perpetuates separation.
Targeting Parents for Doing What’s Best
The Brittany Patterson case sheds light on how family courts and CPS often target parents who choose to raise their children with independence. Patterson’s experience is a familiar one to many parents who believe in a “free-range” approach to parenting. What was once considered normal—allowing children to explore, gain confidence, and develop independence—is now often seen as negligent. CPS has increasingly criminalized parents for allowing their kids to grow and experience the world responsibly.
For Patterson, signing the state’s safety plan would mean surrendering her right to make reasonable decisions for her family. And if she didn’t comply? The consequences could be devastating: a criminal charge, a $1,000 fine, and up to a year in jail. This form of “protection” does not allow for trust between the state and families, instead fostering fear, mistrust, and strict compliance that leaves parents powerless.
How the System Fails Families
The issues with CPS and family courts extend beyond individual cases. Structural biases and a lack of oversight mean that these institutions operate with very little accountability. Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) representatives and caseworkers make critical recommendations that directly impact families, often with limited knowledge of family dynamics or understanding of parenting styles. Additionally, systemic biases tend to favor the mother in custody battles, further marginalizing fathers who want to be equally involved in their children’s lives.
In Brittany’s case, even though her children were found to be healthy and well-cared for, CPS attempted to impose restrictions on her family life. A more balanced system would have recognized Patterson’s approach to parenting as both reasonable and beneficial for her children’s development.
What Can We Do to Change This?
The problems with CPS and family court corruption have led to a growing movement for reform. There are a few key changes that could make a world of difference for families:
Increase Transparency and Accountability: GALs and caseworkers should be held to higher standards and be required to provide clear, documented evidence before intervening in family matters.
End Financial Incentives for Foster Care Placements: With counties receiving substantial funds for each child in the system, there is an inherent conflict of interest. Removing financial incentives can help prevent unnecessary family separations.
Pass Reasonable Parenting Legislation: States should enact laws that allow parents the freedom to make choices that promote healthy independence for their children. Authorities should only intervene if children are in immediate and identifiable danger.
Support Family Stability: Resources should be directed toward keeping families intact rather than focusing on separation and punitive measures.
Standing Up for Parents’ Rights
At the Father’s Advocacy Network, we believe in a system that values parents as the primary decision-makers for their children. CPS and family courts should not have unchecked power to disrupt families without concrete evidence or due process. Brittany Patterson’s case is a reminder of how urgent this issue is, and why we must come together to demand a system that serves, not controls, our families.
No parent should have to fear losing their children over a simple parenting choice. No family should be subject to a system that places profit over protection. It’s time for change.
Call to Action: If you believe in parental rights and family integrity, share this post to expose the truth behind CPS and family court corruption. Let’s work together to bring real reform and give families the protection they deserve.
