[potentialsinglemom]

Just wanted to share

CPS removals of children drop sharply

[Withay]

Very interesting article. I wonder how many abused children are being left in the homes because the local CPS workers are scared to remove them.

[millie58]

It's also happening in New York. When I adopted my 2 youngest a week ago, the adoption worker said the trend now is to keep kids in the family and have CPS "suspervision". What's sad is last month when the case worker came, she said when the economy turns sour, there tends to be more child abuse. It's very scary!

Originally Posted by Withay

Very interesting article. I wonder how many abused children are being left in the homes because the local CPS workers are scared to remove them.

[craftingmama]

It is definitely unethical! Children are being left in abusive homes. I know that locally counties have said 50% less kids in care this year because of $. so they pick the first 50%? or the 50% WORST abused? A good answer might be to keep them in care less time, give parents less time to work their plan, go to TPR and let htem be adopted. move them OUT of the system.

Interestingly, I have a relative in the county listed in teh article.....she lost 3 kids to the state in 2007, TPR and all. She had a baby a year later, hadn't done anything to improve her life, and yet.....they let her keep the baby. it's sad and scary, imo.

[potentialsinglemom]

What I find interesting is that the "safety plan" is not legally binding and the parent could call the police and go to whoever has the children and get the children back.

I have a friend who is a CPS program manager in Harris County. She was saying that the "new reform" has tainted the judges so much that the workers feel it is a waste of time to take the children. She said the judges, because of the public outcry of the unfair justice towards the parents, will send the children right back to the parents citing CPS for wrongdoings. I really do feel bad for CPS. The public does not know what they want and even if it is the judge who sends the children back to the parents and something else terrible happens to the parents, CPS takes the fall for it.

[fredalina]

i've always been curious about what the policies are about removal. i do believe that the best case scenario for an abused or neglected child is if they can stay with or be reunified with their birth parents and the parents can be worked with so the abuse and neglect is corrected. How often this can happen because of such complex issues as addiction and the abuse cycle, i cannot say nor would i want to guess, but when it happens, i think it's the best case.

But there should be clearcut guidelines as to when a child is removed and when they are supervised by CPS but remain in the family and when the case is simply closed due to unsubstantiation or whatever, leaving as little room for discretion as possible. And when there's room for discretion, it shouldn't be, if possible, just one case worker making that decision, there *should* be a judge or at least a CPS supervisor involved wherever possible.

So i've always wondered what those guidelines actually are, because they were never discussed in class. i wanted to ask, but there was a set of grandparents in our classes who kept insisting that their grandchild was removed for no reason whatsoever (according to them there were drugs in the home but the child's mothers ex-boyfriend planted them and then called the police on her for revenge... and denial isn't just a river in Egypt) and i didn't want to get them started... AGAIN. Now i'm wondering if there *are* such clearcut guidelines. Seems like that would serve to protect the individual liability of the caseworkers?

[Joei_in_NJ]

Originally Posted by fredalina

i've always been curious about what the policies are about removal. i do believe that the best case scenario for an abused or neglected child is if they can stay with or be reunified with their birth parents and the parents can be worked with so the abuse and neglect is corrected. How often this can happen because of such complex issues as addiction and the abuse cycle, i cannot say nor would i want to guess, but when it happens, i think it's the best case.

But there should be clearcut guidelines as to when a child is removed and when they are supervised by CPS but remain in the family and when the case is simply closed due to unsubstantiation or whatever, leaving as little room for discretion as possible. And when there's room for discretion, it shouldn't be, if possible, just one case worker making that decision, there *should* be a judge or at least a CPS supervisor involved wherever possible.

So i've always wondered what those guidelines actually are, because they were never discussed in class. i wanted to ask, but there was a set of grandparents in our classes who kept insisting that their grandchild was removed for no reason whatsoever (according to them there were drugs in the home but the child's mothers ex-boyfriend planted them and then called the police on her for revenge... and denial isn't just a river in Egypt) and i didn't want to get them started... AGAIN. Now i'm wondering if there *are* such clearcut guidelines. Seems like that would serve to protect the individual liability of the caseworkers?

I feel you - lol - sorry I mean I can relate to your post. these topics were not discussed - I truly believe that the videos for one need to be updated - that we should be able to ask the questions without feeling that a backlash would happen - my dh is very outspoken and there were times in class where I would have to pinch him because I would see the look on his face when a statement was made on removal that he did not agree to. i "get" that the key word is reunification - I get letting these parent "work" their plan what I don't get is the chances that are given - by all means no parent wants their children taken away - but feel as if there should be a panel - or even like you said not only left to the discretion of the SW - that their supervisor and another advocate be as much a part of the decision - we also had grandparents in the class and a grandmother who actually was more in denial about her parenting skills that why she was there ok rambled on sorry lol

[fredalina]

i figure if DH and i have to have 2 caseworkers and 2 different levels of supervisors like us before we're approved, it shouldn't be left to just one person as to whether the child should be removed or should remain in the home.

[millie58]

I understand what all of you are saying. But, I think the way it's done now (and this is my opinion of how it's done), is that cw's go to homes after calls or reports of abuse. Kids aren't removed right then. cw's stay in contact with all involved. Then they make the decision. Not all people are meant to raise kids. I've had kids where father/stepfather abused kids and mom did NOTHING!! If a mother/father can't protect their kids, kids should be taken away!! There was a case in Long Island about a year ago. Mom was on the radar. Numerous visits by DSS. Dad of one of the kids was trying to get him as mom made threats. DSS tried to get in house but couldn't. Mom killed all 3 kids. Caseworker was fired (I think that was wrong). If any threat is made or there's any type of abuse, kids should be removed.

[potentialsinglemom]

Originally Posted by millie58

DSS tried to get in house but couldn't. Mom killed all 3 kids. Caseworker was fired (I think that was wrong). If any threat is made or there's any type of abuse, kids should be removed.

That is sad because if the caseworker could not get in house. Either by parent disapproval and parent constantly changing addresses... she should not be held liable for that.

The judges don't want to issue orders to get into the home when it is one parent against the other. Sad...but still DSS and CPS get the blame.