A History of the Child Welfare System Why do things work like this?

Civil and Criminal Court Process Criminal = prosecution of child abuse perpetrators Civil = focus is on protecting the child Different Standards of Proof

How Did We Get To This Point? A Volunteer Started “The Child Welfare System”

First Civil Case Acknowledging A Child’s Rights “I saw a child carried out on a horse blanket at the sight at which grown men wept aloud and I knew a chapter was being written in the rights of man” Jacob Reese (Court Reporter) in the 1870s Story of Mary Ellen-1st reported case of civil court intervention in a child abuse or neglect case

Mary Ellen Privately placed out in a home by the NY Department of Charities Privately placed out in a home by the NY Department of Charities Decisions were made without court review Decisions were made without court review Father had died during the civil war Father had died during the civil war Mother, after widow’s pension was cut off, became ill with tuberculosis Mother, after widow’s pension was cut off, became ill with tuberculosis Ms. Etta Wheeler visited the tenement buildings Ms. Etta Wheeler visited the tenement buildings

Ms. Wheeler Looked for legal relief, but there was no governmental response to child maltreatment Teamed up with Henry Bergh & Elbridge T. Gerry of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Obtained a special writ from a civil judge in Brooklyn Mary was made a ward of the court

Impact Around the Nation Notoriety 1899 Juvenile Court Community based organizations formed that focused on child protection and monitoring governmentally run child protection services

Child Protection Services in the Early 1900s Child Rescue Societies = Institutional Care Child Rescue Societies = Institutional Care Cultural assumptions about parenting children Cultural assumptions about parenting children Fathers generally did not raise the children Fathers generally did not raise the children African-American Community African-American Community

But What Is Primary Bonding For A Child? A great deal was learned about warehousing children A great deal was learned about warehousing children Influenza epidemic hit twice at the turn of the century and again in 1918 Influenza epidemic hit twice at the turn of the century and again in 1918

Movement to Get Out of Institutions Orphan Train Movement Orphan Train Movement “Children of Choice” were shipped out west “Children of Choice” were shipped out west Smithsonian exhibit Smithsonian exhibit net/othsa/ net/othsa/

“Clinic-Court” Only a few Only a few Still a contract system-saw children as property Still a contract system-saw children as property Slowly a new concept of child protection services emerged Slowly a new concept of child protection services emerged Sometimes children must be removed Sometimes children must be removed Yet, children removed should get a new safe permanent home (not institutions) Yet, children removed should get a new safe permanent home (not institutions)

Quasi Recognition of Parents’ Rights Institutional care debate lingered Institutional care debate lingered Judicial gatekeeper role developed very slowly across the country Judicial gatekeeper role developed very slowly across the country Courts were only for parents to have a place to voice their complaints Courts were only for parents to have a place to voice their complaints No formal review process of children in the system No formal review process of children in the system

Late 1960s and into the 1970s The concept of judicial review of children in placement emerged over time The concept of judicial review of children in placement emerged over time The case of Gerald Frances Gault pushed us down this path The case of Gerald Frances Gault pushed us down this path Concept of due process was applied Concept of due process was applied When the state takes an action and that action abuts a fundamental zone of family privacy … the state must do so with the least restrictive alternative When the state takes an action and that action abuts a fundamental zone of family privacy … the state must do so with the least restrictive alternative

“Gaulting the System” Officially recognized the liberty interest in the right to raise one’s own child Officially recognized the liberty interest in the right to raise one’s own child Response was to become a “court-clinic” Response was to become a “court-clinic” Lawyers were appointed, notices were served, appellate records kept, codes were drawn Lawyers were appointed, notices were served, appellate records kept, codes were drawn

“Court-Clinic” We separated the clinic and the court We separated the clinic and the court We did not teach clinicians the value of the law, the role of due process and fundamental rights, how to investigate a case, or use evidence in a court of law We did not teach clinicians the value of the law, the role of due process and fundamental rights, how to investigate a case, or use evidence in a court of law We did not teach our judges about child development, children’s needs or psychological issues about separating families We did not teach our judges about child development, children’s needs or psychological issues about separating families

Clopperation instead of Collaboration By late 1970s, we were saying that judges had a much stronger role in overview & responsibility in the system We were testing the limits of judicial authority versus executive authority

Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act 1980 Federal law that strengthened the role of the state judiciary=all children in the child welfare system must have judicial oversight Federal law that strengthened the role of the state judiciary=all children in the child welfare system must have judicial oversight Set up the federal dollar system that was triggered by a judge’s order Set up the federal dollar system that was triggered by a judge’s order Plan was to get significant federal dollars into the foster care system Plan was to get significant federal dollars into the foster care system

Problem Courts and agencies did not get together and develop a strategic plan with local protocols built around judicial findings Courts and agencies did not get together and develop a strategic plan with local protocols built around judicial findings They searched for ways to pass the federal audit They searched for ways to pass the federal audit No money was designated for courts so many really weren’t interested in developing a schematic of practices No money was designated for courts so many really weren’t interested in developing a schematic of practices

State Funding Passed -In effect October 2000 Passed -In effect October 2000 Why? 3 Primary Reasons Why? 3 Primary Reasons Provide Judges in Jurisdictions where Local Governments were Without the Resources to Do So Provide Judges in Jurisdictions where Local Governments were Without the Resources to Do So Allowing for the Opportunity to Appoint More Full-time Juvenile Court Judges When Needed Allowing for the Opportunity to Appoint More Full-time Juvenile Court Judges When Needed

1997-New Laws and Their Effect on the System Adoption and Safe Families Act, Reasonable Efforts & Reunification of Families

1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act Focus of law is on health & safety of the child Focus of law is on health & safety of the child Georgia’s laws which bring us into compliance with this act Georgia’s laws which bring us into compliance with this act SB 611 SB 611 HB 1585 HB 1585 Both Georgia laws offer dramatic changes to our system Both Georgia laws offer dramatic changes to our system

SB 611 Shortened time frame from 18 months to 12 months Allows for submission of a non-reunification plan where reasonable efforts do not have to be made to reunify

SB 611 Submission of a non-reunification plan requires a hearing w/ a report listing specific items A presumption against providing reasonable efforts emerges in 3 instances failure to comply w/ prior case plan third time removing a child (3 strikes) any of the grounds for TPR

HB 1585 Focus is on safety of the child v. reunification Further pushes the states to move children to permanent homes Courts must hold a permanency hearing

HB /22 months/ abandoned infant/ murder provision 3 Exceptions in care w/relative services have not been provided to the families by DFCS compelling reason

Where Are We Today? Intent of the new laws was to make the process more balanced and get more court involvement and more community involvement Concern is how the laws will be implemented

A History of the Child Welfare System Why do things work like this?