There is no dispute that a child removal is a traumatic event that has potential life-long consequences and should be used only as a last resort. It is a terrible shock to a parent-child bond, even in the worst of abuse cases. To "err on the side of child safety" is an unacceptable alternative to child welfare policy, as foster care research indicates that children do not fare better long-term from having been placed out of home. Credible evidence shows a high risk of injury and even death in foster care and dysfunction in adulthood (prostitution, incarceration and homelessness). Federal guidelines focus on prevention of out of home placement with social services to families. It is much easier to address child abuse/neglect by providing social services to families who need help than to pour money into repairing damage caused by adverse action where parents are not afforded due process and children needlessly traumatized on the basis of predictive neglect.
The following is a condensed list of my previous email with background information and what I feel should be implemented to reduce child removals. They are based upon credible research by the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform (NCCPR.org) and Child Welfare Information Gateway at childwelfare.gov
1. Change HRS 587A-26 (A) and Hawaii Administrative Rules Title 17-1610-26 (2) (A)(B) to read "all pertinent evidence of efforts to keep the child at home must be in written form on the Safe Family Home report", to include specific services offered, the name of the resource agency if applicable, dates of appointments and verification by both social worker and parent that those services were offered and completed or not completed"
There is a gap between the requirement of federal law to document efforts to prevent a child removal and actual practice. Federal evaluations (CFSR) on Safety Outcome Number 3 addresses the reasonable efforts requirement by noting a judge's signature that reasonable efforts were made. The checks and balances fall through the cracks when attorneys do not verify those efforts and judges rubber stamp CWS check marks in boxes. Parents are telling me that the checked services have not been offered. I have knowledge that parents who have been coached on this issue have successfully achieved a reversal of the removal order.
2. Enact a law that makes a knowingly false allegation of child abuse and neglect a felony with a fine of $1000.
I have 14 documented incidents of vindictive reports to the child abuse and neglect hotline in Hawaii. A knowingly false allegation to the hotline is not only a waste of departmental resources and taxpayer dollars but the investigation that results harms children. The hotline needs to add a warning to the voice mail that vindictive reporters will be prosecuted. The consequences of harming innocent children should be severe. 29 states have penalties for false reporting. It is a felony in 4 states and an additional 5 states make a second false report a felony.
3. Enact a law that Child Welfare Services be required to record all business on digital recorders and provide a download to the files on the court record.
CWS involved parents are being forbidden to record interviews, home visits, supervised visits and phone calls. Hawaii is a one-party recording state. CWS cannot trump state law. This is a protection for both parties in a case and should simplify and shorten court hearings with undisputable facts, lessening expenses of both the agency and the court.
4. HRS 587A-11 should be reworded to prioritize police intervention and/or an independent professional opinion during an investigation. Mandated reporters should call the police first so that a proper criminal investigation can be started immediately. (Mandated reporters need to be re-educated so that they do not report unnecessarily to avoid license investigation or over report for retaliation).
It is a conflict of interest for child welfare to have the sole authority to place a child into foster care when there is a monetary partial reimbursement to do so. I propose that all child removals have a second verification that the removal is justified. A police investigation with probable cause of a criminal charge of abuse and/or a mental health professional affidavit should accompany an agency request for an order to remove a child. Child abuse is a criminal act and should be treated as such. Non-criminal abuse/neglect should have community services as a remedy, not removal. In home services are less expensive, more educational, less traumatic and address the reasonable efforts concerns. Currently, parents who are never charged with criminal abuse lose their children to foster care and have their name put on a child abuse registry.
5. HRS 587A-25 should be changed to open the courts to the public, except in cases where a judge deems by clear and convincing evidence that a child could be harmed by an open hearing and then, only the documents and portion of hearings that could be damaging to a child should be excluded. HRS 587A-4 should change the definition of Adjudication to read clear and convincing evidence and delete the definition of preponderance of evidence.
When family/dependency courts were established, the only basis for closed courtrooms was that juvenile courts had been that way to protect the identity of a minor in a criminal case. States that have opened their courts have not been disappointed. My latest information is that approximately 20 states have open dependency courts. There needs to be liberalization of and more transparency in child welfare family court for the protection of all parties.
6. Enact a law that requires CWS to provide a copy of parents rights at the time of initial contact and to require a signature of both parties for the record and implement a penalty for failure to comply.
As a parent advocate, I am being told that they have no idea of what their rights are until well into a case that has removed their children from them and many times approaching termination of parental rights. Since many of these cases are low income families, they are appointed attorneys. The legal representation is ineffective, at best. Parents are not advised of their rights, there is little or no communication with the attorney, court reports are not provided to them prior to court hearings to allow a defense to a social worker report and parents are too often being advised that to go along with agency reports and recommendations will get their children back sooner. This is not diligent representation of a client. This proposal is a proper notification that parents have rights. (See attached testimony and copy of the Connecticut bill that was passed into law in 2008)
7. License social workers with the State
A bill to hold DHS social workers accountable to the National Social Workers Association practice of ethics and standards was introduced in Hawaii in 2004. Washington State introduced a similar bill in 2013. The initial cost of this will be offset by a lessening of costs for unneeded services.
8. Enact a bill to disconnect psychological evaluators from control, influence or contracted by CWS and to document to the court why a psychological evaluation is necessary in a case plan.
See attached link to testimony (Attorney Mike Agranoff has offered to assist with a bill draft for Hawaii.
9. Enact legislation to direct social services to consider kinship placement of all children and to document and provide relatives written reasons why the placement is not recommended and to provide that information in a timely manner. (See DHS Kinship Directive dated 6/15/05).
I hear from many grandparents who were never contacted by social services for placement or that they were contacted but never given any information on the home study or other requirements having been done. Those grandparents who followed up with the agency were given a verbal notice that they were not selected, but refusal to provide any reasons. Federal guidelines specifically direct that child welfare MUST give priority to consideration of relative placement.