Child Protective Services

Posted: 9:14 3/20/08 by webmaster

Child Protective Services (CPS) is the name of a governmental agency in many states in the United States that responds to child abuse and neglect. Some states use other names, often attempting to reflect more family-centered (as opposed to child-centered) practices, such as "Department of Children & Family Services" (DCFS). CPS is also known by the name of "Department of Social Services" (DSS) or simply "Social Services."

Sponsored Links

Functions

CPS agencies generally perform a series of functions that can be identified as follows:

  1. Intake: Receive reports of child maltreatment allegations. In most states, everyone is a mandatory reporter, with the following exceptions: attorneys representing clients on child-maltreatment criminal charges; and, substance-abuse treatment providers.
  2. Screening the Report: determine if a received report's allegations meet statutory definitions for child maltreatment. If statutory definitions are met, then the report is accepted for investigation/assessment; otherwise, it is screened out and might be forwarded to another agency.
  3. Investigation/Assessment: if a received report is accepted, then CPS "investigates" or "assesses" the allegations through contacts with the family and pertinent collateral-information providers. Home visits are usually included although different states have different restrictions regarding this.
  4. Case Decision: if the child-maltreatment allegations prove sufficiently credible and/or if the family is in need of services to prevent future maltreatment (independent of the parents/caregivers' actions), either involuntary or voluntary post-investigative services are generally provided.
  5. Treatment/Case Management: CPS case-management/treatment services are provided to a family to prevent or address child maltreatment. If the child's remaining in the home creates an imminent or significant long-term risk to the child's safety, then arrangement for the child's placement outside of the home is made either with the family's consent or through the courts. (See also, foster care.)
  6. Case Closure: if the case decision found no need for follow-up services by CPS, or if the family and/or community has addressed all risk factors that lead to the provision of CPS case-management services, or if a family's rights to a child is terminated and the child has been adopted, then the case can be closed.

 

Laws and standards

Federal

U.S. federal laws that govern CPS agencies include:

  • Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA)
  • Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA)
  • Multi-Ethnic Placement Act (MEPA)
  • Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA)

 

State and local

Definitions: Each state must also have statutes that provide more detailed definitions of what child maltreatment means, for instance, defining terms such as:

  1. abuse, which might include:
    • physical abuse
    • sexual abuse
    • emotional abuse (not recognized by all states)
  2. neglect, which might include:
    • lack of supervision
    • failure to provide necessary medical or remedial care
    • inappropriate discipline
    • exposure to domestic violence
    • exposure to parental substance abuse
  3. alleged perpetrator, which might include:
    • parents
    • other relatives
    • other in-home adults
    • guardians, custodians, caregiver/caretaker
    • daycare staff (not all states)
    • residential treatment (e.g., group home) staff (not all states)

Activities: States must articulate how a CPS agency is to respond to alleged maltreatment including:

  • timeframes for responding to different levels of child maltreatment
  • manner in which reporters are provided follow-up information (e.g., case disposition letters)
  • confidentiality restrictions (e.g., which may differ during the investigative and case-management phases)
  • conflict-of-interest cases (e.g., a CPS agency would not investigate a report against their own staff)

Additionally, state and local CPS-related institutions will develop policies and practices that further shape communities' response to child maltreatment. Examples include:

  • Coordinating efforts between CPS, law enforcement, schools, mental health and other institutions.
  • Providing further standards for defining maltreatment, such as how does one define "inappropriate discipline."
  • Maintaining records and/or centralized databases regarding reports and families.
  • Appeal processes, if any.
  • CPS-related court processes.

 

History

In 1655, in what is now the United States, there were criminal court cases involving child abuse. In 1692, states and municipalities identified care for abused and neglected children as the responsibility of local government and private institutions. In 1696, England first used the legal principle of parens patriae, which gave the royal crown care of "charities, infants, idiots, and lunatics returned to the chancery." This principal of parens patriae has been identified as the statutory basis for U.S. governmental intervention in families' child rearing practices.

In 1825, states enacted laws giving social-welfare agencies the right to remove neglected children from their parents and from the streets. These children were placed in almshouses, in orphanages and with other families. In 1835, the Humane Society founded the National Federation of Child Rescue agencies to investigate child maltreatment. In the late-1800s, private child protection agencies — modeled after existing animal protection organizations — developed to investigate reports of child maltreatment, present cases in court and advocate for child welfare legislation.

In 1912, the federal Children's Bureau was established to manage federal child welfare efforts, including services related to child maltreatment. In 1958, amendments to the Social Security Act mandated that states fund child protection efforts.[6] In 1962, professional and media interest in child maltreatment was sparked by the publication of C. Henry Kempe and associates' "The battered child syndrome" in JAMA. By the mid-1960s, in response to public concern that resulted from this article, 49 U.S. states passed child-abuse reporting laws. In 1974, these efforts by the states culminated in the passage of the federal "Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act" (P.L. 93-247) providing federal funding for wide-ranging federal and state child-maltreatment research and services.

 

In the public eye

The CPS system has numerous detractors, including those who believe that the state forcibly removing children from their homes and families is the ultimate dehumanization.

Many experts who work in the industry meanwhile believe the government fails to do enough.

Professor Ted Melhuish in his research of December 7, 2006 presents the case for additional government intervention in terms of "Rates of Return to Human Capital investment." Citing a 1993 study of 123 young African-American children he finds early intervention ultimately contributes to greater tax revenue and also identifies possible cost savings in the areas justice, mental health and welfare. The study concludes that every dollar invested in Child Protective Services produces a return of $7.16 Why Early Intervention?


Popular television accounts relating to CPS include:

  • Frontline: Failure to Protect
  • Frontline: Innocence Lost
  • Judging Amy (television series)

Cases of CPS abuses against families include:

  • San Diego County CPS Abuse of Wade Family

Governmental inquiries of CPS misconduct include:

  • San Diego County Grand Jury 1991-92 report
  • US Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources Subcommittee on Children and Families Hearing on Child Protection

 

Responsibility for misconduct

The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution includes this text:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Title 42 United States Code Section 1983 states:

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

In May 2007, the United States 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found in ROGERS v. COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, No. 05-16071 that a CPS social worker acting without due process and without exigency (emergency conditions) violated the 14th Amendment and Title 42 United State Code Section 1983.