Alternative Responses to Child Protective Agencies - Research Paper Example

 Alternative Responses to Child Protective Agencies Abstract Alternative responses are also known as multiple track, assessment track or the differential response system is a new approach to Child Protective Services (CPC), which can respond to screened in reports about alleged child abuse or maltreatment in more than a single way. The welfare of every child is important to every stakeholder in the society including the government thus the need for laws that protects the rights of children. Ever child deserves fair handling and freedom from any form of abuse, maltreatment and neglect from anyone not even the biological parents. The Child Protection Service (CPS) are organizations instituted to investigate and assess the risk and safety of every child. Initially CPS used to use traditional investigation approach for addressing child related abuses but owing to a number of shortcomings associated with this method an improved approach known as the alternative was developed to protect children from maltreatment. Alternative Responses Alternative responses also known as multiple track, assessment track or the differential response system is a new approach to Child protective Services (CPC), which can respond to screened in reports about alleged child abuse or maltreatment in more than a single way (Lonne, 2009). Unlike the traditional investigation approach that only focused on addressing child maltreatment through a single response-investigation; alternative response takes into consideration several response approaches to reports of child maltreatment. In other words alternative response does not only focus on investigation of the alleged abuse but also other issues such as assessment of risk involved as well as the safety of the child. The alternative response approach pay more attention on varied ways that may cause child maltreatment and as such proposes a number of paths to be followed to deal with child abuse issues (Children’s Bureau., 2009). In fact, increased interest in alternative response approach is attributable to its high recognition of the significance of family engagement as well as focus on outcomes and accountability. It is noteworthy that application of the alternative approach varies from state to state with respect to the path or tracks of response. Initially alternative response used to involve only two paths that are, investigation and assessment. However, with the passage of time a number of states realized the importance of increasing response paths to serve the interest of vulnerable children better. Presently majority of states are operating a three-path approach which include an (ii) investigation path to determine occurrence of an abuse, (ii) An assessment path which aims at evaluating family strength as well as needs and finally (iii) Prevention track which only covers cases that lacks clear allegations of abuse but identified risk. Most CPS across various states has remained dedicated and involved in working closely with the community agencies to make their work easier. North Carolina Alternative Response It is important to note that North Carolina main alternative response goal is child safety that is freedom from abuse, maltreatment, and neglect. North Carolina alternative response approach puts more emphasis on assessment paths that include safety assessment, risk assessment, risk reassessment (Jordan Institute, 2002). However, investigation path takes place only in cases of reported serious maltreatment of child and therefore it does not constitute core component of the state alternative response. North Carolina assessment path aims at engaging parents, other family members, as well as community partners to identify conditions that may put the Childs safety in jeopardy. The state of North Carolina is also involved in conducting occasional evaluation to assess the overall effectiveness of program and to understand whether the implementation is carried out as intended. Schene (2008), asserts that North Carolina does not only evaluate the alternative response as a whole but also the outcome of services at the family level which may include but not limited to family interactions, self-sufficiency, parent capabilities. North Carolina alternative response applies a family centered principle of partnership in the sense that service plans are developed based on the needs, safety, and risk issues associated with a particular family. Additionally, the CSP are not expected to conduct a formal finding regarding the occurrence of child maltreatment in the family before needs or risk assessment is carried out. North Carolina State piloted its alternative response before it covered the entire states. Comparison and Contrast between North Carolina, California, and Missouri The North Carolina state alternative response approach is similar but also distinctive to other states’ approach in a number of ways. Starting with similarities the state of Missouri and California just like North Carolina operates their alternative responses through counties in addition to the fact that all the states carries out periodic evaluation of their alternative response to establish its effectiveness. Just like North Carolina, state of California and Missouri are family focused in the sense that they plan their services based on the needs, strengths, and risks assessment of each family (Children’s Bureau, 2009). Additionally all the states engage community support in their child welfare programs. Just like North Carolina, California and Missouri assessment paths aims at engaging parents, other family members, as well as community partners to identify conditions that may put the Childs safety in jeopardy. In all the states, the key priority of their alternative response is to ensure that the safety of all the children is not compromised and as such, no child is abused or neglected. Only California has adopted the family reassessment path similar to that of North Carolina, which evaluates the outcome of services at family level. The state of North Carolina and Missouri has ensured that their alternative response is identified in the policy protocol, is authorized by statute, and has statewide implementation (Schene, 2008). A number of differences are also evident in the alternative response of North Carolina and the other two states of California and Missouri. Starting with Missouri, it is operating a dual path approach that is the family assessment and investigation paths. North Carolina on the other hand is only focused on extensive family assessment paths of risk, need, and safety. California is also operating a three-model family assessment path; however, its approach lays more emphasis on risk assessment (Berrick, et al, 2009). For instance, its first path focuses on families experiencing problems but has no statutory definition of abuse. The second path focuses on families with low risk of future harm while the final path focus on families with high risk and children are considered unsafe. Missouri do not reassess family for their self-sufficiency, interaction, safety, and child well being while North Carolina does. According to Schene (2008), unlike the state of North Carolina, the state of California has no statewide implementation of alternative response besides the fact that it is neither recognized in its policy protocols nor authorized by statute. It is noteworthy that the state has done pretty well in their quest for a safe environment for all its children through its alternative response. The key recommendation involves expanding jurisdictions implementing alternative response in order to ensure that successful collaboration and coordination between CPS, different agencies and vital community stakeholders considering that CPS relies a lot on external parties for promoting the safety of North Carolina children. Expanding jurisdiction implementing alternative response will also ensure that the issue of limited resources required for facilitating connections is resolved successfully. References Berrick, J et al. (2009). Differential Response and Alternative Response In Diverse Communities An Empirically Based Curriculum. Retrieved October 12, 2011 from: http://www.csulb.edu/projects/ccwrl/Differential%20Response%201023.pdf Children’s Bureau. (2009). Differential Response in Child Protective Services: A Literature Review. Retrieved October 12, 2011 from: http://www.differentialresponseqic.org/assets/docs/qic-dr-lit-review-sept-09.pdf Jordan Institute. (2002). North Carolina Adopts New Approach to Child Protective Services: Multiple Response. Vol. 7 (4). Retrieved October 12, 2011 from: http://www.practicenotes.org/vol7_no4/approach.htm Lonne, B. (2009). Reforming child protection. New York: Routledge. Schene, P. (2008). Differential Response to Reports of Child Abuse and Neglect. Retrieved October 12, 2011 from: http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/issue_briefs/differential_response/differential_response.pdf Read More