Child Protective Services - Case Study Example

Child Protective Services: Do they protect Children from Child Abuse? Introduction Child abuse is defined by California law as any of the following instances: A child physically hurt by any way other than unintentional means, a child subjected to unruly brutality or inexcusable chastisement, a child is ill-treated or harassed sexually, a child is abandoned by a parent or caretaker who fails to supply sufficient food, clothing, shelter, medical care or guardianship. All these instances require prompt interventions since a child is in danger and incapable of helping themselves out of the situation (Young. et al, 2). Child abuse traverses all professional, socioeconomic, cultural, racial, and religious groups. It can take place outside the family or in the child’s home, and disastrously, it occurs most frequently at home, and regularly the abuser is recognized by the child. Normally, and most of the times, the abuser is a caretaker. Moreover, a caretaker can be a parent, stepparent or a child care provider (Young. et al, 3). Jilani asserts that in the U.S, three million reported instances of child abuse and abandonment result in 2,000 deaths yearly. These statistics are according to the Department of Health and Human Services. Similarly, according to Every Child Matters, a child support association, since 2001, 30,000 American children have been killed in their own homes, committed suicide or been killed in their own areas (1). Due to these abuses, and due to the fact that children are susceptible and are frequently unable to speak for themselves, they require adequate protection. As a response to this concern, the California Child Abuse Reporting Law, together with other state laws, offers the legal foundation for action to protect children and to permit intercession by public institutions if a child is abused (Young. et al, 1). While major responsibility for dealing with child abuse rests with states and local governments, the national government also plays a significant supporting role. For instance, in 1974, the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act was enacted by the Congress. This founded the legal structure for existing federal endeavors which center on data collection and technical help to states. Each of the states has endorsed laws defining child abuse and mistreatment, establishing when external involvement is essential, and founding administrative and judicial formations to handle abuse when it is identified (policyalmanac.org, 1). In California a report is made by directly contacting the local child protective agency and informing them concerning the child’s condition. A child protective agency is either the local law enforcement agency or the county social services section. Social services sections provide child safety services in California. These agencies are obliged to cross-report to each other except for conditions involving accusations of general abandonment. This means that the various agencies notify each other of reports so that each agency can take suitable steps to take action. The neglectful failure of an individual to offer sufficient food, clothing, shelter, medical care or supervision for a child under that person’s care or custody is only dealt with by the social services section (Young. et al, 4). The Child Protective Services is the main system of intervention of child mistreatment and desertion in California. The existing law offers services to mistreated and deserted children and their families. The CPS aim is to keep the child in his or her own home when it is secure and to develop an alternating strategy as speedily as possible when the child is not safe (Brown, 1). Every year, child protection and law implementation agencies in California receive over half a million calls reporting likely child mistreatment and abandonment. However, reasonably few of these calls, roughly 10 percent, essentially meet the required criteria to get services from their county child welfare agencies at the time (Patrcia & Oppenheim, 1). After reporting of a possible abuse has occurred, the suitable Child protective services agency will generally examine and establish whether mistreatment or neglect has really happened. In some instances this always leads to treatment or other specialized services to help the abused child. Other cases might be referred to family or youthful courts for tenacity while intense cases of mistreatment may be directed to criminal courts. In 1998, of the 903,000 children who were recognized as sufferers of mistreatment, an approximated 409,000 received services of some sort and 144,000 were placed in foster care (policyalmanac.org, 1). Moreover, when a transfer of a case is received, the social service personnel acquire facts from the individual making the transfer to establish if the transfer claims misuse, abandonment or abuse. The Emergency Response personnel establish if an in-person reaction is specified. Whenever a statement signifies the necessity for protection, Child Protection Services will: Take the case, intercede in the crisis, if needed, apply family preservation and support Services for some families, evaluate or discover problems, collect facts and elucidate the problems, plan and provide services, establish goals, discover resources and timeframes, document the case, finish the case or relocate it to another program (Brown, 1). Around twelve months of services are offered to children who remain securely in the home while the family receives services. Foster assignment is organized if it is etablished that a child cannot remain in the home, regardless of family protection and support services. However, this foster placement should be in the most family-like setting, which is reliable with the best concerns of the child and located near the parents home (Brown, 1). For instance, if a child is bruised by the mother or the father may be due to domestic violence or due to other conservative reasons of the parent, both the actions of foster placement the child remaining securely at home can apply. A practical example of such an incidence occurred in California where a girl named Pam is bruised by her mother. A county social worker goes to the home, where Pam’s mother consents to let him in and he observes the bruise on Pam’s thigh. The small girl speaks to him, saying that she loves her mother but doesn’t like getting smacked or shouted at, or hearing her parents quarrel. Pam’s parents validate the incidents that the caller described on the hotline, but they worry they may lose their child. The social worker assures them, saying the objective is not to take Pam away but to guarantee her security. He clarifies the county’s team approach that promotes a mutual process in deciding how to keep Pam at home and safe (Patrcia & Oppenheim, 10). However, in case the child is removed from the home and the family is making developments toward reunification with the child, up to 18 months of services are offered to children and their families. Moreover, the child must be offered with a family-like living condition immediately if he or she cannot be returned to a secure home after services have been give (Brown, 1). Patrcia & Oppenheim however asserts that in case of an older child who is affected with some concrete problems a different line of action is taken by the Child protective services. For example, if a girl who is under 18 years is neglected or forced out of her home due to an early pregnancy, a representative from the Child Protective Services and a mental health expert would meet the girl. They would then refer her to a hospital where she would be given prenatal care and deliver her baby, and then help her register in a local high school that offers on-site childcare. The CPS will then follow her and attach her to the relevant organization so that she can get financial help and healthcare for her and her baby (9). 10). Despite the Child Protective Services doing a lot in helping abused children, Jilani feels that these services actually accelerate the abuse. He asserts that nearly half of all the Texas children who are murdered by mistreatment belonged to families that had been examined by Child Protective Services. This is because CPS endeavors to place children with safe family members so as to keep families unified without giving first priority to the welfare of the children. Consequently, these children are often abused by these family members in terms of physical and sexual abuse. For this reason, while its reasons are worthy, CPS should put a higher concern on protecting children from abusers and sexual predators than it does on uniting families (1). Clack presents a good example of this aspect in a story of a girl who was constantly abused by her Dad’s ex-step father. He states that the girl suffered from a broken family where the father was in military. In June 2008 the father was installed to Iraq, and in August the mother learned that the father had assigned his ex-stepfather to have visitation rights to her daughter in his stead. This is provided in section. 153.3161 of the Texas Family Code amended in 2007 by the Legislature. The law permits a member of the military who has been commanded to deployment for a time of more than six months to allow that conservator to assign a person who may employ ownership of the child on behalf of that conservator during any time that the conservator is installed under a military deployment. This indicates how the law of children protection is being used to accelerate the abuse (1). Moreover, Child Protective Services has wrecked and demolished hundreds of thousands of families in America during the last thirty years leaving a track of smashed childhoods, broken hearts and broken visions. Instead of helping families and rehabilitating abused children, government agents have applied unconstitutional laws in youthful courts to separate God-given, natural, parent-child ties, adopt the children of the sorrowful out to others who profit financially with huge monthly adoption grant payments and take children away from their caring parents (fightcps.com, 1). Therolf notes that California has experienced a sequence of losses of children, many of which are connected to errors by the child protective services agency. Some issues linked to these deaths include management responsibility, the departments collaboration with other agencies, breakdowns in technology and lack of competency. These are failures by the Child Protective Services. Social workers and other stake-holders accountable for the welfare of children should have adequate and significant information to get children out of risky circumstances before its very late (1). Conclusion Child Protective Services are widely used in America to avert the dangers of child abuse and neglect. This is because children cannot fight for themselves. These services have been applied in both the positive and negative ways. In part, they have helped various children who have been in situations of abuse. This is by opening a hotline in which people can call any time when they suspect cases of abuse. The services take the relevant measures to ensure that such cases are addressed adequately. On the other hand, these agencies have been used in a negative way. They have been a cause for many deaths of abused children broken the mother to child bonds, taken children away from their mothers and have created laws that increases the abuse instead of mitigating it. The services also have concentrated in uniting the families hence neglecting the primary role of protecting children from their abusers. These services should take into consideration the welfare of the children, amend some of the family laws and help the abused children to fully deal with their trauma. Work Cited Brown, Jerry. Child Protective Services. 2007. Web. Clack, Cary. “With a law like this, some kids are not safe.” San Antonio Express-News 29 March. 2009: 1. Print. Fightcps.com. Fighting child protective services false accusations. 2010. Web. Jilani, Seema. “Mistreating abused children.” The Bradenton Herald 1st June. 2010: 1. Print. Policyalmanac.org. Child Abuse. 2011. Schene, Patrcia & Oppenheim, Stuart. Choosing the path less traveled: Strengthening California families through differential response. 2005. Web. Therolf, Garrett. L.A. “County to audit troubled childrens agency.” Los Angeles Times 4th August. 2010: 4. Print. Young, Katherine. et al. Reporting Child Abuse. 2010. Web. Read More