Abused Analysis - Case Study Example

In regards to Emily X, I have fully investigated the matter. There are a couple of routes that can be taken. One is the parens patriae concept of the treatment of juveniles. The due-process model can also be taken. After explaining the investigation, prior similar cases, and current Child Protective Services (CPS) guidelines, a plan will be suggested on this case. Although the case seems simple, a number of facets must be taken into consideration. A brief background of Emily X’s situation is necessary in order to understand my recommendations. Emily X’s middle school head counselor reported that she had concerns about Emily. Apparently Emily had been showing up at school irregularly. Emily’s tardiness was as frequent as her absences. When she did show up for classes, Emily had a hard time concentrating. Her demeanor was withdrawn and uncommunicative. That is not rare in a thirteen year old, but her lethargic behavior disturbed the administration of her middle school. After a concerned homeroom teacher sent her to the nurse for an evaluation, the nurse did a physical exam. The physical exam revealed that Emily was malnourished and in poor overall physical heath. In addition, bruising that could only have occurred by a severe beating was noted. Emily stated her parents punished her for doing poorly at school by beating her and withholding food from her as well. A meeting between the parents, principal, and counselor resulted. The parents explained that they belonged to a religious group that believes children should be punished severely by beating or withholding food. According to the parents, Emily was not only punished for doing poorly at school, but for joining a gang as well. The parents claim Emilys bruises were the result of "punishment" that she received at the hands of the gang members. The school then informed our office for my recommendation. First I must find abuse or child neglect present. Emily’s abuse and neglect have been proven by the documentation her middle school. In a current Virginia Department of Social Services manual, Part II: Definitions of Abuse and Neglect state: 2.5 Cuts, bruises, welts, abrasions a. Cut: an opening, incision or break in the skin. b. Bruise: an injury that results in bleeding within the skin, where the skin is discolored but not broken. c. Welt: an elevation on the skin produced by a lash or blow. The skin is not broken. d. Abrasions: areas of the skin where patches of the surface have been scraped off. (5) 2.6 Inadequate food Failure to provide and ensure an acceptable quality and quantity of diet to the extent that illness, disease, developmental delay or impairment has occurred or may result. (10) Emily’s bruising falls under 2.5 Cuts, bruises, welts, abrasions section b. Her malnutrition falls under 2.6 Inadequate food. Two sections define Emily’s treatment as abuse or neglect. After finding these results intervention must be recommended, either parens patriae or due process. The religious beliefs of the parents are a concern, only in the sensitivity of dealing with the family. The long term goal of CPS is to keep families together by making them healthier through services. Thus the religion must be treated with the respect it deserves, but not a total blindness of respect that ignores the laws. In America, Americans experience religious freedoms. However, if these religious freedoms break the law, then CPS can step in. For example, the FDLS in Texas cannot force girls twelve or thirteen to marry even if their religion requires it. A case along the lines of Emily’s came out of Arizona: When questioned by police, Kimu Parker said the family were vegans and consult a holistic doctor in Wisconsin, who advised them against giving the children foods containing protein…The Parkers refused treatment for Michaela and Caleb, so Child Protective Services took custody of the children and admitted them to the hospital, where their diagnosis was nutritional starvation. No other signs of abuse were found on any of the kids. Religious beliefs are free unless they endanger a child’s well being, then CPS can step in. It must be kept in mind Emily has rights, but so do the Xs. The Xs have the right to change their behavior. Parental rights are some of the most important rights Americans possess. If the CPS violates a parent’s rights, then parental rights can fundamentally break down. If Emily’s rights are violated, then children’s rights can also fundamentally break down. When making my recommendations I have kept both parties’ rights in mind. My first recommendation would be a parens patriae approach. It would also only be used if my second recommendation does not work. This first recommendation will be used if Emily’s teachers, counselors, I, or my supervisors feel that there is any immediate danger to Emily. The parens patriae approach would remove Emily and any siblings from the home immediately. Under Virginia Law this is a viable option. All services would focus on the parents’ compliance to attend parenting classes, counseling sessions, and other therapy. Emily and her siblings would be placed in foster care. Counseling and medical services would be provided. Supervised visits would be recommended. After a plan of treatment for both child and parents, reunification would be attempted. This recommendation would be best if Emily is being abused by her parents or the alleged gang. It would take her away from the unhealthy situation. Her parents obviously are either abusing her, or allowing her to be abused by this gang. Taking Emily and her siblings away from their parents should be temporary. Reunification should be the goal of this recommendation. The parens patriae approach should only be used as a last resort for several reasons. The first is taking away Emily and her siblings might traumatize them. Secondly, the parents might have a bad attitude if they feel the state is against them. Finally, the best way to teach the parents good parenting skills is for them to deal with children everyday. In order to make an intervention work well, all parties (CPS, parents, and Emily) must be cooperative. In some situations, parent and child can work better together than apart. Thus I have decided to recommend due process for Emily and her family. My first recommendation for the due process would be a weekly CPS visit to the X’s home. A check on Emily’s weigh and health would be undertaken. Food must be present in the house available for Emily’s access. The visits should be random; so as to keep the parents are their toes. Emily must be present at schools, unless she has a doctor’s note. Therapy should be set up for the parents and Emily. Communication should be encouraged by the counselors. Since Emily’s parents have mentioned gang affiliation, an anti-gang program might be offered to Emily. Another service that needs to be set up is nutrition education. This would be the most important part of the whole recommendation. If the parents understand that Emily’s poor performance at school is due to her malnutrition, may they would see the futility of withholding food from her. The food issue concerns me the most. Malnutrition can cause long term illness and premature death. This issue must be resolved first. This recommendation would last for six months to a year. It would be more cost effective than foster care. This could also make Emily and the Xs bond and become a more healthy family. With cooperation a healthy family could emerge by the end of the year. Communication would replace deprivation and malnutrition. This process would work, but only if all the participants cooperate. Keeping Emily in the house would promote goodwill with all parties, allowing Emily and the Xs to have no hard feelings against each other or CPS. In the case of non-cooperation by Emily or the Xs, her removal from the home would not longer be a choice, but a must. One day absent from school, weight loss, more bruising, and any other non-compliance must be taken seriously. If Emily ditches school one day, that can be excused. More than one day, CPS must step in with the parens patriae approach. She must be removed at any hint of danger. CPS must work in coordination with Emily, her siblings, the Xs, school counselors, principals, therapists, and every other adult in Emily’s life. If the system works, then CPS should only remove Emily and her siblings as a last resort, but before the children are abused any more. For Emily I would recommend an in house plan. Counseling and other CPS services would provide a healthy environment for Emily and the Xs. If the plan is not followed, with absences at school, or more bruising, Emily and her siblings must be removed immediately. Emily’s protection must be the first concern. The second concern must be creating a healthy environment and home life for the Xs. That is why I recommend her staying at home for now. Works Cited Johnson, Holly. “Malnourished.” The Arizona Republic. 12 May 2005. Accessed 19 Mar. 2009 from http://forums.macrumors.com/archive/index.php/t-126271.html Virginia Department of Social Services. Part II: Definitions of Abuse and Neglect. Child Protective Services Volume VII, Section III, Chapter A March 2009 Read More