Understand inequities in child welfare.
Happy Tuesday, and welcome back to the Anti-Racism Daily. I've been learning more about the topic of child welfare because of how the landscape is shifting through COVID-19.
On one hand, remote learning, social distancing rules and budget cuts have reduced the number of opportunities for other grownups to report potential child welfare situations. Smultaneously, local leaders are advocating for reduced involvement with law enforcement in these cases – as part of efforts to reduce policing and reimagine public safety. I appreciate Nia's overview of the child welfare space and the racial disparities all the more urgent in this tense time. I hope you do, too.
We're in the final stages of bringing on our first full-time staff member, thanks to the support of our community! Consider subscribing for $7/month on Patreon. Or, you can give one-time on our website, PayPal, or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza). You can also support us by joining our curated digital community.
Nicole
TAKE ACTION
Sign this petition from Black Lives Matter Los Angeles to remove police presence in child services investigations and #ReimagineChildSafety.
Support organizations that are focused on family reunification, and providing direct support to families such as Children’s Rights and Movement for Family Power.
Consider: How does this disparity affect child welfare resources in my community? How can I escalate an issue in a more equitable way?
Remember: child welfare can be greatly supported when you support housing, education. food and other essential services in your local community. Consider how your local organizations and mutual aid networks help reimagine child safety.
GET EDUCATED
By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)
Last summer, cities across the country were forced to address the role of law enforcement in creating unsafe spaces for its communities. Now, many are keeping the pressure on to see action. The Black Lives Matter LA chapter is addressing the intersection of law enforcement and child welfare, an often inequitable system harming the most vulnerable families (BLM LA). Today we are learning about the disproportionate representation of Black families in the child welfare system.
Black children make up 33% of children in foster care, although they comprise only 15% of the total child population (National Conference of State Legislatures). They are also significantly more likely to be removed from their families for the same issues that are overlooked in cases with white children.
Initially, the child welfare system was designed to reunite previously separated families, and it excluded Black families entirely. When the stereotype of the “welfare queen” became prolific in the 1980s, the welfare system became a means of separating Black families and facilitating unnecessary transracial adoptions. Congressional acts passed in the mid-1990s limited funds to support families of origin, but left funds for adoption and foster placement uncapped, incentivizing family separation. Other acts, including the Paired with Inter-Ethnic Adoption Act, facilitated a wave of unnecessary adoptions by parents from another race (Northwestern Journal of Law and Social Policy).
These policies incentivize American states to adopt a more punitive approach to child welfare, directing more funds to separation than direct support to families (PBS). Funding for adoption and foster care is prioritized over directly funding families in need (PBS). The federal Title IV-E Foster Care Program offers unlimited funding to foster care placements, and limits funds for services to keep families intact (Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems).
Poverty is a predictor in the removal of children from their home, and Black parents are more likely to face poverty. (For more on racism and intergenerational wealth, check out our previous article here.) There are multiple case studies where children of color have been removed from their caregivers due to lack of money only, including a case of a family facing eviction, and a hospitalized mother who did not have someone to watch her kids.
In these instances, appropriate supports like housing assistance and respite care were not offered to the families. Instead, the children were removed from their guardians and placed in foster care. These particular case examples were categorized as “emergency removals without prior judicial authorization”, and this type of removal is particularly susceptible to racial bias (Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems). Poverty also contributes to many neglect cases: a child can be removed for being malnourished, due to the family’s food insecurity. However, it would be much less harmful to fund the family than to place the child with another family (Practice Notes).
Black parents who struggle with substance use disorders are also more likely to have their children removed than white parents with the same issue. Black mothers are 1.5 times more likely to be drug tested (or have their baby drug tested) after birth, although positivity rates are about equal in Black and white mothers (Journal of Women's Health). Additionally, incarceration disproportionately affects Black Americans, putting parents at risk of their children being placed in foster care, and their parental rights being terminated entirely (Northwestern Journal of Law and Social Policy).
Before the child welfare laws in the late 20th century were passed, Black families were largely barred from participating in child welfare services at all. Black children were deemed to be unwanted by white adoptive parents and were largely cared for by extended family and church networks when their parents could not care for them. The AACWA was the first legislation that included Black children in child welfare services, and supported reunification or establishing permanency efforts for children in foster care (Northwestern Journal of Law and Social Policy)
Similar acts also facilitated the placement of Indigenous children in the childcare system. Indigenous American children are 2.9 times more likely to be placed in foster care than white children (ABA). The Indian Adoption Act of 1958 effectively allowed the United States Government to remove Indigenous children from their homes and place them in with white families. However, in 1978, the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) allowed tribal courts to intervene in child welfare placements, and required the states to place children in homes that were consistent with indigenous culture (APA). However, the ICWA has not been consistent in its implementation and a 2013 ruling allowing a white family to adopt an Indigenous child has put the law in peril (Washington Post).
The American Bar Association recommends that child services workers recognize and understand biases, as well as working directly with families to better understand their situations. They also recommend that child welfare agencies hire more diverse staff (ABA). Recent policies have shifted more towards keeping families together and to offering services to families who are struggling prior to removing children (Child Welfare). One example is community doula programs that are publicly funded to give support to parents who face poverty (DONA). Although it is clear that children should not be with abusive parents, it is still critical to consider the mitigating factors of many child welfare placements. Separating families due to poverty or racial profiling is unaccepable. It’s time to prioritize funding families directly to keep them intact and healthy.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Initially, Black families were excluded from child welfare systems entirely. It wasn’t until child welfare legislation was fully developed in the late 20th century that the focus shifted to families of color.
Later, the welfare system became a means of separating Black families and facilitating unnecessary transracial adoptions.
Black children are separated from their parents at 2.2 times the rate of white children and Native American children are separated from their parents at 2.9 times the rate of white children.
More funding is directed toward foster care and adoption than to directly funding families that are in the child welfare system due to poverty.
RELATED ISSUES
10/2/2020 | Protect early child care providers.
12/9/2020 | Rethink transracial adoption.
10/28/2020 | Unpack the history of social work.
PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT
Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.
Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza