Before I commit to reading this right before Christmas, can I get a spoiler? Like, is the answer going to be something upsetting like "they shipped them to other states," or "the children don't count as foster youth if they're employed at a sweat shop" or "those weird Soylent meal replacement drinks really are made of people"?
>All agreed, however, that to date, Los Angeles County has slashed its reliance on foster care removals, without a sizable uptick in child fatalities or reports of maltreatment after children leave foster care. Child welfare leaders here also agree that the dramatic decline in the foster care population is no temporary trend, and instead reflects deliberate work to help families remain intact.
To add to this, I worked for a nonprofit that provided in-home family therapy to at-risk kids, as a means to keep them out of foster care. Studies continue to show it works much better than removing a child (or multiple children) from a home. Basically, kids that go into foster care are WAY more likely to end up incarcerated later in life. The foster-care-to-prison pipeline is indisputably real.
This is a great article. The headline here for people who read the comments before clicking is that the city has very deliberately pursuing a policy of supporting families instead of just taking their kids away -- if a school reports that a kid is being sent to school without lunch (which is probably a bad example because I think actually all LA kids get free lunch, but you get the idea), instead of sending CPS, the city sends resources for how to access food pantries. There are also some hospitals that don't take newborns away from moms who test positive for drugs -- they've built a treatment program for these moms that allows the babies to stay with them. Since they've enacted these policies, there has actually been a massive decrease in child deaths due to neglect. While that seems a little counterintuitive at first, it actually makes sense when you think about it -- when families aren't as worried about their kids being taken away, then they don't have to be as secretive and can reach out for help.
I'm a little biased though. I'm sure everyone has that thing their algorithm gave them once and they watched on it and now it keeps giving it to them and they keep watching because it's interesting and now it never goes away. For me randomly that's people talking about adoption. I think it's been interesting to learn about a lot of adoptees who grew up to realize that they might not have been separated from their birth families, whether voluntarily or not, had their birth families just been provided a little support. I definitely think there are some people in that space who thinks that adoption/foster has largely operated in this country as a way of people in higher income families taking children from lower income families. I don't really have a horse in this race, but I think it's been interesting to learn about a perspective I hadn't heard before, and this article seems to really reinforce that fact. Not saying there will never be parents who do deserve to have their children taken away, but pursuing a policy that works thoughtfully to distinguish those cases from cases that are just poverty seems like a really good thing.
I really love all your thoughts here! my immediate fear was that these children were somehow getting shuffled over to immigration detention centers or something so it is really great to see theres an actual positive reason behind the change. I also have gotten a lot of adoption content the past couple years, and had a friend who did some research particularly with international adoption during wartimes and it has definitely altered my perspective on what is ultimately just a highly nuanced issue
This is a really thoughtful and helpful comment, thank you! I am so glad to hear it’s a positive thing and not immigration concentration camps or shipping them to other states’ foster systems.
FWIW - I worked in the juvenile court system for a while (not in CA) and my experience was that due to a lack of funding for services, CPS workers were leaving kids in really borderline scary and dangerous situations in the family home - any reasonable person would have snatched the kids right out of there.
One that sticks in my memory was a young mom and her five year old daughter living in a tent behind a 24-7 Walmart. They came to CPS’s attention because the little girl told her kindergarten teacher that mommy smoked medicine out of a light bulb.
There were other unhoused persons living in those woods, including multiple sex offenders. Mom admitted to turning tricks in the tent for meth, with the little girl there.
CPS left the kid there and did not remove her to foster care or a relative. Even after the girl stopped attending school regularly. They went back one day to check on them, and mom and girl were gone, the tent was gone, and no one knew where they went. CPS just closed the case and moved on.
I try not to wonder what happened to that little girl. Glad LA has figured out a better system.
Oh that's me. I'm the birth mom, my daughter I gave up for adoption will be 21 in a few months, 100% failure of the social safety net. It was 2005, I was 22, I didn't commit to adoption until I was 8 months pregnant, the only help I could get was $140/month food stamps, wic, and medicaid. I was bartending and living in a 1 bedroom apartment with my dad. We couldn't make it and so I did what I had to do. It ruined my life for a long time, I was depressed and traumatized and ended up on drugs for a few years. Her family that adopted her was upper middle class, I was in poverty. I've never stopped feeling like "the economy" basically stole my kid. Idk how to explain it. Like I was just cattle for rich people.
Idk but I have money now and I donate and vote to raise my own taxes every single election cycle. I'm always voting for people who want to fund the welfare system and make it stronger. Seems like just lighting money on fire at this point but it's the right thing to do so whatever. Sorry that was a lot but I'll be pissed until I die about it
My spouse used to work in child protection- specifically in family support/pre-apprehension. Its a double edged sword, cause while she was there to help, and the goal was to keep the child with the family, she also was kinda 'surveillance' for the agency, where her case notes would be used for legal purposes.
She so often said that a lot of her clients just needed a friend, a family member, or just a bit more money each month. She hated that, for those people especially, her notes could be used against them, and she wasn't able to help them to the degree they needed, or refer them to a place that would.
Its a tough balance to strike. Always glad to hear about new approaches that are centered on the child's wellbeing
on the one hand: I love this and I am so incredibly glad to see these families are being better served.
on the other: oh my god, its not rocket surgery. people do undesirable things due to unmet needs. if you help the family in poverty get support, their lives will improve. how have we not figured this out as a society.
It’s true. The unfortunate reality is that many of these systems weren’t built to actually support children and families. I mean, as the article points out, family separation has a long history for both Black families and for Indigenous families. It benefited colonization and gaining capital. It takes an upheaval of the systems to not continue to carry out those legacies.
Overall, I love this in theory. And the numbers do speak volumes—less kids in foster care and no uptick in child fatalities.
But I’m currently fostering my baby nephew and it’s hard not to read this without thinking about his case. He was born not too far from LA and I’m curious how different things would’ve turned out if he were in LA. His mom is homeless, and he was born tox positive (meth) and 10 weeks early. CPS involvement began while she was pregnant. They have been trying to get her into shelter and treatment from the start. She’s been saying over and over again that she wants treatment and housing and wants to be with her baby. But in practice, her actions haven’t been matching her words. A social worker was driving her to a treatment center that would’ve provided shelter for her and her baby, but she asked to turn around to pick up medicine she left behind and then ran off and never returned. One year later, she’s still in the middle of reunification services. I would hope that a case like this would still be considered a case for CPS in LA. It’s kinda scary to think about what would’ve happened if they didn’t drug test her or the baby and just let her go back to the streets with the baby.
I’m glad your nephew has you. I’ve found in addition to these efforts, there’s also a deeper effort to place children with kin and to increase support (aka funding) available for kinship care. I think many people who want reform acknowledge that not every parent is ready to take care of their child right now, but also that those kids who may be safer elsewhere have other people who love them, like an aunt, and they’ll probably be safer with those family members than in the system.
I can already guess why. a lack of foster parents to foster them, pllus a puah for family reunification, as ia the currennt polixy here in Massachusetts- not sure if this is also the case in CA - means more kids have to go back to abusive homes.
OutAndDown27 | a day ago
Before I commit to reading this right before Christmas, can I get a spoiler? Like, is the answer going to be something upsetting like "they shipped them to other states," or "the children don't count as foster youth if they're employed at a sweat shop" or "those weird Soylent meal replacement drinks really are made of people"?
dungeonsandderp | a day ago
From the article:
>All agreed, however, that to date, Los Angeles County has slashed its reliance on foster care removals, without a sizable uptick in child fatalities or reports of maltreatment after children leave foster care. Child welfare leaders here also agree that the dramatic decline in the foster care population is no temporary trend, and instead reflects deliberate work to help families remain intact.
Hope that helps frame your expectations!
OutAndDown27 | a day ago
Thank you!!
copyrighther | 22 hours ago
To add to this, I worked for a nonprofit that provided in-home family therapy to at-risk kids, as a means to keep them out of foster care. Studies continue to show it works much better than removing a child (or multiple children) from a home. Basically, kids that go into foster care are WAY more likely to end up incarcerated later in life. The foster-care-to-prison pipeline is indisputably real.
sourpussmcgee | 18 hours ago
I have done this work, it’s hard, but kids do best with their bio fam as long as they are safe enough.
thesphinxistheriddle | a day ago
Nope! It's "they've put a lot of work into supporting families who are struggling, instead of just taking their kids away" which is really wonderful.
[OP] parkdropsleep-dream | a day ago
Yep, it’s a Christmas miracle!
thesphinxistheriddle | a day ago
This is a great article. The headline here for people who read the comments before clicking is that the city has very deliberately pursuing a policy of supporting families instead of just taking their kids away -- if a school reports that a kid is being sent to school without lunch (which is probably a bad example because I think actually all LA kids get free lunch, but you get the idea), instead of sending CPS, the city sends resources for how to access food pantries. There are also some hospitals that don't take newborns away from moms who test positive for drugs -- they've built a treatment program for these moms that allows the babies to stay with them. Since they've enacted these policies, there has actually been a massive decrease in child deaths due to neglect. While that seems a little counterintuitive at first, it actually makes sense when you think about it -- when families aren't as worried about their kids being taken away, then they don't have to be as secretive and can reach out for help.
I'm a little biased though. I'm sure everyone has that thing their algorithm gave them once and they watched on it and now it keeps giving it to them and they keep watching because it's interesting and now it never goes away. For me randomly that's people talking about adoption. I think it's been interesting to learn about a lot of adoptees who grew up to realize that they might not have been separated from their birth families, whether voluntarily or not, had their birth families just been provided a little support. I definitely think there are some people in that space who thinks that adoption/foster has largely operated in this country as a way of people in higher income families taking children from lower income families. I don't really have a horse in this race, but I think it's been interesting to learn about a perspective I hadn't heard before, and this article seems to really reinforce that fact. Not saying there will never be parents who do deserve to have their children taken away, but pursuing a policy that works thoughtfully to distinguish those cases from cases that are just poverty seems like a really good thing.
dragontruck | a day ago
I really love all your thoughts here! my immediate fear was that these children were somehow getting shuffled over to immigration detention centers or something so it is really great to see theres an actual positive reason behind the change. I also have gotten a lot of adoption content the past couple years, and had a friend who did some research particularly with international adoption during wartimes and it has definitely altered my perspective on what is ultimately just a highly nuanced issue
Legallyfit | 23 hours ago
This is a really thoughtful and helpful comment, thank you! I am so glad to hear it’s a positive thing and not immigration concentration camps or shipping them to other states’ foster systems.
FWIW - I worked in the juvenile court system for a while (not in CA) and my experience was that due to a lack of funding for services, CPS workers were leaving kids in really borderline scary and dangerous situations in the family home - any reasonable person would have snatched the kids right out of there.
One that sticks in my memory was a young mom and her five year old daughter living in a tent behind a 24-7 Walmart. They came to CPS’s attention because the little girl told her kindergarten teacher that mommy smoked medicine out of a light bulb.
There were other unhoused persons living in those woods, including multiple sex offenders. Mom admitted to turning tricks in the tent for meth, with the little girl there.
CPS left the kid there and did not remove her to foster care or a relative. Even after the girl stopped attending school regularly. They went back one day to check on them, and mom and girl were gone, the tent was gone, and no one knew where they went. CPS just closed the case and moved on.
I try not to wonder what happened to that little girl. Glad LA has figured out a better system.
ManateeNipples | 19 hours ago
Oh that's me. I'm the birth mom, my daughter I gave up for adoption will be 21 in a few months, 100% failure of the social safety net. It was 2005, I was 22, I didn't commit to adoption until I was 8 months pregnant, the only help I could get was $140/month food stamps, wic, and medicaid. I was bartending and living in a 1 bedroom apartment with my dad. We couldn't make it and so I did what I had to do. It ruined my life for a long time, I was depressed and traumatized and ended up on drugs for a few years. Her family that adopted her was upper middle class, I was in poverty. I've never stopped feeling like "the economy" basically stole my kid. Idk how to explain it. Like I was just cattle for rich people.
Idk but I have money now and I donate and vote to raise my own taxes every single election cycle. I'm always voting for people who want to fund the welfare system and make it stronger. Seems like just lighting money on fire at this point but it's the right thing to do so whatever. Sorry that was a lot but I'll be pissed until I die about it
5_yr_old_w_beard | 23 hours ago
My spouse used to work in child protection- specifically in family support/pre-apprehension. Its a double edged sword, cause while she was there to help, and the goal was to keep the child with the family, she also was kinda 'surveillance' for the agency, where her case notes would be used for legal purposes.
She so often said that a lot of her clients just needed a friend, a family member, or just a bit more money each month. She hated that, for those people especially, her notes could be used against them, and she wasn't able to help them to the degree they needed, or refer them to a place that would.
Its a tough balance to strike. Always glad to hear about new approaches that are centered on the child's wellbeing
Correct-Spend9298 | a day ago
Well said!
aspiringandroid | a day ago
on the one hand: I love this and I am so incredibly glad to see these families are being better served.
on the other: oh my god, its not rocket surgery. people do undesirable things due to unmet needs. if you help the family in poverty get support, their lives will improve. how have we not figured this out as a society.
[OP] parkdropsleep-dream | 23 hours ago
It’s true. The unfortunate reality is that many of these systems weren’t built to actually support children and families. I mean, as the article points out, family separation has a long history for both Black families and for Indigenous families. It benefited colonization and gaining capital. It takes an upheaval of the systems to not continue to carry out those legacies.
Legallyfit | 23 hours ago
💯💯💯
womenaremyfavguy | 22 hours ago
Overall, I love this in theory. And the numbers do speak volumes—less kids in foster care and no uptick in child fatalities.
But I’m currently fostering my baby nephew and it’s hard not to read this without thinking about his case. He was born not too far from LA and I’m curious how different things would’ve turned out if he were in LA. His mom is homeless, and he was born tox positive (meth) and 10 weeks early. CPS involvement began while she was pregnant. They have been trying to get her into shelter and treatment from the start. She’s been saying over and over again that she wants treatment and housing and wants to be with her baby. But in practice, her actions haven’t been matching her words. A social worker was driving her to a treatment center that would’ve provided shelter for her and her baby, but she asked to turn around to pick up medicine she left behind and then ran off and never returned. One year later, she’s still in the middle of reunification services. I would hope that a case like this would still be considered a case for CPS in LA. It’s kinda scary to think about what would’ve happened if they didn’t drug test her or the baby and just let her go back to the streets with the baby.
[OP] parkdropsleep-dream | 21 hours ago
I’m glad your nephew has you. I’ve found in addition to these efforts, there’s also a deeper effort to place children with kin and to increase support (aka funding) available for kinship care. I think many people who want reform acknowledge that not every parent is ready to take care of their child right now, but also that those kids who may be safer elsewhere have other people who love them, like an aunt, and they’ll probably be safer with those family members than in the system.
womenaremyfavguy | 21 hours ago
That’s great to hear! The county my nephew was born in prioritized kinship placement, which worked out for us
Pretend_Guava_1730 | 15 hours ago
I can already guess why. a lack of foster parents to foster them, pllus a puah for family reunification, as ia the currennt polixy here in Massachusetts- not sure if this is also the case in CA - means more kids have to go back to abusive homes.
[OP] parkdropsleep-dream | 14 hours ago
Guessed wrong! And could work on your spellcheck