Expediency's offspring: the failures of Child Protective Services(CPS).

Expediency's offspring

By Harry Petersen

Special to The Times

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm..._satrdr11.html



Today, kids on the back burner

Thank you for "Another child slips through the cracks" [Times editorial,
Aug. 7], about the failures of Child Protective Services (CPS). Children
will ultimately benefit from continued public attention to CPS.

In spite of the recent minor improvements you mentioned, much more must
be done before I can agree that the agency should not now be separated
from the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) as recommended
by state Sen. Val Stevens, R-Arlington.

When I was working, I formed some vivid impressions of CPS from my
occasional contact with their field offices across the state. I've been
retired for 15 years but recent tragic news about children under CPS'
aegis indicate that my old observations of CPS still are valid.

I don't doubt that caseworkers were good and decent people who initially
were dedicated to their work. However, in spite of other qualifications
they had, many had no previous ex-perience in planning, working on their
own initiative or making decisions in the field, and they lacked the
investigative and interviewing skills necessary to probe a case in depth.

Few developed those skills and abilities to a professional extent. Many
became frustrated with having to deal repeatedly with the irresponsible
element of society that contributed so many children to their caseloads.
They were also frustrated by constant pressure from supervisors to
complete cases and reduce their overly large caseloads.

Most supervisors were formerly caseworkers, some of whom became
supervisors not because of supervisory talent or potential or a desire
for career advancement, but because they didn't want to be caseworkers
any longer.

Caseload management was paramount and casework results secondary.
Caseworkers and supervisors relied on the extensive regulations and
other documents in the office as a source for justification in closing a
case or handling it with the least effort — not for guidance in best
serving the child.

What should be done? First, recognize that CPS management must be held
responsible for the quality of the agency's work rather than be shielded
by layers of bureaucracy in CPS and DSHS. CPS must be separated from
DSHS and operated as an independent agency, with new leadership
responsible directly to the governor.

Second, CPS must be staffed at all levels with intelligent, competent,
motivated employees capable of showing initiative, resourcefulness and
dedication to the needs of children. This will require intensive
training for those who have become drones just grinding out cases, and
perhaps elimination of some of them.

Harry Petersen lives in Bellevue.

Copyright © 2007 The Seattle Times Company






CURRENTLY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES VIOLATES MORE CIVIL RIGHTS ON A
DAILY BASIS THEN ALL OTHER AGENCIES COMBINED INCLUDING THE NSA / CIA
WIRETAPPING PROGRAM....

CPS Does not protect children...
It is sickening how many children are subject to abuse, neglect and even
killed at the hands of Child Protective Services.

every parent should read this .pdf from
connecticut dcf watch...

http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com/8x11.pdf

http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com

Number of Cases per 100,000 children in the US
These numbers come from The National Center on
Child Abuse and Neglect in Washington. (NCCAN)
Recent numbers have increased significantly for CPS

*Perpetrators of Maltreatment*

Physical Abuse CPS 160, Parents 59
Sexual Abuse CPS 112, Parents 13
Neglect CPS 410, Parents 241
Medical Neglect CPS 14 Parents 12
Fatalities CPS 6.4, Parents 1.5

CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, HAPPILY DESTROYING HUNDREDS OF INNOCENT
FAMILIES YEARLY NATIONWIDE AND COMING TO YOU'RE HOME SOON...


BE SURE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOUR CANDIDATES STANDS ON THE ISSUE OF
REFORMING OR ABOLISHING CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES ("MAKE YOUR CANDIDATES
TAKE A STAND ON THIS ISSUE.") THEN REMEMBER TO VOTE ACCORDINGLY IF THEY
ARE "FAMILY UNFRIENDLY" IN THE NEXT ELECTION...