Only 5% of cases merit CPS interventions

http://www.child-abuse.com


George Thomas in Travels in the Trenches.


Excerpt:

Applying these estimated percentages, roughly 1 in every 20 CPS investigations
engages CPS in its central mission of protecting children from the threat or
actual occurrence of real physical harm. These ill-defined definitional
boundaries around demand have clearly contributed to vaulting Child Protective
Services from a minor specialty to the centerpiece in contemporary child
welfare services over the last two decades, and their helter-skelter activities
help convey an image that demand continues to outstrip supply, which in turn
supports calls for more funding and more specialized services to respond to
seemingly overwhelming demand.

Comment: How to *grow a bureaucracy.*

Fern, you are absolutely correct. CPS continues to work with ill-defined
boundaries because in the US we hesitate to protect children. Some states allow
discipline that results in bruising and welts. Some states allow children to be
hit with implements, while other states consider this abuse. Some states allow
children to be hit with implements as long as there is no mark. And still other
states allow children to be hit, below the waist and over clothing, with
implements, as long as there is no mark.

How bizarre is this, and how confusing for CPS workers who are left to make
subjective judgments. How about passing a law that makes all corporal punishment
illegal? How about passing a law that provides children the respect and
protection they deserve? How about passing a law that allows CPS workers to do
their job without the subjectivity they now experience? How about passing a law
that allows CPS workers a livable wage and a livable case load?

LaVonne

Fern5827 wrote:


Applying these estimated percentages, roughly 1 in every 20 CPS investigations
engages CPS in its central mission of protecting children from the threat or
actual occurrence of real physical harm. These ill-defined definitional
boundaries around demand have clearly contributed to vaulting Child Protective
Services from a minor specialty to the centerpiece in contemporary child
welfare services over the last two decades, and their helter-skelter activities
help convey an image that demand continues to outstrip supply, which in turn
supports calls for more funding and more specialized services to respond to
seemingly overwhelming demand.

Comment: How to *grow a bureaucracy.*

On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:

Fern, you are absolutely correct. CPS continues to work with ill-defined
boundaries because in the US we hesitate to protect children. Some states allow
discipline that results in bruising and welts. Some states allow children to be
hit with implements, while other states consider this abuse. Some states allow
children to be hit with implements as long as there is no mark. And still other
states allow children to be hit, below the waist and over clothing, with
implements, as long as there is no mark.

LOL! Poor CPS! ;-)

How bizarre is this, and how confusing for CPS workers who are left to make
subjective judgments. How about passing a law that makes all corporal punishment
illegal? How about passing a law that provides children the respect and
protection they deserve? How about passing a law that allows CPS workers to do
their job without the subjectivity they now experience? How about passing a law
that allows CPS workers a livable wage and a livable case load?

LOL! YUP! Good idea, LaVonne. Make spanking illegal and CPS can take
your kids away from parents because they used spanking. CPS workers
don't even have to think twice! Liveable wage without having to use their
brain! ;-) Can you tell me where all the money go?

Doan

How about passing a law that allows CPS
workers a livable wage and a livable case load?

If it's so bad, why did these people choose this career?

Why pay un credentialed unlicensed people more?
Fire the sand baggers and hire people who DO have
credentials and licenses that they earned and paid
for themselves.

No LICENSE, gov't benefits, gov't retirement, tenure?

We don't live in SOCIALISM yet, and I question whether
even socialism would support such non-producers.