Bill refocuses child-welfare laws
Monday, January 11, 2010 2:55 AM
By Rita Price
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
When child-protection workers are called to investigate, they follow a law that focuses on findings of abuse, neglect or dependency.
"We go out and figure out who to blame," said Crystal Ward Allen, executive director of the Public Children Services Association of Ohio. "That's not always what's best for the child."
Allen said that's why, after more than six years of study, Ohio child-welfare advocates are pushing for an about-face in the old protection laws.
A bill introduced in the General Assembly would replace the existing model with a "Child in Need of Protective Services" statute.
The CHIPS proposal lists seven categories of circumstance -- including harm by exposure to substance misuse or a lack of health care -- in which the child could be ruled in need of protective services.
Existing law focuses on whether there has been abuse or neglect of a child, or whether the child needs to be dependent on the state because the parent is unable to care for him or her.
"It's really changing the thinking from parental punishment in the court system to the needs of the child in the civil system," said Denise St. Clair, executive director of the National Center for Adoption Law and Policy at Capital University Law School in the Discovery District.
Proponents say the new definitions in House Bill 371 would make it easier to get help for children and would create more consistency among Ohio's 88 Children Services agencies.
Or the 500-page bill might reverse a welcome trend in which the number of Ohio children in out-of-home care has dropped by more than 40 percent since 2001, one critic says.
"The very act of calling so many possible symptoms and scenarios to the attention of front-line workers is likely to prompt a surge in abuse and neglect cases and a spike in foster-care placements," Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform in Arlington, Va., wrote in an e-mail.
"And that means this bill also is a budget-buster."
Wexler said current law already allows "almost anything imaginable" to be considered abuse or neglect.
"There is not a parent in Ohio who wouldn't be at risk of losing her or his child to foster care at some point under the provisions of this bill, were a caseworker inclined to take that child away," Wexler wrote.
Supporters say the proposal should do the opposite. They call it a heavily researched attempt to reduce foster placements, and to remedy problems that have been debated -- and cited by federal overseers -- for years.
"I think this will give us a cleaner guide to the situations that warrant child-enforcement action," said Eric Fenner, executive director of Franklin County Children Services. Fenner served on the Ohio Supreme Court subcommittee that examined the need for new child-welfare laws.
"I also think parents will feel better about our having to be more descriptive, to give more explanations," he said. "It gives people a stronger position to challenge our decisions."
St. Clair said the legislation would keep kids safer because their condition, not an abuse finding, is paramount. For example, current law can exempt corporal punishment that results in harm, such as bruises, that would be considered abuse if someone other than a parent did it. Under the new proposal, that exception is eliminated because the focus is simply on whether the child is harmed.
A young girl who has been forced to watch sexually explicit material on television or the Internet might not be a "victim of sexual activity" under current law, St. Clair said, but she could be a "child in need of protective services."
The seven categories that allow for protective services under the proposal are physical, sexual or emotional harm; harm from exposure to substance misuse; and the lack of necessary health care, legally required education or care or supervision.
None would replace the criminal provisions that allow for prosecution of abusers or go soft on those who hurt children, Fenner said.
Fewer than 15 other states have similar "child in need" statutes, and half of those address delinquency instead of protection, St. Clair said.
"This has been years and years in the making," she said. "It really is groundbreaking in its detail."
To read more about the legislation, go to http://www.ohiochildlaw.com/.
rprice@dispatch.com
http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/01/11/copy/CHIPS.ART_ART_01-11-10_B1_I0G8VJQ.html?adsec=politics&sid=101
Isabella Brooke Knightly and Austin Gamez-Knightly
In Memory of my Loving Husband, William F. Knightly Jr. Murdered by ILLEGAL Palliative Care at a Nashua, NH Hospital
People used to think it was necessary to "spank" adult members of the community, military trainees, and prisoners. In some countries they still do. In our country, it is considered sexual assault if a person over the age of 18 is "spanked", but only if over the age of 18.
ReplyDeleteFor one thing, buttock-battering can vibrate the pudendal nerve, which can lead to sexual arousal in some people. There are numerous other physiological ways in which it can be sexually abusive, but I won't list them all here. One can use the resources I've posted if they want to learn more.
Child bottom-battering/slapping vs. DISCIPLINE:
Child bottom-battering (euphemistically labeled "spanking","swatting","switching","smacking", "paddling",or other cute-sounding names) for the purpose of gaining compliance is nothing more than an inherited bad habit.
Its a good idea for people to take a look at what they are doing, and learn how to DISCIPLINE instead of hit.
I think the reason why television shows like "Supernanny" and "Dr. Phil" are so popular is because that is precisely what many (not all) people are trying to do.
There are several reasons why child bottom-slapping isn't a good idea. Here are some good, quick reads recommended by professionals:
Plain Talk About Spanking
by Jordan Riak,
The Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children
by Tom Johnson,
NO VITAL ORGANS THERE, So They Say
by Lesli Taylor M.D. and Adah Maurer Ph.D.
Most compelling of all reasons to abandon this worst of all bad habits is the fact that buttock-battering can be unintentional sexual abuse for some children. There is an abundance of educational resources, testimony, documentation, etc available on the subject that can easily be found by doing a little research with the recommended reads-visit the website of Parents and Teachers Against Violence In Education at www.nospank.net.
Just a handful of those helping to raise awareness of why child bottom-slapping isn't a good idea:
American Academy of Pediatrics,
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
American Psychological Association,
Center For Effective Discipline,
Churches' Network For Non-Violence,
Nobel Peace Prize recipient Archbishop Desmond Tutu,
Parenting In Jesus' Footsteps,
Global Initiative To End All Corporal Punishment of Children,
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In 26 countries, child corporal punishment is prohibited by law (with more in process). In fact, the US was the only UN member that did not ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child.