Posted on 01/28/2005 7:48:26 AM PST by TaxRelief
RALEIGH --In 2004, the state of North Carolina reported a 9 percent decline in child abuse cases. This came with a 5 percent increase in the number of cases investigated, the N.C. Department of Health and Human Services reports.
"We gave social workers new tools to help them make better decisions, and they're working," said Jo Ann Lamm, director of Family Support and Child Welfare Services. "Across the state, all county departments of social services follow the same process when deciding whether to investigate an allegation of abuse. When they do investigate, they all have the same decision-making process to determine the risk to the child. I feel confident that these tools are helping children remain at home when that's the best, safest place for them to be."
In state fiscal 2003-04, 113,557 children were assessed for child abuse and neglect, an increase of 6,400 from 2002-03. Of those cases, 27,310 children were found to be abused or neglected compared to 30,016 the year before.
The statistics include a new measure: "Children in need of services." They are being identified through the new multiple response system, which gives social workers a less-adversarial way to interact with families. A finding of in "need of service" means that, while there are safety issues, social workers can immediately start engaging the families in identifying their strengths that can be enhanced to ensure the safety of the child. This approach focuses on a partnership with parents to ensure the safety of their children. MRS was expanded from 10 to 52 counties during fiscal 2003-04.
Social Worker response decision dree: http://info.dhhs.state.nc.us/olm/manuals/dss/csm-60/man/CS1407-04.htm#P991_89359 (fascinating)
Charlotte, Mecklenburg DSS failure: http://www.rhinotimes.com/charlotte/archives/082803/story02.html
The pivotal court decision that swung control back to parents: http://sswnt7.sowo.unc.edu/fcrp/fp/fp_vol8no1/stumbo.htm
So9
Does the child live in a home in which another child died as a result of maltreatment?
Based on the potential risk, this requires an immediate response.
Lovely that they assume children are in homes where another was killed!
I'd also like to know what they consider "moral turpitude" - probably *not* what we do!
How is it possible that a child would be in a home where another child had already died "as a result of maltreatment"?
The government thinks it's fine, obviously.
I didn't read it that way. I don't think they are assuming anything, but, rather, asking, as a part of the decision making process, if another child died previously in that home as a result of mistreatment. I believe that should wave a HUGE red flag as to the potential for harm to children currently in that home, and the decision tree reflects that.
You're right, of course. But the fact that this point was included in the decision tree indicates that they assume these situation exist. As we in the Charlotte area know, they assume correctly. It's even more chilling that they included "died from mistreatment," as opposed to accident or illness.
This is not unique to this area. Thomas Sowell ran some columns recently about a young child's being returned to parents who had already killed an older child. I believe that was in California.
Here's the link to Thomas Sowell's column:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/ts20041208.shtml
....reading for class.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.