Changes at DCS Coming Under Question
A couple of years ago, the State Division of Children Services (or whatever it was called back then . . .) started a shift towards centralized control of its units, as opposed to letting county directors run their own shops. This regional, or top down control model likely resulted in a more uniform application of standards for providing assistance to families in need, but some questions are coming out.
For instance, last week the Pal-Item noted that Wayne County is floating a surprise $650,000 bond issue to take the Department of Child Services through the end of 2008. Local Director Terry Suttles said that the money was needed to cover an increase in services provided - due to the tough economic times.
However, the time span for the increase in numbers cited by the article - 82 kids in 2005, 143 in 2006, 382 in 2007 and 321 so far in 2008 - cover not the economic changes (that started in 9/08), but cover the shift from the old system of local control to the state control: County sells $650,000 bond issue.
The Indy Star has a piece up now entitled: DCS removes too may kids from homes, report says. The report is issued by an anti-DCS group, National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, so criticism is expected, but the factual claims are surprising: “New data compiled by [Director Richard] Wexler’s group show Indiana removed children from their families in 2007 at a rate of 4.86 per 1,000 children, more than 20 percent above the national average of 3.93.”
Ex Marion County chief juvenile judge and now director of the DCS disputes the claim that the agency has become over aggressive under his rule: “Director James W. Payne said the numbers can be explained in several ways: They reflect a greater incidence of reports of abuse and neglect. DCS has been investigating more of the reports it has received. The agency has found evidence of abuse or neglect in a higher percentage of cases that were investigated than it did a year ago.”
Payne also noted that removals must be approved by a court: “That means an independent judge has said, ‘Yes, these kids need to be safe.’” But that quote hides that practical impact of what normally goes on in a CHINs (Child in Need of Service) case - The DCS make the initial decision to remove the child and THEN goes to the judge. The judge is then to decide if the initial detention was justified and if the detention should continue.
Now put yourself in the position of that judge - The DCS runs in and says “Hey we just took this kid and now he is safe in foster care.” The judge then decides - almost guesses really, based only on the information from the DCS whether the child should stay in foster care or go back to the parents. If the judge make a mistake - the risk that the child will get hurt if returned to the parent and it would be the judge’s fault - dictate that the child is normally retained in care.
What the DCS has done is said - when in doubt, detain, then let the judges take the heat if a child is released and later hurt or killed. A very smart politic move that keeps the agency blameless in those overwrought situation where a child is hurt, but not such a good use of public power and resources.
