No Racial Bias in Child Welfare System, Report Finds

The figures in the study may “speak volumes” but they’re speaking gibberish.

The fatal flaw in this study is its failure to take account the fact that child welfare decisions are affected by both class and racial biases, and they reinforce each other. Indeed, the biggest failing in American child welfare is the confusion of poverty itself with “neglect.”

Three-quarters of all “substantiated” cases of child maltreatment involve neglect. Typical state statutes define neglect as lack of adequate food, clothing, shelter or supervision – a perfect definition of poverty. So it is inevitable that large numbers of impoverished families who have never actually maltreated their children are “defined in” by neglect laws.

Therefore it makes perfect sense that poverty, in addition to causing higher rates of infant mortality, low birth weight, etc. would both contribute to more actual maltreatment, if only due to the additional stress that comes with being poor, but also, more important, to the appearance of more maltreatment when the poverty itself is confused with neglect.

Since Blacks are disproportionately poor, they are disproportionately at risk for being mislabeled as guilty of neglect. So the fact that the “disproportionality ratios” are similar means nothing.

To know where the class bias leaves off and the racial bias begins, it’s necessary to use methods that control for poverty. And study after study controlling for poverty still finds racial bias. For example, When caseworkers were given otherwise-identical hypothetical cases, they were more likely to describe a child as “at risk” when the family was described as Black. There are many more examples in our Issue Papers on child welfare and race – and child welfare and poverty – on our website, which you'll have to find by using Google since this comment form doesn't allow links.

The study results also defy common sense. Whenever I’m at a gathering where people are in denial about racism in child welfare I try to pose one question: Suppose this gathering were taking place late at night. When it ended, who in the room would have the most difficulty hailing a taxi? No one seems to have any problem figuring that out. Why, then, do these distinguished researchers believe that the bias that still is part of every facet of American life somehow disappears at the child welfare agency door, or the office of a doctor or some other “mandated reporter” of child abuse?

Still, in one sense, studies like this one represent progress. I’m old enough to remember when the entire field was “in denial” about poverty having anything to do with who got caught in the CPS net – and professionals would insist that they never, ever take away children just because of poverty. The fact that so many now are willing to, in effect, cop to class bias rather than be accused of racial bias is at least a small step in the right direction.

Richard Wexler
Executive Director
National Coalition for Child Protection Reform

Reply

Flawed? How about this paragraph "Through their research, Drake and his colleagues tapped into national estimates and found that 17 out of 1,000 African American kids were abused or neglected in 2009, according to the report, which is published in the journal Pediatrics. This compares to only one in nine white children." "One in nine white children" equates to 111 out of every 1,000 white children compared to only 17 out of 1,000 African American children. I think maybe someone has mis-stated a statistic here or they have misinterpreted the results.

Reply

Mr. Wexler -



"Typical state statutes define neglect as lack of adequate food, clothing, shelter or supervision – a perfect definition of poverty. So it is inevitable that large numbers of impoverished families who have never actually maltreated their children are “defined in” by neglect laws."
--- This definition can be true however it does not equate to individuals in poverty being labeled neglectful.
"It's not what you know, it's what you can prove in court" A petition for legal and physical custody has to be backed with clear evidence of abuse or neglect, otherwise the judge will laugh in CPS's face. Evidence of either physical, mental health, medical or educational neglect. CPS will help families obtain all forms of assistance. However, when parents continue to sabotage all forms of assistance by focusing more on their addictions, social lives, interests, then it is clear that the child's well being and safety is at risk.

"Why, then, do these distinguished researchers believe that the bias that still is part of every facet of American life somehow disappears at the child welfare agency door, or the office of a doctor or some other “mandated reporter” of child abuse?"
-- Mandated reporters, such as school officials do not even consider race or social class when making reports. In many city schools the teachers and school officials are very diverse and whites can actually be the minority.
Red flags are red flags no matter what the circumstances are. You can not call someone biased for factoring in other concerns as well. If a child comes to school wearing the same dirty shirt every day of the week, that can be an additional factor of concern. Parents who are appropriate would not allow this no matter what their social class is.
-- If someone sees a black person hitting their kid in an office, people aren't necessarily quick to judge, however if they are swearing at their kid and appear to be emotionally neglectful, they will have concerns, just like if it was a white family.

An interesting side note is that many minority cultures will not even call CPS on someone of their own background, because they still posses an "Us vs Them" mentality and feel that even if something they see is wrong, they still should not call and make reports on their "own kind".

The only real bias I have seen in CPS, is when caseworkers become upset at families for their behavior and fail to realize that they have rights too. Oppositional and challenging behavior can sometimes be misread as they have something to hide. Some caseworkers might feel that since they were disrespected, they are going to get the families back by taking away their kids.

Those are the real problems, this article is just trying to state that the reported Bias in the child welfare system is invalid, the message is correct.

FROM NCCPR website:
A second study, of 15,000 cases, is even more devastating. That study found that even maltreated children left in their own homes with little or no help fared better, on average, than comparably- maltreated children placed in foster care.

Wow, that whole article was ridiculous. Families are always offered services prior to action taken. How many chances do they need before something terrible happens to the child and everyone is yelling, Why didn't CPS do something??!!

I hope that your group, NCCPR, can find ways to change our system for the better, instead of preventing children from being taken away from terrible and incompetent parents/families.

Reply