The Tragic Murder of a Social Worker
Tragically, a mother and her boyfriend murdered a social worker who was assigned to the case of their child -- who was deemed neglected. (Read the article.) Now the mother, her boyfriend, and their child are all missing.
This situation illuminates the dangerous nature of the child protective services case workers' jobs. These brave men and women enter homes to remove children, prevent physical abuse, and much more.
In writing about children's rights and laws I find it easy to be very critical of child protective services. Often children who are in danger are not removed from home. This could be for many reasons -- maybe they weren't reported, maybe the case worker thought the birth home was better than the alternative, maybe no caseworker ever made it to that home. Amongst my criticisms, though, I think it is important to recognize just how hard this job really would be to carry out satisfactorily.
The Supreme Court briefly touched on the difficulty of the social worker's job in DeShaney v. Winnebago County. I've written about this case various times -- but always from the point of view of the child. The Court was concerned that by putting a higher burden on child protective services, the case workers would be darned if they do, and darned if they don't: if they remove the child from a home that was really OK, then the case worker could be open to liability from the parents, and if they fail to remove a child, then the case worker would potentially have been open to liability to the child.
While I recognize that it would be nearly impossible to get it "right" each time -- only removing in dangerous situations, and in every dangerous situation -- I still think that something more needs to happen. Case workers have a very difficult job. Maybe the problem isn't the case workers -- maybe it is the support, training, authority, options, services, etc. available for the case workers.
I hope that in the aftermath of this murder child protective services might again be reconsidered and the shortcomings acknowledged. If social workers/case workers are so vulnerable when enforcing removal orders, how can these children be adequately served? I hope that a sensible balance can be reached where the protection of children doesn't come at the expense of dedicated adults' lives, but where the services are not limited by the dangers that adequately carrying out the job can pose.
This situation illuminates the dangerous nature of the child protective services case workers' jobs. These brave men and women enter homes to remove children, prevent physical abuse, and much more.
In writing about children's rights and laws I find it easy to be very critical of child protective services. Often children who are in danger are not removed from home. This could be for many reasons -- maybe they weren't reported, maybe the case worker thought the birth home was better than the alternative, maybe no caseworker ever made it to that home. Amongst my criticisms, though, I think it is important to recognize just how hard this job really would be to carry out satisfactorily.
The Supreme Court briefly touched on the difficulty of the social worker's job in DeShaney v. Winnebago County. I've written about this case various times -- but always from the point of view of the child. The Court was concerned that by putting a higher burden on child protective services, the case workers would be darned if they do, and darned if they don't: if they remove the child from a home that was really OK, then the case worker could be open to liability from the parents, and if they fail to remove a child, then the case worker would potentially have been open to liability to the child.
While I recognize that it would be nearly impossible to get it "right" each time -- only removing in dangerous situations, and in every dangerous situation -- I still think that something more needs to happen. Case workers have a very difficult job. Maybe the problem isn't the case workers -- maybe it is the support, training, authority, options, services, etc. available for the case workers.
I hope that in the aftermath of this murder child protective services might again be reconsidered and the shortcomings acknowledged. If social workers/case workers are so vulnerable when enforcing removal orders, how can these children be adequately served? I hope that a sensible balance can be reached where the protection of children doesn't come at the expense of dedicated adults' lives, but where the services are not limited by the dangers that adequately carrying out the job can pose.
posted by eponcz at 9:50 AM
2 Comments:
Children’s Protective Social Workers have an unmanageably difficult job. They are the bearers of bad news, and everyone wants to kill the messenger.
Children’s Protective Social Workers are never mentioned in the same breath of success as law enforcement, fire fighters, attorneys, judges, teachers, or doctors.
Parents, and just about everyone thinks that they are the child's social worker's boss.
I know of no other profession where the professional is subjected to as much rejection and vilification, except an IRS agent or an actor. . . an the latter is trying to have fun.
I work in child protection. To be subject to threats and potentially violent situations is part of the job. To me the key is in being child focused. Ask how is this situation for the child? What is the risk of harm for this child? It is telling if parents are unable to focus on the needs of their children and how these needs are being met. Job satisfaction comes from seeing children thrive, returned to their family or in permanent care.
Post a Comment
<< Home