Thank you Salem. I did read the CPS thread, most of the posts are quite old, but I will post if the subject matter turns to ideas for reform. I do have a couple of ideas that I will leave here for thought:
One of the biggest things that would save us a considerable amount of time is unfounded reports. If I go out to a home to initiate and assess the family and find that there was a retaliation report made against the family and NOTHING is indicated that there are any problems with the children or the home, I would like to simply close that record. But no, we aren't allowed to do that without interviewing at least 2 sources, ordering criminal histories, 911 records and medical records on the children. Which means open all the paperwork necessary for a complete record and documenting (dictation) everything. If I can't get this all done within 7 days, I have to see the children again (more documenting and dictation). Pretty soon that family is at the bottom of my pile because they are not a high risk and I see them as often as time permits (more dictation every time) but I don't see them often enough to close the case....so its a vicious circle and the case never gets closed. Which is also one of the reasons a lot of people hate us...because we have to remain "in their business" even though we have no reason. This needs to change because we have a lot of retaliation or unfounded reports. Parents often do this during a divorce thinking we will take the child from the custodial parent and place the child with the non-custodial parent. WRONG! We also have neighbor and family disputes and the common "I'm calling DSS" threats. We often have people who think that a child shouldn't be living the way the child is living...sorry, that's a bias. If a parent is providing for the child's basic needs, ie food, medical, education, supervision and is not abusing or neglecting them, it isn't a CPS issue. Poverty is not a crime. Just because someone thinks they can do a better job or the child should have more, doesn't mean it will happen that way. People have rights. We cannot mandate they live a certain way. Just because you or I would have it different, doesn't mean those parents don't have the right to raise that child the best they can. Allow us to close these cases without additional requirements!
Another area that bugs the crap out of me is sexual curiosity with young children. Does everyone know that we are required to respond immediately to any allegations of sexual abuse...which only makes sense? BUT, if the allegations are about 5yr old Bobby touching 3yr old Susie's privates, I have to follow through with Child Medical Evaluations (conducted by a forensic child psychologist followed by a medical exam) AND file a DA report on Bobby? I'm serious. This is complete BS and a waste of time; It can also be traumatic for the child and results in more dictation and paperwork.
BBM While I totally get that you are bound by sometimes very cumbersome paperwork and follow up requirements on cases you feel are unfounded, retaliatory, or just sexual curiosity, not all cases where Bobby touching Suzie ARE a waste of time. I had an experience wherein I caught a female relative (age 6) engaged in very explicit sexual behavior with my then 3 year old son. I reported. The activity I saw was not curiousity but was extremely graphic and specific sexual act being performed on my child. I did not report this incident lightly. I understood the can of worms I was opening and the spotlight I was placing on our families. Turns out the female "peretrator" had been engaging in this sort of very graphic sexual acting out since the age of 3 and it had never been reported or investigated as the adults around the child assumed it was simply "playing doctor (simple normal sexual curiousity).
This young child was interviewed and would never divulge the what, who, when of what caused her to act out in this way, but I assure you, something or someone did. That female relative is a grandchild. I lose sleep to this day worrying that she has been or may continued to be abused by someone.
So while I hear your frustration, and I do not envy you having to try to do your job effectively with the strictures you must operate under, I bristled a bit when I read the BBM.
I am sorry if this is off topic. To bring things back to the Zahra project, I think it is an admirable goal. I also think it could be ineffective if the founders of the project do not really do the research to discover exactly what things are already in place but not enforced, are good ideas in theory but would not work in practice, etc. I really hope that they get good input from a number of different agencies that cross paths in the interest of protecting children and take the information garnered from these experts into cosideration when making their proposal.
In Zahra's instance, we had a situation where EB was apparently well versed in her "rights" and familiar enough through her past history with DSS to know how to evade the investigation that was most probably being done on her regarding Zahra. I think that is what this project hopes to deter in future. The gaps or holes in protection we, the public, perceive in the system that was unable to prevent this tragedy.
My own personal thoughts are, I think DSS needs to be in the child protection business rather than in the family reunifcation business. That may not be a popular stance but it is mine. I am not suggeting that parents never get their children back. I am suggeting that the years spend trying to foster kids while parents who have no interest in following their plan or attending the assigned parenting classes or in general do not take any of the steps required of them to reunite with their children until the eleventh hour are a waste of taxpayer money and valuable time for those children. Suddenly, when the child is situated in a long term placement or hevean forbid, someone wants to adopt them permanently, low and behold, mom is in a big ole rush to be a parent, after years of blowing off this child. I wish that agencies like DSS were more about the child's best interest and less about the parents rights. I do understand that parents rights must be observed but wish the scales weren's so tipped in their favor and were more about the child's rights.