Comment by jvanderbot
2 years ago
This is true, but not for the reasons you might expect. Well, 10% of the time this is the case, but 90% ...
Mostly they are operating on priors. The prior probability of a separation being the right thing to do is very high, because they have a _long list of mitigation before they actually can take a kid away. In the case of a doctor-approved immediate physical danger, they are regulated into acting on behalf of the immediate safety of the child while the investigation is ongoing but even that is considered temporary.
The goal of any foster care situation is to get the kids back with the biological parents, so time is on their side, provided they are not living in a circumstance that disallows the kind of attendance and involvement that the state would require to clear a caseworker to re-unite the family. Sadly, many are.
Source: Foster parent.
Priors should never, ever factor into it like this.
I was a foster child who was taken from my parents wrongly. A third party (not connected to child services) made a false accusation to the cops, who took me and turned me over to child services without any investigation. Even though I insisted nothing had happened and even though child services failed to produce any evidence (beyond aforesaid hearsay) over the course of their investigation, child services nonetheless fought extremely hard against letting me go home to my family.
In the end, a judge had to order them to return me to my family because they refused to accept that the accusation had been a lie.
In the meantime, I went through three different foster homes. I was a very difficult kid to foster (I cried and screamed a lot, demanding to go home) and so I unfortunately experienced abuse and neglect in two of the three homes. (My first foster home was particularly severe, which was strange because they were otherwise great parents to their biological kids. At least the other abusive home treated their real children equally poorly.)
Have you considered suing the third party that made a false accusation? It seems that they’ve caused suffering and irreparable long term harm. This sounds like something that may have a standing. Perhaps you can sue them and either get some material compensation (if they are well to do) put them through a few rounds of trials in another state or something (if they are poor, this will be a good punishment in itself).
[Not a lawyer, this maybe a bad idea. But what you’re describing should have consequences for the party that had caused harm.]
Also not a lawyer, but there is a significant motivation for protection when an incorrect accusation is made in good faith, because a lot of correct reports of child abuse are based on circumstantial evidence and suspicion - so you would need very clear strong evidence that the reporter knew the information was false and was intentionally misleading CPS, or you’d be thrown out of court immediately. In some places you wouldn’t even be given the identity of the reporter.
1 reply →
We never found out who did it. It was an anonymous accusation. It could have been a stranger on the street, for all we know.
We don't even know if it was an intentional lie or if they genuinely thought I had been hurt. We never found out what they told the cops.
1 reply →
Why not?
But on the same note, I would also consider suing child services for failing to act according to their own principles and mainly for ignoring evidence.
1 reply →