CHAPTER V:
CHILDREN IN THE DEPENDENCY SYSTEM WITH VARIOUS NEEDS

CHILDREN WHO SUFFER NEGLECT

The Seriousness of Child Neglect

The 1992 Little Hoover Commission Report implies that child neglect is not as serious as physical and sexual abuse.⁽⁸⁷⁾ However, information is now available that the effects of neglect are at least as serious as abuse and appear now to be longer lasting and harder to overcome. Young children who have been neglected typically score from 10 to 20 I.Q. points below those not maltreated. Academic and cognitive delays show up when they are in school. As they get older they may show increasing signs of withdrawal, aggression, noncompliance, frustration, poor impulse control, lack of empathy, and/or poor peer relationships. Later in life these children often have trouble as delinquents, runaways, truants, and/or drug or alcohol abusers.⁽⁸⁸⁾

In 1995, nearly 3/4 of all children in the California foster care system were removed from their homes due to general or severe parental neglect, up from 2/3 in 1989. (See Appendix I: Trends and Statistics for California's Dependency System for 1990-1996 statistics). Children removed for neglect represent the fastest growing segment of the foster care population.

Once in foster care, neglected children in California remain in care much longer than children placed for other reasons. For those in Kinship care for reasons of neglect, the median length of stay was 23 months, compared to 14 months for physical and sexual abuse. Neglected children placed with non-Kin were in care for a median of 18 months, while those who had been physically abused stayed 9 months and sexually abused children were in care for about 8 months.⁽⁸⁹⁾

Neglect however, is often not taken as seriously as physical and sexual abuse by social workers and services to these families have been limited. There are many possible reasons for this. Social workers, exposed to severe abuse may not as quickly observe cases of neglect. Definitions of neglect are not clear. The lines between neglect, poor parenting skills, poverty and deliberate acts of commission are often blurred. Neglect is the most frequently reported type of abuse, but different people see neglect differently. A social worker can easily document lack of food, clothing or shelter, but "inadequate supervision" or "raising children in unwholesome circumstances" is harder to document in a brief visit or telephone call. Although workers may share concerns about the emotional well-being of these children, they may not have the latitude to intervene.⁽⁹⁰⁾

Researchers studied the referrals made in San Diego, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, looking at a sample of children, whose first referral occurred between January 1991 and September 1991.⁽⁹¹⁾ They found that children referred for severe neglect were most frequently referred by the medical profession (50%) and for general neglect were most often referred by those classified as others.⁽⁹²⁾ Whereas sexual and emotional abuse are more frequently found among Caucasian children, severe neglect, general neglect and caretaker absence or incapacity are more frequently referral reasons for children of African-American descent. Because the causal link between neglect and poverty has been well documented, the types of prevention services appropriated to the reduction of child neglect might be quite different from prevention focused on other forms of abuse.⁽⁹³⁾

The study showed that families who did not receive initial child welfare services after a report of "general neglect" or "caretaker incapacity or absence" were more likely to be referred for "severe neglect" at a later date. The researchers recommended that preventive services be targeted to these children and their families. They are struggling. Although their difficulties have not become so severe that child welfare agencies see the need to become involved, their problems may be exacerbated over time if the initial referral is dropped.⁽⁹⁴⁾

Our knowledge about how to prevent or stop child neglect is severely constrained. To date, researchers and practitioners have been unable to develop a proven technology for preventing or treating this form of maltreatment, even though research is now identifying family characteristics that are correlated with neglect.

1. The majority of families identified as neglectful are poor. According to the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, families with annual incomes under $15,000 are five times more likely to be reported for child neglect than families with higher incomes.

Child neglect, however, is not synonymous with child poverty. Significant differences distinguish poor families from poor families who also neglect their children.

2. Mothers are depressed, hostile or resentful against their children or uninvolved.

3. Social isolation has a strong correlation with neglect. Social support appears to act as a buffer between the stresses of the environment, the family, and the child.

4. Neglecting families have a history of separation and loss that is higher than in non-neglecting families. Nearly 3/4 of the neglecting families in a recent study had lost a child either to death, placement in foster care, or arrest in the previous five years. In a control group, the number was 25%. In the study 25% of the neglecting families reported a suicide or violent death within the family within the past five years.

5. Neglecting families have family histories involving higher rates of alcoholism, neglect, and sexual abuse that non-neglecting families. They also share higher rates of attempted suicide, psychiatric treatment, uncontrollable violence, arrests, and substance abuse.

6. Families experiencing neglect have more children, on average, than other families with similar socioeconomic and religious profiles.

7. Neglecting mothers are less likely to receive prenatal care than other poor women.

8. Neglecting families are highly mobile. One study of chronically neglecting families documented a 70% mobility rate within a 3-year time span.

9. Family stress has been implicated in child abuse. Although the relationship between family stress and physical abuse is dominant, the accumulation of stressful life events such as single parenthood, unemployment, large family size, marital conflict, and alcohol/drug abuse are fairly strong predictors of child neglect. Many neglectful families are subject to harsh environments and because of that, often find themselves in serious crises.⁽⁹⁵⁾

Studies suggest that this type of maltreatment, once identified, often frustrates well-meaning child welfare professionals. It may be one of the most difficult forms of maltreatment to treat. An evaluation of a program set up to address child neglect in its early stages found that many of the families identified as needing help were impossible to recruit into the voluntary program. The evaluators speculate that many were chemically dependent or undocumented aliens and therefore were uncomfortable with the home-visit aspect of the program. Another factor could be that parents who neglect do not bond with members of the families and therefore have a hard time developing attachment and trust with strangers. The researchers question whether voluntary programs will be successful with such families.⁽⁹⁶⁾

Need for a Better Definition of Neglect:

One study noted that "at least some of the dramatic increases in reports stem from systemic or definitional changes rather than actual changes in child maltreatment levels".

In a 1993 review of the research literature on neglect and the child welfare system, the reviewers found the following. Child neglect continues to be the largest single category of child maltreatment, now constituting 55% of all reports. This increase in reports may be related to the professional community's attempt to define maltreatment more precisely. Supporters of more precision argue that it would provide standards for determining whether neglect was actually present and would therefore stabilize or reduce the number of reports to the child protective system. This might then reduce class and cultural bias in determinations of neglect; diminish unwarranted intrusion into family life; identify those families most in need of services at a time of diminished resources; and ultimately reduce the number of children placed in substitute care. Such precision, however, may have actually resulted in more reports.⁽⁹⁷⁾

The reviewers argued that, if child protective services are seen as preventive and should be used to help children and families "at risk of harm", there is a clear need for substantive, ongoing research to determine which conditions are harmful to a child's growth and development in both the short and long term.

They noted that several studies have shown that different cultural groups rate seriousness of certain aspects of neglect differently and that social workers vary in how they rate these aspects as well. Research shows that most minority communities view certain circumstances of general neglect as more serious than their white counterparts, particularly those members of the minority groups most affected by the child protective system. This sense that these families "need help" and are not getting it, may be one of the causes of anger and frustration in the lay community about the child protective system. (See also section on Race and Ethnicity as They Apply to the Dependency System in this Chapter)

The authors state that, if the child protective system decides to encourage professionalism and encourage the importance of formal training, broader definitions of child neglect can be adopted and workers can be allowed some professional (rather than personal) discretion, relying on more formal training to reduce bias. If the field continues to discourage professionalism and reduces the importance of more formal training, then the specific criteria for decision-making must be further refined to eliminate personal discretion that can lead to class and cultural bias.

The authors of the review caution that, in the current social environment, caseloads of protective service agencies will continue to rise no matter how precisely neglect is defined. Until a variety of social problems are addressed in a systematic way, many families will continue to find it difficult to function at their optimal level, and marginal families will, in greater numbers, be unable to meet minimal societal expectations for the care of their children.⁽⁹⁸⁾

VERY YOUNG CHILDREN

While foster care has been growing, the characteristics of children entering the child welfare system(CWS) have been changing.

A 1994 report by the United States General Accounting Office on Foster Care found that:

The 1991 population of young foster children is significantly different from the 1986 population. The number of young foster children increased at almost twice the rate of the general foster care population. We estimate that families where at least one parent was a drug abuser increased from 52 percent to 78 percent. An increasing percentage of children had serious health-related problems in 1991 and most of them were prenatally exposed to drugs... (A)n estimated 58 percent of young foster children had serious health-related problems in 1991 compared with 43 percent in 1986. Those at high risk for problems due to prenatal drug exposure increased from 29 percent to 62 percent over this period.⁽⁹⁹⁾

Jill Berrick of the U.C. Berkeley Child Welfare Research Center reports that "infants now make up 20% of all children entering foster care.⁽¹⁰⁰⁾ It is reported that 25% of all pregnant women in the US do not receive prenatal care in the first trimester, and for black women, it is 40%.⁽¹⁰¹⁾ The reporting of numbers of any kind is difficult due to changes in conditions for reporting, but drug abuse of some sort is highly involved with out-of-home infant placement.

The authors of Bruised Before Birth, 1994, point out that prenatal exposure to drugs and alcohol is a serious and growing problem. But, they claim, it is not possible to determine absolutely which children will be touched and in what ways. Not all children exposed prenatally to drugs and alcohol will automatically have severe problems. As drug testing for pregnant women and follow-up for drug-exposed children has become more widespread, it has been found that some children appear to have minimal or no apparent problems, others have serious learning and behavioral problems. Early remediation can have a huge beneficial result on what the outcome will be. There are many undiagnosed cases of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and whether alone or with other drugs, alcohol is the most common substance to be abused.⁽¹⁰²⁾

Specialized foster care (SFC) is emerging as an alternative service delivery for these children. The number of agencies providing this service has more than doubled in the past 15 years.⁽¹⁰³⁾

Caring for these children is both costly and time consuming. Foster families are provided with training, respite care and a 24-hour on-call social worker. Also pay is higher ranging up to $800 a month, with the average at $600. Most agencies place three children to a family, raising the family income by about $18,000 a month.⁽¹⁰⁴⁾

Issues:

1. Reports indicate that this can double household income in some instances. However, it is less expensive than placement in a Residential Treatment Program. Due to the higher pay, there seems to be more stability and less turnover. Also, the education level of these foster parents is higher than most foster parents. Does this justify the additional expense?

2. Should another be to keep the child with the mother and give them both the necessary support so that they both can cope?⁽¹⁰⁵⁾

RACE AND ETHNICITY AS THEY APPLY TO THE DEPENDENCY SYSTEM

California 1995 Statistics
	Percentage of Foster Care Population	Percentage of Child Population
African American	37	4.8
Caucasian	36	0.8
Latino	25	0.6

In June 1995, the 37% of the foster care population that was black was 4.8% of the population of black children in California. The 36% of the foster care population that was Caucasian represented 0.8% of the population of Caucasian children in the state. The Hispanic 25% in foster care represented 0.6% of the Hispanic children of the state.⁽¹⁰⁶⁾

A 1996 review of national child welfare research found that, compared to Caucasians, families of color are: more likely to be the subject of a maltreatment report, disproportionately represented in out-of-home care; appear to spend longer time in care; and they are more likely to return to out-of-home care after family reunification. The researchers report that, African American children have a dramatically lower likelihood of leaving out-of-home care and especially of being adopted, than Caucasian and Latino children. Lower adoption rates for African American children appear to occur whether or not they are in kinship care. There is some evidence that families of color have a more difficult time having their adoptions legalized than Caucasian families.

The review found that families and children of color often receive fewer and inferior services compared to those provided for Caucasian children and families who have similar needs. In most child welfare jurisdictions services, continue to be provided primarily by Caucasian social workers to a clientele largely made up of persons of color. To improve child welfare outcomes, service models that claim greater efficacy with persons of color should be implemented and evaluated.

Perhaps the most important finding of this review was that many of the observed differences in child welfare outcomes by race and ethnicity reflect differences in the economic and social well-being of children and families. Many of the studies that attempted to account for this variation showed a reduced or non-existent effect of race and ethnicity when social class was factored in to the equation. Several of the studies indicated that the relationships between race and child welfare cannot be separated from the relationship between economic deprivation and child welfare. The reviewers stated that, collectively our social institutions have failed children of color and their families and that one result is an inequitable representation of children of color in the child welfare system.

The authors of the review made the following recommendations.

1. Solutions to the problem of the disproportionately high number of African American children entering out-of-home care (would be):

- alleviating poverty,

- either reducing the number of single-parent families or providing them with needed supports, and

- (addressing) the impact of societal discrimination in general on the ability of people of color to rear their children.

2. Race and ethnicity should be better acknowledged in future child welfare research. The failure or unwillingness to at least acknowledge the relationships among race, child welfare services, and child welfare outcomes may only serve to invite uninformed speculation about the reasons for these relationships.

3. The terms "Hispanic" and "Latino" obscure the underlying differences with this population that may be relevant to service provision.

4. Though Native Americans are over represented in the child welfare system, little empirical work has been done on services to, and outcomes for, this population.

5. Minimal attention has been given to the unique experiences of various Asian and Pacific Islander populations. Clearer understanding of the relatively low utilization of child welfare services by Asians and Pacific Islanders offers opportunities to understand the relationship between culture, resources, community characteristics, and the use of child welfare services.

6. When sample sizes permit, attention should also be paid to mixed-race children and youth who come into contact with the system.⁽¹⁰⁷⁾

The First African American Child Welfare Summit

The First African American Child Welfare Summit was convened by the Black Administrators in Child Welfare, Inc. in 1997. Their report noted that the current increase in out-of-home placements of African-American children began around 1980 -- prior to that time, these children did not dominate child welfare rolls, particularly formal placements. The increased entry of African Americans into child welfare systems parallels the implementation of the mandatory reporting requirements of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974. The unanticipated result of this act was that professionals tended to report families and individuals who often did not "look like them". Since most professionals were disproportionately not African American, the African American community became a vulnerable target for reports of suspected child abuse and neglect.⁽¹⁰⁸⁾

"In the old days, miners took yellow canaries into the mines to warn them when deadly fumes were present. Today the African American poor woman is the yellow canary of society. As the most vulnerable member, she warns us when society is in peril, but we concentrate on the fact that she is yellow." ...Lani Guinier, in an interview on National Public Radio, March 31, 1998.

The report further noted that African American professionals understand that the issues surrounding out-of-home placements for African American children and families are not as simplistic as they sometimes appear. Such placements are inextricably connected to the failures of other systems, such as education; early sexuality and parenting; lack of male presence in families and African American communities; lack of employment opportunities; racial discrimination; and inadequate housing. The solutions lie within the broader perspective of ... economic development, employment, politics, (etc.)⁽¹⁰⁹⁾

The child welfare field continues to be seriously underdeveloped in identifying and implementing clear and culturally appropriate guidelines for determining child safety. This confusion often works to the detriment of African American families; they are often assessed by professionals who are not African American or who establish criteria that may not be culturally indicated or relevant. The report contained many recommendations which included the following:

1. African American professionals and parents need to be involved in present efforts to reform the social services.⁽¹¹⁰⁾

2. The risk assessment process should comprise a constellation of measures, and include involving the family (nuclear and extended) in making decisions about children and families;

3. Caseworkers need to "relearn" how and why risk assessment is used, with emphasis on the cultural context in which it is used. This training should be conducted for all caseworkers, including African Americans.⁽¹¹¹⁾

(See also Chapter II: Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, and other sub-chapters in Chapter V)

CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES

Children with disabilities are abused at a greater rate than other children. Their parents are often frustrated with their children's disabilities or with their own inability to help them. Disabled girls are more often sexually abused that other girls. Children with developmental disabilities have a hard time explaining what happened to the social worker or police. Professionals need to be trained to be patient and understanding with these children.⁽¹¹²⁾

Often children with disabilities enter foster care because their parents have not received the type or level of support to meet their needs. In many cases, parents must work and responsible after-school child care is not available or the parents become overwhelmed with their needs and the demands of the rest of the family. Sometimes, a family emergency occurs. Foster care then steps in to provide the care the child needs. In the foster homes, the foster parents are trained to look after these children and given support within the dependency system. An example of such a program is Aspira, a treatment foster care and family support agency with offices throughout California.⁽¹¹³⁾

CHILDREN OF PARENTS IN PRISON

The Child Welfare League of America recently published an Issue Brief on this topic. The following information is from that document.

Statistics:

Total inmate population	744,208 (1985)	1,630,940 (1996)
Female inmate population	19,607 (1984)	73,607 (1996)

While the prison population which is 94% male doubled nationwide from the 1985 inmate population of 744,208 to the 1996 inmate population of 1,630,940, the female inmate population tripled from 19,205 in 1984 to 73,607 in 1996. Most of the female incarcerations are due to substance abuse and criminal behavior related to addiction. On any given day there are more than 100,00 women being held in jail or prison.

Incarcerated parents	Number	Numbers of minor children
Women	about 90,000	145,000
Men	1.23 million	1.38 million
Total		1.53 million

A widely accepted estimate is that the 90,000 currently incarcerated have 145,000 minor children and the 1.23 million men are fathers to 1.38 million minor children, for a total of 1.53 minor children with a parent in prison. More children will have a parent incarcerated in their lives if the inmate population continues to grow at the present rate of 7.8% annually. Federal drug offenders serve 54% longer terms than 10 years ago. There is another, much larger population of children that has experienced the incarceration of a parent at some point in their lives.⁽¹¹⁴⁾

Profiles of Parents:

The typical woman in prison is young, has a history of drug abuse, has been incarcerated for a drug offense or a related property offense, comes from a single-parent home and has relatives who have been incarcerated. One in five women prisoners comes from a foster home or foster group care facility and 40% report physical or sexual abuse, often before the age of 18 years. They have limited education and poor employment skills; less than half are high school graduates. Most will be re-arrested, and one-third will be jailed or imprisoned within three years. About 75-80% are mothers with an average of two children, single parents themselves, raising the children without the fathers. Of these, 8-10% were pregnant when they entered prison. Among these mothers, 85% intend to regain custody when they are released and are concerned about their children and stay in touch with them while they are in prison through letters, phone calls and visits.⁽¹¹⁵⁾ (Social workers in some counties in California are required to see that arrangements are made for foster children to visit their parents in prison.)⁽¹¹⁶⁾

Of the men in prison, 60% are between 18 and 34 years of age. They too come from single-parent homes and have relatives who have been incarcerated. One in seven was raised by relatives, one in six was raised outside the home, 30% experienced parental substance abuse and 12% report physical or sexual abuse. They also have limited education and employment skills. At the time they were arrested, 90% had yearly incomes of less than $25,000, and 69% had incomes below the poverty level. More than two thirds will be re-arrested within three years of release. Of these men, at least 55% are fathers. Most incarcerated men are not married to, nor have an ongoing relationship with, the mothers of their children and have little or no contact with their children before, during or after imprisonment.⁽¹¹⁷⁾

Situation of Children:

Although many of the children of female prisoners are in some form of kinship care, 5-10% of them enter or remain in foster care when their mothers are arrested and many live apart from their brothers and sisters. In 1993, of approximately 42,000 incarcerated parents, 10% of the children of female prisoners were in foster home care.⁽¹¹⁸⁾

The author noted that, there is very little research on children of prisoners. Although no one knows how outcomes of placement for children of prisoners in out-of-home care differ from outcomes for other children in out-of-home care, we do know that the average woman prisoner serves 16 months and the average male prisoner serves 66 months. Federal law requires that children in out-of-home care have a plan for permanent placement within 18 months of placement, suggesting on the basis of time alone that many children of prisoners are not likely to be reunified with their parents. Although there are few statistics about the rate of termination of parental rights actions for children of incarcerated parents, one survey of African American children in out-of-home care showed that 12% to 18% of all terminations of parental rights within this population occurred among families with an incarcerated parent, where the child entered the child welfare system because of the parent's incarceration.⁽¹¹⁹⁾

There are many obstacles to reunification for mothers who have been separated from their children. Women leaving prison are often homeless, poor, and struggling to stay substance-free. They receive little help with pre- or post-release planning, and in California they are cut off from CalWORKS support just when they need it most.⁽¹²⁰⁾ As of January 1, 1998, there is a lifetime ban in California on any type of aid after a conviction for a felony.

Children feel a broad range of emotions when their parents go to prison. Initially they feel tremendous fear and anxiety. They worry that they have been abandoned or that they will never see the parent again. The uncertainty of the criminal justice system contributes to these fears, as no one can say for certain what will happen to the parent or when they will return. Children may also feel sad and alone. They believe that they did something wrong that caused the parent to leave. This sadness contributes to a sense of isolation and withdrawal. The child may be angry at the parent or feel guilty that his behavior somehow led to the parent's incarceration. Such guilt may cause the child to lose confidence and withdraw or to act out as a way of seeking punishment for his behavior. The guilt may also cause the child to avoid any fun activities or interactions.

The stigma of incarceration is significant. Children may be teased and taunted about their parent's situation, or they may be avoided and isolated for being part of a "bad" family. The stigma of incarceration makes it hard for children to seek help because they feel embarrassed and fear rejection of themselves and their parent. Children also experience confusion about values as they struggle to reconcile what the parent has taught with how the parent has behaved.

Therefore, children of prisoners may develop physical symptoms such as headaches and stomach aches; become afraid of the dark or begin to have nightmares; regress to bed-wetting or thumb sucking; withdraw from social activities; show anger or aggression toward caregivers; become disobedient and defiant at home or at school; perform poorly at school; or engage in delinquent behaviors such as stealing or drug use.⁽¹²¹⁾

Why is This Population Important?

There is an inter-generational aspect to crime and incarceration.

The author of the issue brief suggests the following: Children with parents in prison are a vulnerable population and the number is growing. The implication for the dependency system is significant because of the recent shortening of the permanency planning time frames. Parental incarceration may be an indication that the child is at-risk of abuse or neglect. There are often other problems, such as poverty, domestic violence or substance abuse. The period of incarceration can be a period of stabilization for the parent, if they have been able to develop work skills or address their substance abuse problem.⁽¹²²⁾

Recommendation of the Child Welfare League for the Child Welfare System:

1. Identify the children with parents in prison.

2. Develop and provide services to meet their and their families needs. This could increase successful reunification with their families for the children in the system and prevent the entrance into foster care of the others.

3. Strengthen permanency planning through contact with the incarcerated parent, involving them in the planning, and arranging that they see the children.

4. Consider all the options with the family, such as kinship care with guardianship, kinship foster care, voluntary consent to open or relative adoption, and permanent foster care with guardianship.

5. Assist incarcerated parents with post-release planning by drafting realistic service plans and helping link them with supportive services.

6. Train caseworkers and foster parents about the special issues involved in working with these children.

7. Work collaboratively with the criminal justice system to advocate for and develop responsive programs and services for these families.

8. Raise public awareness of this issue and reach out to professional in other fields to create as holistic a support system as possible for this population.⁽¹²³⁾

CHILDREN WITH GRANDPARENTS AS THEIR CAREGIVERS

A recent study has found that one in ten grandparents is providing primary care for their grandchildren for at least 6 months, while one in five of these caregivers has been doing so for 10 years or more. It is estimated that 30 to 50% of grandparents in the large inner-city areas are providing primary care. The research team is particularly concerned about the 23% of grandparent caregivers who are living below the poverty line. Meredith Minkler, U. C. Berkeley Professor of Public Health urges that they be supported at foster parent rates rather than at welfare rates. Some states, such as New York and Illinois, have begun to make that change.⁽¹²⁴⁾ There is a growing concern that these grandparents need support systems to help them understand the environments that their grandchildren encounter that are so different than their own children encountered. They also need support systems that can provide respite, counseling and group support.

IMMIGRATION STATUS OF DEPENDENT CHILDREN

In a May 4, l998 report to the Los Angeles County Commission for Children and Families, commissioners, staff of the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) and attorneys with the Alliance for Children's Rights discussed the fate of children, with no immigration or citizenship documentation, who become wards of the courts.

Currently there are about 800 undocumented wards of DCFS in Los Angeles County; two to three hundred of them are in permanency planning. The Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS) has ruled that the permanency planning process for undocumented children must have started before they will accept an application for a green card or citizenship.

These children are here illegally, they did not enter of their own choice and often they have no memory of the country of their birth. When they emancipate, they become undocumented, and subject to deportation or to a life of fear and exploitation. If they have disabilities, they are not eligible for any benefits or services, after the age of 18 years. Older children who run away from group homes are subject to deportation. Parents resist Family Preservation services and disappear for fear of being reported.

Groups such as the Alliance for Children's Rights and the Los Angeles County Department of Child and Family Services (DCFS) are working on a plan for getting legal resident status or full citizenship for these children, since legal resident status is easier to obtain for them when the children are dependents of the state. However there are many barriers. A child's birth certificate from the country of origin is required for the child to be processed for permanent status, but often the birth certificate is not available or there is no record of the child's birth. A consulate can write a letter stating that there is no proof the child was born there, then the court can waive the birth certificate requirement and apply to INS for the child. Fingerprint checks are another barrier, as they can take up to twelve months. Alliance staff is working with INS to find ways to expedite services for these children. It is important that this be done long before the child prepares for emancipation. Children without green cards cannot be legally employed, and work experience is an important part of emancipation training.

DEPENDENTS AT RISK OF BECOMING DELINQUENTS

Los Angeles (LA)County 300/600 Task Force

In October 1996, the LA Board of Supervisors established a Multidisciplinary High Risk Unit in recognition that attention needed to be given to a growing number of children who fall between the Dependency Court and the Juvenile Justice System. The Unit is a service delivery model and partnership approach to provide intense and specialized case management services for "high risk" dependent youth exhibiting delinquent behaviors with the goal of preventing them from entering the probation system. When appropriate the unit will refer the youth to the delinquency court system. The Unit, supervised by the Department of Children and family Services (DCFS), will consist of staff from DCSF, County Probation and Mental Health and representatives from the LA County Office of Education and the LA Unified School District. The Unit will routinely collaborate with such groups and agencies as Law Enforcement, District Attorney, Child Advocates, dependency Court Legal Services, Family Preservation/Community Agencies, group homes etc. to jointly assess and determine the most appropriate plan for services or court jurisdiction of an individual youth.

The assessment process conducted by the entire unit would provide evaluation and intervention services to determine if the youth is appropriate to receive specialized case management services; or, to be referred to family preservation/community based resources that deal with crime and gang prevention, substance abuse, conflict resolution, education services, vocational training, independent/transitional living, etc.

The Children's Social Workers (CSW's) in the unit will ensure that each youth was receiving maximum services. The delinquent behaviors will include non-compliance, defiance, assaultiveness and chronic running away. Thus these youth would require close supervision and stabilization. The CSW's will focus on the youth's needs, be immediately available to respond to crisis situations, and serve as mentors, role models and authoritative figures. The entire team will routinely meet to reassess the youth's progress and treatment plan. The CSW's will be giving a caseload which would allow them to do this effectively.

Previous section. Table of Contents. Next section.