THIS CHAPTER WILL CRITIQUE the child welfare system and provide proactive steps that can be taken to address institutional racism, disproportionality, and disparities in any child welfare organization/agency whose goal is equitable treatment for all children and families. A measurement instrument will be included to assess disproportionality in child welfare organizations/agencies. The chapter will conclude with narrative interviews with individuals who discuss their experiences with the child welfare system. Interviewees include a birth mother, a birth father, a former foster parent and kinship caregiver, a former juvenile court judge, an executive director of a private child welfare agency and adoptive mother, an adoptive mother, a female alumnus of the foster care system, and a male alumnus of the foster care system.
HISTORY OF CHILD WELFARE IN UNITED STATES
The child welfare system is a human service organization that has existed for decades; evolution of this organization has been predicated on the ever-changing attitudes and beliefs regarding the government’s role in protecting and caring for children who experience child abuse and/or neglect. It is imperative to reflect on the history of the child welfare system in order to provide a context for change in the current child welfare system. According to Lewis, Packard, and Lewis (2007), the goals of human service organizations are always focused on making life better for the populations they serve. Although the stated goals of the child welfare system are focused on improving the lives of children and families involved in the system, children of color do not receive equitable services to improve their lives once they enter the child welfare system.
Child welfare, in its broader and ideal sense, should be concerned with the general welfare of all children. This has never really been true of the child welfare endeavors in this country. Like other American social welfare endeavors, child welfare efforts have been predicated on the belief that institutionalized services need be extended to only a small segment of the population, because individuals can ordinarily be expected to perform the functions of these services for themselves. In the case of children, the American society expects that children’s fundamental needs for survival, sustenance, and socialization will be met through functions performed by their parents. Only when their parents fail them—and it is expected that not many parents will so fail—does it become necessary for society, through special institutionalized services, to assume responsibility for meeting these needs. This narrow concept of child welfare is the system’s definition, its historical basis, and its major failure.
(Billingsley & Giovannoni 1972, 4)
In the 1700s children whose birth parents could not provide care for them and orphans served as indentured servants for families. Almshouses were prevalent in large cities in the 1800s; many children, including some African American children, lived in almshouses. The first orphanages were also established in the early 1800s, but policy prohibited African American children from living in these orphanages prior to the Civil War. In 1836 Anna Shotwell and Martha Murray established the Association for the Benefit of Colored Orphans in New York; the purpose of this orphanage was to save African American children from the “real dangers” that were prevalent in the almshouse.
One chilly spring day when Miss Anna Shotwell and her step-niece, Miss Martha Murray, were walking along Cherry Street, near where the base of the Brooklyn Bridge now stands, they saw two miserable looking little Negro children huddling on the steps of a dilapidated house. Inquiries revealed that the children were orphans, being kept—“cared for” were scarcely the proper words to describe their state—by a woman in the neighborhood. The woman was too poor herself to continue this help for long, and it seemed that the next step for the little waifs was the Almshouse. There were, at that time, three orphanages in New York City for white children, as well as the Long Island Farms, a public institution for white orphans. But for the Negro orphan there was only the public Almshouse. The discrimination against those unfortunate children was a matter of great concern to Miss Shotwell and Miss Murray. Being Quakers, they shared strong feelings of that group that all men, women and children were equal and should have equal rights in society. Nor was it enough for them simply to deplore this situation. They wanted to do something about it. Emptying their purses, they instructed the woman to keep the two children for a few days until some plan could be made for their future care. …
When the two women returned to Cherry Street a few days later, they found not two, but six orphans. That the number of their charges could triple in a few days made Miss Shotwell and Miss Murray realize that their personal benevolence was not going to be equal to the problem. At this point the idea of an asylum for Negro children came into being, and work to bring it into effect was started.
(Leonard 1956, as cited in Billingsley & Giovannoni 1972, 27–28)
It is apparent that a disparity in services has existed for African American children since the beginning of the child welfare system in this country. “In one sense it might be said that until 1865 slavery was the major child welfare institution for Black children in this country, since that social institution had under its mantel the largest number of Black children” (Billingsley & Giovannoni 1972, 23).
However, African American children are not alone when tracing the history of the U.S. child welfare system and the racist, discriminatory, and disparate practices that have been used with children of color from the beginning of the system to the present time. Native American children have also been the victims of discriminatory and biased practices when involved in the child welfare system. “As part of the assimilation campaign promulgated by the federal government, beginning in the late 1800s, it became U.S. social policy to remove Native American children from their families and communities and educate them in distant boarding schools. In these schools, children were forbidden to speak their languages, practice their religions, or practice any of their cultural traditions. Rather than helping, at times services have been destructive” (Weaver 2005, 12). Boarding schools had a most deleterious effect on Native American children and families.
The concern about the long-term impact on their well-being for children growing up in orphanages prompted private agencies to begin placing orphans with foster families. Children placed in foster homes worked for their foster families and remained in placement until they were adults; the foster families did not receive any type of board payment for children in foster care (Billingsley & Giovannoni 1972). A foster home study or background check was completed prior to placement of children with these foster families.
Charles Loring Brace founded the Children’s Aid Society in New York in 1853 and initiated a formalized system of foster care placements that were family-focused. By the early 1900s the first state laws were enacted for the prevention of child abuse and neglect. The first White House Conference on the Care of Dependent Children was held in 1909, and the U.S. Children’s Bureau was established in 1912. Today all states have enacted laws not only prohibiting child abuse and neglect but also mandating its reporting, investigation, and treatment. The policies and procedures for reporting allegations of child abuse and neglect to child protective services (CPS) are found in these reporting laws.
It is important to note that the first juvenile court was established in 1899 in Illinois. According to Flicker (1982), “The most significant fact about the history of juvenile justice is that it evolved simultaneously with the child welfare system. Most of its defects and its virtues derive from that fact” (29). Juvenile courts have jurisdiction over juvenile delinquency cases, and most juvenile courts also adjudicate child welfare cases that involve child abuse, neglect, and dependency. In some states juvenile courts are known as family courts and have jurisdiction over adoption, legal guardianship, emancipation, establishment of paternity, child custody, child support, and parent–child visitation.
INSTITUTIONAL RACISM AND THE CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM
The stated commitment of the child welfare system to family preservation and prevention of placement of children in out-of-home care unless the children are unsafe and at risk continues. However, this commitment seems an anomaly when one examines the facts and figures regarding the disproportionately large numbers of children of color who continue to be removed from the care of their birth parents and placed in out-of-home care; these children experience much difficulty exiting the child welfare system and being reunified with their birth families. “African American/Black children continue to be the most overrepresented racial group in the United States [in foster care]. … Native American children are overrepresented in foster care at a rate of 2.2 times their rate in the general population” (Padilla & Summers 2011, 7–8). Unfortunately institutional racism continues to prevail in the child welfare system and must be addressed if the child welfare system is indeed truly committed to preserving families and eradicating the problem of racial disproportionality. The child welfare system should be focused on family preservation for all children and not just white children, who enter the system in smaller numbers and have early exits from the system.
It is time for the child welfare system to seriously examine any and all racist practices that have existed in this system for decades and to end any institutional and individual racism that continues to be perpetuated from the point of entry to the point of exit. According to Miller and Garran (2008), “Institutional racism indicates systemic, durable racism that is embedded in institutions, organizations, laws, customs, and social practices” (29). Billingsley and Giovannoni (1972) explored three types of white institutional racism in their groundbreaking work regarding black children and the child welfare system: (1) negative view of black people; (b) exclusion of black people from development, participation, and control of institutions that impact the lives of black people; and (c) exclusion of black people from services and supports. There is a link among institutional racism, sexism, and classism; this type of racism is prevalent toward poor families that are headed by women of color (Hill 2004). Many of these poor women of color and their children are involved in the child welfare system. However, findings from prior studies show that poverty and substance abuse are not explanations for the racial disparities experienced by children and families of color that are involved in the child welfare system (McRoy 2004). “‘It’s no coincidence that the community of color, particularly African Americans and Native Americans, are overrepresented,’ said Raymond Reyes, associate vice president for diversity at Gonzaga University. ‘It’s symptomatic of the historical legacy of racism in this country’” (Graman 2007, 3). Institutional racism of any type is wrong—and certainly not in the best interest of any child in the child welfare system.
Miller and Garran (2008) further note that “Individual and institutional racism coexist side by side and also are interactive; they potentiate one another” (30). Therefore, it is prudent for individual racism to be examined within any child welfare organization/agency. Racial bias in decision making was reported by individuals (caseworkers, child welfare supervisors, judicial officers) who participated in focus groups in Oregon as well as in Washington State (King County Coalition on Racial Disproportionality 2004; Harris & Hackett 2008; Miller et al. 2010). “The real culprit appears to be our own [white social workers’] desire to do good and to protect children from perceived threats and our unwillingness to come to terms with our fears, deeply ingrained prejudices, and ignorance of those who are different from us” (Cross 2008, 11). It is not an easy task for some white social workers and other professionals in the child welfare system to work with children and families of color because their backgrounds and life experiences have been confined to the white world of power and privilege. They come to work in the child welfare system with an entirely different worldview than that of the children and families of color involved in the system. They also come with their own biases, stereotypes, and prejudices about children and families of color that often impact the decisions they make regarding children and families of color. This type of decision making is indeed problematic for children and families of color, as well as for the child welfare worker.
Child welfare workers, regardless of their background and sometimes limited experiences with children and families of color, must value and respect the many faces of diversity and recognize the significance of culture in their work. Otherwise, they will be prone to engage in cultural racism. “Cultural racism is the overarching umbrella under which both individual and institutional racism flourish. It is composed of a worldview that contains a powerful belief: the superiority of one group’s cultural heritage over another” (Sue 2010, 141). Cultural racism or any other type of racism is inherently wrong and unacceptable in work with children and families of color in the child welfare system.
DIVERSITY AND CULTURAL COMPETENCE IN THE CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM
All children in the child welfare system, especially the disproportionate number of children of color in the system, would greatly benefit from a system that is committed to diversity and cultural competence and that embraces rather than negates the role of culture in the daily lives of children and families in the system.
A culturally competent agency is one that emphasizes the strengths inherent in all cultures, respects cultural differences, and effectively incorporates cultural knowledge into service provision. The goal of equal and nondiscriminatory services is included in cultural competence, but true cultural competence goes further to ensure that service provision is responsive to the cultural needs of clients. Cultural competence also involves working in partnership with natural, informal support and networks within communities, such as neighborhood centers; religious institutions; day care programs; cultural arts; music and after school programs; and extended family networks. A commitment to cultural competence is most likely to pervade agency practice if it begins with a formal statement at the highest administrative level. In addition to providing services that respect cultural considerations, administrators can help to ensure culturally competent practice by promoting staff diversity and providing worker training that teaches respect for cultural considerations and imparts cultural knowledge. The assessment and treatment modalities that are taught and utilized by the agency should define what is “normal” in the context of the client’s culture. Workers can also be helped to develop cross-cultural communication skills, and the agency should provide bilingual services when appropriate. Periodically, agency administrators should formally assess the progress of the agency as a whole in reaching its goals to provide culturally competent services, delivered by a diverse and culturally aware work force. In the final analysis, a culturally competent child welfare agency is one which: (1) values diversity through acceptance and respect for cultural difference, (2) has the capacity for self-assessment of cultural competence, (3) is attentive to the dynamics of cultural interaction, (4) has an institutionalized base of cultural knowledge and resources, and (5) has adapted its service resources to meet the needs of children and families from all racial and ethnic backgrounds.
(American Humane Association 1994, 1–2)
Cultural competence is significant at all key decision points in the child welfare system, including (1) the initial allegation/report of child abuse and/or neglect, (2) referral of the allegation/report to CPS for investigation, (3) substantiation of the allegation/report, (4) entry of the child into the system, (5) the juvenile or family court process, and (6) exit of the child from the system. Child welfare organizations/agencies can examine their level of cultural competence by utilizing the Cultural Competency Continuum (see table 3.3) (Cross et al. 1989).
It is also important for the child welfare system to thoroughly assess individual, systemic, and societal factors that continue to perpetuate service disparities for African American, Latino, Native American, Asian American, and Pacific Islander children involved in the system. The National Association of Public Child Welfare Administrators developed the Disproportionality Diagnostic Tool (American Public Human Services Association 2008) to assist child welfare agencies in examining disproportionality in their respective jurisdictions and granted permission for inclusion of the tool and instructions in this book. A description of the tool and instructions for its use follow.
DISPROPORTIONALITY DIAGNOSTIC TOOL: DESCRIPTION
Background
The National Association of Public Child Welfare Administrators (NAPCWA) has made the issue of disproportionate representation of children of color in the child welfare system one of its highest priorities. We recognize and acknowledge that disproportionate representation and the disparate treatment of certain cohorts of children exist in child welfare agencies across the country. The over-representation of these cohorts negatively impacts child and family outcomes. We recognize that helping agencies address such an issue deeply embedded in their organizations would not only reduce disproportionate representation over time, but improve outcomes for all children as critical practices of child welfare are assessed and improved.
When an agency is faced with the reality of disproportionality and disparity in its system, it can be difficult to know where to start interventions. Agencies need specific, accurate data and data trends on children involved in the system at all decision points. Agencies also need to examine their own strengths and weaknesses in their performance of service delivery to children and families. As a result, NAPCWA has focused on developing materials and tools to help members assess their current performance and that of their communities under a more systematic and systemic approach. Our most recent effort is the development of the Disproportionality Diagnostic Tool created to help you examine disproportionality in your child welfare agency’s jurisdiction.
Purpose of Diagnostic
The Disproportionality Diagnostic Tool helps users examine societal, system, and individual factors that may be contributing to disparate treatment of certain groups of children (e.g., African American or Native American Indian children). It provides a preliminary broad assessment from which a user can consider a more robust analysis of the root causes of disparate treatment that children of color tend to face. The tool will be followed by written guidance to help users understand what their assessment results mean and will include reflective questions that child welfare agency personnel can consider as they develop a plan of change and move to take corrective action within their agencies.
Keep in mind that the tool is meant to contribute to the understanding of baseline data about the existence of disproportionality in a particular jurisdiction and related directly to disproportionate representation—it is not a general agency diagnostic.
DISPROPORTIONALITY DIAGNOSTIC TOOL: INSTRUCTIONS
Limitations of the Diagnostic
The Disproportionality Diagnostic Tool was designed to be a thoughtful, initial approach to examining the pervasive issue of disproportionality in child welfare systems in communities. With this in mind it is important to note that the tool is not designed to gather all the information needed to understand all the nuances of disproportionality in an agency. Rather it helps agencies identify gaps in their systems, get ideas about where improvements may be needed, and also highlight agency strengths that could mitigate against disproportionate representation. Please also keep in mind that the tool is being presented at this time in a 1.0 version and will be periodically improved.
Diagnostic Model: DAPIM
A committee of NAPCWA members and subject matter experts devoted significant time and energy to designing the diagnostic instrument as a necessary starting point in this continuous improvement effort. The diagnostic tool parallels DAPIM, a proven model used by APHSA in its consulting practice. Under the DAPIM model, an agency Defines what the issue is; Assesses its current and desired state; Plans both rapid and long-term improvements; Implements those plans in detail; and Monitors plan progress and impact for ongoing adjustment. The diagnostic tool addresses the first two elements of the DAPIM model: Defining the issue and Assessing the current state of your agency and community.
Design of the Diagnostic Tool
The tool is designed as a two-dimensional matrix. The first dimension consists of 11 identified domains:
1. Strategy
2. Culture
3. Policy
4. Legal System
5. Training and Education
6. Communication
7. Resources
8. Practices
9. Economic Issues
10. Data Collection
11. Personnel and Community
Each domain was chosen because of its significant point of leverage within a system. Designers of the tool hypothesized that choices child welfare agencies make in the context of these domains could be contributing to disproportionate representation and equally that positive changes in these same areas could materially impact disproportionate representation. A definition of the 11 domains can be found at the beginning of each section in the diagnostic.
The second dimension has been labeled Spheres of Influence to examine the interconnected layers directly influencing child welfare service delivery: Society, System, and Individual. In fact, child welfare agencies exist within a society of individuals that struggle with institutional and systemic racism. For instance, caseworkers, supervisors, and administrators come into child welfare agencies with their own outlooks, approaches, and stereotypes. It is important then to understand how the 11 domains operate at the three levels of influence on service delivery as a whole. Looking at the 11 domains as they relate to each sphere of influence can help agency personnel identify what is clearly in the realm of the child welfare system and where the agency can play a role. The three spheres of influence are defined below:
Society—includes community agencies; local, state and federal government; major institutions such as education, churches, and banking; and the culture and values of society. It is important to recognize that disproportionality in the child welfare system reflects institutional and systemic racism at the societal level. While child welfare agencies cannot expect to single-handedly overcome bias in society, [they] can be expected to play an active role in reducing disparities through an equitable service delivery approach for families. To positively impact society, child welfare agencies can weigh in on public policies, participate [in] community collaborations, raise awareness of issues, and coordinate preventive resources for families at risk of being separated.
Example: A child welfare agency can work with universities and colleges to provide input on [a] cultural competence curriculum for students enrolled in social work programs.
System—Though policies and practices in child welfare are unlikely to be explicitly biased, there is reason to examine and revisit long-standing approaches to service. Child welfare agencies have the ability to reduce disparities by implementing culturally sensitive standards, policies, regulations, training, and supervision.
Example: The agency adds culturally relevant intake questions, specific to a large number of minority children in the community, to its foster care placement procedures and monitors whether the addition has improved equity for children entering foster care.
Individual—can be a caseworker, supervisor, or administrator that works in the child welfare system and enters with his or her own outlooks and approaches, reflective of his or her family, community, and society at large. The role of the child welfare agency is to reduce the impact of any potential individual bias by concentrating on enhancing and improving individual skills, knowledge, and competencies.
Example: The agency includes a “cultural competence” component to agency-trainings and also evaluated this component on individual performance reviews.
Completing the Diagnostic: User Instructions
The tool is designed to be flexible to the needs of your agency. The number of options showing how to complete the tool is outlined below. Keep in mind that the more inclusive your input is, the richer your results and feedback.
Option 1: You may initially decide as an agency lead to make the first attempt at addressing the issue by completing the diagnostic on your own.
Option 2: To obtain a more collective assessment, you may instead start the diagnostic process by seeking the input of other agency personnel, including professionals from senior and middle management, as well as child welfare workers at the frontline.
Option 3: You may also complete the tool by seeking the input of other agency personnel and also relevant, external stakeholders in the community (e.g., a pediatrician or school teacher for input as mandated reporters).
Each section has a series of questions on each of the 11domains. You will be required to respond with one of the following answers: Y, S, N, or UK for Yes, Sometimes, No, or Unknown, respectively. Use the following guide to select an answer:
Y = if the question asked occurs in your community, agency or among individuals
S = if the question asked sometimes occurs or is somewhat true in your community, agency, or among individuals
N = if the question asked does not occur in your community, agency, or among individuals
UK = if you do not know whether the question asked does or does not occur in your community, agency, or among individuals
Mark the appropriate box to the right of the question by filling in the box. For instance:
Please also answer any corresponding open-ended, follow-up question in italics that may apply to your agency (i.e., questions beginning with “If yes” or “if no”). There is an unlimited amount of room to respond to the italicized question by typing the answer in the provided box. In answering the follow-up question, you may be required to retrieve information from your own data reports or synthesize agency information, e.g., your SACWIS system. If you respond to the primary question with No, Sometimes, or Unknown, the italicized follow-up question may not be applicable to you but afterwards can be used to help guide your thinking about concrete steps your agency can take to address disparities.
Follow-Up Guidance
Guidance on how to make sense of your agency’s data will follow after completing the entire diagnostic and will include reflective questions that your agency can use to guide a continuous improvement process. This process will address the last three elements of the DAPIM model: Planning for improvements, Implementing the plan, and Monitoring the plan’s progress.
Source: “Disproportionality Diagnostic Tool Description.” (2008). Permission to Reprint: The American Public Human Services Association.
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY STRATEGY
Strategy: Strategy refers to specific, thoughtful efforts focused on addressing disproportionate representation. Strategy carries out the vision, values, goals, and priorities that guide the work of the community’s governing agency.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Does your agency’s governing body address the issue of disproportionality in a strategic plan? |
|
Y |
|
N |
UK |
| If yes, in what ways; e.g. listed in values? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Does your agency’s strategic plan address issues of diversity in the values, mission, and goals? |
|
Y |
|
N |
UK |
| If yes, in what ways; e.g. listed in values? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Is disproportionality addressed explicitly in documents other than your strategic plan? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, in what documents; e.g. policy manual? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Do you have stated outcomes or goals that address the specific needs of ethnic and racial minorities (e.g. reduce the length of stay for African-American children in care)? |
|
Y |
|
N |
UK |
| If yes, identify those outcomes. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Do you have a plan for achieving specific stated outcomes or goals for racial and ethnic minorities? |
|
Y |
|
N |
UK |
| Have you gathered data to determine the specific ethnic and racial populations in your jurisdiction (e.g.: demographic patterns, rates of poverty, educational levels, infant mortality)? |
|
Y |
|
N |
UK |
| If yes, what were the data sources and/or tools used? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Have you gathered data on the ethnic and racial breakdown of children being referred by specific groups of mandated reporters, including teachers, medical professionals, and others? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what were the data sources and/or tools used? |
|
|
|
|
|
| If yes, what actions were taken as the result of the data gathered? |
|
|
|
|
|
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Does your staff demonstrate that they have internalized the values, mission, and goals related to diversity and disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, identify the evidence of this internalization (e.g.; in actions, behaviors, and/or decisions). |
|
|
|
|
|
| Is cultural competency explicitly addressed in individual staff evaluations? |
|
|
|
|
|
| If yes, how is cultural competency measured? |
|
|
|
|
|
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY CULTURE
Culture: Culture refers to the attitudes, values, experiences, and beliefs of both the organization and the community it is in.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Are you aware of key events in your community’s history related to ethnic and racial disparity (e.g., redlining, riots, and high profile court cases)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what are they? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Has the community actively addressed these issues? |
|
Y |
|
N |
UK |
| If yes, what were the outcomes? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Has the community conducted studies or polls related to racial and ethnic relations? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what were the major findings? |
|
|
|
|
|
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do you have a diversity committee or other kinds of purposeful forums to discuss issues of fairness and equity regarding practice and policy? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, does your diversity committee have a clear and articulated vision, mission, and goals? |
|
|
|
|
|
| If yes, which of the committee’s goals have been achieved? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Does the agency have staff that represents the community being served? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If not, why? What steps have been taken to recruit a more representative staff? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Are agency policies, protocols, and practices developed with input from staff of diverse backgrounds? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how do staff participate? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Has the system developed mechanisms to gather feedback from staff regarding their concerns about bias in policy as well as behaviors and/or decisions of colleagues? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what actions have been taken based on feedback? |
|
|
|
|
|
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do most staff communicate with one another during formal and informal conversations using culturally sensitive language? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Do most staff encourage one another to be culturally sensitive? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, in what ways does staff do this? (e.g.; do staff actively discourage culturally insensitive language?) |
|
|
|
|
|
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY POLICY
Policy: Policy refers to both legislation and agency policy and regulations on child welfare, ranging from federal policy, to office memos on particular issues.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Are there specific references to disproportionality or other racial and ethnic issues in state human services policy? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, in what policy? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Are there specific references to disproportionality or other racial and ethnic issues in other local or state agency policy? (e.g., education, juvenile justice) |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, in which agency’s policy? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Do other [agencies’] policies affect your reports of maltreatment, acceptance of referrals, investigations, substantiations, placements, exits, and re-entries? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, which decision points have been affected? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Have you evaluated agency specific policies vis-à-vis their effect on outcomes for families and children of diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds? (e.g., placement rates) |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what policies were changed? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Are staff made aware of MEPA and ICWA requirements? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what is the mechanism and frequency of making staff aware of MEPA and ICWA requirements? |
|
|
|
|
|
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Does staff consistently apply policies related to disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, in what ways? |
|
|
|
|
|
| If yes, how do you track that staff are consistently applying these policies? |
|
|
|
|
|
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY WORK WITHIN LEGAL SYSTEM
Legal System: The legal system includes courts, law enforcement, attorneys, and other people associated directly with enforcing the law. This includes child welfare workers interaction with and understanding of the legal system.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Has law enforcement made any public effort to address disproportionality in their system? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how has law enforcement done this? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Have the courts made any public effort to address disproportionality in their system? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how have the courts done this? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Do judges, court appointed attorneys, and/or law enforcement officials receive training related to effectively working with ethnic and racial minorities (e.g. training to examine individual biases and stereotypes and how these may affect their decision-making)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what training is provided? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Are there efforts to ensure that judges, court appointed attorneys, and law enforcement professionals reflect the ethnic and racial composition of the communities in which they work? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what are those efforts? |
|
|
|
|
|
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do families of all ethnicities and races have access to legal representation? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Do families of all ethnicities and races have culturally sensitive and culturally competent legal representation? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, please describe how families receive culturally competent legal representation. |
|
|
|
|
|
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Is there a mechanism in place to ensure that staff can articulate the legal process to their families in a culturally competent manner? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, please describe these mechanisms. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Does the language used in court reports and other written documents reflect cultural competence and sensitivity? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
K |
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY TRAINING AND EDUCATION
Training and Education: Training and education are the formal activities used to engage and instruct anyone associated with child welfare. This could include activities ranging from formal, required child welfare training, to mandated reporter training, to informal, voluntary community education programs, or even “teachable moments” such as newspaper interviews.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do mandated reporters receive training on working with families of various racial/ethnic backgrounds? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what kinds of training are available? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Is the issue of disproportionality included in community education programs? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how is it specifically included? |
|
|
|
|
|
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Is cultural competency training included in the agency’s strategic plan? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Are the trainers aware of the issue and extent of disproportionate representation? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Does the agency include the broader system (courts, attorneys, CASAs, etc.) in its trainings on cultural competency? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how does the agency do this? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Is cultural competence training provided to staff at all levels of the organization? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Does the staff receive information about disproportionality issues of the organization? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Have you evaluated whether practice related to disproportionality outcomes is impacted by the training staff receive? |
|
|
|
|
|
| If yes, what were the findings? |
|
|
|
|
|
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY COMMUNICATION
Communication: Communication is the formal or informal discussion around disproportionality. This exchange of ideas can involve agency interaction with mass media and the community all the way down to a worker’s ability to interact with other staff and people outside of the agency.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Has the mass media outlet covered issues related to disproportionality in the community? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how has the public responded to the media coverage? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Have you communicated with key community stakeholders (faith based groups, schools, etc.) about disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what were their responses? |
|
|
|
|
|
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do you have a communication plan to create value for your work on disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Do you have a specific strategy to communicate with key community stakeholders and agency staff? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what are the principal components of the communication plan? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Does agency staff demonstrate a clear understanding of disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what evidence do you have of this understanding? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Do you regularly communicate with your staff about disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what is the response of the staff to this communication? |
|
|
|
|
|
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Is staff encouraged to communicate about the agency’s goals related to disproportionality to people outside the agency? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, in what ways are they encouraged? |
|
|
|
|
|
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY RESOURCES
Resources: Resources are the facilities, services, and supports available to clients. In addition to general availability, there are many factors that can limit families’ access to important resources crucial to their success.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do clients know the physical location of community services (including social services, mental health services, physical health services, and child care)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Are human services readily available to communities of diverse ethnic and racial populations (including social services, mental health services, physical health services, and child care)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Is public transportation available in all neighborhoods including areas of high racial or ethnic minority concentration? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Does public transportation go to the places families in need must get to (including social services, mental health facilities, physical health services, etc.)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Are adequate emergency services, hospitals, schools, faith based institutions, and other necessary or beneficial services available to communities of diverse ethnic and racial populations? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do you have a comprehensive plan (e.g., foreign language services, assistance with reading comprehension, etc.) to ensure that parents of all races and ethnicities have access to necessary resources? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, will this plan enable parents to complete a treatment plan? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Has your agency worked to develop needed services in communities where children are at risk of being removed or have been removed? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Has your agency developed a resource directory for staff and families that assists in locating providers who are culturally competent, geographically diverse, etc.? |
|
|
|
|
|
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Does staff use available resources (e.g., mentoring programs)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Does staff assess the adequacy of available resources? |
|
|
|
|
|
| If yes, how is this assessment used to improve resources? |
|
|
|
|
|
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY PRACTICES
Practice: Practices are any of the deliberate ways of interacting with families involved with the child welfare agency.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Are community organizations aware of agency practices and/or protocols that impact disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Are there community partnerships that support agency practices and/or protocols that impact disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, who are these partners? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Do community organizations understand how their practices and/or protocols impact disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how is this demonstrated in their work with children and families? |
|
|
|
|
|
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do you evaluate whether and to what extent agency practices impact disproportionality? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what were your major findings (e.g., foster care is used before placement with relatives)? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Do you have a plan for introducing new practices specific to outcomes with minority families? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how are new practices determined? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Do you have families involved in decision making (e.g., Family Group Decision Making or Team-decision making)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Are resource families from diverse backgrounds and neighborhoods actively recruited? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how have your community partners been engaged in these efforts? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Have you evaluated the success of resource family recruitment and retention efforts? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what were your major findings? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Are agency practices equitably administered, particularly among ethnic and racial minority populations? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what evidence supports this? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Do you monitor consequences imposed on racially and ethnically diverse families for non-compliance with their case plans? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what are the major findings? (e.g., minority and ethnic populations are frequently in non-compliance) |
|
|
|
|
|
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Does staff employ the practice orientation of your agency (e.g., strengths based assessment)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how are you assured of this? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Can staff describe their decision making processes in a culturally competent manner? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Does staff consistently ask families for their ethnic or racial identity? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how is this documented? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Does staff engage racially and ethnically diverse fathers (both absent and involved fathers) in cases involving their children? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what evidence supports this? |
|
|
|
|
|
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY AND ECONOMIC ISSUES
Economic Issues: Economic issues are those matters directly affecting the finances of families in your jurisdiction. The issues may be an ongoing condition or a one-time event. Economic issues can include anything from bank practices such as redlining to child welfare worker coordination with economic service workers.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Has money been made available to the community to address disproportionality in any system (education, social services, juvenile justice, etc.)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, by whom and for what purpose? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Are there financial resources, traditional and non-traditional, available to diverse community populations for specific outreach programs such as foster care recruitment and retention or transition services? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Are there any measures by the community or state to discourage discriminatory financial practices (e.g. redlining)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what are they and how have they been addressed? |
|
|
|
|
|
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do you know the socio-economic makeup of all the communities in your jurisdiction? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Do you have specific monies being applied to address disproportionate representation in your agency? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, in what areas? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Have you identified additional funding streams that have the potential to be used in this area? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what are they? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Does the agency have collaborations with other departments such as Community Development, Housing Authority, or Workforce Development that could influence economic development in at-risk communities? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what is the nature of the collaboration? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Has the agency promoted Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) to assist clients economically? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Does the agency link child welfare and managed case plans and case management? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Are positive attitudes towards different socio-economic classes reflected in practice (placement decisions, worker visits)? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how do you track this information? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Are workers coordinating case plans with TANF/Workforce service workers? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, how do you coordinate? |
|
|
|
|
|
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY AND DATA COLLECTION
Data Collection: Data Collection refers specifically to computerized data collection methods and how the data entered is used.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Is community level data available (demographics, key issues) and easily accessible? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what is the source of this data? |
|
|
|
|
|
| What would improve the accessibility of the data? |
|
|
|
|
|
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do you have the appropriate technology for staff to enter the data needed by the organization? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| Do you have practices and/or protocols in place to collect and analyze data to ensure that outcomes related to disproportionality are met? |
|
|
|
|
|
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL STRATEGY
| Does staff enter data? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what practices and/or protocols do you have in place to monitor this? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Does staff enter timely data? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what practices and/or protocols do you have in place to monitor this? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Does staff have access to summary data about their own performance (i.e., can they see a racial and ethnic breakdown of decisions they have made across decision points)? |
|
|
|
|
|
| If yes, how do they use this information to improve performance? |
|
|
|
|
|
NAPCWA DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION: AGENCY DIAGNOSTIC
AGENCY PERSONNEL AND THE COMMUNITY
Personnel: Personnel refers to child welfare staff with knowledge about agency services, policies, practices, protocols. Personnel have intimate knowledge of the community it serves and engages leaders of the community.
SOCIETY LEVEL STRATEGY
| Have you identified specific people or agencies in the community who can be used as resources? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, list the specific people or agencies in the community who can be used as resources. |
|
|
|
|
|
SYSTEM LEVEL STRATEGY
| Do you know the demographics of your staff? (e.g., ethnic, racial, religious, geographic, socio-economic breakdown) |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what are they? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Does your agency have specific policies on the recruitment and retention of diverse staff? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what are they? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Have you identified specific, relevant skills that would make your staff and organization more culturally competent? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, what are they? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Is staff at all levels in your agency held accountable for providing culturally competent services? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
| If yes, describe how all staff is held accountable. |
|
|
|
|
|
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL
| Are there staff who are “champions” and “influencers” that can be models for culturally competent casework? |
|
Y |
S |
N |
UK |
Source: “Disproportionality Diagnostic Tool Description.” (2008). Permission to Reprint: The American Public Human Services Association.
After a child welfare organization/agency has collected baseline data regarding children of color at key decision points in its system and completed the Disproportionality Diagnostic Tool, it will be ready to take the actions required to address disparities in the system. This significant step will inevitably require changes in the organization/agency. First of all, an organization/agency must decide if its goal is to become a multicultural organization or an antiracism organization. There is a difference between the two types of organizations.
A multicultural organization values all consumers and employees while responding to the varying cultures that are part of the human mosaic. It respects all cultures and asserts that none should be privileged or marginalized. An anti-racism organization goes beyond this and acknowledges the destructive power of racism in society, which it attempts to ameliorate. An anti-racism organization certainly includes a commitment to multiculturalism but goes beyond this to examine power and inequities in privilege in addition to building cultural responsiveness and competency. We use the term “anti-racism” rather than “anti-racist.” The former implies a commitment to dismantling racism, which has dimensions that are institutional and social as well as attitudinal and behavioral.
(Miller & Garran 2008, 210)
If a child welfare organization/agency is truly serious about ameliorating racial disproportionality and disparity, it should engage in a planning process to become an antiracism organization. This process will include a change in the organization’s mission, as well as in its vision statements. This process must include changes in any racist policies and practices that involve agency staff, as well as in any racist policies that impact service delivery to children and families served by the organization/agency. According to Miller and Garran (2008), there are two questions that warrant consideration: “Do the policies continue racial inequities, whether intentional or not, and do these policies do anything to dismantle racism?” (212). Changes in a child welfare organization/agency must also include changes in the allocation of resources. It is an exercise in futility to embark on this type of organizational change without the necessary resources. Both social capital and fiscal resources are essential for an organization to change from its current status quo to an antiracism organization. In all likelihood there will be many individuals within the organization that will be resistant to this type of organizational change/transformation. “Each organization has a set of stakeholders—people who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Interests may range from job security to fear of the uncertainty that results from the process of change” (Gibelman & Furman 2008, 196). An administrator or leader of any child welfare organization/agency must publicly sanction the change and continuously demonstrate support of and commitment to the change in order for institutional and individual racism not to continue to prevail as part of the culture of the organization/agency. Data must be routinely collected, analyzed, and disseminated about the racial disproportionality and disparities change process, including changes in racist policies and practices in the organization/agency. The next section of this chapter will focus on interviews from several individuals who have been involved in varied facets of the child welfare system. These individuals will share their personal and/or professional experiences with the child welfare system.
INTERVIEWS
We now turn our attention to several individuals who have been involved in the child welfare system. Interviews were conducted with the following individuals: a birth mother, a birth father, a former foster parent and kinship caregiver, a former juvenile court judge, an executive director of a private child welfare agency and adoptive mother, an adoptive mother, a female alumnus of the foster care system, and a male alumnus of the foster care system.
BIRTH MOTHER
This African American woman is the mother of ten children. She has been married and divorced three times. She is forty-nine years old.
DR. H When did you get involved with the Department of Child and Family Services?
MS. K I became involved with my first three children. I was … like … the issue was I was, um, at the birth of my third child. I was tested positive for co … cocaine (takes a deep breath) and so did my child. And CPS came to my life and placed my children with my parents and left me in their home.
DR. H Did they provide any services for you?
MS. K Yeah they offered me services. Because I was raised, um … very spoiled, I didn’t adhere to a lot of them and my kids were with my parents and I basically did partial services. … I – b*** s****** … it partways that I was never taught to be responsible for my behaviors growing up.
DR. H Did your parents become foster parents for your children (Ms. K interrupts, “No.” Then Dr. H continues to ask the rest of the question.) or did they just raise your kids because they were their grandchildren?
MS. K They didn’t raise my children.
DR. H Okay.
MS. K During the time my kids were with my parents I had shared some language I learned in treatment; my mother … parents were enabling me. The social worker wondered why I wasn’t in compliance. And I used that word, and then my mother asked for respite care to open up a restaurant … two restaurants since she needed time to get those opened. Two weeks just to concentrate on the restaurants. Then when the time came to get them back, they said, “No,” because she’s enabling me. And they didn’t report to it and give her back the children; and that was a crazy reason but, um … instead of making me leave the home, you know, which is a smarter thing. (Dr. H interjects, “Right.”) So my children are placed with this abusive family; I found out later that they were very abusive. My children were sexually, physically and … and (Dr. H interjects, “And how old were your children, Ms. K?” Ms. K. finishes her sentence.) and mentally abused.
DR. H What were the ages of your children?
MS. K They were one and two when it began. When I lost my parental rights, they were two, three, and four years old. And I had given birth to another one and they came and took him when he was six months old. When they discovered him they pulled him into the termination, which I felt was kind of illegal and I wish I could’ve done something because I was in partial compliance by the time they did it; and I wish I had pursued that.
DR. H Did you have any legal advice?
MS. K At least for the fourth one, my attorney at the termination hearing he forgot to file my papers. I saw him a year later. He said, “Oh,” about almost a year later, he said, “Oh I’m sorry I forgot to file it on time.” And he tried some other jack-legged thing which didn’t work.
DR. H And so that’s four kids. …
MS. K Gone.
DR. H Four kids that are known in the system.
MS. K Terminated … (stutters) … and … I believe it just said it was too little too late. And had I been educated about my rights, I could have done something. By the time I did know, I guess it was too late. It was just too (stutters) late to do anything.
DR. H K, where was your social worker?
MS. K Umm … the, ah, I didn’t trust the social worker because usually whenever I said anything, it would be used kind of twisted against me and so there was no relationship there and they lied to me many times, and would say one thing and then it … another thing would occur. Basically, even particularly after several years, there was no relationship with my social worker, even in my second case, when I got my life together. I got married and had three other children; after that, um, I found out that my first three children were in a foster home by that time. I signed my rights to my fourth child over to the dad which saved him from that misery, that terrible pain. I didn’t know at the time, but because I gave him the child to him and his family he was protected from that pain. But … um, when I found my three … first three children were being molested and … um, abused by another aunt … and, ah … the parents were on crack and alcohol and had all kinds of kids being removed by CPS out their home, but they didn’t take mine or their own.
DR. H And this home was a licensed … (Ms. K finishes this sentence along with Dr. H.) foster home?
MS. K All the way, they did … they did child abuse. They abused children from here, Washington to Nevada, before their license was pulled in Nevada. And the whole time my daughter was sexually assaulted by the father and when she told the mother at six; then she beat her and made her the scapegoat of the family until she left home at fifteen.
DR. H I’m so sorry because no child should ever be sexually, physically, or emotionally abused.
MS. K Me too. … I’m sorry that I failed to protect my children. That’s what I did, from not only my issues but for allowing them to enter the system and be abused. It was more … to me; the state did not serve my children in that capacity they should have. They should have figured out that it was best to keep my kids with my family. My parents had no issues; they should have gave my kids to my family and got me out of my family’s home. That would have been a better fit than a great adoptive home.
DR. H And, you know, and I know that family is supposed to be considered first before placement with nonrelatives i.e., strangers. (Ms. K agrees, stating “Um.”)
MS. K Right! And particularly one who is having issues with children … other children being removed for sexual abuse allegations. Anyway, I found that out and I … instead of. … You know, I was smoking weed the whole time so I wasn’t all the way clean. So I consumed … I didn’t react to that news in a smart way. I was pregnant with my third child in that marriage and I took a hit because I was so devastated by that news and then I … being an addict, that’s what I (stutters momentarily) went to, to kill the pain and went into immediate pre-labor. The first hit I don’t even have to … feel (chuckles) the hit at all. But, um, then CPS got involved. I called, um; I was in there. I held the baby. CPS didn’t get involved for some reason. I didn’t know why, but I was concerned about my children being taken care of because the father he was right behind me and the parents, his parents who we lived with were both elderly and one was on oxygen. So I feared for my children’s well-being; so I called Catholic Community Services asking for assistance while I’m in the hospital holding my child and had a maternity case manager worker. Three … workers came in and started working with me and, um, got me a treatment bed for me to go to after the child is delivered. And, um, so I got a pass to go home from the hospital to get my kids to Catholic Community Services, sign them over to them so they can care for them until my child was born. CPS came with them and they lied and said, “If you sign over custody, we’re going to return them to you when you come out the hospital.” And I … soon as I gave birth, they … they put a … (stutters) … hold on my children.
DR. H They took your kids?
MS. K Um, and so I went straight to in-patient treatment from there and, um, and got my kids back.
DR. H How long were you in in-patient treatment?
MS. K Until my kids came home. … I was in treatment for a year, six months in inpatient and six months in outpatient in Spokane. During that time the state didn’t really monitor the father. So while I’m being monitored heavily, complying in progress and treatment, he was in compliance as well but using; he was high the whole time. And when I got back, um … before I got back, the worker had told me, if he or I, cause I lost four before, if he or I relapsed I’m going to lose my babies, and she said there was no option. I couldn’t control him and it was a lot of stress for me when I got back, so he’s using. I couldn’t tell her because she already told me that if he’s using or me, either one is using, we’re gonna lose our kids. And I already lost kids before. So I didn’t understand I had rights … that I really wouldn’t lost them (Dr. H interjects, “Right.”) so I held it for four months when I got back. And I kept peeing for him, UAing [urine analysis] for him and would come home from work. I got a job; I had a car. I would come home, and people were in my house, getting high around my kids. And I just … about four months into that, one day I woke up and the car was gone, and I went out and I found him and … I don’t know how it happened, I just asked for a hit. I didn’t curse him out this time. I didn’t hit him. I just asked for a hit and that’s what caused me to lose my kids … and I lost those kids. They came and got those children and then me … ah. …
DR. H That’s three more kids?
MS. K That’s three more!!
DR. H That’s right, right; these are you and your husband’s three kids.
MS. K Yeah, and so I didn’t go to court for that termination. And, ahh, then I had … after that my life consisted of self-mutilating myself to punish myself for losing my children. And also I was simultaneously … not coping. I was not coping to feel that pain. And I was very intelligent. I was always in very high IQs.
DR. H Yes, these days you seem very smart.
MS. K Oh, I learned how to sell it. And from, ah … wholesale. I mean buy wholesale or just front from big buyers; dealers just manipulated my way higher up in the drug world. And I became a very large drug dealer and all I did … my life consisted of buying more drugs and selling more drugs, to pay for my sustenance; you know, my apartment and my, you know, cigarettes and all of that including whatever clothes and, um, the rest was just to get high. And … ah, and I just started not to work anymore, but it was just that bad. I was involuntarily committed to a mental hospital twice. Um … so, um, then I had my ninth child and I was, um … I was trying to do the services, but it was just that they were not what I wanted. To me, the services available were not commensurate to my culture or commensurate to education.
DR. H They weren’t culturally sensitive.
MS. K They were not significant to my issues. Because I went to a parenting class (stutters) and engaged with all my might. And I never had parenting issues. None of my issues were ever parenting. They never had anything to do about parenting concerns. But they just gave me any old parenting class, which I took. And I and my husband engaged very thoughtfully. I was clean and then nine days later got the most horrible report from this white woman who obviously was not reporting about me; because of how bad it was it could not have been me. Because I am polite; I am smart. I (pauses momentarily) was catching on. I was not regurgi … I mean not regurgitating. I was reiterating, ahh, the tools I’m learning. I’m asking questions; I’m more heavily involved than any parent in that class and I got the worst review. Like some person … like she had no idea who I was and the … the experience that I encountered was different from her experience.
DR. H And you were in one of these generic parenting classes.
MS. K Right.
DR. H You were not in …
MS. K A case specific …
DR. H … in a parenting class that was case specific or culturally specific.
MS. K … specific to me or my wishes.
DR. H Oh! You were not in a parenting class that was developed for African American parents.
MS. K No. No and I was raised white, so I can definitely fit into that (Dr. H interjects, “Right”) mold. So I had no issues with the. … But it was just the issue with this white woman misjudging … jus … just totally lying on me basically. That’s all I can put … basically say (Dr. H interrupts asking, “Do you think that she …”) I was very open to feedback.
DR. H … stereotyped you?
MS. K Yes and didn’t take into account for what I was doing, and just kept some. It was so insane I thought that was the twilight zone when I was listening to the report. It’s like this cannot be said, because first of all, I was up in there all those months and they should have been teaching me if I was in error and giving feedback …
MS. K … and asking questions and giving more feedback; so I’m thinking I’m on … right on. You’ve never said at any point, during the whole time, “you’re incorrect.” And, of course, because I’ve never had a parenting issue, throughout all my cases, I never had any parenting issues but issues with my lifestyle choices and addiction.
DR. H Are you saying that everything resulted from the addiction?
MS. K Yeah, so, um, then my tenth child I, I mean my nine … no, that was my eighth child … then my ninth, tenth child I was incarcerated. It … no, that child was born clean. My eighth child was born clean. I feel that they should have placed him in the home with me. I was doing required services and everything; but they removed him, so that was another thing I’m trying to change now in the systems. I have been speaking a lot against it. When mothers are already engaged, there is a high chance that they’re gonna keep a child with them. They’re gonna keep doing what they’re doing to keep their child.
DR. H Of course, most mothers who have a child removed from their care will comply with service requirements.
MS. K They’re already started before you get involved. And so that was the start for me and then struggling with the addicted husband and not a lot of services around men; you know, the male part. Everyone is watching me but no one’s checking him.
DR. H Children are motivators for moms to do better.
MS. K Yeah. So, um, and then so I failed in that one, my eighth child because, because I was co-dependent and the state didn’t diligently provide. … I feel …
DR. H You didn’t get the services that you needed.
MS. K … the stakes were high and no, I didn’t get the services nor did my husband.
DR. H The system failed both of you by not providing services.
MS. K Actually, the father, right, um …
DR. H How old was this baby when he was placed in foster care?
MS. K … But, um, okay, so the second set were … the first set was zero, one, and two, and then the newborn. Right the first four. (Dr. H, “Right.”) The second set was one and two. They were one and two when I was pregnant with the … so zero, one, and two again and the same pattern, zero, one, and two. And, um, my eighth child was born and was taken at birth. And my ninth child, when I was in … I was in Purdy. And I was … programming, doing excellent and applied for the baby program. They even put me over there; the prison wanted me to have my child there. But the state would not let them.
MS. K They had to agree because the state has part in their decision making. (Dr. H agrees, “Right.”) The state comes in gives priority; the state has to decide yes or no. So the state said, “No.” And, um, ah, and, ah … so then that was … I got a lot of PPD; you know, post-partum depression. (Dr. H agrees, “Right.”) And then I didn’t know where my baby was for three months and then it had a couple of visits before I got out. When I got out I didn’t have adequate housing because I had to go back home. I had no place to live, back then you got $40 gate money and a prison garb to get out; that’s what I was released with and I lasted about three months without adequate help. My brother had my mother’s house; my mother was blind and bedridden by then. He had turned her house into a dope house. And that’s where I was released. So, umm, I didn’t check in with the department and didn’t have no way to talk … to discuss that. And the dynamics or the environment, you know, caused me to lose that one too. And then, ah, so I just … lived a life. I escalated my dealings and my drug use.
DR. H And this is your ninth child gone into the child welfare system.
MS. K Yes, gone. And after that it was … I was going to leave a message; you know, just literally gone. I was voluntary committed and just literally dived all into the drug world and, um, didn’t actually start getting that … it wasn’t working anymore. It was getting hard, the pain. I would literally wake up in the middle of the night, “OW!” from a pain over losing my kids; my husband knew. He wouldn’t say anything; he would just hug me. Because he knew after we loss that child … what I was going through.
DR. H It was emotional pain.
MS. K YEAH! But it would physically hurt me. I would be in dead-sleep, comatose from crack … being up for four days and would wake up from that. POW! Just jump in the bed, “OW!” And then I would go into psychoses … for … um, on the street farm, in between dealings. I would lose myself into, on purpose, to mental illness. Because it was, I made my … I made my drugs … my drugs would roll, but I’m not smoking it (laughs momentarily) and I’m stressing everybody out around me which felt … misery wants everybody else miserable right? (Dr. H agrees, “Right.”) And, um, my … it would be my kids. My kids would be my trigger. I … shh … I’d be like, “Shh, do you hear that?” And they’d be like (whispering in a childlike voice), “Mommy,” oh, it was awful, ooh, it was horrible. So I got into some, you know, from drug-induced psychosis over the pain, grief, sorrow, and loss. And, um, it was a lot of systemic barriers that precluded me; mainly, um, just the cultural divide of just … I would try to be honest and they took it somewhere else and misconstrued it. And, um, didn’t understand it. I mean …
DR. H It sounds like you got no support.
MS. K No support, no services, they ordered me services, but the services were not commensurate to my needs … it was … particularly I didn’t trust the services anymore; particularly after I engaged with all my heart, asked questions, asked for feedback, and got the most horrible review.
DR. H And you had lost nine children to the system. That’s a tremendous loss for any mother.
MS. K Mm, yeah, and then on my tenth child I was like, ah … like again. I was the largest drug dealer in Tacoma; we had the FBI, C.I.A.; everybody was coming at me. It was crazy; it was insane. I started doing income tax and other paper scams. Remember Capitol 1?
DR. H How did you learn how to do all of these criminal acts?
MS. K I had the gifts. Remember Capitol 1 started giving anybody loans with ID and Social Security cards?
DR. H Yes.
MS. K I used to go in the streets, pick up every addict I can find, and load them in the car. I would have one person … I would be doing one person’s tax evasion on a cell phone. I would have one person on this payphone, and I would have one person take the optical in his eye and take the other person in and I did this all day long and they are getting $500 to $1,000 loans each. I give them three crack boxes. I said, “All you need is a Social Security card and ID.” I can give you three credit cards, come in with me, sit in the car, don’t think, don’t ask questions and I did this all day long. I would be taking in thousands of dollars in a day and then I would get all these apartment complexes with thrifts. I made up taxes for these W-2 forms getting rapid returns in two days from, ah … H&R Block and each one came up to $3,033 and every two days I would be getting $3,033; I got caught on that one because someone told on me. But they didn’t come looking for me; I had a car. The FBI car would sit in this big old complex that I was at every day. Every one of the neighbors didn’t even get out of their cars; these people had my name on their car on their door. So I did a lot of that to kill the pain. I was, um … so I was out there and I was, um, bout five months along; so I was pregnant. No, no I found out I was pregnant. I starting calling out to God. I said “Oh my God, I’m pregnant again and I can’t. … I’m horribly deep in now. I’m never going to stop because I’m never going to run out, right?” I was … I was talking to God and I said, “God I can’t stop, but you can change me.” And then I started changing, even on the street I would start apologizing to people because I was so scary. I was so mentally ill, emotionally ill, not mentally but emotionally ill and hurt. I hated myself so much I think I became, spirit demons too. Men were afraid of me; they would literally not fight me and I would fight men. I was so strong when you want to fight me I would go to the ledge, that ledge right there. (Dr. H said, “Yes.”)
I would go over there and I’d be like hold on a minute and I’d go do some push-ups with two hands on my fingertips and then do one hand and then say, “Let’s go,” and they’d go (makes a callusing noise), “Somebody get her.” So that’s how my life was. It was just insane, but any ways I had my tenth child, God, five months late. On March 23, 2004, my prayers were answered in the form of an arrest. I was wanted on a warrant. I was on escape for bail jumping. I escaped a bail jumping warrant, and I got caught in a drug den with a large quantity of drugs and they were Officer L and I ended up painting a mural. I still have this mural in my room and I drew an angel with Officer L with his vest and gun and angel wings because that’s the day God set me free. So I went to jail looking at eight years in prison. I’m now looking at five abbreviated to six to eight months minimum because I already had eight points, and by statute our citizen guiding laws state that because of the eight points and the felony that I already had against me, I was automatically given eight months, right? That’s my minimum, but the prosecutor wants to get the five-year enhancement period on the escape; so they were gonna give me 180 months; so I’m there in jail again. I’m pregnant again. I’m looking at all this time in jail and about a week later I give my life to the Lord and started reading the Bible. About less than a month in I saw a picture that said, “I had to go to prison.” They had it on the news when I got out of prison. It was, um, Isaiah 55:50–8 and it said something like, “if you turn from your ways and return to your God he will have mercy and God will hear you” and I’m like, “Oh my God!” And I just started. … The governor can pardon a murderer and the president can pardon in a … this. That was my exact thinking. God can pardon me and I’m ready to go to prison; so I’m telling everybody, “Oh my God, look I’m not going to prison.” I am telling other people in the cell who are going to prison and they like, “Girl, get out of my face”; so about a month into it was when I found out my future. About a couple of weeks later, my lawyer pulls me aside and he’s all excited he’s been working trying to get me out or get me a lower sentence and he goes “K, I got you down to 40 months plea, sign here and give me 43 months.” I’m like, “T, 43 months? First of all, I’m going to lose this baby because then the baby program is not going to keep me, right? They are going to let me have it and second of all, T, God is gone get me out, right?” So he’s like (scuffs) right? Then I got into the tank.
DR. H Did he think you were mentally ill?
MS. K He sent the mental health to see me (laughingly). I got into the tank; mental health pulled me out, right? Yeah, he called mental health and, ah, I told them that he called mental health and I got mental health services, but I would not sign that plea. I told him, “T, God is gonna get me out, be encouraged.” I’m encouraging him to believe. He’s all depressed and stressed, right? So all the time in that tank all I did was to leave the whole tank to Christ, the whole entire tank except for one Wicca. The other Wicca let me pray for her; the other Wicca told me that she’s the only one who talks about God that she respects, right? Two white supremacists start taking me in their room and kissing me and loving me; the whole others are saints. That’s all I did; people were coming and I’d have a commissary. I would be giving people commissaries and it kept growing. I swear to God that chest grew and I’m, oh … and I’m giving them, you know, love gifts and then this one girl says, “K, come here.” This is all I did, three months in jail, and she says, “Come upstairs,” you can go upstairs and downstairs. (Dr. H said, “Right.”) I go upstairs and she says, “look.” I say, “What?” She says, “Everyone is doing Bible studies, K, and I got an A.” “K, I got a hundred percent” and that’s all I did for three months … my court papers. People were calling my lawyers asking, “When’s my pretrial? What are we gonna do? What’s my strategy?” Hmm, I pulled all my energy into pulling up God’s book and started learning about Him. I stop cursing. You know me; I was a terror. I wouldn’t hurt anybody, but you hit me, it’s over, right? (Dr. H said, “Right.”) Girls would come and say, “Daannana,” and I would say, “I’m so sorry, please forgive me” and they’d be like, “What is wrong with you?” and I started changing and, ahh, then on the day of my court hearing, he came back saying to me that the prosecutors got made. We came back like a month. Two months later he said, “They have withdrawn the plea, they’re going to go for the high end, 108 months; that’s nine years and you’re going to lose. I’m so sorry. Because there is no way you are going to fight them, you’ve got a large credit debt, drugs, bail, and one escape charge.” I had been arrested over forty-nine times and this is my fiftieth time being arrested. So July 1, 2004, that’s when I told him, “Be encouraged God is going to do it, right?” (Dr. H says, “Right, and he thought you were out of your mind.”). Right, so then, ah, um, July 1, 2004, before I go to court, I’m shackled in here seven months pregnant with my arms tied. I go downstairs and I wait to go into the court for my trial to lose, right? He comes out the courtroom like this with a pen and paper shaking like he just took a blast right? He said, “K! Sign here, they’re p……. (pause) you today; zero to twelve months stipulated sentence, whatever that means, the prosecutor can tell B from chocolate what that means later.” But that day, not only did God squash the prosecutor’s brain that were made and were going to go on the high end; he literally squashed their brains that morning. Right, because he’s just shaking. He just surprised him, “Here, sign this,” right? He just did it that morning at the midnight hour. He had to squash the judge’s brain too because that is illegal. (Dr. H says, “Right.”) So! So, ah, I go back to my cell right? And everybody who did not listen said, “K, K, K, how did you do this? What are you going to do?” Yeah, “Just go talk to Jesus.” We started the songs. The Lord let me out and I went to Swedish Hospital. Ah, by then this other great counselor, mental health counselor who also happened to be a maternity case manager too, she got me a treatment bed at Swedish just in case I got out. I kept telling her, “God is going to do it,” but she just said, “Let me do it.” Well, I didn’t know on the backseat this guy had … but she’s already making things move like. … She didn’t believe T when he told her, “It’s not going to happen. Give up!” She did it anyways; then I got out; she was there and came got me out. And then would love on me and all that and then a week later had I not been there, the doctor would not have been able to come and test the heart rate. A little something, they test you all day long because its treatment and you can’t even do drugs, right? (Dr. H, “Right because you were hospitalized.”). So another doctor came back and he was like, “I’m just feeling funny about this; take her to the other Swedish and they got me down there and within five minutes they rolled me in to have a C-section. She would’ve died and maybe me too because you know how they do when you are in jail. I would not have known that something was wrong. I could have been dead from my labor. But if you go into labor in jail, it’s not nice because they gotta, “Hold on, call control first. Control got to send for the nurse.” People like me would have had their baby right there in about five minutes in that jail cell.
DR. H But that’s so inhumane.
MS. K It is so gross. You know, they’re going to have to change that shackling law. You know that right? (Dr. H said, “Yes.”) I was all over the legislators, in the House. This lady said, “Tell me your story.” I felt so horrible. I didn’t remember the birth of my child. I do not remember my child coming out because that guard was in there too.
DR. H But was the baby okay?
MS. K It was a boy. He was perfect. I was in jail/prison so long.
DR. H I am pleased to hear that your baby was okay.
MS. K But I’m saying the guard was in there too. Why was the guard there while my lady’s parts were open? Why was the male guard in there? (Dr. H said, “I assume it was a policy of the prison that a guard had to be with you.”) Mm, yup, with all my goods being seen. (Dr. H said, “Why didn’t the prison superintendent send a female guard with you?”)
MS. K I don’t know.
DR. H Is your son okay at this time?
MS. K Oh yeah! He lives with. … I found him.
DR. H He’s the one you’re parenting, right?
MS. K No, I have … I get my twelve-year-old, my eighth child every weekend. I was getting my eleven-year-old too who was my ninth child when I was in prison. (Dr. H says, “Right.”) Well, she moved to Oregon now. Because she’s really insecure; she makes these long phone calls about why she moved to Oregon and how she didn’t. … You know all this; but her insecurities are about me. She is a heavyset woman, like 500 pounds; she’s not raising my child right at all. He didn’t brush his teeth. It just makes me so mad to have someone just like trailer trash raise him. She has him looking like he just came out a Goodwill dump truck. I try to give him as much as I can when I see him. When I give him stuff … like, she doesn’t take care of it.
She says, “I don’t know”; she’s really good. I didn’t see him as much as my other child; we were not bonded. Because she is so big she might die anytime. I explained to him if anything ever happens, I want you to come home and he said, “I might go with my aunty.” She and I haven’t got that bond and she isn’t giving me that bond; so he can feel comfortable to love me too. (Dr. H said, “Right.”) Whereas the other mother is just all open. You know what I am saying? (Dr. H says, “Yes, I know exactly what you are saying.”) I have him all the time and she knows that if anything happens to her he’s coming to me. Yes, and he already knows.
DR. H But foster parents are supposed to support birth parents.
MS. K Yup, yup, I only have the one that does, and then, ah, the other … the white ones are okay … ah, so then, ah … okay. Keep it line, right? (Dr. H says, “Right.”) So, ah … I had my tenth child, okay, had her and I’m in Seattle right? She came in healthy, perfect, and wonderful. I had been clean for like seven to eight months because I was in jail; you know treatment. I was in jail four months. No, it was March, April, May, June, and July. Five months when I had her, so I was only clean four months; but she was healthy, perfect and, ah … no, nothing was wrong with her. And then, ah … when I was there at the hospital, you know, I had a flag on my name, right? So guess who came to see me? The African American Union came and asked, “Everything okay, you gonna keep your baby (mockingly in a childish voice)?” I never had heard of such a thing. I thought they said something in Greek. She said, “Ump ump what? Do you want to keep your baby?” You never hear that in Pierce County, ever?! (Dr. H says, “No.”). So I never heard that. So I was like, “Yeah!” She said, “Well we’ll go to see him, right?” And I already had that set up, wrote my plan blah … blah; so she let me go through this crazy place, Ginger’s House, and basically no one should ever go there; it is crazy. (Dr. H asks, “It is?”) Yes, so I went there, two weeks later with her and left there two weeks later because they’re crazy and I had a C-section, right? (Dr. H says, “Yes, you stated earlier that you had a C-section.”) The second day they wanted me to do the car wash. (Dr. H says, “Oh my goodness.”) Girl please, there wasn’t even sleeping all day long; you got a wake-up program. I was on ordered bed rest for two weeks and they wouldn’t follow the doctor’s orders.
DR. H Did you call your social worker?
MS. K They wouldn’t let me call her. They wouldn’t let me call nobody until I said, “I’m out of here, right.” So when I said I’m leaving and they tried to hold my baby, then they called her in. She said, “Nobody is holding her baby.” Then they let me talk to her. I told her what happened. She worked at OAACS.
DR. H That was the only program developed to primarily serve African American children and families, although they also served children and families from other racial, cultural, and ethnic backgrounds. That program was the voice for many African American children and families involved in the child welfare system in Washington State. It was the only program that made a concerted effort to return kids home and work with birth mothers, work with birth fathers, and work with kinship caregivers and it had to be closed.
MS. K Did they get that back?
DR. H No.
MS. K That’s crazy. But anyways that’s … I was … they kicked me out and made me go on the porch. I mean wait on the street; so I put on a plastic bag in my hand and my baby in the other hand. I was on the corner, with no money, trying to go to Tacoma from Seattle and called their dad. What happened was he was using when I went in, right? A week before, this is all God, a week before I aborted treatment, he was still using because we were dealers, right. We lived right next to our neighbors who were making and using crack. He said, “God I have a baby now and I need to quit this stuff. I need you to help. I need you to deliver me.” He said, “God said if you flush it down the toilet I’ll set you free,” right? He hops the vine up; that was his treatment and flushed it down the toilet and he has not ever used since. I told him, “Man you should have given that to me” (jokingly). He said, “God didn’t say to give it to you, God said ‘flush it down the toilet.’” (Laughs hysterically.)
DR. H But that’s wonderful! It sounds like he had a reality check and wake-up call.
MS. K Isn’t that something? So he had sent for me. He told the cab driver to come get me. I called the cab driver because the Greyhound bus wouldn’t let me take the plastic bag on the Greyhound bus, and he had to call the cab people to tell them that he’ll pay for the cab when it got there. I got home and so I was doing well. I enrolled in college classes because I pretty much knew God was gonna get me out because he said it right? So I was preparing to go to college when I got out. So while he was in doing the AD classes I was enrolled in college classes. I was said to my teacher, “Teacher can you bring me something harder?” College stuff, she would bring me Algebra one day and Advanced Algebra, Geometry, and Trigs the next day. She’s bringing it all back to me, including Advanced English and I’m taking it in my cell getting ready for college.
I got out and enrolled in college and entered at college level; school started January 5. This is October, right. So I needed to get a job now because I need a car. Back then on welfare you only got $349 because I had done these drug things. You couldn’t get welfare for me then; it changed the next year. But that year, I could get no welfare for me except for my daughter and I needed to go to work and get a car so I can start school in January and be more comfortable. I contacted the maternity case manager and told her that I was going to church, and singing in the choir. I went to DOC [Department of Corrections] when I … as soon as I departed treatment. I went to DOC. I didn’t even go home first, went to DOC and said I need treatment. I’m scared because I had the baby in this hand. I’m a long-time addict … uh, “You won’t let me out without treatment on my own, right?” So I went to DOC and I had a warrant and I didn’t know it because they wouldn’t let me call the DOC while I was in there, right? But I left messages before I went and they said they thought that and they didn’t take me to jail. And I said, “I can’t leave here without treatment,” and I ran out of my doses. I had no more dosage treatment, but they gave me other treatment anyway. And I was in in-patient. I studied as an in-patient; they said, “We give you out-patient.” So I take out-patient treatment. I started out-patient the next Monday, got home Friday, and went to Office of Probation Monday. I asked for five days a week; they said, “No, we’ll give you three.” So I did it three months later starting from July. I left in August, September, and October. Two months later I got all this stuff set up; I did everything in two months on my own. I had no attorney. The case manager was not coming to my home every week; no home nurse coming over to my home every week. A case worker and three different people came to my home every week.
DR. H Did these people come from the Office of African American Children’s Services?
MS. K No! I had moved to Tacoma, she said she was going to transfer me.
DR. H Okay.
MS. K I called her on my phone trying to keep my baby; she said, “Let that baby go.” And I said, “Let me call you back when I get out of here.” She said, “Call me when you get to Tacoma,” right? So I called her and she said, “We’ll transfer your case; keep doing what you’re doing,” right? Because I told her I set up everything. I’m just … I’m cool. I’m thinking my case is up there waiting for it to get down here; soon as I said, “I need daycare and the seat” and the maternity case manager lady call CFWS; that’s not CPS. So I called CFWS; she gave me the number and I took the number from her. I called and I said, “I’m K; I’m a single mom” … single then because we’re not married … “and I’m trying to find daycare for my child; so I could go to work.” They said, “Okay Ms. K.” About an hour or two later my old social worker who was the supervisor, the one who told me that Kenny’s daddy had relapsed, said, “Both of you are going to lose the kids.” She said, “K, you got another baby? Where are you at?” Right? I’m like calm down. I gave her my address and I said, “Come on by.” She sent a CFW and CPS worker to my house. They investigated; I showed them all the documentation and my UAs for the last … from August until ah …
DR. H Do you mean from July?
MS. K From two months and two days and three times, I had all of them. I had copies of people I was working with; my probation officer’s number. So I told them to call him. I’m in perfect compliance with my probation. I gave them my church pastor’s name. They investigated all that information. I had a great job. They saw my home; it was immaculate. They saw my baby; she was perfect. I said, “Here’s the doctor’s name; call him.” I had records of all appointments and shots, everything; so they said, “Great job; find the daycare we’ll pay for it.” They left my home, right? The next day the police came to my home. They were so heartbroken, the two workers. The supervisor and the people who had been my caseworkers didn’t care; they said, “Take the baby, make those women take that baby against.” This decision was against the recommendation of the two workers who had been to my home. So, um, so … I was shaken up. I was like, “Oh my God,” devastated right?
DR. H Right, I can certainly understand why you were devastated.
MS. K This is re-traumatized and I figured surely they’re going to argue my case in the court. They are going to send me to court and the judge is going give these people a piece of his mind, right?
DR. H Right.
MS. K So I bring the record of the agency. I was under the maternity caseworker. My probation officer wrote me a letter, and my pastor wrote me a letter saying, “I’m faithful; I’m going to church almost every day,” right? And then she comes and brings all that and they would not give my baby. My stomach was upset. And I found later after my first degree that that was an illegal removal. I could have sued them because the matrix says imminent harm. There has to be a history of imminent harm to the child and there was no imminent harm. I had done no harm to my baby. I had every protection factor in the freaking world there!
DR. H And they still took your child?
MS. K Took it, but, you know, in hindsight, I think of Isaac when he laid his son down and was about to stab him, but the Lord had the ram, right? I had to sacrifice my being able to breast-feed my child and all that; that was the Lord allowing them. They couldn’t touch me; I was full. I was covered under his wings. I was so saved under warmth. I’m telling you, liberal people can save lives and I was serious about it. The church van was picking up folks in crack allies and all that; so, I knew God had to let them do that. And I remember leaving the 72 and they kept my baby. I said, “Lord I’m mad.” I’m cool with Him. I said, “Lord, I don’t trust you. I don’t know how I’m going to tell anybody to proclaim your name right now because about I don’t trust you; but I am not going nowhere because you hold the word of the liar.” That’s what I said, “I am not going nowhere because I’m not going there again.” I … so I went through it and if I hadn’t done that … at my dismissal they had a party They shut the courtroom down … Judge L, who’s a hard ass, shut the courtroom down and said, “Can you start helping parents in Pierce County?” Had I not done that dependency for no reason at all, then I wouldn’t be doing the great work that God planned for me. I would not be doing God’s great work that I’m doing today if I hadn’t done that. So, I had to go through that so I could take that one. Okay, God orchestrated that one; he didn’t orchestrate it because it was meant for evil. He turned it out for good because he already knew you take whatever you want to, but he had got a plan behind it.
DR. H Think of all the parents you’ve helped.
MS. K I know it’s crazy, hundreds literally, and yup so, it was really tough during that one, but I just kept focusing. People say, “Where’s your baby at?” I say, “Long-term day care.” Those are the ones who don’t really care; you know people be acting nosy. I leave them with that one and I (laughs momentarily) …
DR. H Right.
MS. K So that’s how I did. I started studying; my first quarter I started flunking because my post-traumatic stress syndrome was untreated. I didn’t know and I would be going to the wrong classes. My midterms I got two Ds and C. So I talked to someone. So, I am glad I had the Lord. One of the ladies, a teacher, I told her what’s going on; she said, “Talk to the counselors.” And then she made me do my case. She made me write a letter. She made me do all kinds of stuff for these babies right (laughs). Because I wouldn’t look at no pictures. The police had all my pictures, but I didn’t know they were all gone. She had all my kids’ pictures; she had saved them because I couldn’t at the time. Someone had kids in a dope house and they were willing to let me pay $50 for a clean and sober person in their life to watch them. I’m out of here; you’re not going to be doing that around my kids. So, I had a lot of pain, but the counseling helped me with the post-traumatic stress. Counseling helped me and by the end of that quarter I got two B’s and an A. From then on I got straight A’s and from then on by the Glory of our God. Yup, I remember all through my life I got Evergreen A’s because my grades went right to the top.
DR. H I remember when you graduated from college. And then you got your job in King County.
MS. K No, first I started after dismissal. I started helping in Pierce County; then I joined B, who was the first veteran parent. Both of us started meeting with the parents at court hearings; we would get $25 slices here and there.
DR. H I know her because she is a strong advocate for birth mothers.
MS. K Yeah, she’s phenomenal too and we started getting. We get $25. We started getting $25 slices and we were doing this phenomenal work way above what we were being paid. We got that program up and running. For three years I worked in that program. I continued my education. I got my AA, BA, and Masters in, like I said, five and half years.
DR. H Right.
MS. K At the end of my bachelor’s degree program, I was waiting to start my master’s program. That fall, I got hired at King County and before then I was in Girl Scouts, which is amazing. I had a lot of jobs that where I was filling in. Every job I ever had they only hire people who were filling in. I thought, “Girl Scouts for real come on.”
DR. H But they hired you.
MS. K And, ah … (laughs momentarily) I was hired by the Washington State Senate and King County Superior Court. Isn’t that something?
DR. H That’s wonderful. I think you’re a phenomenal woman who has overcome many adversities in her life.
MS. K It is all Him, cause He is just looking for vessels just like me to do this work. I tell everybody that’s behind me that these parents are doing amazing things; the ones that we’re touching.
DR. H Right.
MS. K Because we put that in them, God wants a vessel just like you that didn’t have anything going for her so that he can show up. All you got to do is wake up every morning and say, “God here I am and what are we gonna do now?” (Laughs joyously.) That’s all you got to do; that’s all I do.
DR. H But He always has a plan for you and everyone else.
MS. K But you got to acknowledge Him and invite Him to have and give you that plan.
DR. H But some people don’t.
MS. K Right, that’s what we tell them, “Get up; this is so simple.” There is a dad who has been pushing, Africa American fathers; you might want to interview him too, the state did him so dirty, girl.
DR. H I actually do want to interview him.
MS. K This talk has made me have a flash about him. Judge C has a flash on this state by this black man.
DR. H I do want to interview him or some other African American father.
MS. K Yeah, you got to. He’s a black man, African American. He is in King County. He is just working hard to get his baby back. It is so ridiculous, girl, the services they didn’t have for him. This African American man, everywhere he went, you know, people were intimidated by him because he is a big black man. This ape … ah. … They just lost their minds, and did not want to hear what he had to say. Every time somebody talked to him they required him to do more things. This boy was doing what he was told to do in spite of his 500, no, 400 pounds, and right? He was getting on a bus, sometimes walking to get to every service and he’s doing twenty times more services than they’re asking him. He’s repeating services on top of that; he’s doing twenty thousand AA meetings. He’s on work force; all that, so that there’s nothing they can do to him, right?
DR. H Right.
MS. K But give his baby back to him. They said he was getting high, girl. Now, I’m an addict, right? As an addict you going to miss at least one appointment.
DR. H Right.
MS. K You’re not going to do the extra. You are not going to do twenty extra groups on top of the ones you were supposed to do; it’s impossible. It is not go and get it. You cannot get high and make all your appointments; it’s impossible.
DR. H I know; I know that it is impossible.
MS. K So they fought him and tried to terminate his rights all the way to the end. Just until recently, in Judge C’s statement she had the flash. But anyway I think you hit me in remission. But yeah, what I have seen is from working in it is that the main problem is the disproportionate number of service providers. I mean the disparate, nonculturally competent service providers and cookie cutter people who approach families from the wrong perspective. They are not validating that families have their own kinds of safety net.
DR. H They also have their own support systems.
MS. K Right and the ways they interact with their child are not going be the way you think; it’s still not unsafe because it’s different. Their difference is seen as unsafe.
DR. H Difference does not mean it’s bad.
MS. K Yup, or it’s unsafe, right?
DR. H Right, difference does not mean that you are putting your child at risk of harm.
MS. K So, yeah.
DR. H Is there anything else that you want to tell my readers?
MS. K No, I think that was an earful.
DR. H I agree; thank you very much for talking to me.
This is an interview with a forty-eight-year-old birth father of nine children. Four of his children are living at home. He is a married black man who is a facilitator for the Father Engagement Program. He has an associate degree. He is a strong advocate for birth fathers. He formerly worked in sales and as a forklift driver.
DR. H How did you get involved with Father Engagement?
MR. B Well, I got involved … um, my kids were removed back in probably 2004 or 2005, and, ah, through my worker I tried to put my family together. It became part of my vocation I guess, as I learned how to navigate these systems.
DR. H Is it hard to navigate the various systems when you want to reunify with your family?
MR. B In many cases it’s almost impossible.
DR. H Did you feel that you were treated differently because you were a male as opposed to a female? And I ask you that because it’s been my experience that the child welfare system and other systems seem to favor mothers more than fathers.
MR. B I think, ah … the answer is yeah. You know, I was treated differently, but I can’t say I was treated differently just because I was a male. I was also a male criminal, black, broke … um … ah, uneducated when it came to things that were systematic. Um … and definitely under-resourced when it came to what I needed to have to do and what the department wanted me to do.
DR. H Let’s back up a little bit. When you became involved with the department and your children were removed from your care, I assume that you were seeing a social worker or a child welfare worker.
MR. B Well they were not removed from me; they were removed from their mother.
DR. H They were removed from their mom, okay.
MR. B So what I wanted to be was their father. I wanted to be their father.
DR. H How did you find out that they became the wards of the state?
MR. B Well they didn’t become wards so …
DR. H Okay, so tell me what happened?
MR. B So my wife now, who wasn’t my wife then, was at a shelter and, you know, went somewhere and started smoking crack, and left my kids with the elder daughter and you know the shelter turned them all of them in basically.
DR. H The child welfare system considers that abandonment when parents leave their kids.
MR. B Ha! Ha! Yeah. And go smoke crack. Yeah, that’s the bad news. Um, I was locked up. I wasn’t in any better shape, but what I was trying to convey to them was that, um … she had a crack problem and they were basically saying that I was a monster. I wasn’t denying the fact that I was a monster. What I’m saying is … you know, I might be a monster, but I wanted them to know that I’m still their dad.
DR. H Why did they call you a monster?
MR. B They didn’t give me the term. I created that term.
DR. H Right, you created it. Why did you feel that you should be called a monster?
MR. B My whole life, my whole life span was that of a monster. I was a drug addict, a drug dealer, um … a criminal enterprise; everything I did was monstrous. It wasn’t like I had a kind of … a gentlemanly approach to anything. Um, but I think that the biggest thing of concern to them was that I’d beat her and so that they had a case. I was definitely a monster when it came to women. So, um … as I was explaining to them, I agree to everything you say about me, but is there some help? Because I’m still their father and what I want to be is their dad. So, I asked for help.
DR. H And I think that’s the positive thing, the fact that you asked for help. I think that’s strength.
MR. B I didn’t get it.
DR. H And I think that’s a travesty.
MR. B There we go.
DR. H Because if you say that you battered your wife, well, she wasn’t your wife, but the mother of your children and people batter for a reason; it’s typically for control. But also sometimes men who batter have been physically abused during childhood and/or adolescence or witnessed domestic violence. There are many reasons why men batter their wives; men who are batterers do need help because it is unacceptable for any man to batter his wife or partner. Now, did you get any help for this problem?
MR. B No, I didn’t get any help.
DR. H And I want to ask you another question. During this time did you still have your parental rights?
MR. B Oh yeah, yeah, I never lost my parental rights. Um, what the department … their position was that my wife needed to separate from me and stay far away from. We had a no contact order for many years and I didn’t feel that the department was interested in preserving my family. I feel that they had made a decision, you know, based on whatever criteria that they use, but the end result was that this family was to be split up. And I didn’t think that was right. I didn’t think that was right because, you know, that’s not what I felt in my heart.
DR. H Not only is that not right, but that is not good social work or good child welfare practice. The first goal for all families should be family reunification.
MR. B Should be, so we say reunification or children reunified.
DR. H I’m talking about children reunifying with their birth parents. Family reunification means returning children to the care of their birth parents whenever possible; family reunification should always be the first permanency planning goal.
MR. B They didn’t have a problem with that. The thing is if you reunify my children with their mother, then you still wouldn’t have a complete family and you still would be reunifying them with a mother who still had a drug problem. What I was trying to get them to understand was that in order for us to be a family, the head of that family was the one that understood what the problem was. So if you were gonna put that piece of the family together, but cut off the head then that really wasn’t gonna be a family reunification.
DR. H Right, the family is mom, dad, and children.
MR. B There we go.
DR. H And if mom and dad have a problem or problems, then services should be put into place to alleviate the problems; that’s good child practice.
MR. B Okay.
DR. H And I know good child welfare practice is not always implemented.
MR. B And I’d go a step further and say that good child welfare practice is rarely implemented if we’re talking about the criteria we just talked about. Because in our reality, um … I very rarely see families reunified. I do see children reunified with mother or father. That’s fine because, you know, you can’t get a family together.
DR. H Right, sometimes dad might be present and he’s willing and able to be the primary caregiver for the children and he should not be denied the opportunity to be the sole parent when it is in the best interest of the children. However, sometimes it’s mom; sometimes it’s mom and dad and that’s the best of all worlds if children have a mother and a dad who are willing to step up and are able to parent them. The child welfare system should be putting services into place to make that happen; you know and I know that does not happen and that’s why I’m writing this book.
MR. B Correct.
DR. H Do you think that race played a part in these decisions?
MR. B I think that race played a part in it; ah … my wife is Native American and white. I’m black and Native American. Um, when it gets right down to it I think that … I can’t say from … I just think that incompetence is incompetence and that the department isn’t good at family reunification. Not saying that they can’t give a child into the arms of the parent, but when it comes to preserving the family as a unit, some of the damage that is done is irreversible. I don’t think that the department takes enough responsibility in that. You know, for them, child safety is first and foremost and that’s great; but for a child to be healthy and for a child to be well rounded you don’t just place it with one or the other if there’s a possibility that the whole unit can be mended.
DR. H I agree with you.
MR. B So, so when it comes to racial I think yeah … it would definitely be racial, but I think I mean how do you say … um, to the department? How do you say to the department that your incompetence is … um, also racial because the same thing that they do incompetently with black families they do with white families.
DR. H I think an issue here is what do we mean by family? I do talk about the meaning of family in my book. And I think it is incumbent upon social workers to ask, “What does family mean to you?” Because what I’m hearing you say is that to you family means you, your wife, and your children. It doesn’t mean that to everybody and so I think that there isn’t a cookie cutter mold that can be used in working with families and children of color; each family is different and they need to be respected and valued for their differences. But I’m coming from a different perspective and I know that when I am talking to people. I’m coming from a perspective that I know works. Long before I became a researcher and an educator, I was a social work practitioner. I’ve actually worked in foster care and in adoptions. I’m not saying anything to you today that I didn’t practice twenty-five years ago; it worked and I reunified families. I know that it can be done. I think that what happened was that you made your voice known and apparently it was ignored.
MR. B Right, my wife went to services. You know, on the surface, she got herself clean. You know, I mean the classes that she was supposed to go to, she did. She maintained a job; she got a house, but she still was an alcoholic. A lot of the decisions and choices that were being made were still putting my kids in jeopardy. What I know now that I didn’t know then was that while I was trying to get the department for looking at my wife for her incompetence, what I should’ve been doing was looking at myself for my incompetence because I was expecting my wife to do a job that was designed for me to do. So it would be like me trying to do Bill Gates’s job; I’m not qualified to do his job. Once I started realizing that at that time I was pointing a finger, I got tired of basically saying, “You guys are looking at this all wrong.” Meaning just, you know, that the department was looking at this all wrong. What I started doing then was saying, “Fine let me put myself in the game.” So I took a domestic violence course. I took an anger management course. I went to intensive in-patient treatment. I got off of DOC. I no longer got arrested.
DR. H How did you find these services?
MR. B Really, um, well, DOC, you know, you don’t find that service; they find you. Um, it took me thirty years to get off of the Department of Corrections. So, that was a whole … you know, that was a skill set in itself that nobody talked about. They assumed that everybody who gets on Department of Corrections eventually someday … you know, they’ll get off of it or they’ll learn how get off of it. What they don’t understand is that we don’t know how to get off of the Department of Corrections; that’s a whole different institution that we’ve never even …
DR. H It’s a very different system than the child welfare system.
MR. B Exactly, and that’s one that if you’re a part of it is going to be hard to do anything within child welfare and many of these fathers once the kids are removed, you know, they start looking at a lot of these fathers that have been incarcerated or are incarcerated now. You got a whole different skill set before you can even deal with child welfare. So for me, I figured that out. It was difficult for me to say, “Hey my kids, I need to be in my kid’s life.” If I was gonna be arrested every 60 days or so for a probation violation, I had to learn that skill set. I had to learn how not to violate my Department of Corrections probation rules. One of those violations by the way was I married my wife, in violation of the no contact order. That was a big no, no! But the reason why I did that one was to honestly institute God’s covenant into my life.
DR. H Okay, I understand what you are saying.
MR. B And so, I had to just go ahead and throw caution to the wind and say, “If we were gonna be a family, we’re gonna do it God’s way.” You know, a husband and wife … um, I was going to take care of my household.
DR. H And so religion is important to you.
MR. B Oh, absolutely, without it none of this would’ve come about. I mean … I probably would have stayed who I was and I know she would have stayed who she was. But the thing that I needed to learn then is department etiquette, terminology. One of the biggest obstacles, you know, is being in compliance by completing services. You know, these services to me just sounded like the white man putting his foot on my neck again. You know, my Department of Corrections officer telling me to pee in a cup. Um, all of these things sounded familiar and really were making me angry. Because these were my kids and you’re talking to me like a parole officer and these were my kids and so I had to understand that and really get help.
DR. H Did anybody, and when I say anybody I’m talking about the social worker or child welfare worker, sit down with you and explain to you we need to work with you and develop your service plan? We need to write this plan together. This is what I mean when I talk about being in compliance. You have to go court; you have to let the judge know that you’re getting services.
MR. B First of all, there are no conversations with the social worker; the social worker feared me. Everybody feared me; so, you know, everything was in a cryptic. You know, they tell my wife what to say; you know, they’d deal with my wife.
DR. H They did not interact with you.
MR. B And then, you know, not me. And then it was always … was always pretty clear to me that I wasn’t really welcome.
DR. H But you’re the dad. You’re part of the family.
MR. B Yeah I’m the dad, but I’m a bad dad. And so, you know, there’s a difference between being a dad and being a bad dad. You know, it’s interesting because who’s making the determination on who’s a good dad or bad dad? And as a social worker, as long as … my understanding is that shouldn’t even be a judgment that they’re making.
DR. H Social workers are supposed to be nonjudgmental; we are supposed to accept people as they are in their lives. It’s our responsibility if you’re not where you want to be or where you think you should be in terms of parenting then we have a responsibility to sit down with you and say, “These are the things that we think you need to do in order to be able to parent your kids; this is where you go to learn how to do these things.”
MR. B In order for me to understand that, you have to talk to me.
DR. H You have to talk to parents including fathers, of course!
MR. B So if you’re a Caucasian social worker and you look on my file and you see that I beat white women, and you look at me to the left and I look back at you to the left, now we have a problem.
DR. H Right, because your social worker is not communicating with you.
MR. B Right, so that was always my history with the department. We didn’t communicate well; we didn’t play well with each other. Now I can say this, the department is changing.
DR. H It is and a lot of it has to do with who works at the department and the legislation that was passed in terms of racial disproportionality. The committee that I cochair … we’re kind of like an advisory watchdog for the department. It shouldn’t have to be that way, but it is. And the department has to answer to us; at our meetings we want to know what they’re doing for families and how they’re doing it, especially what they are doing for children of color and their families.
MR. B So when I first got involved with them again there were no services; the only thing you could possibly get as a father was a parenting class and a domestic violence class. Oh, you could get drug treatment.
DR. H Yes, they seem to feel that everybody needs a generic parenting class. Not every parent needs a parenting class. I strongly feel that parenting should be culturally specific. There should not be just some generic parenting class for every parent that is involved in the child welfare system.
MR. B I thought it was kind of weird that I’m learning about little Johnny, but my son’s name is A. … I’m learning about little Mary, but my daughter’s name is D. … And I’m sorry, but, you know, when you go and you tell D it’s timeout, you need to go into the corner, D is going to look at you like you’re crazy. That’s just the way that she’s cut; she doesn’t know anything about timeout, timeout? What are we talking about here? But I learned that if I was going to understand the department I was going to have to understand what they were using, the medicine that they were using so to speak, and whether I liked it or not or agreed with it or not wasn’t the issue. In order for me to be in compliance and to understand the language and know what they meant, I was going to have to pick up on this stuff. I still, you know, teach people to do this to this day.
DR. H There’s a way to navigate the system and you have to learn how to navigate the system. If you’re an outsider you have to learn it; you might not like it, but you have to think of the larger goal and your goal was to reunify with your family.
MR. B That being said … um, it’s also like brainwashing; when you want something very … very bad and somebody is in control of it and the only way to get it is to do what they say to do. If I do that it’s called manipulation. It’s called coercion; it’s called strong arming, but when the department does it, it’s called good practice. All I’m saying is a lot of this stuff’s damaging.
DR. H And I don’t think it is good practice; it is not good social work practice or good child welfare practice.
MR. B So, one of the things I was left with at the end was kids who knew that they had done wrong would say something like … like my daughter in kindergarten, no this must’ve been in second grade. You know, she had acted up and knew she was going to be in trouble. She knew that she had to go to school and get good grades. She knew what she was supposed to do, so they said that they were going to call her dad and she said, “No, don’t call my dad because my dad will beat me.” The child has maybe gotten a whipping twice in her life. She’s fourteen now and she says that and, you know, they said, “Tell us more.” So, she goes on to talk about he beats me and they’re like well how does he beat you and she says, you know, he beats me with a belt and they said, “How many times has he beat you?” “You know, five or six times.” And they say, “Well, how big is the belt?” And so by time she’s done telling this story about getting these beatings, what she failed to tell them was that she wasn’t even the one getting the beatings. It was her brother getting the whipping and these weren’t beatings. The guy had gotten a spanking and that was probably two years before that time, maybe a year before that time. The other thing she failed to tell them is that he never does it. He says he’s going do it, but he never does it. So anyways, CPS showed up at my house, and as soon as they do, my daughter breaks down. She’s boohooing because I invite them into my house and we have a conversation. She’s just boohooing … just like, “Why are you crying?” and she’s like, “Because I don’t want to go.” And they’re like, “Who said that you’re going?” She said, “My daddy.” I didn’t say anything. She says, “But no, they’re coming to take me and you’re going to let them.” I said, “I should … huh?” and she goes, “No.” I say, “Now, why don’t you tell the people in all reality what is going on?” And she goes on to tell them that she didn’t want to get in trouble and so, you know, she knew that was what they wanted to hear, but she didn’t know that it was going to come to all of this, but now that it came to all of this, you know, they’re surprised. Well, this is something she’s learned; this is … she has been through the system and she’s learned a few tricks. You know, this is residual stuff; you know, with the department being in your life that it is kind of hard to get out them of your life. It is kind of hard to wash out your family stuff. One other thing that I can think of is my son who is now fifteen years old. He has this whole demeanor with his mom; it’s disrespectful and my wife says, “You know, he learned it from you; you know, the way you used to treat people.” And my son says, “No I didn’t learn it from him. I learned it from watching the way they used to talk to my dad.” Meaning all social workers were women, and so when they were talking to me and he would be seeing these things, it was irking him on the inside. He started getting this animosity towards women that he never spoke about. It just started coming out later.
DR. H Well children are always observing; they’re listening, even when people think that they’re not. Is he in counseling?
MR. B Nah, he’s … ah. One thing about both of my kids is that they let you know by their behavior when counseling is definitely what’s needed. And so far, you know, they’re holding down their grades and he’s a sophomore in high school and he’s playing football. So far so good and I’ve asked him, “Man, do you need counseling because if that’s what you need, that’s what you need.” And another residual is once you’ve been in counseling or you’ve been in the department or have had any kind of counseling, as soon as you’re done with it, you don’t want no more. So you may need it, you just won’t do it because you just … you know, you just don’t want anything to do with it.
DR. H But I think that speaks to being referred to the wrong counselor. I think that … and this is not to say that every person of color needs to go to a counselor who is a person of color, but people need to have choices. And sometimes people go to counseling and it’s not the right counselor. They need to be referred to feel empowered to say, “This is not working. I need to another counselor.” Counselors should do ongoing evaluations with their clients about treatment. I say that because I have a psychotherapy practice. I see children and families and I say to families, “We have to decide if this is a good fit. I have to feel like I can work with you and you have to feel like you can trust me to work with you; otherwise, it’s a waste of time.” So, you learned how to negotiate these systems and got your family back together. How long did that take?
MR. B Yeah, well about three years. So my family we were together, but it was a typhoon. Number one, I still had a no contact order. The case was still open; the dependency was still open. My wife was in out-patient and I was in in-patient. The problem was I married and when I married her I threw muck into the whole thing. They were telling her that she needed to be away from me, but now she’s my wife. DOC said I was out of mind because part of my stipulation clearly said I was to stay away from her and I married her. When I married her it put a big monkey wrench on everything and the only reason why I married her was because God told me that he already gave me a wife and that wife is her. Now, I’m wise enough to understand that although he gave me a wife, it didn’t necessarily mean that I was supposed to marry her at that particular time. I may have jumped the gun and in so doing I brought everything to a head. And so a couple of things happened. I had to get an advocate to fight for me to get my no contact order rescinded and that came in the form of Union Gospel Mission, the legal team. They were able to get a temporary stay in the no contact order so that we could live together and raise our family, provided that we were both in compliance. My requirement was that I attend and complete a domestic violence course, anger management, and intensive drug treatment; the intensive drug treatment came in because in 2003 I had a heart attack from a drug overdose.
DR. H I’m sorry to hear that you had a heart attack.
MR. B Thank you. But it was that drug overdose that changed my whole life around and made me even think about the father that I’m supposed to be to my kids or marry A.
DR. H It was probably like a wake-up call.
MR. B More than a wake-up call, yeah, massive heart attacks will definitely change any person if you listen close enough. So, getting the no contact order rescinded with conditions put the focus on me squarely. That in order for this to happen, I had to stay in compliance and do exactly what it was I had to do. That meant I had to get employed; um, again, I had to do the drug and alcohol treatment, the domestic violence. I hadn’t had a license since 1978 and one of the first victories that I won was getting my driver’s license.
DR. H That’s independence.
MR. B That doesn’t sound like a really huge thing, until you’ve been suspended since 1978 and that one win it was victory after victory. When I knew that this family belonged together, not in bits and pieces, not with the kids with me or their mother, was when I got baptized. And when I got baptized and came out of the water the pool was sitting up six feet and my son who was about six years old jumps up and says, “I want to be baptized too,” and his little sister who apparently can talk says, “Me too.” My wife who wasn’t my wife yet, we were just together, said, “If they are then we should.” Then her older daughter and her future husband and so on and so forth, like thirteen people got baptized. And I said, “Okay.” So, I’m going forward with this. And so that gave me the strength, not necessarily to take on the department but to definitely be strong and withstand what they were saying.
DR. H It gave you the strength to do what you needed to do for your family.
MR. B Umm, correct, correct. Had I not known that or had that strength it would’ve been easy for me to just concede that department knew what was best for my kids; that they should just be with their mom and I should just go off and start a new family. And that’s what some of us do in the black community. I got five baby mamas; um, so these kids definitely weren’t my first set. And I’d be remiss if I didn’t include this part in it. This wasn’t the first time that kids were removed from me; my first kids, my daughter is thirty and my son is now twenty-five. And you know the kids got removed then. You know, I got arrested and the mother got busted turning tricks to cops. Um, I remember I knew nothing about family preservation.
DR. H I think we can go right down into that little basement to finish your interview. There is too much noise in here.
MR. B Umm, so to follow up, if I would’ve known about family preservation then I would’ve tried harder to get those kids out of the system.
DR. H Okay.
MR. B And what I did was … I just basically let the mom deal with it and I went and got another baby mama. And that was a pattern. I think that child welfare needs to understand that I personally wouldn’t point a finger at them. Somebody has a dirty job and somebody has to do it. I think that, you know, they’re trying to do it the best they can. I don’t know, but they have to look deeper, especially when it comes to black families. We have way more mitigating circumstances that they’re not even putting into calculations when they’re talking about removing our kids. I also think that they’re putting a lot of stipulations on our kinship caregivers, people that we can put our kids with when we’re struggling.
DR. H You are talking about extended families.
MR. B Right, extended families, you know, grandma may have only one leg, but if she can still walk she knows exactly where every kid is at.
DR. H Well, most grandparents, aunts, uncles, if they know that a family member is about to get involved with the system, they will step up to the plate. And the age of the grandparent doesn’t really matter in black families; they are willing to take those grandkids into their home.
MR. B Absolutely, absolutely. … I think that if we don’t factor that kind of thing in we’re coming up with different types of minority kids.
DR. H I think the key here is putting in whatever services that grandmother or other relative needs in order to keep those kids in the family.
MR. B Yes, absolutely, I would agree. So, I guess for me after I got my act together it was then just a matter of maintaining that year after year after year.
DR. H Okay, how long have you all been together?
MR. B Um, my wife and I have been together it will be twenty years in January 2013.
DR. H That’s wonderful. It is, and I think that it’s wonderful that you are helping other dads.
MR. B That is a good thing.
DR. H Because the child welfare system … in fact, all of these systems, they’re complicated, including the court system. What can you tell me about the court system?
MR. B (Chuckles briefly; he says, “Um.”)
DR. H How difficult was it to navigate the court system?
MR. B It’s the biggest one. As big as child welfare is, it’s nothing compared to the criminal system. It’s just, ah … I guess I’m going to approach it from a black man’s perspective.
DR. H Okay, because there are a lot of black men who are involved with the criminal justice system.
MR. B Yeah, so I’m looking at it from a black man’s perspective and a black father’s perspective. When we’re young and we start indulging in criminal activity we don’t see thirty years down the line. We don’t see what our position in life is going to be; we don’t see that. So when we are in the juvenile system and they tell us that we take this felony. You know, we’re gonna be back by summer time. We don’t look at that and see it as a problem thirty years from now. So we sign it and we take our first felony. They tell us it was a juvenile offense and it can be expunged. You know, it can be wiped away; you won’t have a problem. They don’t give us any tools to make sure that we don’t commit another crime. Because the moment you commit the other crime, you can only get one of them expunged, so …
DR. H This means you’ve got a criminal record.
MR. B You’ve got a record. Even if you … whichever one you’ve got expunged that felony will stay in place once you catch another charge after that. Nobody is really explaining that to us. Not to mention that if that’s close enough to your eighteenth birthday and you continue with the pattern that you are doing, you know, at sixteen, that’s just when you get your first adult criminal charge. You’re going to look as if you did. You know, I need to take this plea. I’ll be back by summer. You are signing it; now it’s official.
DR. H And you’re an adult.
MR. B It’s official, those charges are from your juvenile record. There are charges as an adult, they are all one. The criminal record is plain to see, and now your criminal record goes back. In my case it went all the way back to 1976. So in 1976, the last thing I was thinking was that I was going to buy a home for somebody. I was going to live in a nice lofty neighborhood with some cart cages around me and perhaps buy a boat. I never thought about it. Well, here I am and the decisions that I made in 1976 are impacting me right now today. That being said means that we are missing out on a whole line of education as black men in our community pertaining to the criminal system and fatherhood. If you can’t maintain freedom you can’t maintain consistency when it comes to finances. When that can’t happen you can’t possibly take care of children and when you can’t take care of children, more than likely the relationship is going to dissolve. Family preservation involves a strong covenant. When you’re away long periods of time being locked up, then actually it’s going to be a downfall for your family.
DR. H That is absolutely right.
MR. B So for the last fifty or sixty years we as a black people have been in these systems and nobody is teaching us about the impact that it’s going to have on us. Nobody is teaching about the criminal system and the impact that it’s going to have on us rearing children and taking care of our families. Then is it any wonder that there’s so little family unity today?
DR. H Because in listening to your story, reading the literature, and even talking to women who are incarcerated this criminal activity and subsequent imprisonment have a lifelong impact on men and women, not just some six-month impact.
MR. B Right, it has a lifelong impact. And what I’m finding is that it is not a lifelong impact just on you; it’s a lifelong impact on your kids and probably their kids.
DR. H It has an intergenerational impact.
MR. B Absolutely, I have a twenty-five-year-old, the first ones that I told you about. They were the first kids that were removed; he’s now doing ten years in an Oregon prison. My first child, his older sister, she’s now battling an opium addiction. So, those decisions that I was making back in 1976 when I had my first kids, this was what I was teaching them; this is what they saw. He won’t be having any kids at least for another ten years. She already has one son and he is without his mom because, you know, she’s on drugs right now. Now, he’s being raised by his grandmother. She was the first mother that I had a child with in the first place. Our kids were removed. So here it is now the second generation is off doing their thing and now the third generation is now being raised by the people who started it first.
DR. H And so these behaviors have repeated themselves and they’re impacting the current family members and will impact future generations. And so what I’m hearing you say is that we need to stop the pattern.
MR. B Correct, and one of the ways we can stop the pattern when it comes to child welfare is child welfare needs to stop thinking that the two are the same; ah … European American and African American families. These are troubles that they have; these problems that they have. African Americans, these are problems that we have and if we don’t start becoming specific in dealing with them then I think you’re doing both of them a disservice.
DR. H I think that we need to never forget that American Indian families are different. Latino families are different. African American families are different. European American families are different. They’re all different and they need to be worked with and talked to in ways that are culturally and ethnically specific. And within these groups of people there are differences. For example, if you identify as a black or African American man it doesn’t mean that you are the same as every other black or African American man.
MR. B That is correct. Um, honestly I think that probably covers everything except I guess I’ll give this one to you. It’s been my catch phrase for about six years now. Um, when it comes to fathers throughout every system how important is the dad?
DR. H I think that dads are very important. I think that for too long, the courts, the child welfare system, the education system, the medical system, and the juvenile justice system have forgotten and/or ignored dads. Every child has a father. I feel that it’s the responsibility of the child welfare system to find dads and try to get them involved in their children’s lives because it makes a difference. It makes a difference to girls and it makes a difference to boys.
MR. B I’m done; thank you very much.
DR. H Thank you, thank you.
