Pub Date : 2022-06-30DOI: 10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9922
Caitlyn Garcia, C. Godsoe
Mutual aid may solve the harms arising out of the family policing system. Families need housing, food, and childcare rather than state surveillance and punishment. Giving agency and support to families will transform the way society protects its youngest and most vulnerable members. This Article proposes a community-based, empowering, mutual aid model and advocates for divestment from punitive state interactions. Instead, society must invest in supports for children and families, fund communities, and intervene at the grassroots levels.
{"title":"Divest, Invest, & Mutual Aid","authors":"Caitlyn Garcia, C. Godsoe","doi":"10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9922","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9922","url":null,"abstract":"Mutual aid may solve the harms arising out of the family policing system. Families need housing, food, and childcare rather than state surveillance and punishment. Giving agency and support to families will transform the way society protects its youngest and most vulnerable members. This Article proposes a community-based, empowering, mutual aid model and advocates for divestment from punitive state interactions. Instead, society must invest in supports for children and families, fund communities, and intervene at the grassroots levels. ","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121434322","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-30DOI: 10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9924
Sarah H. Lorr
The public family regulation system fails to live up to its underlying laws and policies that purport to value family reunification as their primary goal. Despite the premise of equitable treatment of parents and families involved in the system, parents are often mislabeled, maltreated, and untrusted by actors within the system. This Article explores how ableism operates in the family regulation system to create an ongoing pathology of parents with disabilities and of parents who have been labeled as disabled by the system.
{"title":"Lived Experience and Disability Justice in the Family Regulation System","authors":"Sarah H. Lorr","doi":"10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9924","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9924","url":null,"abstract":"The public family regulation system fails to live up to its underlying laws and policies that purport to value family reunification as their primary goal. Despite the premise of equitable treatment of parents and families involved in the system, parents are often mislabeled, maltreated, and untrusted by actors within the system. This Article explores how ableism operates in the family regulation system to create an ongoing pathology of parents with disabilities and of parents who have been labeled as disabled by the system. ","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115011449","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-30DOI: 10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9923
M. Carter, Cristopher Church, V. Sankaran
This Article argues that juvenile court judges can safely reduce the number of children entering foster care by faithfully and rigorously applying the law. Judges often fail to perform this core functon when a state child welfare agency separates a child from their family. Judges must perform their role as impartial gatekeeper despite the temptation to be "omnipotent moral busybodies".
{"title":"A Quiet Revolution","authors":"M. Carter, Cristopher Church, V. Sankaran","doi":"10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9923","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9923","url":null,"abstract":"This Article argues that juvenile court judges can safely reduce the number of children entering foster care by faithfully and rigorously applying the law. Judges often fail to perform this core functon when a state child welfare agency separates a child from their family. Judges must perform their role as impartial gatekeeper despite the temptation to be \"omnipotent moral busybodies\". ","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126156782","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-30DOI: 10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9925
Kele M. Stewart
The family regulation system's policing, disruption, and restructuring of Black families and communities spills over into other systems also marked by stark racial inequities - the education and juvenile justice systems. This Article unpacks how that spillage magnifies the harm to Black children; by exploring the structural mechanisms through which these systems work together to compound disparity and perpetuate inequity, this Article provides further evidence of the family regulation system's failings.
{"title":"Re-envisioning Child Well-being","authors":"Kele M. Stewart","doi":"10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9925","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9925","url":null,"abstract":"The family regulation system's policing, disruption, and restructuring of Black families and communities spills over into other systems also marked by stark racial inequities - the education and juvenile justice systems. This Article unpacks how that spillage magnifies the harm to Black children; by exploring the structural mechanisms through which these systems work together to compound disparity and perpetuate inequity, this Article provides further evidence of the family regulation system's failings. ","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"185 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121839030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-30DOI: 10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9921
Rise Staff
Rise is an advocacy organization in New York City dedicated to building the power of parents affected by the family policing system. Rise envisions communities free from injustice, family policing, and separation. Its mission is to support parents' leadership to dismantle the current family policing system by eliminating cycles of harm, surveillance, and punishment. Rise aims to create communities that invest in families and offer collective care, healing, and support. This Article shares the work Rise has performed to build an organizational culture that empowers parents and a political vision centered around parents' expertise.
{"title":"Centering Parent Leadership in the Movement to Abolish Family Policing","authors":"Rise Staff","doi":"10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9921","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9921","url":null,"abstract":"Rise is an advocacy organization in New York City dedicated to building the power of parents affected by the family policing system. Rise envisions communities free from injustice, family policing, and separation. Its mission is to support parents' leadership to dismantle the current family policing system by eliminating cycles of harm, surveillance, and punishment. Rise aims to create communities that invest in families and offer collective care, healing, and support. \u0000This Article shares the work Rise has performed to build an organizational culture that empowers parents and a political vision centered around parents' expertise. ","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"138 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116551699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-04DOI: 10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9149
Anna Arons
In a typical year, New York City’s vast family regulation system, fueled by an army of mandated reporters, investigates tens of thousands of reports of child neglect and abuse, policing almost exclusively poor Black and Latinx families even as the government provides those families extremely limited support. When the City shut down in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, this system shrunk in almost every conceivable way as mandated reporters retreated, caseworkers adopted less intrusive investigatory tactics, and family courts constrained their operations. Reports fell, the number of cases filed in court fell, and the number of children separated from their parents fell. At the same time, families found support elsewhere, through suddenly burgeoning mutual aid networks and infusions of new government entitlements. This large-scale reconfiguration of the family regulation system represents a short-term experiment in abolition: in this period, New Yorkers moved away from a system that oppressed poor Black and Latinx people and not only envisioned but built a more democratic and humane model to protect families. As this Article demonstrates, under this new model, families remained just as safe. Data from the courts and from the city’s Administration for Children’s Services reveal that there was no rise in child neglect or abuse during the shutdown period. Furthermore, once the City began to re-open, there was no perceivable “rebound effect,” i.e. a delayed, compensatory rise in reports. This Article positions the COVID-19 shutdown period as a successful case study, demonstrating one possible future absent the massive, oppressive apparatus of the family regulation system.
{"title":"An Unintended Abolition","authors":"Anna Arons","doi":"10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9149","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9149","url":null,"abstract":"In a typical year, New York City’s vast family regulation system, fueled by an army of mandated reporters, investigates tens of thousands of reports of child neglect and abuse, policing almost exclusively poor Black and Latinx families even as the government provides those families extremely limited support. When the City shut down in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, this system shrunk in almost every conceivable way as mandated reporters retreated, caseworkers adopted less intrusive investigatory tactics, and family courts constrained their operations. Reports fell, the number of cases filed in court fell, and the number of children separated from their parents fell. At the same time, families found support elsewhere, through suddenly burgeoning mutual aid networks and infusions of new government entitlements. This large-scale reconfiguration of the family regulation system represents a short-term experiment in abolition: in this period, New Yorkers moved away from a system that oppressed poor Black and Latinx people and not only envisioned but built a more democratic and humane model to protect families. \u0000As this Article demonstrates, under this new model, families remained just as safe. Data from the courts and from the city’s Administration for Children’s Services reveal that there was no rise in child neglect or abuse during the shutdown period. Furthermore, once the City began to re-open, there was no perceivable “rebound effect,” i.e. a delayed, compensatory rise in reports. This Article positions the COVID-19 shutdown period as a successful case study, demonstrating one possible future absent the massive, oppressive apparatus of the family regulation system.","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134313850","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-04DOI: 10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9470
Shanta Trivedi, Matthew Fraidin
Ostensibly, the "child welfare system" exists to safeguard the well-being of minors. However, child welfare agencies often exercise their authority by removing children in the aftermath of family crises that less disruptive upstream interventions could have mitigated. Children from low-income families are over-represented in the child welfare system; they are removed too frequently from communities that have been systemically marginalized.
{"title":"A Role for Communities in Reasonable Efforts to Prevent Removal","authors":"Shanta Trivedi, Matthew Fraidin","doi":"10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9470","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v12i1.9470","url":null,"abstract":"Ostensibly, the \"child welfare system\" exists to safeguard the well-being of minors. However, child welfare agencies often exercise their authority by removing children in the aftermath of family crises that less disruptive upstream interventions could have mitigated. Children from low-income families are over-represented in the child welfare system; they are removed too frequently from communities that have been systemically marginalized. ","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"707 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116971048","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-05DOI: 10.52214/cjrl.v11i3.8740
V. Copeland
Front-line public “Child Welfare” caseworkers, also known as emergency response or investigative caseworkers, play a significant role in the “Child Welfare” system. Placed in an intermediary role within the system, investigative caseworkers are tasked with making critical decisions while attempting to advocate for families and uphold the system’s policies. To understand the caseworker decision-making processes more in-depth, a qualitative study was conducted with eighteen investigative caseworkers in four different counties. The guiding research question of the current study was: “What impacts the decisionmaking processes in which child protective service workers investigate and substantiate referred cases of child maltreatment?” Findings revealed several nuances and extensive complexities in how workers navigated often contradictory roles within the system. Important emerging themes include caseworkers’ use of surveillance during investigation and multi-institution partnership indecision-making processes. This Comment discusses the ways in which caseworkers react to and navigate ambiguity and parental resistance during investigations, lending an often-overlooked exploration into various nuances within the decision-making apparatus. Understanding nuances in the complex web of decision-making and information-gathering may lead to novel ways of thinking about how the “Child Welfare” system addresses child protection.
{"title":"“It's the Only System We've Got”","authors":"V. Copeland","doi":"10.52214/cjrl.v11i3.8740","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v11i3.8740","url":null,"abstract":"Front-line public “Child Welfare” caseworkers, also known as emergency response or investigative caseworkers, play a significant role in the “Child Welfare” system. Placed in an intermediary role within the system, investigative caseworkers are tasked with making critical decisions while attempting to advocate for families and uphold the system’s policies. To understand the caseworker decision-making processes more in-depth, a qualitative study was conducted with eighteen investigative caseworkers in four different counties. The guiding research question of the current study was: “What impacts the decisionmaking processes in which child protective service workers investigate and substantiate referred cases of child maltreatment?” Findings revealed several nuances and extensive complexities in how workers navigated often contradictory roles within the system. Important emerging themes include caseworkers’ use of surveillance during investigation and multi-institution partnership indecision-making processes. This Comment discusses the ways in which caseworkers react to and navigate ambiguity and parental resistance during investigations, lending an often-overlooked exploration into various nuances within the decision-making apparatus. Understanding nuances in the complex web of decision-making and information-gathering may lead to novel ways of thinking about how the “Child Welfare” system addresses child protection.","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123022526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.52214/cjrl.v11i3.8786
Nicola Galvan
This piece is the editor's note for the Columbia Journal of Race and Law's 11th annual symposium issue, titled Strengthened Bonds: Abolishing the Child Welfare System and Re-Envisioning Child Well-Being.
{"title":"Editor's Note","authors":"Nicola Galvan","doi":"10.52214/cjrl.v11i3.8786","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v11i3.8786","url":null,"abstract":"This piece is the editor's note for the Columbia Journal of Race and Law's 11th annual symposium issue, titled Strengthened Bonds: Abolishing the Child Welfare System and Re-Envisioning Child Well-Being.","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127338260","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This piece is a written version of Professor Dorothy Roberts' keynote speech at the Columbia Journal of Race and Law's 11th annual symposium, titled Strengthened Bonds: Abolishing the Child Welfare System and Re-Envisioning Child Well-Being.
{"title":"Keynote","authors":"D. Roberts","doi":"10.1109/icpm.2019.00011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/icpm.2019.00011","url":null,"abstract":"This piece is a written version of Professor Dorothy Roberts' keynote speech at the Columbia Journal of Race and Law's 11th annual symposium, titled Strengthened Bonds: Abolishing the Child Welfare System and Re-Envisioning Child Well-Being.","PeriodicalId":212657,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Race and Law","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134281141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：