Don't throw out the babies with the bathwater...
Child Protection funding and other news this week.
With any new Presidential administration comes new priorities, and Trump 2.0 has quickly focused on cutting spending, including at USAID, the Administration for Children and Families, and in Medicaid. This column won’t dispute the argument that the federal government spends too much money. After all, uncontrolled deficit spending will have a significant negative impact on the quality of life for today’s children as they enter adulthood. At the same time, I hope federal budget hawks will consider a few important points as they look at both domestic and international spending intended to protect and support vulnerable, neglected, and abused children.
On the domestic front, we know that spending to prevent and end child abuse produces both human and financial benefits. Studies have demonstrated that children who suffer abuse and don’t receive appropriate assistance end up being financially supported by the state in some way (Medicaid, mental health care, prison costs). Moreover, society loses the benefit of their productivity.
A good example of those societal costs (both moral and financial) is demonstrated by a recent US Department of Health and Human Services study of children who were abandoned to foster care due to their significant mental and behavioral health needs. Between 2017 and 2019, up to 25,000 children whose parents could not obtain appropriate care for their children’s complex, disruptive behaviors came into the system. In my experience, many of these “relinquishments” could have been avoided if consistent, comprehensive treatment to address trauma, autism, and mental health issues were available to these children through Medicaid and CHIP. In Georgia during my time running the Division of Family and Children Services, we were spending over $50mm a year in state dollars to care for these children in youth. So, in cutting Medicaid and CHIP, I hope federal officials will take into account that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
On the international front, I’m frankly not understanding why USAID should be funding a charity with a middle-class (and up) constituency, in a developed nation, to support the “rights” of biological males to use women’s bathrooms. At the same time, foreign aid can be used wisely to advance our nation’s collective belief that children should be protected from violence, whether that aid is used to combat human trafficking in Cambodia or supporting recovery for victims of child abuse in Colombia. (Full disclosure: I’ve had the privilege of working on projects like this, so it’s my ox that’s being gored to some extent.) I understand the need to cut the deficit and to focus on priorities that advance our national interests. I believe demonstrating our belief that children should be protected from violence advances those interests and, at the same time, probably helps prevent illegal immigration to the US.
Change is hard, sometimes even chaotic. My hope — for both my colleagues who work in child welfare at the federal and international levels and for the vulnerable children they serve — is that this process helps focus assistance where it’s needed and respects those who are doing the work.
In other news:
On Long Island, NY, they’re recruiting former police officers to work in child protection.
The new administration first suspended, then reinstated, funding for legal assistance to unaccompanied minor immigrant children.
I catch up on federal child welfare policy at Zach Laris’ Substack, and you should, too.
Richard Wexler now thinks child welfare class-action litigation is a good thing, since one of the organizations that brings these lawsuits now supports his viewpoint.
In a blow to parental rights, the First Circuit Court of Appeals has found no harm in a school system’s helping a child transition gender identity and hide that transition from the parents.
On second thought, maybe we should be providing even “developed countries” with USAID funding to protect children, based on this horrid case from France.
Thanks for reading!