Merry Christmas!
...on our moral duty to keep families together.
An excerpt from Dickens’ A Christmas Carol1:
At this festive season of the year, Mr. Scrooge,” said the [one of the gentlemen], taking up a pen, “it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir.”
“Are there no prisons?” asked Scrooge.
“Plenty of prisons,” said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.
“And the Union workhouses?” demanded Scrooge. “Are they still in operation?”
“They are. Still,” returned the gentleman, “I wish I could say they were not.”
“The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?” said Scrooge.
“Both very busy, sir.”
“Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,” said Scrooge. “I’m very glad to hear it.”
“Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude,” returned the gentleman, “a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink, and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?”
“Nothing!” Scrooge replied.
“You wish to be anonymous?”
“I wish to be left alone,” said Scrooge. “Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don’t make merry myself at Christmas and I can’t afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.”
Last year I wrote a bit about Dickens’ famous tale and its connection to child welfare. Dickens helped launch the child protection movement, and for that he should be commended. But this Christmas, following a year in which so many critics have pointed out the effects of child welfare policy and law on minorities and those in poverty, I re-read the story with a bit of a different take.
I asked myself this question: are those of us who are supportive of our child welfare system a bit like Scrooge? Do we depend too much — of course, not on poor houses or prisons — but perhaps on foster care and juvenile detention?
I got to thinking a lot about how, sometimes, we rely on institutions — be it the child welfare agency, our group homes, or our foster care providers — as the answer. They are an answer, but we need to reframe the question. As the solicitor in Scrooge’s story says, a better way is to actually provide struggling families with food, drink, and warmth. For this work I have to commend programs like Together for Families that work to keep vulnerable families together, safe, and cared for. If we can do the preventive work necessary to help these families deal with the stresses of life, we can reduce the need for foster care.
Don’t get me wrong: I’m still concerned about the level of animosity that many in the media and academia display towards those who are trying to keep children safe in the midst of dangerous conditions. Child protective services are necessary, and demonizing them serves no one. But in the spirit of the season, I have to say: let’s do all we can to support those who are working so hard to keep families together.
In other news:
In the vein of that recent journalistic template I just decried, NBC News has a piece on how some parents’ parental rights are terminated quickly and, they suggest, unjustly.
Naomi Schaefer Riley has a counter-argument here.
Speaking of too much reliance on law enforcement to address children with serious needs, check out this situation of a school for children with behavioral health issues that regularly calls cops on kids.
Will New Jersey finally get out of its federal consent decree regulating its child welfare system?
For years we’ve heard stories of illegal adoptions. While changes to and better enforcement of the Hague Convention has helped, South Korea recently set up a commission to review international adoptions from that country.
Addressing the needs of children with gender dysphoria remains a hot topic. Here’s an article from South Carolina discussing how the Medical College of USC has backed off doing gender-transition work.
Finally, if you don’t click on ANYTHING ELSE in this post, please enjoy my favorite ad/Christmas Carol from Guatemala.
Your a big Scrooge! Bah humbug!!!!!!😡
Merry Christmas and thank you for the information on so many important issues. I have worked on all sides of the foster care system and sadly I believe there is a need for foster care. I do, however think that we need a much better assessment of risk before making such a life altering decision. Imagine if probable cause hearings happened before children were removed? What if a risk assessment was rolled out that really measured risk and the document was used in place of testimony for those removing children? Some workers remove kids quickly for fear that a child will die and they will shoulder the blame. Others leave kids in high risk situations because they don’t want to disrupt the family. In reality, a good risk assessment is a diagnostic tool that could provide some insight for many families. Many states have done the work already and Georgia could really benefit from learning from our neighbors. Thank you for the good work that you do for our most vulnerable population. A New Year awaits. Let’s pray for better days and solutions for a system that is currently failing.