U.S. public opinion polls suggest that average citizens have a surface understanding of child welfare; they recognize the complex decisions at stake in matters of child protection; they understand that a public response is sometimes required when children are in danger; and they acknowledge that the work is challenging. Social work academics have, for decades, noted the intricate and delicate balance required in assuring children's safety and honoring parents' freedom to care for children as they see fit. Recently, commentators from within and outside the field have argued that child welfare is an oppressive force toward communities, families, parents, and children. Some are calling for the complete eradication of the public child welfare system. This paper attempts to critically examine whether child welfare is systematically oppressive and if so, when, and to whom. At the same time, we offer suggestions to guide classroom discussions that will sharpen students' critical thinking skills on the topic.

This exploratory study examines youth (ages 15-17) attitudes about child protection. The study includes data from youth in four countries (Finland, Ireland, Norway, and the U.S.) (n = 2,010) to offer an international comparative perspective. The study also compares youth attitudes to adult attitudes in Norway and the U.S. Findings suggest that youth generally favour restricting parenting practices when an infant is experiencing risk and that views about unrestricted parenting are especially negative when risk to an infant rises. Youth had mixed views about whether it was appropriate to separate an infant from a parent and their views were more favourable under conditions of increased risk. In general, findings from the youth were similar to findings from adults. The study has implications for the design of child protective policies based on the views of the social actors ultimately affected by state-protective actions.

An increasing number of families in the United States have opted for homeschooling as an alternative to the formal schooling system. Estimates suggest that in the United States, between 5 % and 11 % of the school-age population participates in homeschooling each year-more than 1.5 million students across the country. Recent high-profile cases of severe child abuse and torture among homeschooled children, however, have highlighted the lack of mechanisms for the detection and prevention of child maltreatment. Though these cases have raised awareness about the potential risks of homeschooling, calls for tighter regulations are often met with resistance. Homeschooling advocates argue that increased regulation in the private homes of families criminalizes parents without sufficient evidence of heightened risk. Meanwhile, critics posit that policy intervention is needed to protect the subset of students at increased risk of maltreatment given the deinstitutionalized and isolated nature of homeschooling settings. In this discussion article, we examine the evidence for heightened risk of abuse and neglect in homeschooling environments through both a review of research and an examination of the policies surrounding homeschooling and child maltreatment across U.S. states. Because of the lack of reliable data and the topic's highly political nature, empirical evidence is limited. We found that although some states have attempted to add explicit child protections to homeschooling law, most efforts have been unsuccessful.

This open letter is published with encouragement of the editor-in-chief following its submission during the preparation of the invite-oriented special issue, “Shaping the Future of the Child Welfare System: Reform or Abolish?” ( Vol. 106, No. 2 ).

Objective: Youths within the child welfare system have high rates of mental health needs and chronic barriers to service access. The cascade-of-care approach was used to explore this population's use of mental health services. Methods: The mental health cascade was used with electronic medical record data to characterize service access among 97 youths served in a child welfare clinic. Results: Of the total sample, 82% of youths met criteria to identify those needing mental health services, 56% were referred for assessment and services, 33% completed an assessment, 24% had a treatment plan signed, and 17% received services. Time between steps averaged 64.52 days from screening to referral, 65.94 days from referral to assessment, 7.05 days from assessment to signed treatment plan, and 19.84 days from treatment plan to service initiation. Conclusions: Significant gaps in the care cascade occurred, especially at earlier stages. Multilayered efforts to reduce service gaps in this population are needed.

Adolescents in foster care report high rates of mental health needs, yet intervention access remains limited. Substance use commonly co-occurs with mental health symptoms, but availability of substance use services for foster youth is even more scant than mental health services. Technology has advanced access to behavioral health care across the lifespan, but only for certain sectors of the population. Little research focuses on leveraging technology to advance access for foster youth. We report open trial findings, as a precursor to launching a large-scale implementation science trial, on how a U.S. nationwide serving support system for foster youth, Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA), might be leveraged to expand access to substance use prevention resources via the FostrSpace app. FostrSpace provides asynchronous resources and synchronous navigator, peer support, and direct clinical intervention. A concurrent 6-session ECHO® substance use prevention telementoring curriculum was co-developed as a FostrSpace implementation strategy with a 6-member CASA Advisory Board. Seven youth-CASA dyads enrolled in the open trial. We used a mixed-methods design (quantitative assessment and qualitative exit interviews) to assess feasibility and acceptability of ECHO® sessions (CASA-only) and the usability of the FostrSpace app (youth-only). Six of seven of the youth accessed the app at least once, but a majority reported the app log-in process was burdensome and unappealing, thereby limiting them from frequently using the app. All youth rated the app features, design and content as appealing, helpful and relevant. ECHO® -FostrSpace session attendance was high (most attended 5 or more sessions) and CASAs found the content highly engaging and useful, especially regarding CASA-youth substance use communication skills. Technological barriers, such as log-in burden, can prevent youth in need from accessing relevant services and must be regularly assessed and resolved. Substance use education and skills-building for CASAs is novel and a viable implementation strategy to increase foster youth access to digital behavioral health services innovations. Substance use prevention content should be integrated within discussions on youth mental health and trauma to be most engaging and relevant. Findings are informing the subsequent hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial design of FostrSpace with 400 youth-CASA dyads across 10 CASA programs in California. Retrospectively registered.

Scholars and advocates are at odds about how to achieve higher levels of child safety and permanency. Calls for change include the recent upEND focus on eradication of child welfare services to a radical refocusing of the present system towards prevention/early intervention. To clarify the implications of reform over abolition, we seek to portray a future in which the abolition of child welfare has occurred, in juxtaposition to maintaining four core elements of established child maltreatment programmes around the world: (1) receiving and responding to community signals about the risk to children; (2) assessment of need coupled with a proportionate response; (3) rights protections to ensure fairness when placement outside the family is required; and (4) procedures for accountability and quality improvement. For each of these functions, we outline abolitionist advocates' positions and implications for children and parents. Across these elements, we delineate how assigning these responsibilities to communities, as suggested by upEND, would likely (1) exaggerate racial and economic inequities and (2) create structural barriers that would increase harm to children. We suggest several evidence-informed enhancements to practice, research and policy that would mitigate these inequities while also increasing safety and permanency.

Abstract: Jill Duerr Berrick uses a diverse range of data sources to examine the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on family dynamics and trends in child maltreatment and protection in the United States. While there was a sharp decline in official reports of child abuse and neglect during the height of the pandemic's lockdowns and social restrictions, hospital admissions for injuries to children from suspected maltreatment and abuse increased. Relying on official reports of abuse and neglect does not accurately reflect the experiences of the many children whose families were disrupted by the pandemic. Significantly, the implementation of remote learning meant teachers and other school personnel did not have the advantage of observing daily children's physical and mental condition. But self-reporting by parents and investigators shows heightened stress within families and an increased use of harsh parenting techniques. Berrick also explores the "toxic trio" of domestic violence, substance abuse, and evidence of diminished mental health. Berrick calls for comprehensive efforts to address child and family poverty by recognizing the urgent need to improve support systems for vulnerable populations, especially children in those families, during times of societal upheaval such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

This study examines a representative sample of adults in California (USA) and Norway, and their attitudes toward adoption versus foster care in a child protection case. The results show that a majority of people favour adoption for a child who has been removed due to maltreatment and cannot be reunified with birth parents. The study examines if people's rights orientation, favouring children or adults, or favouring birth parents or adoptive parents, or their institutional context explain their preferences about long-term care options. Data material consist of representative samples of the population in California (USA) and Norway (n = 2222), using a vignette survey design. Findings suggest that individuals with a child rights position favour adoption, but attitudes about birth parents' and adoptive parents' rights are not related to care option choices. Institutional context, anchored in policy feedback literature, partly explains the preference for adoption and the population's rights orientation. Further studies are necessary to confirm the role of rights attitudes and institutional context.

Abstract Jill Duerr Berrick examines one of the most distressful disruptions in family life, which occurs when parents are unable or unwilling to fulfill their obligations for their children’s well-being and the state must intervene to provide the necessary protection and care. She explains that the reasons for separation of children from their parents usually involve one or more of these adversities: destitution, danger, departure, death, disease, drug use, delivery, detention, deployment, divorce, desertion, diversion, or desire. Berrick highlights the wide variation in policies governing the role of the state and the family in the decision-making process regarding the removal of children with examples from high-income and low-income countries around the world. Her analysis of social policy trends in this area suggests an emerging agreement on some ideas about how the state should respond to children in situations requiring public protection, particularly a preference for out-of-home placements in foster care and kinship foster care over group homes and other forms of congregate care.