Timely Permanency or Unnecessary Removal?: Tips for Advocates for Children Who Spend Less Than 30 Days in Foster Care
Removal and placement in foster care is child welfare’s most severe intervention, contemplated as “a last resort rather than the first.” Federal law, with an overarching goal of preventing unnecessary removals, bolsters this principle by requiring juvenile and family courts to carefully oversee the removal of children to foster care. Expansive research reminds the field that removal, while often necessary, is not a benign intervention. Physically, legally, and emotionally separating children from their parent(s) can traumatize children in lasting ways. Yet review of federal data concerning children in foster care reveal a troubling narrative: each year, tens of thousands of children are removed and placed in foster care for less than 30 days. Most of these children return to the same home from which they were removed. This article discusses the experiences of these children and highlights strategies to promote a healthy child welfare system that removes children from their families only when absolutely necessary.
Sankaran, Vivek, co-author. "Timely Permanency or Unnecessary Removal?" Christopher Church and Monique Mitchell, co-authors. ABA Child L. Prac. 36, no. 3 (2017): 71-2.
Courts Commons, Family Law Commons, Juvenile Law Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons
This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or downloaded or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.