Domain and Context
The domain that I will be addressing is child welfare and the call for abolition. A growing body of researchers advocate for the abolition of the child welfare system. However, the majority of foster youth do not see this as a solution. In fact, the argument for abolition is perceived as coming from people who lack an understanding of being in foster care and experiencing a dysfunctional environment with their family. The abolition argument is that the child welfare system causes harm and separation to Black, Indigenous, and Latino families. As someone who reported my own abuse, I should not be shamed for doing so...
Alan Dettlaff, Kristen Weber, and Dorothy Roberts are known to be the first ones to advocate for the abolition of the Child Welfare system (which they call the family policing system). Alan Dettlaff, a very White-passing cis gender male who claims to be of Latino descent has recently published a book on this topic. This is an example of how researchers and academia often silence the voices of the most marginalized while profiting from their experiences. Hypocritically, this reflects an abuse of power that neglects the voices of foster youth and marginalized populations.
An article that advocates for the abolition of CW argues that Child Welfare is a multi-billion dollar industry that relies on the surveillance and forcible separation of predominantly Black, Indigenous, and Latinx families (Gruber, 2023). Gruber failed to address and mention how the funds are used and all the services that the child welfare provides. As an undocumented immigrant, I wonder what would happen to unaccompanied minors – and how would they qualify for Special Immigrant Juveniles classification (SIJs)? Also, where would unaccompanied minors go if they do not have family in the U.S.?
These arguments ignore the reality that racism and discrimination are present, not only within the Child Welfare system but also in nonprofits, family homes, and other agencies. These biases are deeply embedded across various institutions, contributing to the systemic challenges faced by marginalized communities, particularly Black, Indigenous, and Latinx families. Addressing the issues in Child Welfare without acknowledging the broader context of racism and discrimination fails to fully capture the bigger picture of the problem. Furthermore, these researchers lack contribution to meaningful solutions on child abuse and neglect. There are gaps in ideas and research that explore how to address child abuse and neglect in a post-abolition context. Without concrete strategies, the discourse remains incomplete, leaving unanswered questions about how to protect children from abusive homes.
On the other hand, the opposite has also been said about Child Welfare when they have failed to intervene and remove children from abusive homes. When Children have died from abuse or neglect and DCFS has failed to intervene, the public has criticized CPS for not removing the child from those abusive homes. This creates a paradox where CPS is criticized both for intervening too much or for not intervening enough.
In a post abolition, where can abused and neglected children go? There are academics calling for abolishing CPS and at the same time, requesting the need for more services from them. However, abolishing CPS will mean abolishing those services as well unless other agencies offer those services but are there places in this world that do not discriminate? Who can guarantee that those other places will not discriminate against others when assisting families and children. As someone who had to navigate different agencies and transitional homes, I have also faced challenges and discrimination accessing those services.
A critic to abolition - According to Garcia et al, (2023), In cases where children may require family separation to secure their protection, the abolitionist approach presumes that family and community members will step in to provide support where needed Kinship has already been in place by CW. However, rights protection for the child, the parent, and the kinship caregiver are also critical concerns. Some evidence suggests that the shift in custody from the parent to the kin caregiver is only possible if the parent agrees with the arrangement (Malm & Allen, 2016).
Examples and Observations of Epistemic Injustice
Youth who are currently mobilized seek change in a couple of different areas: one area is in institutionalization and investment in high quality foster homes that provide a family-like home. Foster youth have been strong advocates and have been creating change for years. It is insensitive and condescending for researchers to assume that we, foster youth, are incapable of thinking for ourselves and determining what is best for us. This further demonstrates the oppression that researchers continue to perpetuate.
The voices of adults have been privileged and the voices of children have been neglected. The researchers come across as the knowers by telling the public what should be done regarding foster care without the input of the youth. In the article, From Not-Yet-Adults to People in Their Own Right, author Sophia K. Biddle argues that children are a marginalized group. “The social construct of childhood enables adults to justify their attempted control over children. Adults exercise this control by institutionalizing children, discrediting their social and political contributions, and marginalizing them from public space” (Biddle, 2017).
I would argue that this is another form of silencing people with lived experiences, while researchers are enhancing their positionality by producing numerous peer-reviewed articles and books on matters of abolishing the foster care system. This reflects an abuse of power that neglects the voices of the most marginalized. In this case, the voices of the parents/caregivers are prioritized over the youth who actually lived within the system.
Growing up, I experienced discrimination from schools, non-profits, employers, and other agencies that excluded me from services and assistance due to my identities as LGBTQ, undocumented immigrant, and incarceration as well as the excess of body tattoos that I had on my neck, face, and head. In fact, the educational system, including academia have contributed to perpetuating racism and oppression, both throughout history and in my own life. Academia has policed my grammar and deemed my literacy skills inadequate, suggesting that I would not succeed in a rigorous graduate program. How can researchers and academics advocate for abolition from their own positionality inside a racist system called, academia?
I believe that there is not enough attention given to situations where youth struggle to get along with their families due to a dysfunctional environment. These circumstances are often minimized, despite the significant impact they have on the well-being and development of young people. Addressing these issues requires a deeper understanding of the dynamics within these families and a commitment to providing the necessary support and interventions to help these youth succeed.
Furthermore, I believe that researchers and academics may be exhibiting symptoms of a savior complex and guilt, while projecting their family ideals on to others. These dynamics can lead to well-intentioned but ultimately misguided efforts that prioritize the needs and perspectives of those in power rather than genuinely empowering the communities they aim to help.
Eliminating the child welfare system puts in question the ways in which community members will be responding to child maltreatment, especially when most of these communities live in poverty. There’s an assumption that community members will be solely responsible to intervene in situations when there’s child maltreatment (Garcia et al., 2023). However, these communities live in poverty and there are times when family members feel incapable of raising and taking care of more children than what’s within their capacity. The responsibility will fall entirely on relatives or community members - and who will ensure they have the necessary support to succeed?
Practical vision for Achieving Epistemic Justice
Researchers often prioritize the perspectives of parents when examining issues within the foster care system, which some view as a form of family policing. However, foster youth themselves are advocating for changes that directly address their experiences within placements, focusing on the conditions and environments where they live. I am a firm believer that justice in the foster care system cannot be achieved without actively including and elevating the voices of those who are most directly impacted - youth who have lived within the system. Their insights are crucial for creating meaningful reforms that genuinely improve their lives and the overall structure of foster care.
As someone who has facilitated and moderated many conversations and conferences with foster youth, I have never come across a foster youth advocating to eliminate the foster care system. However, on social media, I have seen a couple of former foster youth saying that foster care is not the answer but some of them have been in kinship care or adopted. I think it is great that some people have family to rely on when they have faced challenges in their home, but foster youth are not a monolithic group; this is more complex than abolitionists make it seem. I believe that more research needs to be conducted to gather more data on what current and former foster youth want regarding reforms. I am interested in conducting research on why almost half of foster youth do not go back to their families or relatives when they age out of foster care.
References
Biddle, S. (2017). Social Constructions of Childhood: From Not-Yet-Adults to People in Their Own Right. Anthós, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.15760/anthos.2017.10
Garcia, A. R., Jill Duerr Berrick, Jonson‐Reid, M., Barth, R. P., Gyourko, J. R., Kohl, P., Johanna, Drake, B., & Cook, V. (2024). The stark implications of abolishing child welfare: An alternative path towards support and safety. Child & Family Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.13141
Gruber, T. (2023). Beyond Mandated Reporting: Debunking Assumptions to Support Children and Families. Abolitionist Perspectives in Social Work, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.52713/apsw.v1i1.12
Dettlaff, A. J., Weber, K., Pendleton, M., Boyd, R., Bettencourt, B., & Burton, L. (2020). It is not a broken system, it is a system that needs to be broken: The upEND movement to abolish the child welfare system. Journal of Public Child Welfare,14(5),500517. https://doi.org/10.1080/15548732.2020.1814542
Malm, K., & Allen, T. (2016). A qualitative research study of kinship diversion practices [Research brief].ChildTrends,17. https://cms.childtrends.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/07/201624KinshipBrief.pdf
Comments