KARA advocates for the people, policies and programs.

that improve the lives of abused and neglected children.

KARA Signature Video (4 minute)

 

Safe Passage for Children of Minnesota has delivered hard news on what appear to be terrible practices guiding child protection in our community. This comes at a time when reporting and transparency about at risk children is very limited due to the COVID pandemic, an overwhelmed media and politics.

Not long ago, MN children were living with the terrible circumstances that killed four year-old Eric Dean and prompted our Governor to declare child protection a colossal failure.

The task force that was formed soon after did change some of the dangerous circumstances that were hurting children (like the four MN counties screening out 90% of their child abuse calls and social workers unable to reference a families prior history of child abuse when investigating a new case).

Safe Passage has reported on what appears to be manipulated data showing positive outcomes for Family Assessment Evaluations when in fact the outcomes were not positive.

People working in overwhelmed institutions frequently feel huge pressure to not look bad. It helps no one and certainly not the children in need of our protection when data is manipulated or other lies are told. If the public were more aware of the depth and scope of the difficult task of keeping children safe, more attention would be paid and more resources available. Please share this information widely – it could make a difference in the life of an at risk child.

 

 

In their paper Issues in Differential Response (DR), Hughes, Rycus et. al. analyzed 57 studies of DR – known in Minnesota as “Family Assessment” (FA) – written between 1993 and 2010.  They noted that the few evaluations showing positive outcomes were mostly written by the same consultants and paid for by the creator and promoter of Differential Response, Casey Family Programs.

These favorable studies claimed that DR kept children safe while engaging parents more effectively than traditional approaches. Hughes and Rycus concluded that the evaluation authors manipulated data to obtain these findings, and that most other studies had opposite results. Piper et. al. analyzed an additional 50 studies in 2019 and reached similar conclusions.

The concerns raised about DR/FA in the child welfare literature are substantial.  Its proponents should acknowledge that and address these findings more fully than they have to date.

Hear this blog post, as well as our in-depth commentary, in this week’s podcast.

 

Click here to comment on this blog post
Tap to hear this blog post, as well as our in-depth commentary and analysis, in this week’s podcast