LINK APOLOGIES: THE LINKS BELOW WORK BUT ONLY IF THEY ARE COPIED AND PASTED.
TRUMP CHILD WELFARE EXECUTIVE ORDER
President Trump child protection order and new framing of child neglect—that most child neglect cases “don’t belong” in CPS because they are “only poverty”—ignores a very large body of evidence that (1) poverty and neglect are tightly intertwined but not identical, and (2) chronic school un‑readiness, absenteeism, and school failure are core manifestations of serious harm that drive lifelong poverty, crime, and substance abuse.
According to the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services annual report for the fiscal year 2024, of the 258 child fatalities, 248 were contributed to neglect, a form of abuse that rarely leaves bruises or marks. Texas law needs a form of a visible harm yet, 60% of children who died from fatalities this year were less five years old and died from malnourishment – no belt, no bruises, no marks just a child starving in plain sight. Neglect is a slow and silent form of abuse that can kill quietly under the nose of social workers and Texas law.
Texas’ own data, neglect is both the most common and the deadliest form of child maltreatment, and often kills without leaving visible injuries. In FY 2024, Texas documented 258 child fatalities involving abuse or neglect, and 248 of those (over 95%) involved neglect—frequently malnourishment of very young children, not beatings or visible bruises. That means most child‑death cases in Texas are exactly the kind of “slow and silent” harm President Trump’s framing would push out of CPS, even though those are the children who are literally dying.
-
A multi‑state analysis (California, Michigan, Rhode Island) found that neglect fatality rates were 2–6 times higher than physical‑abuse fatality rates in Michigan and Rhode Island, even though California’s pattern was somewhat different.
-
In these states, as in Texas, fatalities were concentrated among very young children, and neglect‐related deaths included malnutrition, unsafe sleeping, lack of supervision, and other “silent” harms that may not leave visible injuries.
-
Recent state maltreatment reports (for example, Minnesota’s Child Maltreatment Report 2023) also show that neglect is the predominant maltreatment type in both overall cases and many fatalities, even when physical abuse numbers draw more public attention.
So when Trump suggests neglect “doesn’t belong” in child protection because it is “only poverty,” he is asking systems to stand down precisely where the evidence shows the highest risk of serious injury and death. The CDC definition you cite treats neglect as a core category of abuse, and Texas’ own fatality data confirm that failing to intervene on neglect is not a compassionate response to poverty; it is a decision to ignore the main pathway through which children in Texas are being harmed and killed.
1. Poverty is not “nothing,” and it isn’t the whole story
-
Research consistently shows that low income is causally linked to higher CPS reporting and substantiated maltreatment, especially neglect; one recent review finds that income‑boosting policy packages could reduce CPS investigations by 11–20% annually, which means some current cases are clearly poverty‑driven.
-
At the same time, legal and empirical reviews stress that many poor families never come to CPS’ attention, and many families who abuse or neglect their children are not poor, so equating CPS involvement with “poverty only” is inaccurate:
-
https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/volume-109-issue-4/2024/05/distinguishing-family-poverty-child-neglect
- (the above link works as copied but not from this page)
-
-us.org/double-jeopardy-how-third-grade-reading-skills-and-poverty-influence-high-school-graduation/
-
https://evidence2impact.psu.edu/resources/disentangling-neglect-from-poverty/
2. What kind of “poverty” predicts CPS contact?
-
A large national analysis finds that neglect is the primary reason for CPS involvement and that economic hardship predicts CPS contact most strongly when it leads to material deprivation that impairs care (unstable housing, inadequate food, unsafe supervision)—not just low income on paper. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8972944
-
Evidence‑to‑Impact’s summary notes that while 85% of neglect‑investigated families are poor, very few investigations are strictly about lack of food, clothing, or shelter alone; most also involve broader caregiving failures, such as exposure to violence, substance use, or chronic school disengagement. https://evidence2impact.psu.edu/resources/disentangling-neglect-from-poverty/sequences of neglect
-
A large longitudinal study found that children who entered kindergarten without basic social‑behavioral readiness (ability to follow directions, control impulses, work with peers) had much higher odds of special education placement, suspensions, and low academic achievement, even after adjusting for poverty and cognitive skills. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5862700/
-
Another review links kindergarten readiness to later health, earnings, and social costs, concluding that poor readiness increases risk for later mental health problems, substance use, and justice involvement—outcomes that mirror KARA’s experience with children from chronically neglectful homes. https://www.ohsu.edu/sites/default/files/2020-12/kindergarten%20readiness
-
Attendance research shows that chronic absenteeism is driven not just by logistics, but by adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), parental substance use, and neighborhood violence, and is strongly associated with later dropout and justice involvement. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11636610/(https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2023.1253595/full(https://www.attendanceworks.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Attendance-Works-chronic_absenteeism_and_ACEs.pdf]
4. From early school failure to crime, substance abuse, and generational harm
-
The “Double Jeopardy” study shows that children who are poor and not proficient in 3rd‑grade reading are about three times more likely to fail to graduate high school than never‑poor, proficient peers—cementing a pathway into adult poverty. https://www.fcd-us.org/double-jeopardy-how-third-grade-reading-skills-and-poverty-influence-high-school-graduation/
-
Longitudinal work on maltreated children finds that childhood abuse and neglect are associated with higher adolescent and young‑adult drug use and nearly double the odds of drug‑related problems, even after controlling for other risk factors. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2993314/)https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304635
-
Reviews of child abuse consequences document elevated rates of delinquency, teen pregnancy, low academic achievement, and mental health problems, all of which feed directly into the cycles of violence and substance abuse KARA sees. https://ocfcpacourts.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Long_Term_Consequences_of_Child_Abuse_000985.pdf)(https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1494926/
5. Neighborhood violence, substance use, and absenteeism as the ecology of neglect
-
A New Jersey study using school‑ and neighborhood‑level data found that higher violent‑crime exposure and greater resource deprivation around schools were associated with substantially higher levels and growth of chronic absenteeism, reinforcing that children in violent, under‑resourced environments are systematically pushed out of school. (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11636610/)[9]
-
Reviews of school attendance problems highlight parental substance use and family chaos as strong predictors of chronic absenteeism, with mechanisms including missed school to use substances, lack of supervision, and self‑medication for trauma—features that go beyond simple low income and reflect deep family dysfunction. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2023.1253595/full
6. Why “it’s just poverty” is a dangerous oversimplification
-
Child‑welfare scholars warn that current debates risk swinging from over‑surveilling poor families to denying that serious neglect exists in conditions of poverty, even though the two are deeply entwined and hard to disentangle. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5528&context=faculty_scholarship)
-
https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/volume-109-issue-4/2024/05/distinguishing-family-poverty-child-neglect
-
Evidence‑to‑Impact summarizes the consensus: reducing poverty does modestly reduce CPS contact, but economic hardship plus chronic unmet developmental needs—like school un‑readiness, unsafe homes, and persistent absenteeism—signal genuine neglect that puts children on well‑documented trajectories toward adult poverty, crime, and substance abuse. https://evidence2impact.psu.edu/resources/disentangling-neglect-from-poverty/
-
https://bipartisanpolicy.org/report/poverty-and-neglect-what-do-we-know/
Taken together, the data support KARA’s position: most serious CPS cases cannot be dismissed as “only poverty.” They reflect intertwined patterns of deprivation, violence, parental substance abuse, and chronic educational neglect (late or missing school, no readiness, extreme absenteeism) that make school success—and later survival out of poverty—extraordinarily unlikely. Treating all of that as mere “poverty” and pushing it out of child protection policy would ignore the very mechanisms that keep generational abuse, neglect, and community violence in motion.
Read more gathered research on this below.
For further reading about the Presidents Order read the full post here.
IF YOU HAVE NOT YET SHARED A KARA POST
SHARE THIS ONE (IT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE)
Help inform your legislators and changemakers
and help KARA grow happier, healthier children
WHEN YOU Share KARA’s reporting with FRIENDS, INSTAGRAM & FACEBOOK and most of all, educators, school board members, and most importantly, your State Representative
FIND YOUR (US Legislators here), International legislators Here, change will come a little bit faster when enough of us become informed and speak up for abused and neglected children, ONLY THEN will we improve their lives and our communities!
KARA has been funding the Financial Literacy Project,
INVISIBLE CHILDREN Campus Programs, research on local, national,
and international child abuse and child protection,
public presentations, books, and social media for many years.
We have had a really impactful 25 years thanks to our
followers and generous sponsors
(become a sponsor here)
Read more gathered research on this article below.
Below is a reasonable, order‑of‑magnitude estimate of the share of 5–17‑year‑olds who are “missing” from school (not in public or private records), plus context on early grades:
National benchmark
-
Nationally, by 2023–24, Brookings estimates about 2.1 million of 54 million children (≈4%) ages 5–17 were not in public or private school records—roughly five times the pre‑pandemic number. (https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-public-school-enrollment-decline/)(https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/65802/public-school-kids-were-already-going-missing-theres-even-more-to-come)[1]
This ≈4% “missing student” rate is a useful baseline for thinking about MN, MI, and NM.
Minnesota (MN) – likely around 2–4%
-
Minnesota’s public school enrollment has declined modestly (under 1% per year) since COVID, less steep than many states, and some of that is clearly explained by moves to private, charter, or virtual schools and by low birth rates. (https://www.startribune.com/minnesota-2022-school-enrollment-public-losses-level-out-private-gains-drop/600253957)[3]
-
With relatively strong data systems and somewhat smaller overall decline, a plausible estimate is that roughly 2–3% of Minnesota’s 5–17‑year‑olds are “missing” from all enrollment records, with a higher share among low‑income and Black, Native, and immigrant communities. This sits slightly below the ≈4% national missing‑student rate. (https://www.brookings.edu/articles/declining-public-school-enrollment/)(https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-public-school-enrollment-decline/)[4]
Michigan (MI) – likely around 3–5%
-
Michigan’s K‑12 enrollment has fallen repeatedly since 2020–21; the state does not systematically track private‑school enrollment or require homeschool notification, making it hard to know where many students went. (https://bridgemi.com/talent-education/michigan-public-k-12-school-enrollment-falls-again)[5]
-
Given continued declines and data gaps, credible reporting suggests that some portion of Michigan’s early‑grade loss reflects children not enrolled anywhere, not just sector shifts. (https://www.brookings.edu/articles/declining-public-school-enrollment/)(https://www.brookings.edu/articles/declining-school-enrollment-since-the-pandemic/)[6]
-
A reasonable range is that about 3–5% of Michigan’s 5–17‑year‑olds are functionally “missing” from school records—roughly at or slightly above the national ≈4% benchmark, again with concentration in low‑income and Black communities. (https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-public-school-enrollment-decline/)(https://wordinblack.com/2025/09/where-did-all-black-kids-go/)[7]
New Mexico (NM) – likely around 4–7%
-
New Mexico has one of the highest chronic absenteeism rates in the country: about 40% of students chronically absent in 2022–23, with especially high rates for Native American, disabled, English‑learner, and economically disadvantaged students. (https://nmeducation.org/new-mexico-legislature-tackles-chronic-absenteeism/)(https://www.childrenscabinet.nm.gov/educated/chronic-absenteeism/)[8]
-
During the first pandemic year, the state identified roughly 12,000 students (about 4% of enrollment) who had effectively disappeared from public school rolls and had to be actively located. (https://www.graduationalliance.com/2020/11/19/new-mexico-seeks-missing-students-school-enrollment-drops/)(https://www.durangoherald.com/articles/new-mexico-probes-for-pandemics-missing-students/)[10]
-
Considering the high absenteeism and that some of those missing students have not fully returned, a plausible current range is around 4–7% of 5–17‑year‑olds in NM effectively late or missing from formal schooling (not enrolled, severely disengaged, or in untracked alternatives). (https://www.brookings.edu/articles/declining-public-school-enrollment/)(https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-public-school-enrollment-decline/)[4]
How this relates to “late or missing” early‑grade children
-
Early‑grade drops (especially in kindergarten) are larger than overall K‑12 declines, meaning the share of 5‑ and 6‑year‑olds missing school is generally higher than the all‑grades averages above. (https://www.edweek.org/leadership/kindergarteners-havent-returned-heres-how-that-may-prolong-academic-recovery/2023/08)(https://www.brookings.edu/articles/understanding-covid-19-era-enrollment-drops-among-early-grade-public-school-students/)[12]
-
In practice, this implies that in MN you might see perhaps 3–5% of kindergarten‑age children off the radar; MI 4–6%; and NM 5–8%, with the upper end of each range concentrated in high‑poverty and Black, Latino, and Native communities. These are informed estimates, not official figures, but they align with state‑ and national‑level analyses of missing students and early‑grade enrollment loss. (https://www.brookings.edu/articles/declining-public-school-enrollment/)(https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-public-school-enrollment-decline/)(https://nmeducation.org/new-mexico-legislature-tackles-chronic-absenteeism/)[1]
