REASONING PROCESSES OF SOCIAL WORKERS Part 369 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

There must be better decision-making in our child care system. I wonder whether social workers who have the responsibility for deciding the child's best interests are willing to evaluate that approach to decision-making and possibly to develop their capacity for critical thinking.

Periodic public inquiries into child abuse tragedies in British Columbia have demonstrated a level of public concern about the services that are designed by our Legislature to protect children. These inquiries have identified faults in the practice by professionals but the findings of such inquiries although spaced years apart from one another reveal similarities which is indicative of recommendations having had little impact upon improving practice. Quite possibly the most effective systemic transformation will come from self-improvement by social workers themselves.

This is but one example of a problem area. Professionals typically base assessments of risk on a narrow range of evidence. What has become apparent is that such assessments are biased toward the information that is readily available. Workers consistently overlook or ignore important data that is known to other professionals. The range of evidence relied upon is also biased towards more memorable data, expressly the evidence that may be graphic, concrete and that which arouses emotion. Moreover, it will be evidence that is either the first or last information that was received. Much of the evidence is often inaccurate, primarily because it is derives from biased or dishonest reporting or from errors during communication.

Of great concern is the observation of a pattern that new evidence is accepted if it is supportive of the existing MCFD view of the family. It is a significant issue that professionals are reticent to revise their opinions even in the face of a growing body of evidence pitted against the existing view.

It is unfortunate and absolutely dangerous to families that the errors in professional reasoning in the course of child protection work are not rare and random but predictable because people intuitively try to simplify reasoning processes when making complex judgments. Granted, such errors can be reduced and avoided entirely when social workers are aware of them and endeavor consciously to confront them. There is a great need for a balanced relationship between intuition and formal analytic thinking in decision-making and practice. Effective child protection practice requires both.

CONTENDING TO KEEP THE BOYS BUT KNOWING IT’S WRONG / Part 175

CONTENDING TO KEEP THE BOYS BUT KNOWING IT’S WRONG

The Ministry’s lawyer thinks that the boys should be given back to their parents but he will ask that they not be returned. Figure that out!

This is the week when Judge Thomas Crabtree, newly appointed Chief Justice of British Columbia is scheduled to hear the counsel for the Ministry of Children and Family Development, Finn Jensen speak to the application that Paul and Zabeth Bayne have made through their lawyer, Doug Christie, to have their two sons, the eldest of their three children, returned to them immediately.

It has been expected that Mr. Jensen will make statements in opposition to this application. Well that’s professionalism for you. Because in fact, he informed his client, the Ministry of Children, that there was no evidence to support the continuing custody of the two boys. He made it clear that in his opinion he could not win this order in court. How can we know that? Well, his letter to Ministry execs was leaked. News media and networks have it. He counselled the Ministry to return the boys to the parents, namely Paul and Zabeth. This was his professional advice last spring 2009 but the Ministry ignored that advice. It was as though they were saying, “we don’t care that there is no evidence to support keeping the boys.”

So here Mr. Jensen is in court this coming Thursday morning obliged to argue for the retention of the boys because his advice to his clients was disregarded. At least if no one has changed their minds that will be Mr. Jensen’s role. Don’t you admire such professionalism? No? To be able to argue ardently that there is justification for the Ministry’s hold on the boys when he himself believes the opposite.

I understand that there is principle involved in representing a client. What the client wants, the client gets. A client is not obliged to take your advice. There is a significant payment for services rendered. Of course I understand that too. What do you do with your conscience? That’s what puzzles me. When you know that the client is not misled by inaccurate information or imprudently diligent but rather, recklessly wrong, it is the epitome of professional practice to continue to represent your client’s cause. Somebody has to do it.

Art by Griff Williams, 2005

For Love and For Justice / Part 120 / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Here is a USA website, the content of which becomes a challenging read. It is entitled and subtitled in this way. ‘NATIONAL COALITION FOR CHILD PROTECTION REFORM, Working To Help America's Vulnerable Children By Changing Public Policy Concerning Child Abuse, Foster Care, And Family Preservation.'

NCCPR advocates for systemic reform. The membership of this coalition is comprised of professionals who have been involved in or with the child welfare system within the United States. This coalition provides them with a forum for affecting positive changes to policies that concern child abuse, foster care and family preservation. They are most concerned to make the system better for vulnerable children.

Besides the website rich with article and document resources, NCCPR also operates a blog called ‘NCCPR Child Welfare Blog (News and commentary from the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform concerning child abuse, child welfare, foster care, and family preservation.)'

In its rationale for child advocacy NCCPR states, “But we don’t see getting the word out or “raising awareness” as an end in itself. Rather, our goal is reducing the number of children needlessly torn from everyone loving and familiar. In addition to sparing children from the harm that comes from being consigned to America’s chaotic system of foster care, keeping those children out of the system also gives child welfare agencies more time to find children in real danger.”

The careful research and the boldly accurate writing has earned the contributors high respect among journalists and reform-minded child welfare professionals. Among the comments about this advocate group are the following.

“A voice of reason …[that] can find fault with an agency without sounding like [they’re] denouncing the Third Reich.” --Tom Lyons, Columnist, Sarasota (Florida) Herald-Tribune

“You are a tremendous force and asset to children across the country and I have nothing but the utmost respect for your work. I think you have made a tremendous difference in people's lives through your media advocacy work. … Now more than ever the services of NCCPR are needed to keep the heat on. You helped reporters like me stay focused, to not be swayed by the state bureaucratic and political machines and to remember what child welfare and child protection is really supposed to be about - helping children and preserving families - which, sadly often gets lost in the rhetoric of the day …” --Colin Poitras, former reporter, Hartford Courant

“A remarkable advocate for child welfare reform [with] an impact all over the country.” --Benjamin Wolf, Director, Children and Institutionalized Persons Project, American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois (counsel for plaintiffs, Illinois class-action child welfare suit)

“NCCPR has been a key support for the child welfare reforms in Maine. … The strong voice of NCCPR gives voice to ideas that challenge the status quo. The children of Maine need that voice. … The work that [NCCPR] has done with the media in Maine has helped them understand the complexity of the child welfare system and has helped them to understand that the reforms are in the best interest of children and the people of Maine.” --James Beougher, Director, Office of Child and Family Services, Maine Department of Health and Human Services