Protecting OK Children pt1 |
Previous | 1 of 3 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
This page
All
|
Each One Of Us Is A Report of the Oklahoma Child Abuse Study Commission L~· DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT TULSA COUNTY COURTHOUSE TULSA, OKLAHOMA 74103 DEBORAH C. SHALLCROSS (918) 584-0471 JUDGE EXT. 2400 The Honorable Henry Bellmon Governor, State of Oklahoma The Honorable Steve Lewis Speaker, House of Representatives The Honorable Robert V. Cullison President Pro Tempore, Senate Gentlemen: The legislation creating the Child Abuse Study Commission mandated that we examine all laws, policies, and procedures relevant to child abuse and neglect. Protecting Oklahoma's Children: Who Is Responsible? is the result of six months' work by citizens of Oklahoma who are committed to securing a safe and productive future for our children. Our children are our most precious resource for the future. The effort to develop industry and encourage investment in Oklahoma is one element to assure our prosperity in the twenty-first century. Our children, however, will perform the factory jobs we hope to create, repair aircraft, program computers, heal the sick and teach the next generation. They are Oklahoma's most important resource, and we all have an interest in protecting this asset. Unfortunately, as documented in our report, this most valuable resource is often being inadequately nurtured and prevented from reaching full potential. Thousands of Oklahoma's children are deliberately, battered, maimed, burned, and bruised each year. Children who are emotionally, physically, and/or sexually abused must struggle to become produc-tive citizens and loving parents of the next generation. We know that the vast majority of persons incar-cerated for violent crimes were abused as children. We know there is a correlation between teen preg-nancy and family violence, drug and alcohol addiction and family violence, juvenile delinquency and family violence. Children that are abused are more likely to become a burden to Oklahoma than an asset. None of the components of Oklahoma's child protection system is functioning adequately - including the most important component, the family - to protect or to provide services when a child is injured. Recognition of the magnitude of the problem and recognition of the failure of the current system to ensure children are safe in their families are initial steps to correcting the problem. We believe that implementation of our recommendations will improve the system which protects our children from abuse and neglect. We have outlined areas for further study which complete the task. With your leadership, we can begin to address the areas of concern identified in our report. Child abuse and neglect, however, is not a problem that government alone can or should resolve. Churches, extended families, professionals, and all citizens have a responsibility and a vested interest in preventing its occurrence. Thank you for your commitment to our children. ~~::'-{~~ Deborah C. Shallcross, Chair Child Abuse Study Commission OKLAHOMA CHILD ABUSE STUDY COMMISSION Membership 1988 - 89 CHAIR Deborah C. Shallcross Judge of the District Court, 14th Judicial District MEMBERS Nancy Anthony, Director Oklahoma City Community Foundation, Oklahoma City Robert Block, M.D., Professor and Vice Chair, Pediatrics University of Oklahoma College of Medicine - Tulsa Ben Brown State Senator, Oklahoma City Edna Brown, A.C.S.W., L.S.W. Edwin Fair Community Mental Health Center, Ponca City Bernest Cain State Senator, Oklahoma City Eva Carter, Director Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy, Oklahoma City Craig Corgan, District Attorney, Washington County, Bartlesville Kay Dudley State Senator, Oklahoma City Caroline Emerson, Designee of Attorney General Robert Henry, Oklahoma City Sandra Farmer, Assistant Superintendent Coweta Public Schools, Coweta John Foley, Assistant District Attorney, Designee of Robert Macy, District Attorney, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma Robert Fulton, Social Services Cabinet Secretary Office of the Governor, Oklahoma City Evelyn Hibbs, Executive Director Women In Safe Homes (W.I.S.H.), Muskogee Maxine Horner State Senator, Oklahoma City Reverend Moses Howard, Pastor Marshall Memorial Baptist Church, Oklahoma City Lynn Jones, Lieutenant Tulsa Police Department, Tulsa Fred B. Jordan, M.D., Chief Medical Examiner State of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City Linda Larason State Representative, Oklahoma City Phillip Lujan, Chief Justice Court of Offenses for Western Oklahoma, Norman Cynthia Meyerson, Chair Oklahoma Permanency Planning Task Force, Oklahoma City Billy A. Mickle State Senator, Durant Jo Montana, Mayor City of Vinita Susan Morris, Director Youth and Family Resource Center, Shawnee Deborah Rothe, Programs Coordinator Department of Human Services, Oklahoma City Joe Sam Vassar, Chief Staff Counsel National American Insurance Company, Chandler Charles Waters, General Counsel Department of Human Services, Oklahoma City CREDITS Staff assistance at Commission and Task Group meet-ings and in preparation of this report was provided by: Sue W. Clark, Executive Secretary Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth, Oklahoma City John F. Gajda Management and Service Development Consultant Tulsa Thomas S. Kemper, Director Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth, Oklahoma City Jonas Mata, Program and Administrative Consultant Department of Human Services, Oklahoma City Linda Passmark, Director Office of Child Abuse Prevention, Department of Health, Oklahoma City Janice Sharp, Secretary Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth, Oklahoma City Trisha Williams, Special Projects Consultant Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth, Tulsa TABLEOFCONTENTS----------------------------- Study Commission Members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. iii Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 Summary of Issues and Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 Blueprint for Action: Shared Responsibility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 INTRODUCTION 15 PRIMARY COMPONENTS OF THE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17 HISTORY AND STRUCTURE OF THE CASCo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21 THE FOUNDATION: PRINCIPLES FOR THE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM 23 CHILD ABUSE STUDY COMMISSION TASK GROUP REPORTS 25 Report Organization 25 Definition of Child Welfare. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25 THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICE TASK GROUP 27 I. Insufficient Number of DHS Child Welfare Staff 27 II. Training for Child Welfare Staff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 29 III. DHS Child Welfare Policy 31 IV. Child Welfare's Public Image and Priority Within DHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 33 V. Accountability within DHS 35 LAW ENFORCEMENT, LEGAL, JUDICIAL TASK GROUP 37 VI. Multidisciplinary Team Approach to Case Management 37 VII. Multidisciplinary Training on Child Abuse and Neglect 39 VIII. Law Enforcement Officer's Training 40 IX. District Attorneys' Training in Child Abuse/Neglect and Domestic Violence 41 X. Training of Judges 42 XI. The Adversary Process and the Child Victim 43 XII. Children as Witnesses 44 XIII. Child Advocacy and Legal Representation 46 XIV. Rape, Molestation, and Sodomy Definitions and Sanctions 47 XV. Treatment Involving Extended Family Members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 48 XVI. Professional Liability 49 COMMUNITY SERVICES TASK GROUP 51 XVII. Inadequate Knowledge of Laws Governing Reports of Suspected Abuse 51 XVIII. Inappropriate Application of Confidentiality 52 XIX. Interagency Coordination of Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 53 XX. Community Based Service Needs 54 XXI. Relationship Between Domestic Violence and Child Abuse and Neglect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 55 XXII. Problems in Recruitment and Retention of Foster Homes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 56 SYSTEM FAILURE: RECURRING ABUSE AND CHILD DEATHS 59 XXIII. Recurring Abuse Leading to Child Deaths 59 XXIV. Investigations of Child Deaths Caused by Abuse 61 XXV. Monitoring the Quality of Service Delivery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 62 XXVI. Protection of Children in the Legal System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 63 XXVII. Diagnosis, Reporting, and Testimony by Medical Professionals 64 ISSUES FOR FURTHER STUDY 67 APPENDIX 69 A. Commission Study Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 B. Interagency Survey Results 72 C. Glossary of Terms 73 D. Authorizing Statute 76 E. Footnotes 77 F. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 78 iii CHILDREN-------------------------------------- by Ina J. Hughes We are responsible for children who put chocolate fingers everywhere, who like to be tickled, who stomp in puddles and ruin their new pants, who sneak Popsicles before supper, who erase holes in math workbooks, who never find their shoes. And we are responsible for those who stare at photographs from behind barbed wire, who can't bound down the street in a new pair of sneakers, who never "counted potatoes", who are born in places we wouldn't be caught dead, who never go to the circus, who live in a x-rated world. We are responsible for children who bring us sticky kisses and fistfuls of dandelions, who sleep with the dog and bury goldfish, who hug in a hurry and forget their lunch money, who cover themselves with Band-aids and sing off key, who squeeze toothpaste all over the sink, who slurp their soup. And we are responsible for those who never get dessert, who have no safe blanket to drag behind them, who watch their parents watch them die, who can't find any bread to steal, who don't have any rooms to clean up, whose pictures aren't on anybody's dresser, whose monsters are real. We are responsible for children who spend all their allowance before Tuesday, who throw tantrums in the grocery store and pick at their food, who like ghost stories, who shove dirty clothes under the bed, and never rinse out the tub, who get visits from the tooth fairy, who don't like to be kissed in front of the carpool, who squirm in church and scream in the phone, whose tears we sometimes laugh at and whose smiles can make us cry. And we are responsible for those whose nightmares come in the daytime, who will eat anything, who have never seen a dentist, who aren't spoiled by anybody, who go to bed hungry and cry themselves to sleep, who live and move, but have no being. We are responsible for children who want to be carried and for those who must, For those we never give up on and for those who don't get a second chance. For those we smother. .. and for those who will grab the hand of anybody kind enough to offer it. iv PREFACE-------------------------------- Parents are the most important people in a child's life. Nurturing and caring for the child is the most important responsibility of parents. There is no greater failure in our society than the disintegration of a family. As individuals, communities, churches, and governments we all share the burden of this failure. To ensure its own future society must value its children, and as a respon-sible society we must be committed to protecting chil-dren who cannot protect themselves. No decision made by government officials is as serious as a decision which deprives a family of its children. However, the number of confirmed cases of child abuse, child neglect, and child sexual abuse in Oklahoma have risen dramatically since 1981. Thou-sands of children are suffering immense physical and emotional pain, and too many have died. The Study Commission calls for a comprehensive effort by profes-sionals, neighbors, churches, and government to protect children and to meet the needs of families. An effective program for victims of child abuse, child neglect, and child sexual abuse requires services which emphasize the safety of children and the treat-ment or restriction of the offender. The professionals in public and private agencies providing these services and charged with protecting children must be adequately trained, competent, and given the resources to do their jobs. An effective program for children and families requires advocacy and oversight by members of the community. The Child Abuse Study Commission is concerned about the safety of Oklahoma's children and about the availability of resources which protect our children. Oklahoma's child protection system Is falling. The Study Commission believes our recom-mendations can, upon implementation, improve the system to provide greater protection for the children of Oklahoma and more services to strengthen their fami-lies. Our task will not be complete, however, until each child is safe and secure in a nurturing family that is free from abuse and neglect. ", , , , . , , the law must make the child's needs paramount. Each time the cycle of grossly inadequate parent-child relationships is broken, society stands to gain a person capable of becoming an adequate parent for children of the future. " Beyond the Best Interests of the Child, Goldstein, Freud, Solnit, 1973. 1 m><mo c: ~<: m ecn: ss:: l> :ll -< EXECUSTUIVMEMARY-------------- The Oklahoma Child Abuse Study Commission was created by legislation proposed in 1988 by Gover-nor Henry Bellmon in response to his concern that over 50 Oklahoma children died from abuse and neglect in a recent period of less than two years. (See Appendix D for text of statute.) The Commission is comprised of 27 professionals, citizens, legislators, and agency officials who were appointed by the Governor, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate. The Commission organized into four task groups to study the major components of Oklahoma's child protection system. After identifying the important issues, determinations of findings were made based upon months of discussion and research. Recommendations to strengthen the child protection system were gener-ated, and specific action steps to implement recommen-dations were developed. Each issue identified by the Task Group is assigned a Roman numeral (I through XXVII). The Summary of Issues and Conclusions includes each issue identified by a Task Group and a summary of the conclusions developed for the issue. The Blueprint for Action: A Shared Responsibility summarizes the action steps which will implement the Study Commission's recommendations. Following each action step is a citation to an issue, an action step, and a page which refers the reader to the full text of the appropriate Task Group report (for example, XII.A.3. at page 9 represents issue XII, action step 3, at page 57). In each Task Group report the letter F represents a Finding and the letter R represents a Recommendation of the Task Group and Study Commission. SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND CONCLUSIONS ISSUE I: Insufficient Number of DHS Child Welfare Staff DHS does not have a sufficient number of personnel, both direct service and supervisory workers, to deliver and oversee statutorily mandated child welfare services. Lack of workers has resulted in high turnover, frequent burnout, low morale, and questionable decision-making, all of which have reduced the overall quality of services provided and have placed Oklahoma's children in danger. ISSUE II: Training for Child Welfare Staff In the past five years, the Child Welfare Unit has not had a formal training program for new workers, con-tinuing education for experienced workers, or manage-ment training for supervisors. Absent a specialized training curriculum, the basic training for DHS child welfare workers falls on the front line supervisors. Un-fortunately, the supervisors often have not had recent access to training and are too busy with caseloads to spend much time teachlno, DHS desperately needs a basic skills training program for state office and field child welfare staff. Child welfare workers also need multidisciplinary training to build working relationships with medical and legal professionals that will benefit the child. ISSUE III: D.H.S. Child Welfare Policy DHS does not have clear guide lines on how child welfare policy should be developed, written, and distributed; nor are procedures clear about when policy becomes effective, time tables for policy training, and staff accountability for knowing and adhering to policy. The absence of guide lines has produced wide and varying interpretations and practices by staff in the delivery of statutorily mandated child welfare services. ISSUE IV: Child Welfare's PubliC Image and Priority Within D.H.S. Child Welfare Services, and consequently the abused and neglected children who receive services, have been overshadowed by more visible and vocal DHS program interests. Both inside and outside the DHS, Child Welfare Services is seen as weak, without direction, and politically unpopular. For Child Welfare to succeed at becoming a priority within DHS and in the community, Child Welfare Services must assert them-selves, develop and publicize their short and long range plans, document their successes, and become more visible. This young boy was beaten by his father about the head and face with a leather belt. 2 ISSUEV: Accountability Within D.H.S. DHS programs for children and youth operate without checks and balances, quality control, and ac-countability of programs and employees. These inade-quancies adversely affect DHS's delivery of services to children and families and was an issue repeatedly heard in the various public forums held by the Commission. There appear to be ineffective sanctions for DHS staff who fail to follow policy and no accountability up the chain of command for unsatisfactory performance, mis-conduct, unauthorized disclosure of confidential informa-tion, insubordination, or neglect of duty. Although the current DHS policy for disciplinary action is effective when applied, DHS sepervsors and managers do not use the procedure for corrective discipline as often as warranted. ISSUE VI: Multidisciplinary Team Approach to Case Management A lack of coordination among the various disci-plines responsible for the investigation and prosecution of deprived and criminal child abuse cases has contribu-ted to frustration and territoriality among the various disciplines. This has resulted in further victimization of the child by poor case management, untimely interven-tion, and piece-meal case planning and oversight. A multidisciplinary review team, organized by the district attorney in each jurisdiction, could provide the coordina-tion and collaboration between professionals needed to monitor and ensure the appropriate handling by DHS and the courts of deprived and criminal child abuse cases. ISSUE VII: Multidisciplinary Training on Child Abuse and Neglect There exists no cross-agency training in Okla-homa for professionals who are involved in investigating, prosecuting, or treating child abuse, child neglect, sex-ual abuse, and domestic violence. A multidisciplinary approach to training would provide opportunities for pro-fessionals to learn from each other about their role and responsibilities to children and families, to learn how to more effectively coordinate their services to abused and neglected children, and to develop new ideas and innovative approaches to solving system problems. ISSUE VIII: Law Enforcement Officers Training in Child Abuse/Neglect and Domestic Violence Existing state law does not include a specific training requirement for law enforcement officers on child abuse/neglect or family violence issues. The current CLEET training curriculum and education requirements for law enforcement officers needs to be expanded to include specialized training in child abuse, child neglect, and the dynamics of family violence so that officers can more effectively investigate and intervene in child abuse cases. ISSUE IX: District Attorney's Training In Child Abuse/Neglect and Domestic Violence Existing state statutes do not mandate any specific training requirements for district attorneys on child abuse and domestic violence. All district attorneys, as dictated by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, are requir-ed to participate in 12 hours of annual training and only one course requirement is specified (one hour of ethics). Specialized training in the area of child abuse will prepare district attorneys to do a better job in the prose-cution of child abuse cases. ISSUE X: Training of Judges A majority of judges have not received training and education in the theory of the dynamics of the abusive family, child abuse and neglect. and sexual abuse. Without an understanding of these issues, judges are unable to evaluate testimony of children and expert witnesses and draw correct conclusions from that testimony, nor are they able to exercise discretion appropriately to protect child victims. Without this knowledge, judges are unable to make the best possible decisions about a treatment plan or disposition plan which will enable the family to be reunified and protect the child from recurring abuse. "Research has convincingly demon-strated that using the "rod" creates children who are not more obedient but who are instead simply more angry and aggressive than other kids. Parents who routinely slap or strike their children are actually handing them a model of violence to imitate-and many do indeed grow to be abusive, some even murderously so. " Julius Segal, Ph.D. Psychologist ISSUE XI: The Adversary Process and the Child Victim The adversary process functions to protect the child victim only when the trier of fact receives accurate, complete information from all interested parties with legal standing. Protection of the child victim requires well-trained law enforcement and DHS personnel; appointment of competent, independent counsel at each stage of the process for the child; and well-trained, competent judges with the knowledge to appropriately evaluate information from the components of the child protection system, the parents, the child, and his or her attorney. ISSUE XII: Children As Witnesses The judicial process does not treat abused children with care or sensitivity and often adds trauma to 3 m><mo e-t < m (J) css:::: l> :-:<0 m>< moc- I <m: ec::»n:: lJ -< the child's life. Children who are victims of physical and sexual abuse are often forced to testify several times during the judicial process. Current law prohibits the child's parent or caretaker from being present in the courtroom during the child's testimony (Rule of Seques-tration), yet the child must testify with the perpetrator present. (The use of video tape can only be applied to children under the age of 12 who have been sexually abused.) Although judicial hearings (juvenile or criminal) involving children are often continued for valid reasons, rarely are the continuances in the best interest of the child. ISSUEXIII: Child Advocacy and Legal Representation Advocacy for abused and neglected children is all but absent in the court process. Existing statutes are inconsistent in the standards applied to admissible evidence and attorney representation in child physical abuse versus child sexual abuse. Statutes do not prohibit anyone from intimidating a State's witness in a deprived case. Appeal procedures involving children are often lengthy, leaving the child's living arrangements unresolved for long periods of time. The legal system must find ways to treat child victims with regard to their developmental needs and compassion for their trauma. ISSUEXIV: Rape, Molestation and Sodomy: Definitions and Sanctions Sentences for child beating and rape by instru-mentation are too lenient when compared to the emo-tional, psychological, and physical damage inflicted on the child. The current statutes on molestation, rape, and sodomy need revision so that all aspects of sexual crimes against children are addressed. Victims who have been forcibly sexually violated know the emotional devastation and long term effects. For children the trauma is much greater. Any type of sexual exploitation of children betrays trust, causes physical injury, dam-ages ego development and self concept, and robs the child of his/her childhood. ISSUE XV: Treatment Involving Extended Family Members There exists no jurisdiction for the juvenile court to order stepparents or "live-ins" to attend counseling, parenting classes, or any treatment option that is neces-sary to constructively reunify a family who has been adjudicated deprived. Changes in societal norms have dramatically increased the number of children who live with a stepparent or other "live in" at some point during their childhood. These extended family members are responsible for an increasing number of abuse cases, and courts must have authority to dictate their treatment in order to protect the child victim. ISSUEXVI: Professional Liability Police officers and child welfare workers current-ly may be sued as individuals for alleged misconducts in dealing with abused and/or deprived children (21 O.S. 843, et. seq. and 10 O.S. 1101, et. seq., Governmental Tort Claims Act 51 O.S. § 151 et seq.). Personal liability laws discourage intervention by leaving the professional open to suit. 4 ISSUE XVII: Inadequate Knowledge of Laws Govern- Ing Reports of Suspected Abuse Any person in Oklahoma having reason to believe that a child under 18 has been abused is man-dated by law to report the suspected abuse. Despite efforts by state agencies to educate the public, including professionals coming into contact with suspected abuse or neglect, the public continues to be misinformed and confused about their responsiblity and immunity in reporting suspected abuse and neglect. Large segments of the public continue to think that not all abuse needs to be reported and that failure to do so is not unlawful. ISSUE XVIII: The Appropriate Application of Confidentiality Child welfare caseworkers and other profession-als with knowledge of a child abuse case are sometimes lax about maintaining confidentiality of reporters or complaints. At the same time, professionals involved in implementing a treatment or service plan are often denied access to necessary information on the basis of maintaining confidentiality. The parameters of confidenti-ality in child abuse and neglect cases need clarification, and professionals working in child abuse and neglect need training on the appropriate application of confiden-tiality of case information. ISSUE XIX: Interagency Coordination of Services There exists a lack of coordination among DHS caseworkers, legal and judicial personnel, medical personnel, schools, community service providers, and other state agencies. The current quality of case plans for abused and neglected children can be vastly im-proved by a protocol that ensures thorough information sharing and proper reporting across agencies and between professionals that are called upon to intervene in a particular case. This should result in a cost saving that can be used to provide more quality services for children. "When those who are not injured are as indig-nant as those who are, then shall justice come to America. " Robert Geiser,The Illusion of Caring XX: Community-based Service Needs DHS does not have a sufficient number of community-based programs to serve deprived children and their families. Oklahoma must expand services to families in their own communities to reduce the number of children and families that will later require costly treatment services. ISSUE XXI: Relationship between Domestic Vio-lence and Child Abuse and Neglect Although approximately 65% of abused children come from homes with concurrent spouse abuse, little attention is given to the dynamics of domestic violence by child welfare workers, attorneys, and judges. Greater service coordination and training is needed between child welfare and domestic violence programs in such areas as risk assessment, crisis intervention, parenting education, and on-going support programs for families at risk of recurring abuse. ISSUE XXII: Problems in Recruitment and Retention of Foster Homes Maintaining a sufficient number of quality foster homes to serve abused and neglected children across the entire state is extremely difficult. For every home that is used, at least two other homes must be available to allow for attrition. DHS is experiencing problems in recruiting sufficient foster homes in different parts of the state. The state foster care system should receive priority consideration and support by DHS, especially with regard to recruitment and length of retention of foster homes. ISSUE XXIV: Investigations of Child Deaths Caused By Abuse Not all child deaths caused by abuse and neglect are identified and properly investigated. A case review of each child death in Oklahoma resulting from non-natural causes is needed to allow more accurate tabulation and identification of deaths to children caused by child abuse or neglect; better protection of siblings still living in dangerous situations; and identification of inadequate policy and procedure within each component of the child protection system. An adequate review must include review by professionals from the medical, legal, and social service community. ISSUE XXV: Monitoring the Quality of Service Delivery Existing supervision and accountability of the child welfare system is not sufficient to protect children at risk of being abused or who have been abused. Children and parents in crisis are being further victimized by arbitrary or incompetent actions of case workers, or are becoming lost without proper follow-up within the system. Although no system of this size is expected to function completely without error, the combination of child welfare's shortcoming in such areas as training, accountability, and sufficient personnel, along with the lack of coordination among agencies and professionals has increased the number of cases being mismanaged and has contributed to further victimization of the child. 5 mX mo c: """<m ec3n:: -:»=D<= mx mo c: -i =m< ecE»En::: J] -< ISSUE XXVI: Protection of Children in the Legal System The primary goal of a legal proceeding involving a family with children must be protection of the children without undue intrusion into the rights of the parents. Most attorneys representing abused and neglected children have little training in the dynamics of child abuse or devote very little time to competently advocate for and represent the child. Without an understanding of the theory and research of the abusive family and an understanding of child abuse and neglect, judges are not able to correctly evaluate testimony of the child or to draw appropriate conclusions from the information. ISSUEXXVII: Diagnosis, Reporting and Testimony by Medical Professionals Only 3 to 6 percent of reports of supected child abuse are made in Oklahoma by physicians. Nationally an average of thirteen percent of all reported cases of abuse are made by physicians. Physicians and nurses in Oklahoma should be working as advocates to protect children from unnecessary harm. Physician training in diagnosis and treatment must be expanded and more physician abuse experts must be available for consulta-tion to rural counties. Although physician concerns regarding immunity, financial renumeration for services, and lengthy court commitments are reasonable, physi-cians and nurses cannot allow these concerns to over-ride their legal Obligation to report suspected abuse, or their obligation as healers to intervene if a child's life and safety is in jeopardy. BLUEPRINT FOR ACTION: SHARED RESPONSIBILITY The Study Commission believes that child abuse, child neglect, and child sexual abuse are a community problem that require a community response. The child protection system is not one agency or one service delivery system. Each Oklahoman is responsible for protecting Oklahoma's children from abuse and neglect. To meet this challenge we must all share the responsibility for implementing the Study Commission's recommendations. The Blueprint for Action identifies the department, agency, or organization which has the primary responsibility for implementation of specific recommendations. The Department of Human Services should: 1. allocate sufficient funds to implement a specialized, competency-based training program for child welfare staff by October 1, 1989. The program should include core training curricula for local workers, basic and advanced specialty curricula for all levels of child welfare staff, and a core management curri-cula for supervisors and district supervisors in child welfare. (1I.A.1. and 3., page 31) 2. train local child welfare workers and front-line supervisors under the specialized training program by June 30,1990. (1I.A.4., page 31) 3. revise Child Welfare Services' training policy and procedure by January 1, 1990, to specify who is responsible for the training program, who will ensure that the field receives the training needed, and who will oversee the entire process. (liAS., page 31) 4. through the Director, issue a request to the DHS Legal Division to develop and deliver by October 1, 1989, a curriculum on legal issues for the training program for child welfare. (11.A.6.,page 31) 5. by September 1,1989, fund and hire three (3) Child Welfare Services field full-time employees as area training coordinators to aid the state office coordinator in administering and overseeing the statewide training program. (11.A.2.,page 31) 6. by October 1, 1989, through the Human Services Commission exempt Child Welfare Services from any and all hiring freezes and grant Child Welfare permission to hire from outside the DHS. (1.A.1., page 29) 8 7522 7 , 3,733 6 5 4 3 2 Thousands 1983 1988 Confirmed cases of abuse and neglect in Oklahoma have increased dramatically. 7. by March 1, 1990, through the Director request that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) conduct an audit of the Child Welfare Services to determine if the current classification under which child welfare staff operate is commensurate with the actual responsibilities, extended hours, and dangers 6 associated with protecting children and working with families, and is consistent with guidelines of the Council on Accreditation of Services to Families and Children, and with national standards for sala-ries for child we~are workers as established by The National Association of Social Workers. 8. through the Director and the Human Services Commission seek legislative approval to increase the total DHS full-time employee ceiling and to give Child Welfare additional funded staff positions to meet their mandated responsibilities in a more timely and effective manner. All authorized positions should be hired and filled by January 1, 1991. (I.A.3., page 29) 9. by September 1, 1990, collaborate with OPM, the DHS Per~onnel Divi~ion,ana Cnila Welfare Sera vices, to create and im~lement a s~ecialclassifica· tion for child welfare worKers which recognizes program areas of specialization. (1.A.4., page 29) 10. through Child Welfare Services, develop technical assistance teams of specialists to assist generalist child welfare workers in rural counties. (1.A.5., page 29) 11. by FY 1992, through the Human Services Commission reinstitute graduate level scholarship programs and direct the Personnel and Finance Divisions to create a commensurate pay scale to reward staff who have graduate education. (1.A.6. page 29) 12. by FY 1991, through the Human Services Commission develop a budget process for the Division of Children and youth Services (DCYS) that is fair and equitable in determining the priorities among DCYS unit's budget requests and program needs. (IV.A.1., page 34) 13. by November 1, 1989, establish Child Welfare Advisory Committees in each child welfare district. (IV.A.2., page 34) 14. by January 1, 1990, develop a comprehensive plan for Child Welfare Services of short range (0 to 2 years) and long range (5 year) goals and objectives. (IV.A.3., page 34) 15. by January 1, 1990, conduct district-by-district team building sessions across the state aimed at building motivation, self-esteem, program ownership, and professionalism in Child Welfare Services staff. (IV.A.5., page 34) 16. through the Director issue a memo by October 1, 1989, requesting each DHS division and office administrator to identify the supervisors and managers that have not been trained in corrective discipline and require them to complete the training. (V .A.1., page 36) 17. through the Personnel Division, complete a status report by March 1, 1990, on the effectiveness of the corrective discipline procedure. (V.A.2., page 36) 18. by FY 1991, through the DHS Staff Development Unit and the Office of Personnel Management develop and implement a core management curriculum for DHS supervisors and managers, and conduct such training for all DHS supervisors and managers within a year. (V.A.3., page 36) 19. through the Director initiate the development of a ~erie~ofeoucationanaoi~cu~~ion~eminar~onni~n standards of em~lo~ee~ertormance, ~rofession· alism, and program integrity with the goal of enhanc· ing DHS's public image as well as motivating all DHS employees to take pride in their work. DHS's Division Administrators should work with the Staff Development Unit of the Personnel Division to develop a seminar series by January 1, 1990, and complete the series by September 1, 1990. (V.A.4., page 36) 20. complete and issue the long awaited comprehensive revision of Child Welfare policy by January 1, 1990, and train all staff on the revised policy within 30 working days after the policy is issued, i.e. a rule promulgated under the Administrative Procedures Act. By January 1990, the DHS establish for every division or unit providing services to children and families policy and procedures which delineates the responsibility of each staff member and the agency for the detection and recognition of children at risk of abuse and neglect. The policy should also describe the appropriate response to these children by staff and the agency. (1I1.A.1.,page 33) 7 m ><mo c: -t :< men c: 33:: l> :II -< m ><mo c: -I <m en c33»::: :ll < A normal x-ray of a small child's skull. The scan on the right shows a white thickened area that represents bleeding inside the child's skull. This bleeding is compressing the brain, and is commonly seen in "shaken child syndrone". Wallace Hooser, MD, Radiologist, Saint Francis Hospital, Tulsa 21. through Child Welfare Services develop a procedure by October 1, 1989, to ensure that local workers receive draft policy for comment, are given time to review and submit comment, and receive written feedback from the state office on their specific comments. (1I1.A.2., page 33) 22. through the Director and the Human Services Commission submit a request for additional child welfare staff and allocate a position in the Child Welfare Unit to add a specialist in child welfare policy development. (1II,A.4., page 33) 23, tnrou~n Cnila Welfare SeNices immediatel~develop a schedule of statewide consultation on existing policy, to be completed by November 1, 1989, to ensure that all staff review and understand existing policy and are provided with a specific procedure for requesting clarification or assistance when policy questions arise. (IILA.5., page 33) 24. during FY 1990 and 1991 , the DHS Legal Division in conjunction with Child Welfare Services develop written protocol that can be used for interagency agreements regarding child abuse confidentiality and release of information issues. (XVIILA.1., page 53) 25. through Child Welfare Services instruct supervisors to reinforce with all child welfare workers the import-ance of confidentiality with reporters/complaints of suspected abuse. (XVIII.A.2., page 53) 26. through the Unit Supervisor of Child Welfare Services, request a review and written report by November 1, 1989 from staff responsible for intake/ investigation policy and procedures to identify DHS practices which act as barriers to citizen reporting. (XXIII.A.2., page 60) 27. through the Unit Supervisor of Child Welfare Services, issue a directive by October 1, 1989, instructing district supervisors and local supervisors to begin fulfilling their assigned responsibilities of conducting periodic case reviews and management conferences with local workers. The Division of Children and Youth Services' Monitoring and Review Unit is to place special emphasis on verifying the occurrence of case reviews and management conferences by supervisors as required by Section 1416, DHS Policy Manual. (XXV.A.1., page 63) ~~I a~ri~fY~1~~C~~1iWl~~lf~Sr~~~ir~~~~~~ql~~t~ tne priorit~s~stemfor investi~atin~cnild abuse rspons to includs neglect as a high priority, (XVII. A.2., page 52) 29. during FY 1990, through Child Welfare Services in conjunction with the DHS Graphics and Publications Services and the State Department of Health Office of Child Abuse Prevention, develop a statewide public education campaign on child abuse and neglect. (IV.A.4., page 34) 30. during FY 1990, provide financial assistance to the statewide public education and awareness campaign planned by the Governor's Cabinet Council on Children. (XVILA.1., page 52) 31. During FY 1990, through the Human Services Commission fund a statewide media campaign to recruit foster parents. (XXII.A.1., page 57) 32. during FY 1990, through the Human Services Commission provide sufficient matching funds to begin implementation of the federal Title IV-B plan to improve Oklahoma's foster home prgram. (XXII.A.2., page 57) 8 33. by July 1, 1990, through Child Welfare Services establish a risk assessment process that identifies children who can remain in the home with the help of intensive services, and subsequently divert, for the development of intensive services, the funds that would have been normally used for a foster care arrangement. (XXII.A.3., page 57) 34. by October 1, 1989, through Child Welfare Services temporarily assign additional foster care workers to needy counties to recruit foster homes and provide services to foster care children. (XXII.A.4., page 57) 35. by January 1, 1990, Child Welfare Services develop a proposal for funding the foster program with sufficient resources to establish and maintain a quality program. The proposal should be funded no later than May 1, 1990. (XXII,A.6., page 57) 36. take the lead on scheduling meetings to develop greater service coordination between Child Welfare Services and domestic violence programs so that specific procedures for referral to one another are developed and implemented by June 30, 1990. (XXI.A.3., page 56) 37. in any child abuse case with concurrent domestic violence, include intervention and counseling for the male batterer and female victim in all DHS prepared or court approved treatment plans. (XXI.A.4., page 56) 38. give budgetary priority in FY 1991 to the following services for abused and neglected children: 20 therapeutic foster care beds; 6 additional specialized community homes, with 4 beds; 30 additional Level D group home beds; 12 Level E beds; emergency concrete services to families in crisis (home-based); and expansion of parent-aide programs across the state such as those currently located in Oklahoma, Garfield, and Comanche Counties. (XX.A.1., page 54) 39. through the Division of Children and Youth Services explore public as well as private funding sources and explore various models from other states, which will assist with broadening the continuum of family services. (XX.A.2., page 55) -"Fallu.. - 2.7'lI to thrive Withheld 1-9% medical otte . 6. Neglect Abuse This graph provides a break down of the 7,522 DHS con-firmed cases of abuse and neglect in Oklahoma in 1988. Within the next year the Legislature should: 1. enact legislation during the fiscal year 1990 session mandating the establishment by October 1,1990, of multidisciplinary review teams organized by the district attorney in each jurisdiction. These teams should coordinate information and monitor disposition of DHS confirmed priority 1 and 2 child abuse referrals; perform critical incident reviews of child deaths or severe injury cases not prosecuted, and receive for review any case that generates con-flicting professional opinions during investigation. (VI.A.1., page 38; XXIlI.A.3. page 60) 2. enact legislation creating and funding by July 1, 1990, the Child Abuse Training Coordinating Council (CATCC) to identify and make provision for multidis-ciplinary training on child abuse issues for profes-sionals across the state with responsibilities affecting children. (VII.A.t, page 40; XXI.A.1., page 56) 3. enact legislation creating the Oklahoma Child Death Review Board as outlined on page 61, for legislative approval and funding by June 1,1990. (XXIV.A.1., page 61) 4. by FY 1991 appropriate sufficient funds to DHS to purchase liability insurance for foster parents. (XXII.A.5., page 57) Within the next three years the Legislature should: 5. enact legislation to provide for specific civil immunity for police officers and social workers when acting within the scope of their duties and in good faith. (XVI.A.1., page 49) 6. enact legislation to allow video tape and other hearsay statements of an abused child to be admissable evidence, especially at a preliminary hearing. (Amend O.S. 752, 753 to make compatible with 10 O.S. 1147, 1148. Also amend 12 O.S. 2803.1). (XII.A.1., page 57) 7. enact legislation to eliminate the necessity of a jury trial in juvenile termination of parental rights pro-ceedings. (Amend 10 O.S. 1110). (XII.A.3., page 57) 8. enact legislation to require coordination of juvenile and criminal cases to prevent children from testifying several times before different juries. (Amend appro-priate sections of Titles 10 and 22 O.S.) (XII.A.2., page 57) 9. set guidelines as to the duration of in-court testimony that can be obtained from a child in a single episode 9 mX mo c: -t =m< CJ) c: ss»:: :xJ -< >mom< c: -I <: men cs::: l> :-x<J of testimony so that the time frame considers the child's ability to tolerate examination. Also, set guidelines as to a lawyer's behavior toward the child during questioning. (Amend appropriate sections of the Evidence Code Title 12). (XII.A.4., page 45) 10. enact legislation that defines corroboration in 12 O.S. 2803.1 to permit admissability of children's out-of- court statements. (XII.A.5., page 45)) 11. enact legislation that allows consistent statements of children to be considered sufficient corroborative evidence. (XII.A.6., page 45) 12. enact legislation to require all hearings involving child victims to be set within a short specified period of time. (XII.A.7., page 45) 13. enact legislation requiring all such cases to be heard when set and not to be continued without exigent, valid cause. (XII.A.8., page 45) 14. enact legislation to make paramount the child's best interest when considering continuances. (XII.A.9., page 45) 15. allow the court the power of sanctions for witnesses found to be in bad faith. (XII.A.10. page 45) 16. enact legislation to modify the Rule of Sequestration to allow relatives, friends, and caretakers to be present and close during the child's testimony. (XII.A.11., page 45) 17. enact legislation to allow devices to be used, e.g. video taping, screening, or two-way mirrors which protect a child from further victimization by the perpetratororthe system. (10 0.S.1147, 1148 and 22 O.S. 752, 753). (XII.A.12., page 45) 19. enact legislation requiring attorneys to be appointed to represent the child victim in the criminal prosecution of sexual abuse. (Amend 21 O.S. 846). (XII.A.1., page 45) 18. amend current video tape and hearsay statutes (10 O.S. 1147, 1148; 22 O.S. 752, 753; and 12 O.S. 2803.1) to apply to children under the age of 12 who have been physically abused. (XII.A.13., page 45) 20. enact legislation allowing hearsay statements of physically abused children to be admissable evidence. (XIII.A.2., page 46) 21. enact legislation to require as a contingency of the bond that the accused have no contact with the child victim or his caretaker without the permission of the court. (XIII.A.3., page 46) 22. amend intimidation of a State's witness (21 O.S. 455) to include those endorsed on a juvenile petition. (XIII.A.4., page 46) 23. enact legislation requiring the appellate process, including the opinion, to be completed within a specified period of time in cases involvinq victimized children. (10 O.S. 1123, et. seq.) XIII.A.5., page 46) 24. enact legislation establishing a compelling state interest in the welfare of children, and make statu-tory amendments to allow juvenile court involvement when a child has been abused and the perpetrator is unknown or out of the household. (See 10 O.S. 1101, et. seq.). (XIII.A.6., page 46) 25. increase to life the punishment allowed for child abuse. (21 O.S. 843). (XIV.A.1., page 48) "Some day, maybe, there will exist a well-informed, well-considered, and yet fervent public conviction that the most deadly of all possible sins is the multi/ation of a chi/d's spirit". Erick Erikson Journal of the American Medical Association, 1972. 26. enact legislation amending 21 O.S. 1123, 111, and 1114 to define "lewd molestation" to include acts identified on page 47. Also, Section 1123 should be amended to allow evidence of penetration to be introduced in a lewd molestation case, It should specifically state that penetration is not an element in the case. (XIV.A.2., page 48) 27. amend the "Rape Shield Statute" (21 O.S. 750) to protect rape victims from having their entire sexual history brought into the courtroom on the issue of consent. This statute should also be amended to include victims of lewd molestation (21 O.S. 1123), sodomy (21 O.S. 886 et. seq.), and rape by instrumentation (21 O.S. 1111, 1114), and should preclude their sexual history and sexual conduct from being brought into a criminal case. (XIV.A.3., page 48) 28. combine the statutes regarding sodomy (21 O.S. 886,888) since they cover the same crime. The statutes should also be reviewed to define anal and oral sodomy, state that a person under the age of 16 cannot give consent to the crime of sodomy, and clarify that penetration is not always an essential element in the crime of sodomy. (XIV.A.4., page 48) 10 29. to be consistent with other child sexual abuse criminal provisions, amend 21 O.S. Supp. 1986, 1114(A) (1), to include victims under the age of 16. (XIV.A.5., page 48) 30. classify rape of any victim under age 16 by a mem-ber of the same sex as rape in the first degree and punish accordingly. (XIV.A. 7., page 48) 31. classify rape by instrumentation of any victim under the age of 16 as rape in the first degree and punish accordingly. (XIV.A.6., page 48) 32. enact legislation that will allow the court to adjudi-cate a child deprived based on the abusive or neglectful behavior of extended family members (10 O.S. 1116) and provide statutory authority for the court to order treatment options for stepparents, "Iive·ins", and others who have significant responsi· bility and contact with the deprived child. (10 O.S. 1116, 1121). (XV.A.1., page 48) Failure to thrive in an infant usually results from the most severe cases of emotional neglect and can result in permanent disability or death. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court should: 1. by January 1, 1990, mandate that within 30 days of election or appointment, each judge with family law or juvenile law case responsibility will receive a minimum of eight hours initial training in child abuse, child neglect, child sexual abuse, and the dynamics of family violence. (X.A.1., page 42) 2. by November 1, 1989, convene a committee to select an appropriate curriculum for this initial training described in #1 above. (X.A.2., page 42) 3. select a representative of the judiciary who is an expert in family law to participate on the governing board of the proposed Child Abuse Training Coordinating Council. (X.A.3., page 42) 4. mandate by July 1, 1991, participation by every judge with family law or juvenile law case responsi-bility in the curriculum selected by the Child Abuse Training Coordinating Council. In the event a curricu-lum is not selected by the CATCC, the chief justice will convene a committee to identify an appropriate curriculum before September 1, 1991. An appropri-ate curriculum will include a minimum of 32 hours training in child abuse and neglect and the dynamics of family violence and will include a yearly review and update component. (X.A.4., page 43) 5. direct the Office of the Court Administrator to pre-pare a synopsis of current statutory and case law on appointment of counsel for the child in deprived and criminal cases to be completed by January 1, 1990, and distributed to all judges. (XI.A.1., page 44) 6. direct the Office of the Court Administrator to con duct a survey of all judges with family law, juvenile law, and/or criminal law responsibility on practice and procedure regarding appointment of counsel for children, including an estimate of monetary cost, at each stage of deprived or criminal proceedings. This study will be initiated by November 1, 1989, and completed by February 1, 1990. (XI.A.2., page 44) 7. convene a committee to study the results of the survey and develop a plan to deal with problems identified, including cost problems. This plan will be developed by June 1, 1990, and implemented by October 1, 1990. (XI.A.3., page 44) The Oklahoma Attorney General should: 1. develop a plan and propose necessary legislation to establish an appeal process in the Attorney General's Office of actions taken by District Attor-neys in child abuse and neglect cases. This appeal may be initiated upon a recommendation of the Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth or at the discretion of the Attorney General. (XXVI.A.4., page 64). The District Attorney's Council should: 1. develop or contract for a specialized curriculum, pre-service and ongoing, on child abuse and domestic violence by November 1, 1990. The Council should participate on and coordinate adopted training through the proposed Child Abuse Training Coordinating Council. (XXVI.A.1. and 2., page 64) 11 mX moc: -t<m ecn: 33:: l> lJ 0( m>< mo e"<m"'" : ecssn:: >:D -< 2. also adopt or develop a module of multidisciplinary training to emphasize probation and treatment plan restrictions to protect the child victim. (XXVI.A.2., page 64) One group of studies examined the child rearing practices in homes of offenders convicted of first degree murder or who were habitually violent and found that when those offenders were children they had been the victims of remorseless physical brutality at the hands of their parents. National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect u.s. Department of Health and Human Services Washington, D.C. The Oklahoma Medical Association and Oklahoma Osteopathic Association should: 1. identify and encourage participation in statewide multidisciplinary training for all Oklahoma physicians who offer primary care to children, and should participate on the proposed Child Abuse Training Coordinating Council. The Council should identify, by July 1, 1991, for review and approval of the medical community, in residency training and continuing education courses on abuse and neglect identification, reporting, and treatment for pediatri-cians and family practitioners, (XXVII,A,1., page 65) 2. during FY 1991, the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine and Oklahoma Children's Hospital seek funds to develop a program of consulting assistance to physicians in rural areas on diagnosing, docu-menting, and testifying on child abuse and neglect. (XXVII.A.3., page 65) The Council on Law Enforcement, Educa-tion, and Training should: 1. effective July 1, 1990, increase the number of hours of pre-service training and provide at least eight hours of on-going training in domestic violence and child abuse for law enforcement officers. (VII.A.1., page 39). 2. coordinate with the proposed Child Abuse Training Coordinating Council after March 1, 1990, for pre-service training, in-service training, and annual continuing education on family violence and child abuse for law enforcement officers. The Oklahoma State Department of Health should: 1. request FY 1991 funding from the Legislature of $3 million to provide full-service health departments with strong child guidance clinics in every county. (XX.A.3., page 55) The State Department of Education should: 1. during FY 1990, arrange for training in child abuse and neglect for teachers and other public school personnel to emphasize reporting responsibilities and confidentiality. (XVIII,A.3., page 53) The State Department of Mental Health should: 1. request sufficient funding for FY 1991 to implement a statewide network of domestic violence shelters. (XXI,A.2., page 56) The Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth should: 1. establish by January 1, 1990, a standing committee of state agency directors to generate ideas and encourage cooperation among programs providing services to abused and neglected children. (XX.A.5., page 55) The Governor of the State of Oklahoma should: 1. include in his budget message to the Legislature provisions in the proposed budgets of the Department of Human Services, the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Health, and the Commission on Children and Youth to fund the implementation of the Study Commission recommendations. 2. offer the support of the Governor's Office to legislation proposed which will implement Study Commission recommendations. 3. issue an Executive Order which converts the Child Abuse Study Commission to the Child Abuse and Neglect Commission. 12 "We are guilty of many errors and many faults, but Our worst crime is abandoning the children, Neglecting the fountain of life. Many of the things we need can wait. The child cannot. Now is the time his bones are formed; His blood is constituted; His senses are being developed. We cannot answer him "Tomorrow." His name is "Today." Gabriella Mistral Nobel Prize Winner, Poetry The Child Abuse Study Commission will: 1. monitor the achievement of each action step listed in this report. 2. assist with writing proposed legislation, such as creation of the Oklahoma Child Death Review Board, liability protection for medical professionals, and increased penalties for crimes of abuse. (XXVII.A.2., page 65; and XXVI.A.3., page 64) 3. assist when requested with developing proposed programs, such as a plan for an appeal process in the Attorney General's office to actions taken by courts. (XXVI.A.4., page 64) 13 m >< moc -4 <: men c == l=>= lJ 0( INTRODUCTION-------------- "In the little world in which children have their existence, whosoever brings them up, there is nothing so finely perceived and so finely felt as injustice." Charles Dickens A Case History Matthew is dead. He died on March 26, 1988 alone, struck by a car while wandering the streets in the middle of the night with no place to go after fleeing his home. This 12 year old boy is not included in the Medical Examiner's list of 54 children who died in Oklahoma during 1987 and 1988 as a result of confirmed child abuse and child neglect. He should be case number 05, From 1979, when the family first came to the attention of the child protection system, to March 4, 1988, when the children were again returned to their mother's custody by the court, Matthew and his six siblings were involved in 10 confirmed incidents of serious abuse and neglect. Sexual abuse was confirmed at least three times, and serious neglect at least five times. They were "vulnerable childen" whose best interest was swept aside in favor of a mother who could not protect or provide for her family.(1) Oklahoma's child protection system failed these children: The children were repeatedly neglected, deprived, and abused, but were left in a grossly inadequate parent-child relationship. The Department of Human Services, prosecutors, the Court, district attorneys, the attorney for the children, doctors, and other professionals failed to collaborate in a multidisciplinary coordinated review of circumstances affecting these children. The numerous service plans prepared for this family by the Department of Human Services were inappropriate and unrealistic. The continued acceptance by caseworkers of maternal excuses contributed to inadequate case planning. Inadequate training and supervision as well as frequent turnover among DHS workers and assistant district attorneys resulted in a lack of continuity of case monitoring. Each time a new person became involved, the family was given another chance to respond to treatment. During one year, three different DHS workers were assigned to this case. Six different Assistant District Attorneys were also involved. The court system also failed to properly protect the children. The children were wards of the court during a nine year period. During that time the children were victims of criminal acts, including child sexual abuse, but the perpetrators received neither appropriate treatment nor appropriate punishment. The attorney representing the children also represented the abuser of his clients. The goal of the system remained to reunite the family, finding that it was in the best interest of tne cnildren, Tnat was not true for Matthew, victim of child neglect one last time, now dead. Matthew was killed as much by the system that should have protected him as by the car that struck him. The child protection system was an accessory to his death. This case illustrates the multiple failures of the child protection system which are repeated throughout Oklahoma. Historical Overview of the Abuse of Chil-dren The Oklahoma Child Abuse Study Commission was legislatively mandated to examine all Oklahoma laws, policies, and procedures relating to child abuse and neglect. One hundred years ago such a study would not have been possible. Historically, society has ac-cepted maltreatment of children. The evolution of the current system of child protection is a phenomenon of the twentieth century. Historic records contain evidence of violence against children, both physical and emo-tional, including child neglect and sexual exploitation.(2) Infanticide, exposure, child slavery, and child labor were accepted practices in cultures as diverse as ancient Rome, England, China, and the United States. Common to culturally accepted child maltreat-ment are two beliefs: 1. "Children were seen as their parents' property and it was taken for granted that parents had every right to treat their children as they saw fit. ... ", and 2. "... harsh treatment was justified by the belief that severe physical punishment was necessary to maintain discipline, transmit educational decisions, and expel evil spirits."(3) 15 The beginning of a change in these views was the development in the United States during the nine-teenth century of a new understanding of the needs of children and their right to be protected from abuse and neglect.(4) In 1825, the New York Society for the Reforma-tion of Juvenile Delinquents established an institution primarily to provide services to delinquent children and, secondarily, for neglected and abused children. In 1874, the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children was organized as a result of the famous Mary Ellen Wilson case in which animal cruelty laws were used to protect an abused child.(5) By the early 1920's, most states had passed specific laws against child maltreatment, often within the context of newly created juvenile courts. By the late 1930's, basic networks of public and private child welfare agencies developed.(6) The recognition by the medical community of "the battered child syndrome", a term first described in 1860 by Ambroise Tardieu, a professor of legal medicine in Paris,(7) accompanied the evolution of the child protection movement. It was not, however, until the early 1960's when an interdisciplinary presentation was arranged by C. Henry Kempe for the annual meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics on the battered child syndrome, followed by an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which incorporated pediatric, psychiatric, radiological, and legal concepts, that there was a comprehensive description of the s~ndrome,(8) In 1963, the United States Children's Bureau promulgated a model law that required physicians to reportchildren with a "serious p~~sicalinju~ or injuries inflicted other than by accidental means" to a child protection agency. Within four legislative years, all 50 states enacted reporting laws modeled after the Children's Bureau proposal.(9) The 1960's marked the beginning of a rapid evolution of the child protection system. The abused and neglected child became the object of community concern and the subject of a developing body of laws, policies, and procedures which spanned the legal, lawenforce-ment, and human service systems. The Study of National Incidence and Prevalence of Child Abuse and Neglect, published in 1988 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services con-cluded that more than one and one-half million children experienced abuse or neglect in 1986. The most fre-quent type of abuse was physical, followed by emotional and sexual abuse. In 1986,375,000 American children suffered sexual abuse. Since 1980, the number of cases of maltreatment increased 66%. The most significant portion of the increase represented an increase in the incidence of abuse (74%). Since 1980, physical abuse increased nationally by 58% and the incidence of sexual abuse more than tripled. Reporting and confirmation patterns were found not to have changed significantly, with an estimated 53% of all reported cases substanti-ated by protective service units. Incidents of child abuse, child neglect, and child sexual abuse in Oklahoma have increased at the same alarming rate. Although the percentage of children in the general population has remained steady (27%), reports of abuse and neglect have increased 120% over the last eight years: from 10,109 in fiscal year 1981 to 23,179 in fiscal year 1988. The number of confirmed cases of abuse and neglect increased 101%: from 3,733 in fiscal year 1981, to 7,522 in fiscal year 1988. Perhaps the most alarming statistic is that child abuse and/or child neglect claimed the lives of 162 children in Oklahoma in the past six years; 54 of those children died between July 1, 1986, and June 30, 1988. Child abuse and child neglect result in perma-nent and serious damage to the physical, emotional, and mental development of children. Severe physical injuries cause mental retardation, blindness, deafness, loss of limbs, and disfigurement. An estimated 50% of abused children will experience significant developmental delays, slow physical growth or mental development, and impairments in language, perceptual or motor skills. The most severe abuse results in coma or death. Abuse and neglect are oijen as dama~in~ emotionally as they are physically, resulting in lowered self esteem, poor self concept, and defensive function-ing, Abused children often exhibit higher levels of aggression, anxiety, and self destructiveness. The abused child is likely to become a troubled teenager and an equally troubled adult, requiring costly juvenile detention, and psychiatric treatment, and subsequent prison confinement. Providing prevention and intervention services to families and children is not only in the best interest of the children, it is in the social and financial interest of Oklahoma. The Study Commission's report examines specific issues which confront the child protection system and impair the effectiveness of the system. 16 PRIMARY COMPONENTS OF OKLAHOMA'S CHILDPROTECTION SySTEM----------------------------------- The State of Oklahoma has designated by law and policy three primary systems which respond to reported incidents of child abuse, child neglect, and child sexual abuse: Law Enforcement, which includes police and sheriff departments; the legal system, which includes the courts, district attorneys, practicing attorneys, and the statutes which govern the actions of these components; and the social service system, primarily the Department of Human Services, Division of Children anaYou\~ SeN~e~, C~i\~We~are Unit These \hree maior s~s\ems are augmenlect by a commu-nity network of health and social service providers. The legal system, law enforcement, and the Department of Human Services are only three of at least fifteen related components including schools, private social service agencies, and public and private health services. The Legal System "In the eyes of the law, to be a CHILD is to be at risk, dependent, and without capacity or authority to decide free of parental control what is best for oneself. To be an adult is in law to be perceived as free to take risks with the independent capacity and authority to decide what is best for oneself without regard to parental wishes. To be an ADULT who is a parent is therefore to be assumed by law to have the capacity, authority, and responsibility to determine and to do what is good for one's children, what is best for the entire family."(1 0) The legal system is society's method of resolv-ing disputes or conflicts between people. The adversary process, the presentation of two conflicting points of view by an advocate, is the method used to resolve conflict. This method, however, "has not proved to be appropriate in family law, where the need is for harmo-nizing the interests of the family members, and negotiat-ing conflicts between the rights of parents and the rights and developmental needs of children. In family law, the predominant need is not to establish guilt, but to work out complex interpersonal, economic, and social prob-lems".( 11 ) Laws which allow for state intervention in the family range from the assignment of a child at birth to his biological parents by birth certificate to the removal of the child if the child is at risk and the parents are found to be unfit. "The traditional goal of state intervention is to serve the best interest of the child".(12) Laws which permit intervention in the family exist in two broad areas and empower each component of the child protection system.(13) 1. Those matters about which there is clear societal consensus such as compulsory education, compulsory immunization, child labor. 2, Those matters which allow iud~esana state a~enc~~ersonnel to act as ~arents ~atr\ae lito investi~atel ~u~eNisean,a supervene ~arental iuo~ment"I In Oklahoma the laws which relate to the child protection system are contained in two sections of statutes. Title 10, first enacted in 1909 and subse-quently amended, provides the statutory scheme pursu-ant to which the legal system may intervene to protect the abused or neglected child. This scheme also is designed to protect the rights of the parents and chil-dren. Title 21, which deals mainly with criminal matters. contains the laws which govern reporting of child abuse and neglect. The most common way in which a child comes to the attention of the child protection system is through a report made pursuant to Title 21, O.S. §846 (1987) to the Department of Human Services, specifically: Every physician or surgeon, including doctors of medicine and dentistry, licensed osteopathic physicians, residents and interns, examining, attending or treating a child under the age of eighteen (18) years and every registered nurse examining, attending, or treating such child in the absence of a physician or surgeon, every teacher of any child under the age of eighteen (18) years and every other person having reason to believe that a child under the age of eighteen (18) years has had physical injury or injuries inflicted upon him or her by other than accidental means where the injury appears to have been caused as a result of physical abuse or neglect, shall report the matter promptly to the county office of the Department of Human Services in the county wherein the suspected injury occurred. 17 After a petition is filed with the Juvenile Division of the District Court, a summons is issued, "requiring the person or persons who have the custody or control of the child to appear personally and bring the child before the court at a time and place stated". (§1104) "If it appears that the child is in such condition or surroundings that his welfare requires that his custody be immediately assumed by the court, the judge may immediately ... authorize the taking of the child into custody". (§ 1104 [d]) "A hearing on the petition is conducted, as in all other cases, except the hearing is private, unless specifically ordered by the judge to be conducted in public". (§1111) "If the trier of fact finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the allegations of the petition are supported by the evidence, and that it is in the child's best interest that he or she be made a ward of the court, the court will make an order of adjudication finding the child is deprived". (§1114) The statutes provide a full range of procedural due process protections, including the right to trial by jury and the right to counsel. The Juvenile Court system functions most appropriately to review and monitor the work of compe-tent professionals who are skilled in human relations and family dynamics and able to devise and manage treat-ment ~Ianslorchildren and familie~,The ~urt,when lunClionin~ i~Ballr,~rovldesau!~orlo/re~Ulred10ensure im~lemenla!lon an~ monitoring 01 the plan, (j4) Law Enforcement Law enforcement, which includes the sheriff of each county and police departments which exist in communities, has the primary role of investigating incidents of crime in Oklahoma. Child abuse, child neglect, and child sexual abuse are crimes. The focus of child protection was originally law enforcement. The first child protection agency, the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, was ''the model for the law enforcement approach to child rescue, with its agents exercising police powers under legislative authority". (15) During the 1960's most states moved from a pure law enforcement approach to child protection to a "child protective services response to suspected inci-dents of maltreatment".(16) This is the scheme utilized in Oklahoma, a scheme which emphasizes treatment rather than punishment. Law enforcement, however, retains an important role in this scheme. A law enforcement officer is authorized to immediately take custody of any child who is in a situ-ation which endangers his welfare. The officer is then required to report to the judge (§1107), and the provi-sions of 10 O.S. §1101 controls the judge's subsequent action. The larger police departments in Oklahoma provide specialized children's and child abuse units, with officers who are trained in child abuse investigation and interviewing techniques. At least one city (Tulsa) is utilizing a multidisciplinary team approach (including the District Attorney, Department of Human Services, Police Department, and a physician) to managing child abuse and neglect cases. The Office of the District Attorney is authorized by 19 O.S. §215.1(1965). The District Attorney, or his or her assistants, are required to "prosecute all actions for crime committed in his district. .. " (19 O.S. §215.4 [1965]) including the filing of a petition in juvenile pro-ceedings (10 O.S. §1103 [1982]) which include cases of abuse and neglect. The District Attorney represents the State of Oklahoma in all child protection proceedings. The District Attorney receives child abuse re-ports from the Department of Human Services pursuant to 21 O.S. §846. Exact procedures for the processing of these reports to determine if a petition should be filed in juvenile court, a criminal complaint should be filed against the perpetrator, or both, are unique to each D.A.'s office. TheSocial Service Sfstem Tne egla~lis~menl 01a c~lwl~e/lare srS1em ana chl~ren's proleellva ~eNice~wa~a10~lcaldevelo~menl of the child welfare movement in the United States. In Oklahoma, the state agency previously known as the Department of Public Welfare and then the Department of Institutions, Social and Rehabilitative Services, became known in 1980 as the Department of Human Services (56 O.S. §162.1). The social service component of the child protection system has become synonymous with the Department of Human Services because this agency provides the state funded response to this problem. Within the current Department of Human Services, the Division of Children and Youth Services, Child Welfare Unit is the entity designated to ensure that children are protected from harm. There are two aspects to the mandate: 1. To identify, treat, and prevent child abuse and neglect; and 18 2. To ensure that reasonable efforts are made to maintain and protect children in their own homes. The Child Welfare Unit provides directly or contracts with individuals or agencies to provide services to abused and neglected children and their families, including a statewide child abuse hotline; investigation of reports; treatment services; foster homes services, community based residential care services, and emer-gency shelter and group home services. There are numerous health and social service providers that also voluntarily serve abused and neglected children. The Department of Human Services is the agency mandated by 21 O.S. §846 to receive reports of child abuse. The county office receiving the report investiga!eS and forwards findings to the District Attor. ney: DHS is also mandated to maintain a ~ermanenl r~~II~I\~~~~n~\raCl ~\loA~useRe~I~0\1~allre~on llnaln~S, I PU~suant\0 Title 10 O.S. §11 01, et seq. (1988) the Department of Human Services may make the preliminary inquiry to determine whether the interests of the child require that court action be taken (§11 03), provide protective custody, provide investigative informa-tion to the court, post adjudication placement plans (§1115.1), and review reports (§1116.1). DHS operates under the scrutiny of the court. Children can not be removed from their homes without a court order, except for a brief period of time on an emergency basis by a law enforcement officer, and no order of a court may be entered without a determination by the court of whether or not "reasonable efforts have been made to prevent the need for removal and, as appropriate, reasonable efforts have been made to provide for the return of the child to his home; or without a determination whether or not an absence of efforts to prevent the removal of the child from his home is rea-sonable under the circumstances, if such removal of the child from his home is due to an alleged emergency and is for the purpose of providing for the safety of the child". (§1104.1) Conclusion Child abuse, child neglect, and child sexual abuse are a community problem that require a commu-nity response. The child protection system is not one agency or one service delivery system. The system includes a complex network of functions and activities. All individuals and agencies must coordinate services and cooperate in an interdisciplinary interagency effort to perform the protective service function adequately.(17) 19 HISTORYANDSTRUCTUREOFTHEOKLAHOMACHILDABUSE STUDYCOMMISSION------------- In Oklahoma, the child protection system is failing. The Oklahoma Child Abuse Study Commission was created by legislation proposed by Governor Henry Bellmon in response to his concern that "even one death from child abuse is a terrible tragedy. To have more than 50 of Oklahoma's children die from abuse and neglect in less than two years is totally intolerable. We must, can and will improve our laws, our policies, our procedures, and our programs for dealing with this insidious prob-lem." The membership of the Study Commission was divided into four task groups: Law Enforcement, Legal, and Judicial which focused on the functioning of those systems relevant to the reporting, investigation, and prosecution of abuse and neglect. Title 62 O.S. §21 mandated the Study Commis-sion to examine Oklahoma's law, policies, procedures, ~ndpracti,ces related to child abuse and neglect, includ. Ing reporting requirements and practices, investigating procedures, civil proceedings to remove children from their ho~es, crlmi~al prosecutions, and any other aspect of the child protection system the Study Commission may determine it should review. (For full text of statute see Appendix, page 76.) The 27 members of the Study Commission were appointed by the Governor, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate. All meetings were held in compliance with the Open Meeting Act, although executive sessions were convened to review information on individual child abuse investigations. Department of Human Services, which focused on agency policy and procedures for the protec-tion of abused and neglected children and their families as they relate primarily to intervention and case planning. The Community Service System, which focused on other state, local, and private agencies providing prevention and treatment servces to children and their families. The first task of the Commission was to identify and adopt a Mission: "To provide legislative and admin-istrative recommendations which, upon implementation, will improve the system which protects the children of Oklahoma from all forms of child abuse and neglect." System Failure: Recurring Abuse and Child Deaths, which focused on the systemic gaps that are evident from cases of child abuse and/or neglect, especially when neglect or abuse continues after initial intervention, or when the death of a child occurs as a result of abuse. The following goals were established: 1. Develop a legiSlative agenda for changes in the statutes which govern the reporting, investigation, and adjudication of incident's of child abuse and neglect. 2. Recommend changes in agency policy and procedures which will facilitate the protection of children. 3. Develop budgetary recommendations for implementation of recommended strategies. 21 THE FOUNDATION: PRINCIPLES FOR OKLAHOMA'S CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM ------------ Society creates social programs in response to a perceived problem. Once created, however, a program can grow and expand to such a degree that any sense of the original mission of the program is subverted or lost. In order to accomplish a complex task when diverse interests share responsibility for the task, all actions must be founded on a common set of principles or beliefs which provide guidance and direction to activities. A common mission, which is based on a well articulated set of principles, will ensure that, as programs grow and many organiza-tions become involved in addressing a problem, the activities of all components are mutually supportive and consis-tent. Protecting Oklahoma's children from abuse and neglect is a complex task addressed by a network of organi-zations. All components of the child protection system must function as interdependent components rather than as independent entities if the network is to succeed. To achieve this all components must operate according to a com-mon set of prinCiples which are the foundation of the activities of all organizations sharing the responsibility for accom-plishing this important mission. The Oklahoma Child Abuse Study Commission recommends that the operation of all programs, services, and activities of public and private organizations charged with protecting our children be founded upon the following principles: Each child Is a unique, valuable, and treasured resource. The primary protector of a child Is his/her family. Society shares this responsibility and should preserve the family's dignity and its right to make decisions to the fullest extent possible. Every child needs to be loved and nurtured consistently by another human being. Every child needs to feel safe and secure. Every child needs to have a home. Each child needs to be protected from those stronger and more powerful who threaten their safety and security. All children need access to adequate nutrition, and physical and mental health care. All children need to be educated to the limits of their capability through processes designed to develop their maximum potential. Childhood Is a time for exploring and learning through both success and failure. Each child should be allowed to experience the opportunities of childhood without the expectations Imposed on mature adults, and be permitted meaningful choices at appropriate points in their development. 23 Services provided to children and their families should be tailored to the needs of Individual children and reflect the sequence, pattern, and circumstances of a child's current functioning. Children cannot speak for themselves and must rely on others to speak for them. Those appointed to speak for children must be free of conflicting obligations and knowledge-able in the needs of children. Processes which protect children must be speedy and decisive so that the permanency of children's lives is maximized. Every child who is In conflict with society should be dealt with compassionately as society'S charge, not society'S outcast. These principles should be applied equally to all children without distinction or discrimination because of race, color, sex, handicap, religion, or beliefs. 24
Object Description
Description
Title | Protecting OK Children pt1 |
OkDocs Class# | C1650.3 C563a 1989 |
Digital Format | PDF, Adobe Reader required |
ODL electronic copy | Deposited by agency in print; scanned by Oklahoma Department of Libraries 8/2011 |
Rights and Permissions | This Oklahoma state government publication is provided for educational purposes under U.S. copyright law. Other usage requires permission of copyright holders. |
Language | English |
Full text |
Each One Of Us Is
A Report
of the
Oklahoma
Child Abuse
Study
Commission L~·
DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
TULSA COUNTY COURTHOUSE
TULSA, OKLAHOMA 74103
DEBORAH C. SHALLCROSS (918) 584-0471
JUDGE EXT. 2400
The Honorable Henry Bellmon
Governor, State of Oklahoma
The Honorable Steve Lewis
Speaker, House of Representatives
The Honorable Robert V. Cullison
President Pro Tempore, Senate
Gentlemen:
The legislation creating the Child Abuse Study Commission mandated that we examine all laws,
policies, and procedures relevant to child abuse and neglect. Protecting Oklahoma's Children: Who Is
Responsible? is the result of six months' work by citizens of Oklahoma who are committed to securing a
safe and productive future for our children.
Our children are our most precious resource for the future. The effort to develop industry and
encourage investment in Oklahoma is one element to assure our prosperity in the twenty-first century.
Our children, however, will perform the factory jobs we hope to create, repair aircraft, program computers,
heal the sick and teach the next generation. They are Oklahoma's most important resource, and we all
have an interest in protecting this asset. Unfortunately, as documented in our report, this most valuable
resource is often being inadequately nurtured and prevented from reaching full potential.
Thousands of Oklahoma's children are deliberately, battered, maimed, burned, and bruised each
year. Children who are emotionally, physically, and/or sexually abused must struggle to become produc-tive
citizens and loving parents of the next generation. We know that the vast majority of persons incar-cerated
for violent crimes were abused as children. We know there is a correlation between teen preg-nancy
and family violence, drug and alcohol addiction and family violence, juvenile delinquency and
family violence. Children that are abused are more likely to become a burden to Oklahoma than an asset.
None of the components of Oklahoma's child protection system is functioning adequately -
including the most important component, the family - to protect or to provide services when a child is
injured. Recognition of the magnitude of the problem and recognition of the failure of the current system
to ensure children are safe in their families are initial steps to correcting the problem. We believe that
implementation of our recommendations will improve the system which protects our children from abuse
and neglect. We have outlined areas for further study which complete the task.
With your leadership, we can begin to address the areas of concern identified in our report. Child
abuse and neglect, however, is not a problem that government alone can or should resolve. Churches,
extended families, professionals, and all citizens have a responsibility and a vested interest in preventing
its occurrence. Thank you for your commitment to our children. ~~::'-{~~ Deborah C. Shallcross, Chair
Child Abuse Study Commission
OKLAHOMA CHILD ABUSE STUDY COMMISSION
Membership 1988 - 89
CHAIR
Deborah C. Shallcross
Judge of the District Court, 14th Judicial District
MEMBERS
Nancy Anthony, Director
Oklahoma City Community Foundation, Oklahoma City
Robert Block, M.D., Professor and Vice Chair, Pediatrics
University of Oklahoma College of Medicine - Tulsa
Ben Brown
State Senator, Oklahoma City
Edna Brown, A.C.S.W., L.S.W.
Edwin Fair Community Mental Health Center, Ponca City
Bernest Cain
State Senator, Oklahoma City
Eva Carter, Director
Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy, Oklahoma City
Craig Corgan,
District Attorney, Washington County, Bartlesville
Kay Dudley
State Senator, Oklahoma City
Caroline Emerson,
Designee of Attorney General Robert Henry,
Oklahoma City
Sandra Farmer, Assistant Superintendent
Coweta Public Schools, Coweta
John Foley, Assistant District Attorney,
Designee of Robert Macy, District Attorney,
Oklahoma County, Oklahoma
Robert Fulton, Social Services Cabinet Secretary
Office of the Governor, Oklahoma City
Evelyn Hibbs, Executive Director
Women In Safe Homes (W.I.S.H.), Muskogee
Maxine Horner
State Senator, Oklahoma City
Reverend Moses Howard, Pastor
Marshall Memorial Baptist Church, Oklahoma City
Lynn Jones, Lieutenant
Tulsa Police Department, Tulsa
Fred B. Jordan, M.D., Chief Medical Examiner
State of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City
Linda Larason
State Representative, Oklahoma City
Phillip Lujan, Chief Justice
Court of Offenses for Western Oklahoma, Norman
Cynthia Meyerson, Chair
Oklahoma Permanency Planning Task Force,
Oklahoma City
Billy A. Mickle
State Senator, Durant
Jo Montana, Mayor
City of Vinita
Susan Morris, Director
Youth and Family Resource Center, Shawnee
Deborah Rothe, Programs Coordinator
Department of Human Services, Oklahoma City
Joe Sam Vassar, Chief Staff Counsel
National American Insurance Company, Chandler
Charles Waters, General Counsel
Department of Human Services, Oklahoma City
CREDITS
Staff assistance at Commission and Task Group meet-ings
and in preparation of this report was provided by:
Sue W. Clark, Executive Secretary
Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth,
Oklahoma City
John F. Gajda
Management and Service Development Consultant
Tulsa
Thomas S. Kemper, Director
Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth,
Oklahoma City
Jonas Mata, Program and Administrative Consultant
Department of Human Services, Oklahoma City
Linda Passmark, Director
Office of Child Abuse Prevention, Department of Health,
Oklahoma City
Janice Sharp, Secretary
Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth,
Oklahoma City
Trisha Williams, Special Projects Consultant
Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth, Tulsa
TABLEOFCONTENTS-----------------------------
Study Commission Members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. iii
Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2
Summary of Issues and Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2
Blueprint for Action: Shared Responsibility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6
INTRODUCTION 15
PRIMARY COMPONENTS OF THE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17
HISTORY AND STRUCTURE OF THE CASCo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21
THE FOUNDATION: PRINCIPLES FOR THE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM 23
CHILD ABUSE STUDY COMMISSION TASK GROUP REPORTS 25
Report Organization 25
Definition of Child Welfare. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25
THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICE TASK GROUP 27
I. Insufficient Number of DHS Child Welfare Staff 27
II. Training for Child Welfare Staff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 29
III. DHS Child Welfare Policy 31
IV. Child Welfare's Public Image and Priority Within DHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 33
V. Accountability within DHS 35
LAW ENFORCEMENT, LEGAL, JUDICIAL TASK GROUP 37
VI. Multidisciplinary Team Approach to Case Management 37
VII. Multidisciplinary Training on Child Abuse and Neglect 39
VIII. Law Enforcement Officer's Training 40
IX. District Attorneys' Training in Child Abuse/Neglect and Domestic Violence 41
X. Training of Judges 42
XI. The Adversary Process and the Child Victim 43
XII. Children as Witnesses 44
XIII. Child Advocacy and Legal Representation 46
XIV. Rape, Molestation, and Sodomy Definitions and Sanctions 47
XV. Treatment Involving Extended Family Members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 48
XVI. Professional Liability 49
COMMUNITY SERVICES TASK GROUP 51
XVII. Inadequate Knowledge of Laws Governing Reports of Suspected Abuse 51
XVIII. Inappropriate Application of Confidentiality 52
XIX. Interagency Coordination of Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 53
XX. Community Based Service Needs 54
XXI. Relationship Between Domestic Violence and Child Abuse and Neglect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 55
XXII. Problems in Recruitment and Retention of Foster Homes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 56
SYSTEM FAILURE: RECURRING ABUSE AND CHILD DEATHS 59
XXIII. Recurring Abuse Leading to Child Deaths 59
XXIV. Investigations of Child Deaths Caused by Abuse 61
XXV. Monitoring the Quality of Service Delivery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 62
XXVI. Protection of Children in the Legal System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 63
XXVII. Diagnosis, Reporting, and Testimony by Medical Professionals 64
ISSUES FOR FURTHER STUDY 67
APPENDIX 69
A. Commission Study Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71
B. Interagency Survey Results 72
C. Glossary of Terms 73
D. Authorizing Statute 76
E. Footnotes 77
F. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 78
iii
CHILDREN-------------------------------------- by Ina J. Hughes
We are responsible for children
who put chocolate fingers
everywhere,
who like to be tickled,
who stomp in puddles and ruin their
new pants,
who sneak Popsicles before supper,
who erase holes in math workbooks,
who never find their shoes.
And we are responsible for those
who stare at photographs from
behind barbed wire,
who can't bound down the street in a
new pair of sneakers,
who never "counted potatoes",
who are born in places we wouldn't
be caught dead,
who never go to the circus,
who live in a x-rated world.
We are responsible for children
who bring us sticky kisses and fistfuls
of dandelions,
who sleep with the dog and bury
goldfish,
who hug in a hurry and forget their
lunch money,
who cover themselves with Band-aids
and sing off key,
who squeeze toothpaste all over the
sink,
who slurp their soup.
And we are responsible for those
who never get dessert,
who have no safe blanket to drag
behind them,
who watch their parents watch them
die,
who can't find any bread to steal,
who don't have any rooms to clean
up,
whose pictures aren't on anybody's
dresser,
whose monsters are real.
We are responsible for children
who spend all their allowance before
Tuesday,
who throw tantrums in the grocery
store
and pick at their food,
who like ghost stories,
who shove dirty clothes under the
bed, and never rinse out the tub,
who get visits from the tooth fairy,
who don't like to be kissed in front of
the carpool,
who squirm in church and scream in the phone,
whose tears we sometimes laugh at
and whose smiles can make us cry.
And we are responsible for those
whose nightmares come in the
daytime,
who will eat anything,
who have never seen a dentist,
who aren't spoiled by anybody,
who go to bed hungry and cry
themselves to sleep,
who live and move, but have no being.
We are responsible for children who
want to be carried and for those who
must,
For those we never give up on and for
those who don't get a second chance.
For those we smother. .. and for those
who will grab the hand of anybody
kind enough to offer it.
iv
PREFACE--------------------------------
Parents are the most important people in a
child's life. Nurturing and caring for the child is the most
important responsibility of parents. There is no greater
failure in our society than the disintegration of a family.
As individuals, communities, churches, and governments
we all share the burden of this failure. To ensure its own
future society must value its children, and as a respon-sible
society we must be committed to protecting chil-dren
who cannot protect themselves.
No decision made by government officials is as
serious as a decision which deprives a family of its
children. However, the number of confirmed cases of
child abuse, child neglect, and child sexual abuse in
Oklahoma have risen dramatically since 1981. Thou-sands
of children are suffering immense physical and
emotional pain, and too many have died. The Study
Commission calls for a comprehensive effort by profes-sionals,
neighbors, churches, and government to protect
children and to meet the needs of families.
An effective program for victims of child abuse,
child neglect, and child sexual abuse requires services
which emphasize the safety of children and the treat-ment
or restriction of the offender. The professionals in
public and private agencies providing these services and
charged with protecting children must be adequately
trained, competent, and given the resources to do their
jobs.
An effective program for children and families
requires advocacy and oversight by members of the
community. The Child Abuse Study Commission is
concerned about the safety of Oklahoma's children and
about the availability of resources which protect our
children. Oklahoma's child protection system Is
falling.
The Study Commission believes our recom-mendations
can, upon implementation, improve the
system to provide greater protection for the children of
Oklahoma and more services to strengthen their fami-lies.
Our task will not be complete, however, until each
child is safe and secure in a nurturing family that is free
from abuse and neglect.
", , , , . , , the law must make the
child's needs paramount. Each time the
cycle of grossly inadequate parent-child
relationships is broken, society stands to
gain a person capable of becoming an
adequate parent for children of the future. "
Beyond the Best Interests of the Child, Goldstein,
Freud, Solnit, 1973.
1
m> |
Date created | 2011-08-22 |
Date modified | 2011-08-22 |