Foster Parents FAQ » Foster Parents Paid » MO. House Tentatively Approves Foster Care Reform Bill

MO. House Tentatively Approves Foster Care Reform Bill

Question:

Tonya writes: >>I am on the fp Advisory Board for my county and several higher >>ups have

said that the day this bill passes is the day they quit. They >>balk mostly at being held criminally responsible for actions of >>their social workers. Hi, Tonya! I wish them well in whatever new endeavor they choose. As a social worker, I mentioned previously that I have problems with the criminal component to the bill as well. This issue was not proposed by the child and family advocates, but added as a last minute amendment by a Republican caucus. There is most certainly malicious malpractice by government bureaucrats that lead to institutional abuse of children. But my fear of the criminal consequence component of the bill is that it will act as a chilling effect on good child welfare practice – caseworkers may feel pressure to apprehend children to stay on the "safe side." The system cannot tolerate a horde of new errors – erring on the side of the worker’s behind is already too common a practice. >>Aren’t most of these points already ont eh books?

A number of the components are already addressed by DFS policy. The legislature discovered through the commission report that workers were not following their own policy, so they acted to make the practices a requirement of statutory law. The legislature is taking on more direct responsibility in its role of overseeing these agencies. For instance, DFS policy calls for workers to make diligent efforts to place children with their relatives. The legislature discovered that, despite this policy, workers were not making an effort to locate and assess relatives. Rather, there is a distinct bias among the rank and file for kinship placement. Hence the law. Most of the components to the new law are new. The major reforms – requiring DFS to have probable cause to believe that a child has been abused or is at risk of maltreatment and making hearings and records public are new. In 2001, 74% of the children placed into foster care were removed from homes DFS itself unsubstantiated for either risk of or actual child abuse or neglect. http://tinyurl.com/9a1f The new law would allow the agency to remove only those children substantiated as being at risk of child abuse or neglect. The test required to substantiate allegations in Missouri is "probable cause" to believe the risk exists or that actual maltreatment occurred. >>>How about giving DFS the proper funding it needs to work?

I believe that the agency gets ample funding. It receives increases in its budget each fiscal year. What is needed is for the agency to redistribute those funds in ways that will serve the best interests of children rather than the legions of adults who impose forced "services" (sanctions) upon children and their families. The new law should free considerable funding to do just that. Since 90% of child welfare funding goes to foster care, a reduction in the foster care population would free funds for services that will help children and their families. Going by 2001 figures, 9,205 less children will be apprehended by caseworkers if they are required to have probable cause to remove them, as the law proposes.

Response:

I am on the fp Advisory Board for my county and several higher ups have said that the day this bill passes is the day they quit.  They balk mostly at being held criminally responsible for actions of their social workers. Aren’t most of these points already ont eh books? How about giving DFS the proper funding it needs to work? Tonya "Doug" <dougl…@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:Swnma.22450$ey1.1986539@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Posted on Thu, Apr. 10, 2003 > Missouri House tentatively approves reform bill for foster care > By TIM HOOVER > The Kansas City Star > JEFFERSON CITY – The Missouri House on Wednesday tentatively approved a > foster-care reform bill that would hold caseworkers more accountable and > allow religious and nonprofit groups to provide some services. > The legislation also would open many juvenile court proceedings and records > for the first time. > The bill, which won initial approval on a voice vote, had significant > bipartisan support. The House still must give it final approval before it > can move to the Senate. > Speaker Catherine Hanaway, a St. Louis County Republican, handled the bill > personally and said it would "protect parents from children being seized > from their homes when there are not substantiated claims of abuse and > neglect," while at the same time ensuring that abused children were removed. > The bill follows a preliminary report from the Missouri Supreme Court > Commission on Children’s Justice that said fewer children should be placed > in the foster-care system and more emphasis placed on keeping families > intact. > The commission’s report followed similar recommendations that have been made > since the August death of 2-year-old Dominic James of Springfield. The boy > died while in foster care, and James Dilley of Willard, his foster father, > has been accused of shaking the toddler to death. > The House bill incorporates some proposals made in the Supreme Court > commission’s report, which have been supported by lawmakers of both parties. > Nonetheless, some Democrats balked at language in the bill that would allow > private nonprofits and religious and charitable organizations to receive > state funding to provide some child services. > Hanaway’s bill would require division officials to set up a two-year pilot > project in Greene County, in St. Louis and in an undesignated rural county > to allow nonprofits to provide services such as foster and adoptive parent > recruitment and placement of children. The state still would handle > child-abuse investigations and family assessments. > The nonprofit agencies would have to have a license or a "proven record of > providing child welfare services" in Missouri. > Several Democrats said allowing unlicensed agencies to provide child > services would preclude their employees from undergoing background checks > that might reveal sexual offenders. It also would exempt them from meeting > minimum safety and health standards that licensed facilities would have to > follow, the Democrats said. Nonetheless, the House defeated two Democratic > amendments to require licensing. > Under the legislation, the state would open juvenile court proceedings for > parental rights terminations but would keep adoption hearings closed. Judges > still could close the juvenile hearings, and all testimony from children > would be closed. > All case records would be open unless a judge closes them, as would court > orders and pleadings. The victim’s name, however, would remain confidential. > Files such as medical records, psychological evaluations, and caseworker > investigative documents would remain closed. > Much of the bill would enact greater oversight of the Division of Family > Services, which some lawmakers have accused of bungling the Dominic James > case. > The bill would make it grounds for dismissal for a division employee to > knowingly violate department policies or state law if the violation resulted > in death or serious injury. However, it also would allow excessive caseloads > to be considered as a mitigating factor in the decision on whether to > dismiss an employee. > But the House adopted an amendment from Rep. Mark Wright, a Springfield > Republican, that would allow prosecutors to charge employees who violate > policy with a misdemeanor in the event of a death or serious injury. > Division officials had expressed concern it would be harder to recruit > people to the low-paid, high-stress caseworker jobs if they could be charged > with a crime for making a mistake. > Throughout the past year, lawmakers and aggrieved parents had complained > about the state’s child abuse hot line. Many said a high proportion of the > calls produce false accusations or frivolous reports. > The measure requires the division, when taking hot line calls, to give > priority to the well-being and safety of the child as well as "due process > for those accused of child abuse or neglect." It also would allow the > division to establish a "child well-being hot line" to take reports that > don’t rise to the level of child abuse or neglect. > Although some lawmakers had favored requiring all callers to the child-abuse > hot line to give their names, the legislation would only require "mandated > reporters," such as teachers, doctors and clergy, to give their names. > The bill also: > Requires background checks for anyone in a foster home older than 18 before > a child is placed in the home. The bill also requires division officials to > look for protective orders. > Requires criminal background checks for all school employees who have > contact with children. > Requires a hearing before a judge within 72 hours after a child is taken > from its parents. > Prohibits courts from granting continuances in juvenile hearings unless > there are compelling extenuating circumstances. > Requires the division to first place a child with relatives if it is not > against the child’s best interests. > The foster care bill is HB 679.

Response:

Can we have a link to where this came from? On Mon, 14 Apr 2003 00:45:38 GMT, "Doug" <dougl…@earthlink.net> wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Posted on Thu, Apr. 10, 2003 >Missouri House tentatively approves reform bill for foster care >By TIM HOOVER >The Kansas City Star >JEFFERSON CITY – The Missouri House on Wednesday tentatively approved a >foster-care reform bill that would hold caseworkers more accountable and >allow religious and nonprofit groups to provide some services. >The legislation also would open many juvenile court proceedings and records >for the first time. >The bill, which won initial approval on a voice vote, had significant >bipartisan support. The House still must give it final approval before it >can move to the Senate. >Speaker Catherine Hanaway, a St. Louis County Republican, handled the bill >personally and said it would "protect parents from children being seized >from their homes when there are not substantiated claims of abuse and >neglect," while at the same time ensuring that abused children were removed. >The bill follows a preliminary report from the Missouri Supreme Court >Commission on Children’s Justice that said fewer children should be placed >in the foster-care system and more emphasis placed on keeping families >intact. >The commission’s report followed similar recommendations that have been made >since the August death of 2-year-old Dominic James of Springfield. The boy >died while in foster care, and James Dilley of Willard, his foster father, >has been accused of shaking the toddler to death. >The House bill incorporates some proposals made in the Supreme Court >commission’s report, which have been supported by lawmakers of both parties. >Nonetheless, some Democrats balked at language in the bill that would allow >private nonprofits and religious and charitable organizations to receive >state funding to provide some child services. >Hanaway’s bill would require division officials to set up a two-year pilot >project in Greene County, in St. Louis and in an undesignated rural county >to allow nonprofits to provide services such as foster and adoptive parent >recruitment and placement of children. The state still would handle >child-abuse investigations and family assessments. >The nonprofit agencies would have to have a license or a "proven record of >providing child welfare services" in Missouri. >Several Democrats said allowing unlicensed agencies to provide child >services would preclude their employees from undergoing background checks >that might reveal sexual offenders. It also would exempt them from meeting >minimum safety and health standards that licensed facilities would have to >follow, the Democrats said. Nonetheless, the House defeated two Democratic >amendments to require licensing. >Under the legislation, the state would open juvenile court proceedings for >parental rights terminations but would keep adoption hearings closed. Judges >still could close the juvenile hearings, and all testimony from children >would be closed. >All case records would be open unless a judge closes them, as would court >orders and pleadings. The victim’s name, however, would remain confidential. >Files such as medical records, psychological evaluations, and caseworker >investigative documents would remain closed. >Much of the bill would enact greater oversight of the Division of Family >Services, which some lawmakers have accused of bungling the Dominic James >case. >The bill would make it grounds for dismissal for a division employee to >knowingly violate department policies or state law if the violation resulted >in death or serious injury. However, it also would allow excessive caseloads >to be considered as a mitigating factor in the decision on whether to >dismiss an employee. >But the House adopted an amendment from Rep. Mark Wright, a Springfield >Republican, that would allow prosecutors to charge employees who violate >policy with a misdemeanor in the event of a death or serious injury. >Division officials had expressed concern it would be harder to recruit >people to the low-paid, high-stress caseworker jobs if they could be charged >with a crime for making a mistake. >Throughout the past year, lawmakers and aggrieved parents had complained >about the state’s child abuse hot line. Many said a high proportion of the >calls produce false accusations or frivolous reports. >The measure requires the division, when taking hot line calls, to give >priority to the well-being and safety of the child as well as "due process >for those accused of child abuse or neglect." It also would allow the >division to establish a "child well-being hot line" to take reports that >don’t rise to the level of child abuse or neglect. >Although some lawmakers had favored requiring all callers to the child-abuse >hot line to give their names, the legislation would only require "mandated >reporters," such as teachers, doctors and clergy, to give their names. >The bill also: >Requires background checks for anyone in a foster home older than 18 before >a child is placed in the home. The bill also requires division officials to >look for protective orders. >Requires criminal background checks for all school employees who have >contact with children. >Requires a hearing before a judge within 72 hours after a child is taken >from its parents. >Prohibits courts from granting continuances in juvenile hearings unless >there are compelling extenuating circumstances. >Requires the division to first place a child with relatives if it is not >against the child’s best interests. >The foster care bill is HB 679.

Barbara has one of the best web site for foster parents at http://www.fosterparents.com/ Barbara has all kind of info for foster parents from online training to a chat room there is also a page with links to  with your state agency. http://www.fosterparenting.com/   There also great info on http://www.fosterclub.com/grownups/index.html You can get tons of support/information here. http://www.kuddlekids.com/ There is also a web ring for foster parents if you go to  http://o.webring.com/webring?ring=fostercarering;list there is a list of sites in ring You can do a net search using http://www.yahoo.com/ http://www.google.com/ You can go to http://www.copernic.com/  and get Copernic 2001 basic for free, it will search  obtain fast, relevant results from the greatest number of information sources 18 and categories available on the Internet!

Response:

Posted on Thu, Apr. 10, 2003 Missouri House tentatively approves reform bill for foster care By TIM HOOVER The Kansas City Star JEFFERSON CITY – The Missouri House on Wednesday tentatively approved a foster-care reform bill that would hold caseworkers more accountable and allow religious and nonprofit groups to provide some services. The legislation also would open many juvenile court proceedings and records for the first time. The bill, which won initial approval on a voice vote, had significant bipartisan support. The House still must give it final approval before it can move to the Senate. Speaker Catherine Hanaway, a St. Louis County Republican, handled the bill personally and said it would "protect parents from children being seized from their homes when there are not substantiated claims of abuse and neglect," while at the same time ensuring that abused children were removed. The bill follows a preliminary report from the Missouri Supreme Court Commission on Children’s Justice that said fewer children should be placed in the foster-care system and more emphasis placed on keeping families intact. The commission’s report followed similar recommendations that have been made since the August death of 2-year-old Dominic James of Springfield. The boy died while in foster care, and James Dilley of Willard, his foster father, has been accused of shaking the toddler to death. The House bill incorporates some proposals made in the Supreme Court commission’s report, which have been supported by lawmakers of both parties. Nonetheless, some Democrats balked at language in the bill that would allow private nonprofits and religious and charitable organizations to receive state funding to provide some child services. Hanaway’s bill would require division officials to set up a two-year pilot project in Greene County, in St. Louis and in an undesignated rural county to allow nonprofits to provide services such as foster and adoptive parent recruitment and placement of children. The state still would handle child-abuse investigations and family assessments. The nonprofit agencies would have to have a license or a "proven record of providing child welfare services" in Missouri. Several Democrats said allowing unlicensed agencies to provide child services would preclude their employees from undergoing background checks that might reveal sexual offenders. It also would exempt them from meeting minimum safety and health standards that licensed facilities would have to follow, the Democrats said. Nonetheless, the House defeated two Democratic amendments to require licensing. Under the legislation, the state would open juvenile court proceedings for parental rights terminations but would keep adoption hearings closed. Judges still could close the juvenile hearings, and all testimony from children would be closed. All case records would be open unless a judge closes them, as would court orders and pleadings. The victim’s name, however, would remain confidential. Files such as medical records, psychological evaluations, and caseworker investigative documents would remain closed. Much of the bill would enact greater oversight of the Division of Family Services, which some lawmakers have accused of bungling the Dominic James case. The bill would make it grounds for dismissal for a division employee to knowingly violate department policies or state law if the violation resulted in death or serious injury. However, it also would allow excessive caseloads to be considered as a mitigating factor in the decision on whether to dismiss an employee. But the House adopted an amendment from Rep. Mark Wright, a Springfield Republican, that would allow prosecutors to charge employees who violate policy with a misdemeanor in the event of a death or serious injury. Division officials had expressed concern it would be harder to recruit people to the low-paid, high-stress caseworker jobs if they could be charged with a crime for making a mistake. Throughout the past year, lawmakers and aggrieved parents had complained about the state’s child abuse hot line. Many said a high proportion of the calls produce false accusations or frivolous reports. The measure requires the division, when taking hot line calls, to give priority to the well-being and safety of the child as well as "due process for those accused of child abuse or neglect." It also would allow the division to establish a "child well-being hot line" to take reports that don’t rise to the level of child abuse or neglect. Although some lawmakers had favored requiring all callers to the child-abuse hot line to give their names, the legislation would only require "mandated reporters," such as teachers, doctors and clergy, to give their names. The bill also: Requires background checks for anyone in a foster home older than 18 before a child is placed in the home. The bill also requires division officials to look for protective orders. Requires criminal background checks for all school employees who have contact with children. Requires a hearing before a judge within 72 hours after a child is taken from its parents. Prohibits courts from granting continuances in juvenile hearings unless there are compelling extenuating circumstances. Requires the division to first place a child with relatives if it is not against the child’s best interests. The foster care bill is HB 679.

Response:

Related Posts

Leave a Reply