Rethinking Foster Care

Isn’t Housing Child Welfare? Yesterday, I finally got an appellate opinion in a case in which I represented the child’s mother.   The Court of Appeals unanimously reversed the trial court’s finding of dependency, determining my client had been penalized for simply asking the Department of Family and Children Services (“DFCS”) for help to find housing for herself and her child. In the first paragraph of a blistering concurring opinion, Judge Dillard wrote, As President Ronald Reagan once quipped, “ ‘[ t]he nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help’ ” V.G.’s mother learned this the hard way when she sought government assistance in securing suitable housing for her and her young son. Big mistake. The opinion highlights the ways in which the State utterly fails the most needy families. DFCS removed V.G. because his family was homeless and no one could help the family obtain housing. That’s it. This choice cannot be ...

For the past few weeks, I’ve been reading transcripts from child protective hearings. Hundreds of pages of transcripts. I’ve seen examples of clear legal errors. I’ve read many lines of parents’ lawyers grumbling and complaining. I’ve read even more of those lawyers simply agreeing to whatever the agency is proposing. I’m still waiting, though, to see one key phrase in the transcripts. I’m waiting for one lawyer to say it. “I object.” In fact, in the six years I’ve co-directed the Child Welfare Appellate Clinic at the University of Michigan Law School, I’ve rarely seen that phrase in a transcript. I’ve rarely seen motions filed by parents’ lawyers, even when confronted with obvious mistakes. I’ve rarely seen a hint of outrage about the process. Instead, I usually see very little advocacy. I’m typically struck by the acquiescence of the lawyers in the courtroom. This week, I experienced this feeling of acquiescence when I conducted a training for pa...