Is Foster Care Riskier Than Smoking Pot?

Written by -

Over a month ago, the Georgia Division of Family and Children Services took David Brill – a fifteen-year old boy – from his parents and placed him in a group home – a form of foster care run by strangers to the child.  Why did the Division proceed with such a drastic step?  It did so because David’s parents made a medical decision to allow him to use marijuana to help stop life-threatening seizures.  


The Brills wanted David to have a normal life, and conventional medicines were not reducing his seizures.  So they turned to medical marijuana, which recent evidence suggests might be an effective treatment for children with seizures.  A 2017 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found a 40% drop in seizures for children who used marijuana.  The principal investigator of the study concluded that “the study clearly establishes cannabidiol as an effective anti-seizure drug for this disorder.”  In fact, just this past April, an advisory panel recommended that the FDA approve an epilepsy medication with an active ingredient found in cannabis.  So the decision by the Brills was informed by emerging science, and certainly not outside the scope of the types of decisions good parents make.  Who amongst us wouldn’t take this chance, especially when nothing else seemed to work?  Before being taken from his family, David’s seizures had stopped for 71 days.

Yet Georgia doesn’t allow anyone to smoke marijuana for medical treatment.  So as a result of the Brill’s decision, David is in foster care.  While evidence suggests that marijuana might be helpful for children like him, the evidence is clear that foster care is not.  Research demonstrates that removing a child from his parents is a toxic intervention, which, while sometimes necessary, has drastic, life-long consequences.  The removal itself creates an ambiguous loss in the lives of children, who do not know where they will live, when they will see their families, and if they will ever return home.  These children are taken from their communities, separated from siblings and relatives, and forced to attend different schools.  

All too often, children in foster care bounce from home to home during their time in care, living with strangers.  A recent study indicated that 14% of youth in foster care self-reported being assaulted while in the system.  And children raised by the system who age out of foster care face dire consequences, including high rates of unemployment, homelessness, and incarceration.  Given these dynamics, it is unsurprising that after studying outcome data involving 15,000 children, Joseph Doyle – an MIT economist – concluded that children taken from their parents and placed in foster care fared far worse than similarly situated children who remained at home. 

The research shows that foster care is a dangerous intervention that must only be used sparingly.  Certainly serious cases, typically involving sexual or physical abuse, warrant the protection of children by the system.  But, if parents make well-informed decisions that they believe are necessary for their child’s health, the State has no reason to intervene.  Rather, it should stand in kinship with them, offer them support, and respect the heavy burden they carry caring for children with special needs.  

Unfortunately here, the State chose a different approach.  It stood in judgment of the Brills, punishing them for their decision.  In doing so, it is inflicting a harm on David far worse than anything caused by smoking marijuana to stop seizures.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Song for Families

Written by -
A Song for Families   An episode of NPR’s all-songs-considered has been stuck in my head for the past week or so.   I listened to it on the drive back to DC from the holiday weekend.   The theme was anthems.   It was fascinating.   The hosts discussed the contexts in which the songs were written, how each came to be known, what they represented and why they warranted anthem status.   They explored how anthems can celebrate, commemorate, or question if America is living up to its ideals-- and how each type was inherently patriotic.   The Star Spangled Banner headlined, but the hosts soon turned to “This land is our land,”   “Blowing in the Wind”, “Born in the USA”, “Fight the Power” (both versions) and a couple others.   They unpacked the songs.   Some were controversial.   Some were misunderstood.   All are emblematic. Guthrie sang to the dangers of economic disparity. Springsteen called us to do better by veterans. Dylan questioned the prudence of war.   Public Ene
Read more

It's Time To Follow The Law And Take Reasonable Efforts Seriously

Written by -
It’s Time to Follow the Law and Take Reasonable Efforts Seriously David Kelly Special Assistant to the Associate Commissioner of the Children’s Bureau A caseworker driving a child four hours--one way-- to visit his mother on a weekly basis.   The child welfare agency putting a family up in a hotel for two days and hiring a professional cleaning service to return a home to a habitable condition.   A children’s attorney refusing to give up on finding a family connection for a severely disabled young man, even though he requires a residential treatment setting.   A judge understanding the treatment and recovery process and insisting a parent receive the support they need.   These are all solid examples of reasonable efforts to prevent removal or finalize a permanency plan recently provided by an audience of child welfare legal professionals.   In total, a dozen or so strong responses to the straightforward question, what are the best examples of reasonable efforts that you hav
Read more

Redesigning The Delivery Of Legal Services To Prevent Children From Entering Foster Care

Written by -
Imagine, for a moment, that we redesigned the delivery of legal services to prevent children from unnecessarily entering foster care.   What would that look like?   How would we allocate resources?   Would it be effective?   Four fundamental principles inform my thinking about these questions.   First , struggling families need access to legal advocacy well before a problem turns into a crisis.   Consider a family about to become homeless due to a wrongful eviction.   Or a single mother improperly being denied public benefits.   Think about a kid acting out in school and at home because administrators are unwilling to offer him the special education services he is legally entitled to.   Lawyers can play an integral role in solving these problems.   And each of these problems, if unresolved, could add significant stressors to a family that could destabilize a family unit.   Second , families in crisis – that is those involved with Child Protective Services (“CPS”)
Read more