BLOG: Forces in the U.S. are calling for the abolition of the child protection system. Could Europe be next?
Blog post by Jill Duerr Berrick, Professor of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley, and Professor II at the Department of Government, University of Bergen
The national mood in the U.S. is sour. Deep political divisions have riven the country; some argue that we last witnessed similar political rancor just prior to the Civil War.[1] Three quarters of American adults indicate that the country is headed in the wrong direction,[2] and a majority of U.S. adults hold a dim view of the future economy, our future political climate, and our future role as a trusted international leader.[3] Public trust in science is on the decline, [4] trust in social media (particularly among young Americans) is on the rise,[5] trust in elections is falling,[6] and trust in government is at an all-time low.[7]
Shadows of these trends can also be seen across Europe. According to recent studies, trust in government across European countries is also thin with almost five in 10 European citizens indicating “low” or “no” trust in government.[8]
In this context it is not surprising that the public holds a dim view of child protection both in the U.S. and in several European countries. In a recent survey of public attitudes across nine countries, researchers Skivenes and Benbenishty found that on a four-point scale from “very little,” “some,” “quite a lot,” to “a great deal,” respondents in most countries indicated that they had “some” trust in child protection agencies, social workers, and courts. Respondents from the U.S. had the lowest marks, but there was general disaffection across country contexts.[9]
There have been longstanding debates in the U.S. about child protection. Does the government intervene too little? Too late? Is the threshold for involvement too high? Too low?
Jill Duerr Berrick
There have been longstanding debates in the U.S. about child protection. Does the government intervene too little? Too late? Is the threshold for involvement too high? Too low? For decades, most advocates and scholars have clamored for additional family services modeled, generally, on strategies employed across many European countries. But progress has been slow and uneven.
As these debates have continued in the background, the foreground of child protection is only witnessed by the public in relentless headlines from the media that broadcast the latest failing; another child insufficiently protected; another family needlessly separated.
Combine these ingredients with the stark racial disproportionalities that are a hallmark of the U.S. child protection system, and the result is deep dissatisfaction and fear that child protection is too flawed to fix. Urgent calls to reform child protection have instead been replaced in the U.S. with calls for a complete withdrawal, for the entire abolition of the system itself.
Urgent calls to reform child protection have instead been replaced in the U.S. with calls for a complete withdrawal, for the entire abolition of the system itself.
Jill Duerr Berrick
More tempered minds have weighed in about why abolition would actually harm children and would likely disproportionately harm children of color – the very children abolitionists are purportedly trying to protect.[11] But the movement for eradication continues apace.
Europe could be next. European countries have previously welcomed new ideas from the U.S., whether that includes evidence-based practice, data-driven decision making, risk assessment, or the more careful use of congregate care. Some of the contextual factors also align, with reduced faith in government and public insecurity about the future.[12] Some nations, including Norway, have loosely organized groups that are galvanizing support for abolition. Which countries will be next?
Some nations, including Norway, have loosely organized groups that are galvanizing support for abolition. Which countries will be next?
Jill Duerr Berrick
What can states do to respond to the abolition narrative? Where is there common ground?
Researchers, advocates, and policymakers can examine the roots of the abolition narrative and can be responsive to the essence of their claims. The starting point rests on three important principles:
First, most agree that children enjoy their best childhood when they can safely live with their original family and when parents can be supported to love and care for their children according to their ideals. Visible family support services that help families before they fall into trouble are an important aspect of that plan. Some European countries have maintained or developed their support for this principle; the U.S. has much to learn from these models.
Second, for families who are struggling to safely care for their children, efforts to develop clear, objective, transparent standards that clearly delineate the common threshold for government intrusion into the family are needed. Trust in public institutions can only be maintained if there are legitimate reasons for state intervention – particularly regarding the private sphere of the family. Child protection in most countries is far from reaching this goal.
And finally, states can partner with researchers to fund studies that examine the effectiveness of state-sponsored services. The field is still in its relative infancy as it seeks to uncover what works for struggling families. If the state intends to safeguard vulnerable children, then evidence of their safety should be paramount.
If the state intends to safeguard vulnerable children, then evidence of their safety should be paramount.
Jill Duerr Berrick
Abolition is not the answer when children’s protection is at stake. Children are some of the most vulnerable members of our society whose voice and whose agency are already weakened by their age and status. Instead, efforts to reform – perhaps even to radically transform child protection — into the service system that children deserve would be an important step in rebuilding public trust in our shared commitment to children.
[1] https://politics.georgetown.edu/2019/10/23/new-poll-voters-find-political-divisions-so-bad-believe-u-s-is-two-thirds-of-the-way-to-edge-of-a-civil-war/
[2] https://politics.georgetown.edu/2019/10/23/new-poll-voters-find-political-divisions-so-bad-believe-u-s-is-two-thirds-of-the-way-to-edge-of-a-civil-war/
[3] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/24/americans-take-a-dim-view-of-the-nations-future-look-more-positively-at-the-past/#:~:text=Compared%20with%20a,the%20United%20States%2C
[4] https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2023/11/14/americans-trust-in-scientists-positive-views-of-science-continue-to-decline/
[5] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/10/27/u-s-adults-under-30-now-trust-information-from-social-media-almost-as-much-as-from-national-news-outlets/
[6] https://www.pewresearch.org/2022/01/05/trust-in-america-do-americans-trust-their-elections/
[7] https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/09/19/public-trust-in-government-1958-2023/
[8] OECD. (2021). Trust in government. https://www.oecd.org/governance/trust-in-government/
[9] Skivenes, M., & Benbenishty, R. (2022). Populations trust in the child protection system: A cross-country comparison of nine high-income jurisdictions. Journal of European Social Policy, 32(4), 422-435.
[11] See: https://imprintnews.org/opinion/the-questions-that-must-be-answered/244119; https://discretion.uib.no/the-ultimate-denial-of-childrens-rights/; Garcia, A., Berrick, J.D., Jonson-Reid, M., Barth, R.P., Gyourko, J., Kohl, T., Greeson, J., Drake, B., & Cook, J. (in press). The stark implications of abolishing child welfare: An alternative path toward support and safety. Child and Family Social Work.
Ref. my Imprint and our articles and previous blog
[12] European Social Survey. Exploring public attitudes. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/ESS1-3_findings_booklet.pdf