For the Good of the Group 237
B.H. Consent Decree, Ashley M. v. the Department of Child and Family Services, a series of class
actions regarding safety plans, and In re Aristotle P. Finally, this article will look at the successes
of these actions and determine the prospects of using this means of change in the future and how
to discern if these methods of change are effective.
The child welfare system in America is relatively new; the federal legislation governing it
has only been in place since 1980 and there have not been many changes to the initial framework
except for a clarification of standards in 1997.8 The Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act
lays out guidelines and a framework in which the states must fit their systems and provides
standards states must meet in order to receive federal funding for their child welfare programs, but
still leaves significant discretion to the states.9 Through this act, the federal government imposes
standards for state systems that the states must set goals for their progress, display reasonable
efforts, and create case plans for the children in care.10 But for the most part, there are no
standardized systems for how these federal standards must be met by the states. While the federal
government’s legislation has remained mostly unchanged, states have gone through shifts in their
policies.
Within child welfare policy, costs are immediate but the payoffs are delayed because the
results are often not seen until the children are older. Therefore, it can be difficult to garner
motivation and support for child welfare policy. Thus, child welfare legislation can be reactionary,
meaning legislative pushes for policy change are spurred by specific instances where the policies
have failed to protect children.11 For example, after the Sandusky case in Pennsylvania, there were
24 pieces of state legislation passed to alter the mandated reporting statute in an attempt to better
protect children.12 When situations like this are heavily publicized, legislators act fast to tell their
constituents they solved or prevented the problem, but while their motivation is important for
change to occur, it can rush a solution without enough thought into the residual effects of the new
policy. When people mobilize around these reactionary efforts, however, they want quick fixes
and quick results. Reactionary policy is particularly dangerous within child welfare because it
allows policymakers to claim they made a change and then ignore the problems.
8 Id.
9 Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act, Pub. Law 96-272, 94 Stat. 500 (1980) (codified as amended at 42
U.S.C.A. § 670 et seq.).
10 Id.
11 See generally Ariana Brockington, Hot Car Deaths: Senators Propose Bill to Help Prevent Child Heatstroke in
Vehicles, NBC (Aug. 1, 2017) http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hot-car-deaths-senators-propose-bill-help-
prevent-child-heatstroke-n788571, Chloe Valentine’s Death Prompts Changes to SA Child Protection Laws, ABC
(Apr. 14, 2016) http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-15/chloe-valentine-case-prompts-child-protection-
amendments/7328078, Following Children’s Deaths, Legislation looks to more closely monitor home-schoolers,
MICH. RADIO (Apr 17, 2015), http://michiganradio.org/post/following-childrens-deaths-legislation-looks-more-closely-monitor-home-schoolers, Florida lawmaker Introduce ‘Caylee’s Law’ in Response to Case, TAMPA BAY
TIMES, (July 7, 2011) http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-lawmakers-introduce-caylees-law-
in-response-to-case/1179303 (As can be seen from these examples, when tragic incidents involving children occur
there are often efforts to prevent the future problem with legislation.)
12 See generally Penn State Scandal Fast Facts, CNN LIBRARY (Nov. 8, 2016),
http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/28/us/penn-state-scandal-fast-facts (the Sandusky case involved a football coach from
the Pennsylvania State University committing several counts of child abuse. After the news of this scandal broke, it
became apparent that several other professionals knew what had occurred but hadn’t reported it. Therefore, after the
scandal, the legislators pushed for a legislative change to remedy this particular issue); Debra Schilling Wolfe,
Revisiting Child Abuse Reporting Laws, 12 SOC. WORK TODAY 14 (2012); Child Protective Services Laws, PA.
DEP’T OF HUM. SERV. (last visited June 1, 2017), http://keepkidssafe.pa.gov/about/cpsl/index.htm.
