“We are pleased to see Congress take action to protect children in residential treatment facilities by passing the Stop Institutional Child Abuse Act. The impact of this systemic neglect and abuse on children is profound and long-lasting, and it must not be tolerated. Congress has taken a critical first step that will shed light on the practices of these facilities and prevent future abuse,” said Bruce Lesley, president of First Focus Campaign for Children. “It is long past the time for policymakers to come together to address this issue and ensure that every child receives the care, support, and protection they deserve. Only then can we truly say we are fulfilling our duty to safeguard the well-being of our nation’s children.” 

These facilities, which receive significant federal funding from Medicaid, the child welfare system, and private health insurance, are intended to provide specialized care for children with serious emotional and behavioral health disorders. Pervasive instances of abuse, however, have been reported by youth themselves and detailed in a report based on a two-year investigation the Senate Finance Committee undertook at the direction of Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). The Stop Institutional Child Abuse Act would establish an interagency Federal Work Group on Youth Residential Programs to support and implement best practices regarding the health and safety, care, treatment, and appropriate placement of youth in youth residential programs; improve data transparency by recommending a national database to track treatment of youth; and require the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to contract with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study on the use of restraints, seclusion, and other restrictive interventions in youth residential programs.

The post Congress Passes Bill to Protect Children From Institutional Abuse appeared first on First Focus on Children.

For example, in a 2016 speech at Christian Center Shreveport, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), who has a “covenant marriage,” blamed both no-fault divorce laws and the teaching of evolution for amoral actions like school shootings.

California passed the first no-fault divorce law under Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA) back in 1969. So it’s the fault of Ronald Reagan and Charles Darwin?

The Republican Party platforms in Texas and Nebraska also call for ending no-fault divorce (and some other pretty substantial changes to marriage).

Texas’s platform also expresses support for covenant marriage, which is a religious-based contract that states such as Louisiana, Arizona, and Arkansas have passed to make it significantly harder to get a divorce.

Michigan GOP gubernatorial candidate Tudor Dixon even proposed banning books that are about divorce. She expressed concern about the impact on children.

Does that include books about divorcees like Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump?

Clearly, efforts to make it more difficult to get divorced or to even talk about divorce are often made in the name of “protecting children,” but let’s be clear, keeping children in violent or unhappy families can be disastrous to their lives and well-being.

Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate J.D. Vance talked about divorce at California’s Pacifica Christian High School in the following video obtained by VICE News. He said:

This is one of the great tricks that I think the sexual revolution pulled on the American populace, which is the idea that like, “well, okay, these marriages were fundamentally, you know, they were maybe even violent, but certainly they were unhappy. And so getting rid of them and making it easier for people to shift spouses like they change their underwear, that’s going to make people happier in the long term.”

And maybe it worked out for the moms and dads, though I’m skeptical. But it really didn’t work out for the kids of those marriages. And that’s what all of us should be honest about, is we’ve run this experiment in real time. And what we have is a lot of very, very real family dysfunction that’s making our kids unhappy.

In the discussion, Vance advocates for boosting marriage stability and formation and promotes a policy from Hungary to “send a material…and a cultural signal from leadership that marriage is important” by giving a newly married couple a loan that they would not have to repay if they stay married.

While Vance is certainly not expressing support for domestic abusers (in fact, his own life was impacted by instances of domestic violence), his words ignore and dangerously understate the severe impact that domestic violence has on children.

“What you do to children matters. And they might never forget.” — Toni Morrison

Share

The Myth of Marital Stability in Violent Homes

Proponents of maintaining marital stability often argue that children need both parents in the home to thrive. However, this perspective fails to consider the quality of the home environment. Research has consistently shown that the presence of domestic violence severely undermines any potential benefits of a two-parent household. Children exposed to domestic violence are at risk of a range of negative outcomes, including physical harm, emotional trauma, and developmental delays.

In fact, research finds that allowing no-fault divorce has resulted in declines in domestic violence, suicide, and the murder of women.

Emotional and Psychological Impact

According to a study published in the Journal of Family Violence, children exposed to domestic violence are more likely to suffer from anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) compared to their peers from non-violent homes. These children live in a state of constant fear and uncertainty, which can impede their ability to form healthy relationships and trust others. Children exposed to domestic violence “tripled the odds of perpetrating violence toward a partner.”

“The single most important precursor to adult violence is domestic violence.” — George Albee​

Moreover, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) highlights that children who grow up in violent homes are more likely to exhibit behavioral problems, including aggression and delinquency. The emotional turmoil caused by witnessing violence can manifest in disruptive behaviors, making it difficult for these children to succeed in school and other social settings.

A key finding from a study published in Pediatric Clinics is that “any level of exposure to violence in any form is associated with considerable impairment in children similar to other forms of child abuse and maltreatment.”

Physical Health Consequences

The impact of domestic violence on children is not limited to emotional and psychological harm. A report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicates that children exposed to domestic violence are at higher risk of experiencing physical abuse themselves. The physical abuse of newborns, toddlers, school-aged children, and adolescents is sometimes hidden in domestic violence situations, but it is significant.

Also, even if they are not directly abused, the stress of living in a violent environment can lead to significant physical health problems. Chronic exposure to stress, as seen in children from violent homes, has been linked to, for example, cardiovascular disease and immune system dysfunction. The toxic stress these children endure can have lasting effects on their physical well-being, well into adulthood.

“There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.” — Nelson Mandela

Developmental Delays and Academic Challenges

The chaotic environment of a violent home can severely disrupt a child’s development. Research finds that children who witness domestic violence often experience developmental delays. These can include delays in language skills, cognitive development, and social-emotional growth.

Academic performance also suffers significantly. Children from violent homes have higher rates of absenteeism and lower academic achievement. The trauma and stress they experience can make it difficult to concentrate, retain information, and perform well in school. This educational setback can have long-term consequences on their future opportunities and economic stability.

Countering the Argument: The Fallacy of Staying Together for the Kids

Speaker Johnson’s and Vice-Presidential Candidate Vance’s argument that couples should stay in marriages for the sake of their children, even in cases of violence, is fundamentally flawed. It ignores the overwhelming evidence that children are better off when they are not exposed to violence.

Single-Parent Homes Can Be Safe Havens

Contrary to the notion that single-parent homes are inherently detrimental to children, many studies have shown that children can thrive in such environments, provided they are free from violence and instability.

The Office of Women’s Health writes:

Children do best in a safe, stable, loving environment, whether that’s with one parent or two.

Single parents who are free from abusive partners often provide a stable, loving environment for their children. They can focus on their children’s needs without the constant fear and stress that comes with living with an abuser. This stability is crucial for the healthy development of children.

As researcher and journalist Sara Shoener writes:

To be sure, children who enjoy the support of two adults fare better on average than those who do not, and parents with loving partners often benefit from greater emotional and economic security. However, I have seen the ways in which prioritizing two-parent families tethers victims of violence to their assailants, sacrifices safety in the name of parental rights and helps batterers maintain control. Sweeping rhetoric about the value of marriage and father involvement is not just incomplete. For victims of domestic violence, it’s dangerous.

Legal and Social Support for Survivors and Their Children

Efforts to eliminate no-fault divorce and pressure couples to stay together overlook the importance of legal and social support for survivors of domestic violence and their children. No-fault divorce allows individuals to leave abusive marriages without having to prove fault, which can be a daunting and dangerous process. By making it easier for survivors to escape violent relationships, no-fault divorce laws protect the well-being of both women and children.

Organizations such as the National Organization for Women (NOW) argue that access to no-fault divorce is essential for the safety and well-being of domestic violence survivors. Restricting this access traps individuals in dangerous situations, perpetuating the cycle of violence and exposing women and children to continued harm​.

Policy Recommendations: Protecting Children from Domestic Violence

If politicians like Speaker Johnson and Vice-Presidential Candidate Vance truly want to protect and prioritize the well-being of children, they should adopt measures that address the root causes and consequences of domestic violence. This includes:

1. Prevention Initiatives: Developing and implementing prevention programs that address the root causes of domestic violence. These can include community education, support groups, and early intervention strategies to identify and help at-risk families before violence occurs. Furthermore, to reduce stress in families, policymakers must do better in support families with children, such as expanding the Child Tax Credit, home visiting programs, and family resource centers.
2. Strengthening Support Systems: Providing robust support services for domestic violence survivors, including safe housing, counseling, and financial assistance. These services help survivors rebuild their lives and provide a stable environment for their children.
3. Promoting Awareness and Education: Increasing public awareness about the impact of domestic violence on children and the importance of safe, non-violent homes. Education programs in schools can also help children recognize and seek help for domestic violence.
4. Ensuring Access to No-Fault Divorce: Preserving and promoting access to no-fault divorce laws to allow individuals to leave abusive relationships without unnecessary legal hurdles. This legal protection is crucial for the safety and well-being of both survivors and their children.
5. Rejecting “Parental Rights” Laws That Undermine Child Safety: Some policymakers and “parental rights” advocates are pushing changes to the law that threaten the health, safety, and well-being of children under the guise of “parental rights”. Children are not property and have inherent fundamental rights that are often rejected and undermined by some of these laws.
6. Integrating Trauma-Informed Practices: Implementing trauma-informed practices in schools, healthcare settings, and social services to better support children who have experienced domestic violence. This includes training professionals to recognize and respond to the signs of trauma.
7. Funding Research and Intervention Programs: Investing in research to understand the long-term effects of domestic violence on children and developing effective intervention programs. This research can inform policies and practices aimed at mitigating the impact of domestic violence.

“Children are a gift from God. They are not throw-away objects. We should not abuse them, but should love them dearly.”

Desmond Tutu

The notion that children benefit from staying in violent marriages is not only misguided but also dangerous. The evidence is clear: domestic violence has devastating effects on children, impacting their emotional, physical, and developmental health and well-being. Policies that encourage couples to stay in abusive relationships in the name of marital stability do a grave disservice to the very children they claim to protect.

The post Beyond the Veil: The Impact of Domestic Violence on Children and the Danger of Ending No-Fault Divorce appeared first on First Focus on Children.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | iHeart RADIO | Podcast Addict | Amazon Music | Deezer App | Player FM | PodChaser

In this episode, hosts Bruce Lesley and Messellech Looby chat with Dr. Terry Brooks, executive director of Kentucky Youth Advocates, a nonprofit watchdog for Kentucky’s kids. Dr. Brooks has successfully worked with Democrats, Republicans, and Independents to make necessary improvements for the lives of children across the state, such as supporting kinship caregivers and kids in foster care. Dr. Brooks tells our hosts that Kentucky’s children, like those around the country, are at a crossroads. Society has accepted issues such as child poverty as normal, he says, and he shares his efforts to press policymakers to focus on issues such as child care and child poverty, rather than on distractions like the culture wars. Dr. Brooks also discusses the complexities of a Kentucky ballot initiative that would allow the general assembly to use public money for private schools. 

Learn more about Kentucky Youth Advocates:  

• Resource: Kentucky KIDS Count, By Kentucky Youth Advocates 
• Podcast: The American Rescue Plan & Efforts to End Child Poverty, By Kentucky Youth Advocates, Featuring Bruce Lesley

To join the conversation, follow First Focus on Children on Instagram, LinkedIn, and Twitter. 

Send us comments on thoughts via email: SpeakingOfKids@firstfocus.org

Find us on Twitter/X: @SpeakingOfKids, @BruceLesley and @First_Focus

Want to be a voice for kids? Become an Ambassador for Children here. 

Transcript

Coming soon

The post Episode 20: Advocating for Kids in Kentucky and Across America with Dr. Terry Brooks appeared first on First Focus on Children.

Excerpt from the letter:

Currently, there is no federal agency that has been tasked with ensuring and supporting state and local child welfare agencies’ compliance with ICWA standards. The bipartisan Strengthening Tribal Families Act would grant such responsibility to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) by tying the ICWA requirements to a federal funding stream, Title IV-B of the Social Security Act. We anticipate that empowering HHS to assist child welfare agencies in their ICWA implementation will result in more Native American children remaining connected to their families of origin, extended family, and culture when they encounter the child welfare system.

Read the full Senate letter.
Read the full House letter.

The post Joint Letters: Support the bipartisan Strengthening Tribal Families Act of 2022 (H.R. 8954) appeared first on First Focus on Children.

The case before the U.S. Supreme Court today challenging a 1978 law governing the welfare of Native American children could upend what has long been considered the gold standard for protecting the best interests of the child in custody cases.

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), at issue in Brackeen v. Haaland, emphasizes reunification of Native American children with tribal families. The statute requires “active efforts” to prevent a Native American child from being removed from their home, and, once removed to keep the child within the tribe and reunify the child with family. The “active efforts” standard is a higher standard than the “reasonable efforts” standard required by other child welfare laws and child welfare experts widely consider it best practice.

“We should actually be expanding the active efforts concept,” said Aubrey Edwards-Luce, an attorney who leads First Focus on Children’s Child Welfare and Racial Equity (CWARE) Collaborative. “One of the overarching arguments in this case is that the Indian Child Welfare Act puts the rights of the tribe before best interests of the child, but in fact the opposite is true. The law’s consideration of the child’s connection to their community is an essential part of assessing their best interest. When Congress passed ICWA, it provided and increased levels of protection and respect for a child’s connection to their culture and background and community. We think that standard should apply to all children, especially those whose backgrounds have been used to marginalize them.”

Congress passed ICWA to end decades of forced assimilation of Native American children by removing them from their tribes and placing them with non-Native families or in boarding schools. The challengers argue the law violates the 14^th Amendment and unfairly gives preference to one race over another. Courts have repeatedly ruled that ICWA is not “race-based,” but rather acknowledges the political status of tribal citizenship and Congress’ authority to govern federal interaction with tribes.

Between 25% and 35% of Native American children were being taken from their homes and placed with adoptive families, in foster care or in institutions before ICWA, according to the Associated Press. Most were placed with white families or in boarding schools in attempts to assimilate them.

“Native American young people and children are disproportionately represented in the child welfare system at every stage,” Edwards-Luce said. “They are investigated disproportionately, put in foster care disproportionately, and congregate care disproportionately.”

The CWARE Collaborative, established in 2020 by the advocacy organization First Focus on Children, is a coalition of organizations dedicated to transforming the child welfare system with guidance and leadership from those with lived experience as foster children, youth, parents, kinship care givers, and foster parents. The Collaborative promotes racial and cultural equity within the child welfare system so that children, parents, and families are free to thrive in their homes and communities.

The Collaborative supports efforts to strengthen and protect ICWA such as the bipartisan Strengthening Tribal Families Act, which would strengthen and support enforcement around ICWA. Introduced by Rep. Judy Chu (D-CA) and Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE), the legislation would assist state and local child welfare agencies with implementing ICWA.

First Focus on Children is a bipartisan advocacy organization dedicated to making children and families a priority in federal policy and budget decisions.

The post SCOTUS could scuttle “gold standard” in child welfare appeared first on First Focus on Children.