Termination Of Parental Rights Research Articles

The harms of punishing substance use during pregnancy

As rates of substance use have increased in the United States, rates of substance-involved pregnancies have also been on the rise, inspiring new civil policies designed to punish pregnant and parenting individuals who engage in substance use or are living with an untreated substance use disorder. Proponents of punitive civil policies argue that such policies will deter substance use behaviors and/or that substance use during pregnancy deserves punishment for harming the fetus. Current scientific evidence invalidates both claims, offering compelling evidence that punitive civil policies often worsen the harms of substance use for both parent and child. In this commentary, we review this evidence and explain how punitive policies that threaten child removal and the termination of parental rights exacerbate the very problems they are ostensibly designed to reduce. Rather than coercive and punitive responses, families affected by substance use need greater access to affordable, evidence-based treatment as well as services that address the structural and relational concerns underlying substance use. Above all, responses to perinatal substance use in both policy and practice should prioritize keeping families together.

Examining Value-Added: Jury-Trial Rights in Termination of Parental Rights Cases

Research typically finds some variability in verdicts across judges versus juries, indicating juries’ added value in legal disputes; that is, juries can and do see cases differently than judges. In an exploratory study, we examine termination of parental rights (TPR) trials, a nontraditional context in which a few states permit juries as well as judges to make decisions. Prior unpublished reports suggest that both judges and juries overwhelmingly terminate rights, but we questioned whether the same pattern would emerge in an area (Texas) with a strong anti-government history. Examining 60 trials in one county, with verdicts on 110 parents, we find that parents used juries infrequently (15% of trials, 12% of parental verdicts) and that terminations dominated verdict outcomes for both judges and juries. An intensively coded subsample of cases revealed few substantive differences in case types, although jury trials last nearly four times as long as bench trials. We conclude that juries are unlikely to provide different outcomes to parents fighting TPR, but we discuss other potential value of jury trials in these cases. Nonetheless, states may need to balance such advantages against cost considerations stemming from longer, more intensive trials.

Contact with Child Protective Services is pervasive but unequally distributed by race and ethnicity in large US counties

This article provides county-level estimates of the cumulative prevalence of four levels of Child Protective Services (CPS) contact using administrative data from the 20 most populous counties in the United States. Rates of CPS investigation are extremely high in almost every county. Racial and ethnic inequality in case outcomes is large in some counties. The total median investigation rate was 34.5%; the risk for Black, Hispanic, and White children exceeded 10% in all counties. Risks of having a CPS investigation were highest for Black children (32.9 to 62.8%). Black children also experienced high rates of later-stage CPS contact, with rates often above 20% for confirmed maltreatment, 10% for foster care placement, and 2% for termination of parental rights (TPR). The only other children who experienced such extreme rates of later-stage CPS interventions were American Indian/Alaska Native children in Middlesex, MA; Hispanic children in Bexar, TX; and all children except Asian/Pacific Islander children in Maricopa, AZ. The latter has uniquely high rates of late-stage CPS interventions. In some jurisdictions, such as New York, NY, (0.2%) and Cook, IL (0.2%), very few children experienced TPR. These results show that early CPS interventions are ubiquitous in large counties but with marked variation in how CPS systems respond to these investigations.

Ending the Family Death Penalty and Building a World We Deserve

U.S. history is rooted in the rationalization of family separation to benefit white supremacy, capitalism and mainstream U.S. values. Because of this dark history, the U.S. history has become the world’s leader of legal destruction of families through termination of parental rights. It is the only country in the world that routinely pays people to adopt children whose parents, often women, very much want to be their parent. The Adoption and Safe Families Act, enacted in 1997, wildly changed the legal landscape of the family regulation system. At that time 47% of the children in the system were Black, and the drug war had been targeting Black men for low level offenses, and labeling Black mothers as “crack moms”. The result was an extreme attack on Black families, for which we have yet to recover. Abolition teaches us to unroot oppressive structures, disrupt and dismantle them while simultaneously supporting a praxis of imagination, healing, and building. In this paper, we encourage people not only to work to repeal ASFA, but to interrogate the imagination which entrenched the legitimacy of ASFA. Part I centers the discussion in our imaginations—the world we want to build, and the demands we are making. Part II moves into a discussion about the counter imagination, the ideas and mythology that created ASFA—the legal framework. In this section, we isolate ASFA as a target for abolition and organizing. Part III moves into a practical discussion about ethical ways to mobilize around ASFA. This section is intended to invite the reader to learn, and question, together. It invites questions, thinking, and problem solving in lieu of providing a recommendation.

Justice for Families

Abstract. When a substantiated allegation of child maltreatment occurs, a family may be referred to the child welfare court. This court may temporarily remove children from their homes, making them dependents of the state. Over the course of a case, the judge assesses the child's needs and safety, and orders services for the family to help them reunify. Internationally, the child welfare court process is complex and lengthy, with a number of hearings that parents are required to attend, and a host of legal decisions rendered. One major decision that may arise from these proceedings is a permanent legal separation of children from their parents, referred to as a termination of parental rights. A decision to terminate parental rights can be life-altering for the entire family. Yet, very little is known about parents' experiences during child welfare court cases, particularly about their legal understanding. A lack of parent understanding may contribute to difficulties with navigating cases and complying with court mandates. Recent mixed-methods research conducted with parents in child welfare proceedings in the United States systematically examined parents' understanding. Findings revealed that parents had a limited understanding of common court terms, professionals' roles, and key processes. Furthermore, 12% of parents could not describe the judge's most recent decision in their case. Qualitative research in the United Kingdom and Canada demonstrates that parents in these countries may also experience challenges with understanding child welfare proceedings. Policy recommendations are offered to underscore the importance of assessing and promoting parents' legal understanding, globally.

Recent Developments in Indiana Family Law: October 2017 to September 2018

This Article considers the notable developments in Indiana family law during the survey period of October 1, 2017 to September 30, 2018. The published appellate cases surveyed in this Article concern property division upon divorce, parenting time and visitation, child custody, child support, adoption and paternity, CHINS and the termination of parental rights, and jurisdiction and procedure.

The Psychiatric Genetic Data of Children in Proceedings to Terminate Parental Rights.

The introduction of psychiatric genetic evidence in court proceedings to terminate parental rights raises concerns that such information will result in misconceived assumptions about the child's mental health trajectory and unjust rulings on termination of parental rights. We conducted an online vignette-based survey with a nationally representative sample of adults from the general public (n = 300 respondents) to assess their views on how evidence about a child's psychiatric genetic makeup may affect key decisions in termination proceedings. Our findings indicate that genetic evidence increased the child's labeling as having a psychiatric disorder, regardless of the presence of symptoms, treatment recommendations, evaluation of prescription medication, and beliefs in treatment efficacy. Genetic evidence alone did not affect whether participants would terminate parental rights, but participants who thought that the child did not have a psychiatric disorder were more likely to terminate in the presence of genetic test results. We conclude that psychiatric genetic evidence in termination proceedings may have unintended consequences, and that measures should be taken to ensure that it does not unfairly affect outcomes.

The Stability Paradox: The Two-Parent Paradigm and the Perpetuation of Violence Against Women in Termination of Parental Rights and Custody Cases

Despite changing family compositions, entrenched in family law is the antiquated idea that a two-parent household, or its approximation vis-à-vis a shared custody arrangement, promotes stability and integrity and, thus, is in the best interest of the child. Yet, the concept that the two-parent household (or shared involvement of both parents in the child’s life if the parents separate) promotes stability for the family and is best for the child is a dangerous fallacy. When rape or intimate partner violence (IPV) is present, or the re-occurrence of violence remains a threat, the family unit is far from stable. This Article explores the legal system’s glorification of the nuclear family, its resistance to shifting away from the two-parent paradigm, and how this resistance creates a stability paradox and perpetuates violence against women and children. The harmful impact that the nuclear family paradigm has on families is further explored by an examination of the statutory constructs and judicial interpretations of termination of parental rights (TPR) and custody statutes in cases where a child is conceived as a result of rape or exposed to ongoing IPV. Cases are utilized to examine how courts have interpreted parental rights statutes where a child is conceived as a result of rape. Additionally, a hypothetical case is discussed to explore arguments that may be advanced in TPR cases where children are exposed to ongoing IPV. The Article finds that although there are inherent problems in enacting statutes to terminate parental rights in cases involving rape or IPV, legislation is also a necessary tool for survivors. Model legislation is proposed for termination of parental rights in cases where a child is conceived as a result of a sexual offense or when a child is exposed to ongoing IPV.

Termination of Parental Rights in Missouri

The termination of parental rights is one of most awesome powers of state, and is often referred to as the civil death penalty. This work provides insight into Missouri case law on subject, and covers how these cases begin through their appeal. Each of statutory requirements is discussed, as is case law interpreting them. The work also includes an appendix with some of more important cases involving termination of parental rights.

Termination of Parental Rights as a Private Remedy: Rationales, Realities, and Alternatives

Termination of Parental Rights as a Private Remedy: Rationales, Realities, and Alternatives

Families Who Return to the Child Welfare System after a Previous Termination of Parental Rights: Few in Number, High in Court Utilization

Anecdotally, judges, court staff and behavioral health providers working in the child welfare system indicate that families commonly return to the system after a termination of parental rights. The current study is the first to empirically investigate these families who return to the system with new children. Results show that although only a small proportion of families returned after a previous termination of parental rights, these families often returned multiple times with new children. Future research should attempt to replicate these results in other jurisdictions and focus on risk and protective factors to better understand the needs of these parents and children, and determine how to better support them within the child welfare system.

Does A Parent's Right to Parenting Matter in Termination of Parental Rights? An Analysis of Court Cases

The right to parenting refers to the biological parent's right to make decisions about the care and wellbeing of the child and is considered a fundamental constitutional right. But if the child faces imminent risk of harm, this right can be revoked. This study examines the right to parenting in child maltreatment cases where parental rights were terminated and the way this right was balanced against other rights and interests of the child and parents. Drawing on a sample of 212 court cases, the study found that the right to parenting was discussed by the courts only in a quarter of the cases. It was also found that the right to parenting was referenced more often in less severe cases than in more severe cases. This paper discusses legal marginalization as reflective of the social marginalization of families involved in the child welfare system and the importance of a deliberate consideration of the right to parenting in every individual case from a legal as well as therapeutic perspective. It suggests that when professionals neglect parental rights they may also fail to provide parents with a full chance to participate in services that could help them improve their parenting skills and be reunified with their children.

Termination of Parental Rights in New York: Why Such a Variation By County?

Termination of parental rights (“TPR”) ends the parent–child relationship though a process governed by state law. As a recent analysis of federal data revealed, TPR rates vary widely by state. In West Virginia, the TPR rate was 283 per 100,000. In New York State, the focus of this article, there were approximately 30 TPRs for every 100,000 children in 2014. Within New York State, TPR rates vary by county. In this exploratory piece, we analyze TPR rates in New York by county, noting discrepancies and seeking possible explanations for these variations, including possible effects of income disparities, single‐parent households, poor mental health, binge drinking, and drug addiction. This is an initial exploration only, and is not intended to be a rigorous quantitative study. Rather, our scope arises from what we have noticed from front line practice. It is our hope that researchers will use our exploratory findings for extended analysis, including analysis of TPR data from other states.

A Survey: Children’s Rights Post Termination of Parental Rights and Pre‐Adoption

AbstractThis survey of the statutory provisions and case law of all 50 states and the District of Columbia includes the rights of children to parental support, inheritance, and familial association remaining upon termination of parental rights. A majority of states terminate all the child’s rights at the time parental rights are severed. However, a number of states by explicit statutes or statutory construction have determined that a child’s rights to parental support survives termination of parental rights. This survey examines the prevailing law in each state and suggests statutory reforms to protect the legal status and rights of children.

Ice Ice Baby: The De Facto Termination of Parental Rights by an Enforcement Agency

The current administration's zero tolerance stance on illegal immigration has resulted in the separation of thousands of families and the de facto termination of parental rights. While undocumented parents were always at risk of detainment, expanded immigration enforcement under the Trump administration has greatly increased that risk. Detainment has directly and indirectly resulted in the prolonged separation of parents from their children. This Note proposes a Department of Homeland Security Regulation that will require ICE to use the least restrictive methods to achieve its goals while emphasizing efforts to keep families together.

The Cumulative Prevalence of Termination of Parental Rights for U.S. Children, 2000-2016.

Recent research has used synthetic cohort life tables to show that having a Child Protective Services investigation, experiencing confirmed maltreatment, and being placed in foster care are more common for American children than would be expected based on daily or annual rates for these events. In this article, we extend this literature by using synthetic cohort life tables and data from the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System to generate the first cumulative prevalence estimates of termination of parental rights. The results provide support for four conclusions. First, according to the 2016 estimate, 1 in 100 U.S. children will experience the termination of parental rights by age 18. Second, the risk of experiencing this event is highest in the first few years of life. Third, risks are highest for Native American and African American children. Nearly 3.0% of Native American children and around 1.5% of African American children will ever experience this event. Finally, there is dramatic variation across states in the risk of experiencing this event and in racial/ethnic inequality in this risk. Taken together, these findings suggest that parental rights termination, which involves the permanent loss of access to children for parents, is far more common than often thought.

The revolving door of families in the child welfare system: Risk and protective factors associated with families returning

The number of families involved in the child welfare system (including child protective services, foster care, juvenile court) has increased since 2011(Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System, 2015). Professionals involved in these systems have discussed the increase in number of families who return to the child welfare system after an initial case closure. We aim to identify risk and protective factors associated with families returning to the system within a social ecological framework, to identify gaps in the current literature, and to discuss areas for future research. A literature search was conducted using PsycInfo, PubMED, and SociIndex through June 2017 on three case outcomes: reunification, re-entry/reactivation, and termination of parental rights. The authors then reviewed the articles located and highlight the findings using a social ecological framework.

Recent Developments in Indiana Family Law: October 2017 to September 2018

This Article considers the notable developments in Indiana family law during the survey period of October 1, 2017 to September 30, 2018. The published appellate cases surveyed in this Article concern property division upon divorce, parenting time and visitation, child custody, child support, adoption and paternity, CHINS and the termination of parental rights, and jurisdiction and procedure.

Children conceived from rape: Legislation, parental rights and outcomes for victims

Approximately 5% of women who are victims of rape become pregnant, and approximately 32% of those women choose to raise their child. Many of the rapists are known to the victims and the victims who conceive often experience multiple rapes and pregnancies. Several states allow termination of parental rights of rapists but only after criminal convictions, which are nearly impossible to obtain. Without criminal convictions and termination of parental rights, family courts are ordering victim mothers to parent their children with their rapists. This article provides an overview of the state statutes regarding the termination of parental rights of rapists and the psychological and health impacts on the victims and their children. This article concludes discussing possible legislative remedies for victim mothers that will make the justice system process easier for and more accessible to these hidden families.

The Effects of Federal Adoption Incentive Awards for Older Children on Adoptions From U.S. Foster Care

AbstractThis paper analyzes state responses to the 2003 and 2008 changes in the federal Adoption Incentives program to increase adoptions from the U.S. foster care system. The 2003 change introduced a $4,000 payment to states for every adoption of a child aged 9 and older above a state‐specific baseline. In 2008, the payment was doubled to $8,000. Using a discrete hazard model cast in a difference‐in‐differences framework, I do not find robust evidence that the incentives increased the probability of adoption for older children relative to younger children following the policy changes. I also do not find that the incentives affected the timing of adoption, likelihood of termination of parental rights, or the amounts of adoption assistance for older children relative to younger children. The findings illustrate the incentives are unable to help states overcome many of the challenges associated with achieving adoption for older children.