Ideologues on either end of the spectrum frequently view child protection as “government interference” in families.
For example, the practice of promising parents immunity from a maltreatment finding before doing any fact-finding reflects a liberal goal to engage families more respectfully. But this significantly limits caseworkers’ ability to protect children.
More subtly, progressives talk a lot about the trauma that children experience by being removed from their families, but conspicuously less about when the trauma of leaving them in place becomes unacceptable.
Similarly, this conservative op-ed piece urges parents to stop doctors from administering a HealthPartners questionnaire that identifies when children are risk.
State law requires child protection to give priority to child safety, but ideologues keep pressuring the system to give more weight to parents’ rights.