Ignoring Abuse Not The Answer
The scariest part about a proposal to change the state’s definitions of child abuse and neglect just might be that the supporters’ arguments seem to make sense. At first.
The current law is too vague, says one. It leads to over-reporting, says another. It leaves open the possibility parents will be wrongly accused of abusing their children.
Washington Rep. Bill Backlund’s bill, currently under consideration in a subcommittee, purportedly seeks to cut back on the number of false reports to spare innocent parents pain and to ease the case load on overworked state social workers.
Hmmmm, that all seems reasonable. Until you consider the children.
They’re out there, more than you think. In 1991, 62,500 incidences of child abuse were reported in Washington - that’s one occurrence for every 21 children. It might be a bruise, it might be a broken arm, it could be a burn or a slap. Sometimes it’s death. It happens.
The Republican proposal would significantly raise the threshold of tolerance for abuse of children. Right now, abuse is defined simply, and, yes, vaguely: injury, sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, negligent treatment or maltreatment. The new guidelines would define abuse as infliction of physical injury that causes a substantial risk of death or serious impairment.
That leaves the field wide open for abusers. It means state officials will have to wait around for a grand slam before intervening.
It’s a huge risk, much too big a risk to take with society’s most vulnerable population.
What this bill ignores is that calls to homes with lower levels of abuse provide a starting point for help to many parents who may be in over their heads. Children in these homes are at high risk, without intervention, of more serious abuse in the future. Social workers offer parenting classes and referrals to agencies that provide respite. If this bill passes, thousands of children suffering from “low level” abuse will go unnoticed and unhelped until it’s far too late.
At least three children died in Spokane last year at the hands of a family member or friend. Many more will die, if social workers aren’t able to step in at the beginning stages of abuse.
If Backlund’s true aim is to narrow the definition of child abuse and neglect because social workers are overworked, he should rethink the bill. The answer isn’t cutting back, it’s adding more caseworkers, it’s upgrading training.
Backlund’s logic suggests if we don’t report the problem, there is no problem. Emergency room and shelter employees can tell you differently.
This bill smacks of parental rights run amok. If a few people are inconvenienced by a case worker knocking on their door, too bad. Washington’s children are worth it.
, DataTimes The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = Anne Windishar/For the editorial board