New York Times: May 6, 2009
Published: May 6, 2009
INDIANAPOLIS — After resolving to leave her longtime but violent
partner in March, Janai Parahams, 25 and jobless, wanted to make a
fresh start. But she felt trapped: she was tending four small children
with no family support or child care. She could scarcely leave her
house, let alone find a job and a new place to live.
“I needed stability so I wouldn’t go back into an abusive relationship,” she said of those first days of confusion and fear.
A social worker told Ms. Parahams about a nonprofit group, Safe
Families for Children, that places the children of parents in crisis
with volunteer families, on a temporary basis — from a day to a year or
more. Ms. Parahams could approve the caretakers, see her children
whenever she wanted and get them back with no courts involved.
This unusual offer of extended respite to overwhelmed parents is part
of a broader national trend in child welfare to keep many cases out of
the courts and foster care systems. State agencies traditionally had a
stark choice between breaking up families in turmoil or leaving
children in potentially risky homes. Now many are doing more preventive
work to forestall abuse and neglect.
Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri and Ohio are among the states redesigning
official programs to identify families at risk and offer counseling or
parenting classes. Other states are making intensive efforts to help
families in more serious trouble stay together, placing a social worker
in the home for weeks at a time to assess and advise parents, refer
them to needed therapies and secure help with day care, housing and
even emergency cash.
The group that Ms. Parahams turned to, Safe Families for Children,
takes a different approach, finding mentoring families to take children
temporarily, without the formalities and potential legal battles of
foster care.
“It’s consistent with the whole movement in child-welfare agencies to
find a broader range of responses for families in need,” said Mark
Courtney, a family expert at the University of Washington.
Safe Families, which was founded in Chicago about five years ago, says
that requests for help have accelerated this year along with the rise
in unemployment and foreclosures.
Not all child welfare experts agree that removing children, even temporarily, is a good idea if there is no imminent risk.
Started by David Anderson, a child psychologist who heads a Christian
service agency, Safe Families draws mainly on churches to find families
who will take in children, with no compensation or expectation of
adoption.
The approach has recently spread to Atlanta; Chattanooga, Tenn.;
Davenport, Iowa; Los Angeles; Milwaukee; and Rockford, Ill.; with the
blessing of state welfare officials.
“Where parents recognize issues they need to address and ask for
support before abuse or neglect takes place, it’s a great thing,” said
Erwin McEwen, Illinois director of child and family services.
In the Chicago area, Safe Families has placed more than 1,200 children,
helping out single mothers who are suddenly homeless, fleeing domestic
violence or, in one case, seeking a home for a baby born in prison
while the mother served out her term.
Richard Wexler, director of the National Coalition for Child Protection
Reform, criticized the removal of children from homes with no evidence
of abuse. “Volunteers could bring the respite to the mom’s home by
baby-sitting or mentoring there, instead of taking the children away,”
he said.
Mr. Anderson said some Safe Families programs were planning to
experiment with in-home mentoring, but stressed that all the parents
involved had decided themselves that they needed a break from
child-rearing to get back on their feet.
Removing children from parents should be avoided when possible, experts
in child welfare agree. Placing them with relatives is next best, but
when there are no acceptable alternatives, encouraging contact between
parent and child during the separation, and friendship between the two
families, can minimize the trauma, said Peter J. Pecora, director of
research with Casey Family Programs, a nonprofit group in Seattle that
develops child welfare programs.
Safe Families must deal with many of the safety and legal concerns of
foster care. It makes background checks of potential hosts, visits
homes to make sure things are going well and carries insurance in case
of accidents. Mr. McEwen said he had not heard of any safety problems
or other complaints in Illinois.
Legal arrangements vary: in Illinois, parents must sign over formal
guardianship, while Indiana requires only a temporary placement
agreement, with power of attorney granted for emergency medical
decisions.
In Chicago, Safe Families expects to place 1,000 children this year,
for average stays of 45 days. Administrative costs total $350,000 a
year, with $100,000 coming from the state and the rest from churches
and foundations. If those children ended up in foster care instead, Mr.
Anderson noted, the cost to the public would be millions.
In Indianapolis, where several dozen children have been placed in the
last year, and elsewhere, the group screens the children and does not
take those with major behavioral problems, who need trained therapists.
Ideally, and as often happens, Mr. Anderson said, the hosts “become
like extended family,” helping mothers and staying in touch with the
children.
Such ties appear likely in the case of Brenda Bailey, 51, of
Indianapolis, who has lung disease and lost her lease in October. She
moved into a women’s shelter but could not provide for her sons, then
ages 10, 16 and 17.
“I decided the kids would be better off without me,” she said,
recalling the night she took handfuls of Valium. But when she woke up
the next morning, she said, she swore she would reunite the family.
Her middle son moved in with an older half-sister, while the oldest and
youngest sons were taken in by Safe Families. Then Ms. Bailey’s lung
collapsed, requiring months of recovery. Her youngest son, Elijah, now
11, stayed with one family for four months, and in February moved into
the suburban home of his gym teacher, J. T. Crook, and his wife,
Samantha. Ms. Bailey, largely recovered and planning to rent an
apartment, has become friends with the Crooks, and agreed that Elijah
would stay with them until school ends, then spend weekends with them
in the summer.
Ms. Parahams, the woman seeking a fresh start, used her month away from
her four children to finish a job-preparation course. On April 20, she
started work with the Census Bureau, and three days later, her children
moved into her new home.
The families that looked after her children, she said, “helped me at a time of great need.”
“They showed real love, which is all you need,” Ms. Parahams said.
A version of this article appeared in print on May 7, 2009, on page A2.
http://www.nytimes.com/