Monday, March 11, 2019

Migrant Children, Our Children

By Mark Singer, Ph.D., and Tom Royer, M.P.A.

As Americans, we are participants in a growing humanitarian and moral crisis by tolerating the institutionalization and traumatization of over 10,000 migrant children. These children have been wrenched from their parents and relatives and housed in facilities that are not open to scrutiny, since the federally contracted facilities accommodating these children are exempt from child welfare inspections. More than 100 of these residences currently exist scattered across numerous states. They are referred to as “holding facilities,” “shelters,” and “detention facilities,” but what they all have in common is housing scared and confused children, many of whom don’t speak English, supervised by staff with unknown credentials. These congregate settings are converted, schools, motels, tents, a former Walmart, and other edifices never meant to house vulnerable children. They have become big business, enriching a few and providing employment to many.

Last August, two youth workers in separate facilities were charged with sexually assaulting migrant teens. One of the workers, who is HIV positive, was charged with sexually abusing eight teenage boys. Recently released videos show children in a migrant center being slapped, pushed and dragged by staff. We may never know the full extent of the abuses occurring in these facilities because the children in residence have no voice, the caregivers won’t speak out and our country’s system to safeguard minors is not being employed. This victimization must stop….but how?

This country has a rich heritage of providing special services and safeguards to children. In 1899, the United States established the world’s first juvenile court in Chicago, IL. The Social Security Act of 1930 provided funding for children who were dependent or neglected, and over the years, amendments to this act have resulted in increased services and funding for vulnerable children. The Child Abuse and Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974 provided substantial funds for the purpose of improving our nation’s response to child abuse and neglect. Additionally, private foundations dedicated to children’s rights and well-being have furnished both leadership and funding to improve the plight of vulnerable children.

It is well documented that vulnerable children placed in residential treatment or detention settings are at high risk for both peer abuse and adult predation. With these vulnerabilities in mind, we have established legal, treatment and organizational oversight for these residential settings and try to avoid placing children in restrictive settings. For example, in Ohio, most of these migrant children would never end up in congregate care because we have learned how devastating this is to children not only in the short term, but over a lifetime. In Ohio, children are removed from their families as a last resort for their safety and security or for the safety and security of the community. In the event that a child must be separated from their own family, most still do not end up in congregate care settings because it is widely considered less traumatic for children to live in a family setting such as foster care.

Unfortunately, some children do end up in congregate care settings. The difference is that when children are placed in residential or detention facilities in Ohio, they are highly regulated. Staff are required to go through extensive FBI and Bureau of Criminal Investigation background checks. Organizations providing these services must be certified by the Ohio Department of Mental Health or the Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services. Organizations are subject to routine, rigorous surveys and are open to investigation at any time. Organizations are accredited by The Joint Commission, The Council on Accreditation or The Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities. Ongoing certification and accreditation mean that organizations are following standards related to safety, quality of care, supervision, documentation and reporting. And even with these safeguards, some abuses still occur. It is horrifying to contemplate what could, and probably is, occurring without them.

Regardless of how you feel about migrants, it is undeniable that the trauma of separating children from their parents takes a horrible toll and places these children at high risk. Why not employ some of the same safeguards mentioned above in the congregate care settings housing migrant children? While these standards and regulatory bodies vary somewhat from state to state, they are present in varying forms in all states. We are spending tens of millions of dollars to house migrant children, but nothing to ensure their safety and protection. Deploy our existing safeguards!

.

Mark I. Singer, Ph.D.

Leonard W. Professor of Family and Child Welfare

Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences, and

Professor of Psychiatry, School of Medicine

Case Western Reserve University

Thomas Royer, M.P.A.

President and CEO

Beech Brook (a non-profit agency serving children and their families)