Review by John Gilman rev 06/27/99

Oregon's Cohort studies assess demographics of people subjected to long-term (one year) removal of children into state custody. Cohort IV covers the period of 1995-1997. Cohort IV contains a number of changes from previous studies.

Cohort IV (C4) is a fairly large study, which reviewed 809 individual cases. Nonetheless, its validity is questionable. C4 does not require independent confirmation of caseworker assessments. Thus, for Oregon's Cohort studies, accusation is fact. This is a VERY important distinction, and is a major difference between child protection statistics and studies of say, violent crime. Since there are no criminal or civil penalties against false accusations, and since local agency funding is based on the number and severity of cases, study statistics must be viewed with appropriate skepticism.

Ample evidence of "abuse inflation" is to be found early in the study. Witness these changes between C3 and C4: "Since Cohort III....domestic violence was established as a removal category," Also, "...the severity of maltreatment has been reclassified - moderate has been changed to substantial, and mild has been changed to moderate. Thus, the new categories are moderate, substantial, and severe forms of abuse. Lastly, mild burns have been changed from moderate (once mild) to substantial (once moderate) physical abuse. These changes reflect...the opinions of protective experts."

Even with an important qualification, C4 contains much good data. C4 reveals eleven categories of behavior defined by SCF to justify foster care. There is of course no category for children wrongly taken into custody, nor for emotional abuse inflicted on children by Oregon's foster care system. Categories of foster-care level "abuse" specifically do include belittlement, "child's treatment needs" and "threat of harm."

C4 reveals at least one sea change in reasons children are removed from home. Cases classified as "child's treatment needs" roughly doubled, to twenty percent of the total. Neglect and physical abuse cases shrank. The study does not explain what is meant by "child treatment needs".

C4 indicates most families whose children are removed do indeed have serious problems. Caseworkers believe the average family involved with SCF has five risk factors. These factors include chronic neglect, drug abuse, criminal involvement, teen at first birth, and single parenthood.

However, C4 data also reveal a significant subpopulation of families (between 8% and 15%) who may well be victims of overzealous agents. These are families whose children have been in state custody for more than a year, yet whose accused behavior is a five or lower on Oregon's seven-part scale. On this scale, Level 1 is severe abuse or neglect, parent in jail, or death of a sibling. Level 7 is primarily older youth, children beyond parental control, and minor maltreatment of a young child. Level 5 is for mild (moderate) physical or emotional maltreatment of older children. Children often suffer extreme trauma upon forcible, long-term removal from home. When long-term removal results from relatively minor maltreatment, SCF may well be doing far more harm than good.

C4 notes that roughly 75,000 charges of abuse are logged to SCF each year. SCF believes about one-third are merited, though all are supposed to be investigated. Roughly one child in every 135 is in foster care in any year, giving a total childhood risk level as high as one in twenty. About 5800 children are in foster care on any day, that number is growing by 10% annually. If nothing is done, the number of children in foster care will double by 2005.

C4 does not attempt to judge the efficacy of SCF behavior, it just gives the statistics associated. Within them both sides of the child welfare debate can find consolation. Most children taken by SCF appear to face substantial trouble at home. On the other hand, the study seems to imply that between 10% and 15% of children in the system are suffering because of it. As importantly, it also evidences the state's unwillingness to confront its own misbehavior.