Due 3/10/2021

In many cases, the decision to recommend that a child be removed from the home is not completely clear. In most jurisdictions, CPS investigators, along with the court, typically prioritize allowing children to remain in their own homes with their usual caregivers. This priority is usually upheld if the child can remain safely in the home, and the risk of harm can be managed. However, most jurisdictional statutes and case law do not require that the child has to actually be harmed to be removed from the home. This often raises questions about the amount of potential harm that needs to be present in order to recommend that a child be removed from the home. Additionally, for law enforcement personnel who remove the child from the home, the process can be dangerous for both them and the child.

In this Assignment, you are asked to make recommendations to the court about child welfare. You will select a case to analyze and—based on the behavior of the caregivers, conditions in the home, statutes in your jurisdiction, and case law—you will make a recommendation to the court about whether or not the child should be removed from the home. You will also consider ethical considerations related to your case analysis and recommendation, as well as the potential dangers involved if you recommend that law enforcement remove the child from the home.

To prepare for this Assignment:

• Read the two case studies in the Learning Resources and choose one to analyze in terms of the behavior of the caregivers and conditions within the home.
• Using the Learning Resources, locate the statutes concerning child neglect within your state or country.
• Review the case law on pg. 110 of Chapter 4 in Family Violence: Legal, Medical, and Social Perspectives, which summarizes how the court has defined the legal rationale for removing a child from the home.
• Review relevant Learning Resources and scholarly references about child neglect.
• Review relevant ethical guidelines.
• Consider dangers that law enforcement officers need to consider should the child be removed from the home.

The Assignment: 3 full pages

In your chosen case study, imagine that this case took place in your state or country. Address the following in your paper:

• Would the behavior of the caregivers or the conditions within the home be considered in violation of statutes pertaining to child neglect? If so, what jurisdictional statutes apply?
• What ethical issues are present in this case? What are 2–3 strategies you could use to address these issues appropriately?
• What risks and dangers currently related to the caregivers’ behavior or the conditions in the home need to be taken into consideration if law enforcement officers need to remove the child from the home?
• Recommend whether or not the child in the case study should be removed from the home. Support your viewpoint with your jurisdictional statutes, case law, and scholarly references that pertain to the behavior of the caregivers and conditions within the home.

© 2017 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 1 of 1

Week 2 Case Studies

Case #1

Hannah is a 3-year-old girl with no siblings who lives with her biological parents in a second-
story apartment. Both parents work full-time jobs. Hannah came to the attention of the
apartment complex manager when the tenant below the family complained that water was
leaking through the ceiling. The apartment complex manager went to the upstairs apartment to
investigate and found Hannah locked in a bathroom and handcuffed to the plumbing pipes. She
had turned the water on in the bathtub, flooding the room. The apartment complex manager
contacted the police, who came to the scene, unlocked the handcuffs, and referred the case to
Child Protective Services (CPS). Hannah was taken to a temporary shelter by CPS, who notified
her parents of this. Both parents were very responsive, left their jobs immediately, and drove to
the shelter to be interviewed by CPS. The preliminary CPS investigation revealed the following:
Heather seemed to be a happy child who readily engaged with the investigators. She had no
signs of physical abuse, but did show some moderate signs of malnutrition and dehydration.
She appeared to be delayed in meeting developmental milestones in all areas except motor
skills. She expressed only one-word utterances and appeared to be at an 18-month-old
developmental level. Her parents were forthright with the investigators and admitted handcuffing
and locking Hannah in the bathroom. They reported that they had been doing this for over a
year, because they did not know what else to do with her while they were at work. They did not
have enough money for childcare, but both needed to work in order to pay their bills. Neither
parent had a criminal record, and there had been no previous reports of child maltreatment.

Case #2

Tony is a 10-year-old boy living with his mother and her male partner, Hank, in a rural area in a
trailer that is rented by his mother. Hank has two children, ages 3 and 7, who visit 1–2 times per
week, but do not spend the night. These children are in the custody of their mother. Tony’s
mother works intermittently as a part-time motel maid, while Hank occasionally works
construction jobs. Tony came to the attention of Child Protective Services (CPS) after the police
arrested Hank at the trailer for illegally manufacturing methamphetamine. He was taken into
custody, and Tony was taken to a temporary shelter by CPS until his mother could be notified.
The mother responded by immediately going to the shelter to be interviewed by CPS. The
preliminary investigation revealed the following: The mother and Hank had been living together
for two years in the trailer. There were no previous reports of child maltreatment, but Hank was
on probation and had an arrest record that consisted of possession of illegal drugs. He had
been making methamphetamine in the trailer kitchen and selling it. The mother denied
knowledge of this, but since drug production paraphernalia was in full sight in the kitchen, her
denial was suspect. The mother had been arrested about five years prior for drug possession
charges that were later dropped. Tony appeared to have no signs of physical or emotional
abuse. Preliminary developmental screening reflected that he seemed to be functioning like a
normal 10-year-old. He was cooperative with investigators and answered all of their questions.
He reported that Hank had shown him how to pour stuff into a glass bottle (beaker), then he
would watch as Hank heated this over a fire. Law enforcement investigators reported that the
“meth lab” in the family’s kitchen was extremely dangerous and at risk of blowing up. Hank’s
punishment was unknown at the time of the CPS preliminary investigation, but it is likely that he
will be detained in jail to face charges for methamphetamine production and sales. The mother
intends to continue living in the trailer with Tony.

© 2017 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 1 of 1

Week 2 Case Studies

Case #1

Hannah is a 3-year-old girl with no siblings who lives with her biological parents in a second-
story apartment. Both parents work full-time jobs. Hannah came to the attention of the
apartment complex manager when the tenant below the family complained that water was
leaking through the ceiling. The apartment complex manager went to the upstairs apartment to
investigate and found Hannah locked in a bathroom and handcuffed to the plumbing pipes. She
had turned the water on in the bathtub, flooding the room. The apartment complex manager
contacted the police, who came to the scene, unlocked the handcuffs, and referred the case to
Child Protective Services (CPS). Hannah was taken to a temporary shelter by CPS, who notified
her parents of this. Both parents were very responsive, left their jobs immediately, and drove to
the shelter to be interviewed by CPS. The preliminary CPS investigation revealed the following:
Heather seemed to be a happy child who readily engaged with the investigators. She had no
signs of physical abuse, but did show some moderate signs of malnutrition and dehydration.
She appeared to be delayed in meeting developmental milestones in all areas except motor
skills. She expressed only one-word utterances and appeared to be at an 18-month-old
developmental level. Her parents were forthright with the investigators and admitted handcuffing
and locking Hannah in the bathroom. They reported that they had been doing this for over a
year, because they did not know what else to do with her while they were at work. They did not
have enough money for childcare, but both needed to work in order to pay their bills. Neither
parent had a criminal record, and there had been no previous reports of child maltreatment.

Case #2

Tony is a 10-year-old boy living with his mother and her male partner, Hank, in a rural area in a
trailer that is rented by his mother. Hank has two children, ages 3 and 7, who visit 1–2 times per
week, but do not spend the night. These children are in the custody of their mother. Tony’s
mother works intermittently as a part-time motel maid, while Hank occasionally works
construction jobs. Tony came to the attention of Child Protective Services (CPS) after the police
arrested Hank at the trailer for illegally manufacturing methamphetamine. He was taken into
custody, and Tony was taken to a temporary shelter by CPS until his mother could be notified.
The mother responded by immediately going to the shelter to be interviewed by CPS. The
preliminary investigation revealed the following: The mother and Hank had been living together
for two years in the trailer. There were no previous reports of child maltreatment, but Hank was
on probation and had an arrest record that consisted of possession of illegal drugs. He had
been making methamphetamine in the trailer kitchen and selling it. The mother denied
knowledge of this, but since drug production paraphernalia was in full sight in the kitchen, her
denial was suspect. The mother had been arrested about five years prior for drug possession
charges that were later dropped. Tony appeared to have no signs of physical or emotional
abuse. Preliminary developmental screening reflected that he seemed to be functioning like a
normal 10-year-old. He was cooperative with investigators and answered all of their questions.
He reported that Hank had shown him how to pour stuff into a glass bottle (beaker), then he
would watch as Hank heated this over a fire. Law enforcement investigators reported that the
“meth lab” in the family’s kitchen was extremely dangerous and at risk of blowing up. Hank’s
punishment was unknown at the time of the CPS preliminary investigation, but it is likely that he
will be detained in jail to face charges for methamphetamine production and sales. The mother
intends to continue living in the trailer with Tony.