Should Child Protection workers be required to have previous experience w/ kids?
By FDBrister
@FDBrister (115)
United States
January 14, 2009 10:19am CST
Should CPS workers be required to either have children or have previous experience with children?
I have a son who's adopted and one of the stipulations is that CPS comes calling to check up on us every now and then. The worker who comes to see us has no children, has never had any experience with children, and is probably not long out of college. I have two other children besides the adopted child, so when the CPS worker comes, my house is always less than spotless (not a total disaster area, but you can tell I have children living here). Every time she comes by, she says she understands that I have three children (and a business to run), but I HAVE to keep the house absolutely clean. Of course she can't write me up for it, but she can be a nuisance about it. Every other aspect of my house is above the norm: all meds are kept in a lockbox, my kids are clean and well fed, and they have enough toys that their rooms and my attic look like toy stores. Because my son is special needs, I also have all kinds of social workers and tutors and other such people coming in and out of my house; if anything was wrong, they're mandated to report it. In other words, this lady just has NO CLUE what it means to truly raise children.
I think CPS workers should minimally have experience working with children, if not have children of their own... what do you think?
2 people like this
4 responses
@irishidid (8687)
• United States
14 Jan 09
Yes they should and it should be a requirement. Not just taking child care or child development classes either. They should require them to either have children or go through a program as a mom's helper.
Honestly, if I was a CPS worker and walked into an immaculate house I'd be concerned. I'd wonder if you were letting the kids play or keeping them confined to keep the house clean. Give me a lived in house and happy kids any day!
1 person likes this
@soooobored (1184)
• United States
16 Jan 09
I disagree, child protection is not at all about raising or coddling kids, it's about taking an impartial view of the home / family and making sure that there is no evidence of abuse. These workers go in and out of the filthiest homes in the country, I'm sure that while they may comment on a home's cleanliness, it would have to be very very unsanitary for the child to be taken away!
1 person likes this
@irishidid (8687)
• United States
16 Jan 09
Are you saying it is better for them to know nothing at all about children? Are you aware that over 1/2 possibly 3/4 of complaints of child abuse are made intentionally to cause trouble to a family? That it's a favorite method of revenge?
Who determines what a clean house is? A worker might decide a normal looking "lived in" home could be deemed as filthy, therefore taking the kids away from the mother who spends valuable time with her kids while the mother with the immaculate house and always yells at her kids when they act like children is called a good parent. It isn't always what you see.
A person with no experience with children does more harm than good. How many have used the bruises that kids get just playing as a sign of abuse? This isn't about raising or coddling children, it's about knowing children. It's about knowing what it is to be a parent and what's important.
1 person likes this
@soooobored (1184)
• United States
17 Jan 09
Of course the majority of calls to child protection are about revenge. That's why child protection workers who HAVE children are at an extreme disadvantage, it is too disconcerting for them to have to take children from a home where children shouldn't be removed.
The realistic position of a child protective worker is to act as an advocate of the child, and treat the parent as guilty until proven innocent. It's an entirely necessary approach to the job. People without children can be more objective, and children are not taken for good without good cause, it takes A LOT for children to be permanently removed from the home.
@soooobored (1184)
• United States
16 Jan 09
The people I have known who worked with child protection were actually better off without children. It's a hard job no matter what, but the people with children had the hardest time taking kids away from their parents (obviously a necessary part of the job!!). Ultimately they would leave, usually for less money, just because they couldn't handle that part.
People working in child protection NEED to be impartial, it's a lot easier without kids from what I can tell, so I think a more effective employee would be one without kids.
1 person likes this
@soooobored (1184)
• United States
16 Jan 09
I'm not sure it's about them making judgment calls, so much as reporting on what they see. There are red flags that need to be addressed or reported, but it sounds more like the worker was giving you a heads up to not let it get out of hand. It might be uncomfortable, but it doesn't sound to me like your kids are in jeopardy. I've seen some of the houses that PASS child protective visits, it doesn't sound like you're anywhere near the red flag point!
1 person likes this
@FDBrister (115)
• United States
16 Jan 09
I understand the need to be impartial, however how can someone who's never had kids (or worked with them) truly understand what it's like to be responsible for taking care of them. How can someone who's never had the privilege of having to pick up after kids have the right to say your house needs to be cleaner because you have kids. Believe me when I tell you my house is no pigsty; there may be toys strewn everywhere and I may not have had a chance to do the dishes after lunch because the baby was crawling around and getting into things, but I can tell you that my house is far cleaner than many people's.
1 person likes this
@cobrateacher (8432)
• United States
15 Jan 09
With no experience, they should be required to serve an apprenticeship with a proven worker until that mentor can assure the supervisory personnel that the new worker can handle the job. Children are far too fragile to have less than the very best.
1 person likes this
@JLHolley (128)
• Visalia, California
6 Jan 20
My social worker lost her children and then was successfully reunified. She said that the only requirment to beco.e a social worker is to have a degree.
