Native American Child Welfare Essay

Native American Child Welfare

Introduction

Native American Child Welfare agency is an institutions funded by the government to safeguard the rights of the native children’s in times of risk and abuse from the people within the community.

          Native Americans living in Los Angeles County, most of them are classified as the working poor people. Their ancestors come to Los Angeles in 1950’s during the federal government that let the Native Americans moved from different reservations to large urban areas to discourage tribal identity unity and to encourage assimilation.

          Native American children in the county come to the attention of the child welfare system at an alarming rate. It is due to the exacerbated poverty, substance abuse, lack of health care, inadequate housing, and other factors that increase the risk of child abuse in the community.

          Aboriginal people in Canada are one the indigenous peoples recognized in the Canadian constitution. The aboriginal peoples are the Indians, the First Nations, and Métis. And the Inuit. It also refers to self _ identification of Aboriginal Peoples who live within Canada.

These Indigenous Peoples who assert that Sovereignty rights have not been extinguish point to the Royal Proclamation of 1763.

Body of the Paper

Child Welfare in Canada was established in the year 2000, under the leaderships of the Ministry of Community and Social Services (MCSS), The Child and Family Services Act (CFSA), Children’s Aid Societies (CASs) and other approved agencies. The Ministry of Community and Social Services develops policies ad programs for a range of services which includes the following:

Licensing of children’s residential care facilities
Use of extraordinary measures
Young offender services
Child Welfare Services
Treatment and Intervention Services
Abuse Neglect and Prevention Services
The Director of the Child Welfare is responsible for the development and implementation of policy for the child welfare program, in this child welfare services the Program Management Division is the one responsible for monitoring child welfare service delivery by the contracted service providers.

Service Delivery Network

Ontario Canada has five aboriginal child welfare agencies initiated and operated by a Board of Directors, with an Executive Director and administrative staff they are responsible for providing child welfare services in its mandated geographical area.  The services agency establishes a “review team”. The role of the review team is to provide the agency with professional advice or protection recommendation on child abuse cases that are referred to the team. The composition of the team includes individuals from the community who are professionally qualified to perform medical, psychological, developmental, educational or social assessments, and must include at least on legally qualified medical practitioner. When their is a case refer to the review team who may be suffering or has suffered abuse, the review team reviews the case and recommends to the Society how the child may be protected. It is the duty of the review team to consider all cases when their is a suspicion of abuse of a child who is under a temporary custody order. Or any protection order before the child is returned to the caregiver in charge when the abuse allegedly took place.

Funding Network

The funding for child protection had been shared by the Ontario government and the local municipalities. In 1998, the Ministry of Community and Social Services assumed responsibility for 100 per cent of Ministry-approved CAS expenditures. This was done within the context of realigning Ontario government responsibilities. A new funding framework for child protection was phased in over three years and fully implemented in 1999—2000. The purpose of the funding framework is to:

1)       emphasize investments in front-line protection services;

2)       move towards equitable funding of agencies based on demonstrated need for child protection services and standard benchmarks for key budget items;

3)       incorporate financial controls as well as incentives for cost efficiencies within agencies and across the province;

4)       include standard definitions and operational benchmarks including:

caseload sizes for front-line workers;
supervisory requirements for agencies;
salaries for front – line staff and supervisors; and
Provide appropriate funding for out – of – home care, including foster care boarding rates.
As states devise their child care subsidy policies, it is critical that they use their child care funds as effectively as possible. Policymakers face many important questions: How generous should child care subsidies be? How much should parents earn before losing eligibility for subsidies? How often should parents be required to verify their eligibility for subsidies? And how should subsidized child care programs be structured to encourage the use and provision of high-quality care by low-income parents? The goal of the Evaluation of Child Care Subsidy Strategies is to inform these critical questions. The project consists of several experiments that are designed to test the effectiveness of various child care subsidy strategies aimed at improving low-income parents’ employment outcomes, the quality of subsidized child care, and children’s school readiness and well-being.

The jurisdiction boundaries of the child welfare in Canada are within the set of jurisdiction, and authority or control of any particular CAS. Each CAS has the responsibility of setting its own criteria and qualifications and for recruiting and selecting staff. As a result, some CASs requires a minimum Bachelor of Social Work degree to qualify as a child protection worker, while others do not. Was phased in over three years and fully implemented in 1999—2000. The purpose of the funding framework is to:

emphasize investments in front-line protection services;
move towards equitable funding of agencies based on demonstrated need for child protection services and standard benchmarks for key budget items;
incorporate financial controls as well as incentives for cost efficiencies within agencies and across the province;
Provide appropriate funding for out-of-home care, including foster care boarding rates.
include standard definitions and operational benchmarks including:
Caseload sizes for front-line workers, Supervisory requirements for agencies; Salaries for front-line st leading authority on child welfare, takes a critical look at the current child welfare system. He traces the transformation of child welfare into child protective services. The current focus on abuse has produced a system that is designed to protect children from physical and sexual abuse and therefore functions as a last resort for only the worst and most dramatic cases in child welfare. In a close analysis of the process on investigating and handling child abuse, Lindsey finds that there is no evidence that the transformation into protective services has reduced child abuse fatalities or provided a safer environment for children. He makes a compelling argument for the criminal justice system to assume responsibility for the problem of child abuse in order that the child welfare system can address the well-being of a much larger number of children now growing up in poverty.aff and supervisors; and management team

Conclusions:

Studies concerning future child welfare services team provides cross-cultural training to its employees, consults more widely, recognizes the importance of traditional Aboriginal family ties, employs additional Aboriginal child welfare officers, and enters into collaborations with local Aboriginal communities to be acquainted with their customs and traditions in life. Far from constituting a `radical departure’ from previous policy, the recommendations contain little new, and fail to address fundamental issues as to who should be determining Aboriginal child welfare policies and be responsible for implementing those policies.

Government policies concerning Aboriginal child welfare have been a failure. Evidence of the failure shows that recent attempts at reform have had only limited success and calls into question the ability of the DCS management team and other similar government agencies to adequately change its system. In some related areas, such as juvenile justice and education, Government policies are taking backward steps. This fragmented approach, often compounded by the separate areas of responsibility of the different government agencies, which is endemic to western bureaucracies. In this event, the areas of Aboriginal child welfare, child protection, adoption and juvenile justice are all dealing with the same fundamental issues, the care and upbringing of Aboriginal children. A holistic approach is required to prevent improvements in one area being counteracted by retrograde steps in other areas. Furthermore, the fundamental question needs to be addressed who is best equipped to respond to problems and implement solutions for the future.

References:

Aboriginal peoples in Canada, Retrieved December 1, 2006 from

http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2005state.htm

At a Glance: What is the Indian Child Welfare Act? Retrieved December 1, 2006 from http://www.calindian.org/legalcenter_icwa.htm

Duncan Lindsey, the Welfare of Children Retrieved December 1, 2006 from http://www.childwelfare.com/kids/Welfare%20of%20Kids/welfare.htm

Evaluation of Child Care Subsidy Strategies, Retrieved December 1, 2006 from

 http://www.mdrc.org/project_16_38.html

Introducing the Child Soldiers Project, Retrieved December 1, 2006 from
http://www.childsoldiers.org/home/intro.asp

Native American Rights Fund Retrieved December 1, 2006 from

http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2005state.htm

Sweeny Desmond, Aboriginal Child Welfare: Thanks for the Apology, but What about Real Change? Retrieved December 1, 2006 from http;www.iisd.orgaiwaterhen.htm

Williams v Minister, Aboriginal Land Rights Act (1995) 35 NSWLR 497; `The Stolen Generations Case’, Volt 3, 73 Aboriginal Law Bulletin 25.

 Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://www.calindian.org/legalcenter_icwa.html

Sweeny Desmond, Aboriginal Child Welfare: Thanks for the Apology, but What about Real Change? Retrieved December 1, 2006 from http;www.iisd.orgaiwaterhen.htm