Discussion on applying guiding principles to child welfare practice

Last week, you were introduced to a set of basic guiding principles for practice with disabled people in your Chapter 1 reading. Read this case as a group and answer the questions at the bottom of the case as a team.

Guiding principles:

Community inclusion
Self-determination
Dignity of risk
Nothing about us without us
Circles of support
Interdependence

Summary: Sada Gonzalez is a 21-year-old woman who has a developmental disability. She gave birth to Daya, and two days later DCF removed the baby from Sada's custody while she was recovering from childbirth in the hospital. Ms. Gonzalez lives with her parents, who do not have developmental disabilities. Her parents have continually intended to provide her support in parenting her child. Ms. Gonzalez's mother, Kaya, quit her job to provide full-time support for Sada and Daya.

Information about Sada Gonzalez's developmental disability: Due to Sada's developmental disability, she requires repetition, hands-on instruction, and frequency in order to learn new things. She has difficulty reading and following oral instructions, and explains that she learns best visually and through practice.

Information about Sada Gonzalez's life: Sada lives with her parents in rural Massachusetts. Sada volunteers for an organization in her community matching families with donated clothing and household items. Sada is finishing a few courses in a special education program in her high school in order to obtain her diploma. Mostly, Sada aspires to parent Daya – to teach her to hike and fish. Sada has realistic expectations and acknowledges that it would be difficult to care for Daya on her own, and fully recognizes that she needs the assistance of her parents.

Removal of Daya Gonzalez by DCF: While Sada Gonzalez was in the hospital, recovering from giving birth to Daya two days earlier, DCF received a report containing allegations of neglect stating she “was not able to comprehend how to handle or care for the child due to the mother’s mental retardation.” Investigators said she had difficulties holding and feeding Daya, and that she had to be reminded by an investigator to burp the baby and clean spit out of the baby’s mouth. Sada was uncomfortable at changing the baby’s diaper. Sada forgot to feed Daya during one night shift. Sada explained to the investigators that she could not read an analog clock, which is why she had trouble remembering when she last fed her daughter. Sada also reported that she started keeping a journal to track feedings.

The Grandparents’ plans to support Daya and Sada Gonzalez: Kaya Gonzalez, intended to assist Sada with parenting Daya. DCF was concerned because the Gonzalezes had been involved with the agency in the 1990s, although all services to the family were closed based on the Gonzalez’ cooperation and successful completion of a service plan. No current or recent safety concerns were noted and ample baby supplies were in the home. The Gonzalez’ family-supported parenting plan involves Kaya and Samuel Gonzalez obtaining guardianship and responsibility for making educational, medical, and other significant decisions, while Sada would live in the home and learn how to care for her daughter with her mother’s assistance. However, DCF decided to place the baby in a non-kinship foster placement.

Reasons for non-kinship foster care placement: Sada was “unable to recognize, comprehend and react to the demands of an infant. . . . The concerns are there are no services in place. . . . [Daya] needs to come into foster care at this time. There are concerns with [Sada’s] ability to meet the basic needs of a newborn child.” DCF also noted that Sada and her parents had a previous history with DCF and that she has “serious developmental delays.”

Sada’s early visits with Daya: Sada had some difficulty with feedings, diaper changes, and transitioning Daya between people. DCF also noted that Sada walked away from the changing table on a couple of occasions, during supervised visits. Since that time, Sada has participated in numerous parenting classes and her parenting skills have improved significantly.

Interventions from DCF: Over the next two years, DCF provided basic supports and opportunities to Sada while she sought to reunify with Daya. Visitation was set at once per week for one hour, despite Sada’s request for more frequent visits. Visits were supervised by DCF outside of the family home. DCF would not permit Kaya Gonzalez or vocational support caseworker specializing in work with parents with disabilities to assist/teach Sada for most of the visits. The frequency of visits was reduced to once every other week after seven months, when DCF changed Daya’s permanency planning goal from reunification to adoption. Sada participated in and successfully completed DCF-sponsored parenting classes.

Late assignment of a parent aide: Sada agreed with DCF’s requirement for her to work with a parent aide during her visitation with Dana to learn and utilize effective parenting skills. A parent aide is a trained individual who provides support and strengthens parenting skills. However, DCF failed to provide Sada parent aide services for more than eight months and only provided these services after it already decided that Sada would not be fit to parent Kaya and changed the goal to adoption. Even after the parent aide was secured, DCF limited the parent aide’s participation to the last thirty minutes of Sada’s visits with Kaya. The parent aide was otherwise tasked by the agency with teaching Sada parenting skills using a “life-like” doll.

Daya’s treatment by her foster parents: Numerous safety concerns were noted in Daya’s pre-adoptive foster care placement. In two years, Daya received a black eye, bumps, bruises, scrapes, burnt hands on two occasions, and was left unattended on a kitchen table when she was only a few weeks old.

Answer these questions about the guiding principles:

How does this case relate to the principle of community inclusion?
How does this case relate to the principle of self-determination?
How does this case relate to the principle of dignity of risk?
How does this case relate to the principle of nothing about us without us?
How do “circles of support” factor into this case?
How does this case relate to the principle of interdependence?
Do you see ableism manifested in this case? If so, in what ways?
How would you have approached supervision or management of the workers/teams in this case?
How would you think through the policy implications in this situation? What are some of the relevant DCF level and federal level policies that come into play in this case? How might these policies (or their implementation) be impacting the situation (recall our policy analysis discussion in week 4)?