Too often reporters assume that child protection agencies, because they are "experts," know what's best for children. But are we sure these agencies aren't self-serving, using children as pawns in a game to get more power and larger budgets?
Are we sure they never act like vultures, selectively destroying poor and weak families who are unable to protect themselves in court? Are we sure they are not bounty hunters, getting paid for each family they can disrupt, and paid more for each child they can place in a foster home or a permanent adoption?I ask these scandalous questions because I, like many of our lawmakers, have heard such stories and met such victims.
I hope Gov. Mike Leavitt signs SB98, which drops unsubstantiated abuse cases off the data base after 10 years. "Unsubstantiated" usually means there was not a shred of evidence in the first place. The allegation could have come from a dishonest, spiteful teenager or child, a gossipy neighbor or from a caseworker.
Many caseworkers were themselves abused and are now paranoid about the tiniest imperfections they can observe or report. Such "experts" have no idea how to raise good families; they do far more damage than good.
Raising good families is an art, like landscape painting or musical performance. Giving the critics Gestapo powers is exceedingly destructive.
The best thing we can do for children is to restore due process for parents, encourage almost all marriages and families, and protect them from rogue caseworkers.
Steve Barrowes
President, Citizens for Strong Families
Salt Lake City