TOC Next Previous

Perceptions About Intervention Into The Family:



Most participants agreed that there are
circumstances when it is appropriate for the community, through a government
agency, to intervene into a family situation that appears to be potentially
harmful to children. However, many of the participants, particularly in Colorado and Kentucky,
agreed but expressed great hesitance.


·      
There is
already enough government involvement in citizens’ lives.


·      
Government
intervention has had a negative impact on child-rearing.


·      
Parents
have become afraid of government.


·      
Parents’
fear of disciplining their children is creating a generation of willful and
disrespectful kids.


·      
Intervention
does not serve any purpose because workers are too quick to return children to
their birth parents.


·      
The
allegations of abuse may be wrong and parents can be falsely accused. What
happens then?


·      
Should
the government be the one determining the definition of what is abuse or
neglect?


·      
What
assurances does the public have that the child will be better off if he is
removed from his family?


Participants generally agreed that
intervention (by government) should occur when the situation is extreme, but
ONLY when it really is extreme.


·      
A child
is being sexually abused.


·      
A child
is beaten to the point where marks are left or bones are broken.


·      
The
situation is life-threatening.


·      
A young
child is left all day without food.


·      
There is
alcohol or drug abuse, violence, or criminal activity in the home.


Expressing a pervasive concern, participants
emphasized that government should not intervene into the lives of families when
reasonable parents are disciplining their children.





TOC Next Previous