A new law in Texas set to go live in September will make sure that child welfare workers and family courts consider additional medical opinions before removing children from their parents.
The law — drafted in response to an investigation by US news outlet NBC and passed following an in-depth research project in the state — found that legal and medical professionals were not always able to tell the difference between accidental and non accidental injuries in children.
Under the new legislation, carers accused of abuse based on a medical report will be able to request another opinion from a doctor with experience relevant to the child’s injuries. The judge overseeing the case is then required to consider the second opinion before making any child protection orders.
The new law also states that when a social services department refers a case for forensic assessment, the chosen physician must not have had any involvement with the initial report alleging abuse or neglect.
James Frank, the Texas state Representantive said:
“False removals are traumatic for kids first and foremost, but also for their parents. So we have to be more precise in the way we go through the removal process. I think sometimes when an expert in a white suit says something, there’s a tendency for [Child Protection Services] to go, ‘They’re 100 percent right.’ But that’s not always the case.”
The UK’s child protection sector has also come under fire for failing to correctly diagnose the cause of children’s injuries in such cases.
A judgment in 2019 highlighted concerns about health care professionals wrongly diagnosing accidental injuries as intentionally inflicted ones, leading to families being separated from their children. Judge Bedford who handed down the judgment said:
“It is imperative when treating medical professionals have made a diagnosis of non-accidental injury that they keep this under review and update this diagnosis when new medical evidence is received and give active consideration to convene a multidisciplinary meeting.”
The baby in the case was eventually returned to their parents and siblings, after having been separated for more than five months.
Following the judgment, Researching Reform called on the government to roll out robust training for all doctors working on cases with suspected non accidental injuries.
We need more checks in the U.K. too.
Social Workers need to be held accountable for what they write & say in court. Too many excuses are made for them when it’s found out they lied in court but most don’t get found out. Taking a child from home is serious for all concerned but it’s become an emotionless conveyer belt procedure for professionals but not to the families involved.
LikeLiked by 2 people
They stole my children, under my PTSD, my children was never exposed to my PTSD, stolen “Under Potential Future Emotional Harm” totally illegal act of the U.K. stealing of children.
OK Potential Emotional harm ((CANNOT BE PROVED))), why is it that, then they TAKE your children away on “false potential emotional harm”? When they separate four close loving brothers.
One oldest moved away from the foster carers (the oldest one 7 years old) as he to old to be adopted, then 5 year old who has special needs, cries for days asking for his big brother, then his two younger brothers now being adopted and now he his on his own, lost all of his three brothers and in a right mess, totally mental abuse on his mental welfare of mental by social services “Bridgend Wales” who have the highest forced adoption in Wales.
His withdrawn in school and THEY HAVE CAUSED EMOTIONAL HARM !! THAT’S OK FOR THEM TO DO IT THIS… THAT’S OK IS IT??
LYING SCUM – Do they look abused before they snatch my kids away!!
Judge [edited] (A Corrupt Family Judge), has NEVER ruled in all his years as serving Judge that children to be returned to the parents, he is corrupt and always sides with Local Authorities Social Services.
This Judge is ruthless and maliciously discriminates against any parent !!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ian Josephs said:
True,It’s bad enough wheh they remove children in Texas for what they call non accidental injury based largely on guesswork.
It is far worse in the UK where children are removed (often at birth) when they have never been injured at all . Social workers and judges claim the ability to foretell the future and remove these unfortunate children following crystal ball predictions of harm likely to happen to them in the future !
You couldn’t make it up ……………..
LikeLiked by 2 people
keith brettwood said:
when the SS get involved in a child protection case they always inform the Police who will then conduct recorded interviews with the parents at a police station. when they conclude there is no case to pursue the SS should also be told to drop the case and simply monitor the situation for a few months to make sure the child is safe. why is this not the case.
When one of my children got injured, the person got took to Criminal Court proving it was not deliberate, but caused through play.
All the time it was stuck to claiming it was NAI or non accidental injury.
I still got pursued through Family Court losing said child to a forced ‘alleged’ adoption.