Q&A
The case for a ‘fundamentally
different’ child-welfare system
BY JANELL ROSS
And secondly, why is the response
to their greater need this very vio-
lent, traumatic approach of family
separation?It seems like you’re talking
about the infrastructure that
theoretically protects children
as more like a policing force that
punishes need. In a way it’s to
punish parents who don’t conform
to certain norms. Look at Texas.
Governor Greg Abbott’s directive
to caseworkers to investigate the
families of children who were pro-
vided with gender-affirming care;
that’s a very clear case.What are we to make of the way
that directive has
galvanized such a
strong response?
We should object to
Governor Abbott’s di-
rective, but the same
kinds of incursions on
Black families have
been happening at
a higher rate for de-
cades, and it has never
gotten that level of
public outcry.So, what needs to be done here?
There are vulnerable children
of all races who actually are in
danger. [In] a nation that truly
provided income support, health
care, affordable housing, equal
high-quality education for all—
the vast majority of children in
foster care today would not be
there. There still would be, of
course, children who are pro-
foundly neglected or physically
or sexually abused. But the system
we have now doesn’t prevent that
from happening. We need a fun-
damentally different way that gets
to the root of why there’s so much
violence in our society. □Scholar Dorothy robertS haS
a record of writing about social
problems in ways that research-
ers and laypeople alike recognize
as real. Her new book, Torn Apart,
applies her lens to the American
child- protection system—which,
as Roberts explains in this conver-
sation with TIME, consistently fails
to live up to its name.
What brought you to this topic?
I learned about the child-welfare sys-
tem intimately when I was working
on my book Killing the Black Body.
I was doing research on prosecutions
of Black women for being pregnant
and using drugs. [I] discovered that
Black children were grossly overrep-
resented in the [child-
welfare] system.
Ateverylevelofacti
theseagenciestake,
thereareracialdisp
ities?Oneofthemos
strikingfindingsina
centstudyisthatmor
than half of all Black
childrenwillexperien
achild-welfareinvest
gation by the time they
reach age 18: 53%. But Black children
are also more likely than white chil-
dren to be taken from their families
and put in foster care. They’re more
likely not to go to college after experi-
encing foster care, more likely to go to
prison. So the outcomes are bad too.
Why are these disparities so
pervasive? The system is designed
to deal with the hardships of chil-
dren who are disadvantaged by
structural inequality— including
structural racism—by accusing their
parents. Some people will say, “Well,
Black children are more likely to
have all these interventions because
they have greater needs.” But, first of
all, why do they have greater needs?