Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

sponsored by
News


FAMILY SERVICES: Agency's practices criticized

Background checks lacking for caregivers of 22 children

Twenty-two children involved in abuse or neglect cases during the past two months were placed with relatives or family friends before Clark County Family Services caseworkers completed all required criminal background checks on the caregivers.

"This practice will need to cease and desist immediately," Family Services Manager Paula Hammack said in a Jan. 30 e-mail sent out to department employees.


Most Popular Stories
  • TRAFFIC STOP: Shooting accounts conflict
  • Man shot by police identified as local attorney
  • NORM: At time, drug use wasn't suspected
  • One motorcyclist killed, another critically injured in accident
  • Nurseries fence out day laborers
  • NORM: Marie Osmond, manager battling
  • Second person dies after being restrained by police
  • Boy struck, killed by car pulling out of driveway
  • Three children fall from vehicle; mothers arrested
  • REFUSING THEIR OWN MEDICINE: Vaccination policy spurs legal action




  • "This infraction is considered egregious in nature as it jeopardizes the safety of children, which is the primary function of our agency."

    The internal e-mail was leaked to the public. Its content angered child welfare advocates who have been pressing Clark County to reform its faulty system of care for abused and neglected juveniles.

    "Simply because someone is a relative doesn't mean you should presume they are a qualified caregiver," said Bill Grimm, senior attorney for the National Center for Youth Law.

    The California-based not-for-profit has a federal lawsuit pending against Clark County and Nevada that alleges child welfare officials are failing to protect the health and safety of children in their care. To Grimm, the e-mail supports that allegation.

    "Overall, what this is evidence of is careless attention to the needs and safety of children," Grimm said.

    During the past 12 months, children have twice been placed and then removed from relatives' homes because belated federal criminal background checks raised red flags about the caregivers.

    Clark County Family Services spokeswoman Christine Skorupski could not detail what safety concerns prompted those removals. In general, she said, any violent crime against a person disqualifies an individual from becoming a child's guardian. No child is known to have been harmed or injured as a result of the improper placements.

    Clark County Family Services Director Tom Morton agreed that placing children before caregiver background checks are performed is an unacceptable practice, which is why he directed his managers to tell staff not to do it -- twice.

    Morton said he tried to stamp out the practice in July when he first took charge and realized it was happening. In January, when data showed that children were still being placed with relatives before they cleared the criminal background checks, Morton told managers to deliver a more forceful message to field workers.

    "When I got the report about the ... cases, I met with my managers to say that we have to act immediately to stop it," Morton said.

    That's when Hammack sent out the e-mail, Morton said.

    Historically, caseworkers have been able to act independently to place children with relatives or family friends. But under policy implemented by Morton, all placements have to go through the department's receiving team, a requirement imposed partly to avoid inappropriate child placements by individual caseworkers.

    Morton said that future end runs around that policy will be considered a behavioral problem on the part of the responsible employee and leave them open to disciplinary action.

    "There are a lot of things here for which there have never been consequences," Morton said. "This now constitutes an egregious infraction that jeopardizes the safety of children."

    Morton said the problem isn't rooted in a desire to keep the population at the county shelter for abused and neglected children low: Child Haven's new state license caps the number of residents at 80; its population as of Wednesday was 25.

    "We have plenty of room," Morton said.

    In addition, the problem of placing children with unvetted adults emerged in the summer, before the cap was imposed at Child Haven, Morton said.

    But Grimm questions that. The decline in numbers at the once-bulging shelter had Grimm wondering where the children were being put.

    "This is at least a partial answer," Grimm said. "They're being placed in danger with unchecked caregivers."

    Gary Peck, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, was part of a coalition that persuaded the county to stop using Child Haven for very young children and instead find them family-like settings.

    But that needs to happen in a manner that assures the safety of the children, Peck said.

    "In a circumstance like this when you're dealing with a matter of this importance, follow-up should have been done to ensure that the directive was followed," Peck said. "Then you don't have to explain later why the problem continues to persist."

    Steve George, spokesman for the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services, said that Morton has explained the situation to state officials, who are confident that corrective action is being taken. State child welfare officials have oversight of Clark County Family Services. The issue of criminal background checks will be covered by state inspectors during Clark County's next review, George said.

    Contact reporter Lisa Kim Bach at lbach@ reviewjournal.com or (702) 383-0287.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 10 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    Jang wrote on February 15, 2008 04:36 PM: Good your home page !

    have nice day lucky !


    Report abuse

    tejeda wrote on February 07, 2008 09:45 PM: CPS is a joke...That is true, and very sad.

    What is the educational and ethnic make up of the CPS workers here? I would find that information very important. Do language skills make up for education? Does affirmative action make up for experience and education?


    Report abuse

    Child Protective Services is a joke... wrote on February 07, 2008 09:15 PM: They wait weeks before responding to complaints only to find a complaint unsubstantiated because, well NO EVIDENCE... the bruises are gone after that long. Then, they help in taking children away from their parents and siblings because the parent protects them from the abusive parent. This is that new unrecognized (false) syndrome called Parental Alienation. The problem with CPS and most anyone that has anything that has to do with family court is that they are just in it for the money. If they don't find things wrong and don't take children away and make bad reports then they would not have jobs!!! DUH! It does not take a rocket scientist to realize the system is messed up! And abuse is in the opinion and background of the person investigating, there are no general guidelines. Only opinions.


    Report abuse

    Mamamia wrote on February 07, 2008 07:49 PM: Oh sure, by all means, check out the backgrounds of the idiots who are related to the first idiots of a precious little child, after handing over the little one and placing it in danger! How brilliant an idea is that!

    It may well be true that America is "dumbing down" and it's a given that the dumbest ones run all the child related services in this town.


    Report abuse

    Jon H. wrote on February 07, 2008 11:20 AM: Nevada reader, the ignorance is yours not mine.

    Your response starts in an attack – i.e. “true ignorance in your response”.

    Then goes to a classic straw man – i.e. “You have no idea how many children are suffering . . . ”

    I have a question to ask you, Nevada Reader: When did Government become our guardians and parents? Is it proper and desirable for Government have taken that role? I say NO.

    And, from a Constitutional Government, rule of law perspective, please cite where our Government was granted the authority to assume this role.

    And to save you some time, the well overused and abused General Welfare clause is not an acceptable answer.

    And lets now consider your question on who will fund such a private organization? Ask yourself who funds the March of Dimes, the Red Cross, and the countless other Private Charity programs in the US. The answer is We the People. That is who.

    And you call me ignorant and want me to shut-up?

    Who are you, anyways?

    In a word, nobody.


    Report abuse

    nevada reader wrote on February 07, 2008 10:51 AM: Jon H.....true ignorance in your response. Who is going to fund a private organization? You? You have no idea how many children are suffering because their parents are more concerned with their next fix than they are with the children they brought into the world. The govt steps in because there is no one else who will do it. How many unwanted and neglected children have you adopted? Either step up and help solve the problem or shut up....


    Report abuse

    Jon H. wrote on February 07, 2008 09:44 AM: anon wrote:

    "Why don't you become a foster parent and help solve the problem, instead of complaining."

    Interesting question.

    My answer is that doing so would make one part of the problem.

    Government should fill no role in a foster parent system.

    Private organizations set up for this purpose, and funded through private means is the better way to go.

    These organizations can stand their own audits, be decentralized, and can handle any legal questions through the courts.

    Government is often properly described as the Monopoly of Force in a Geographic Region, and in general is above the law.

    Government controlled programs are no place for children in need. When we say it takes a Village to raise a child, we were not speaking of Government, as being a Village, we were speaking of the people in general and the extended family unit in particular.


    Report abuse

    Sheri wrote on February 07, 2008 09:28 AM: It is amazing how the Director blambs staff for his lack of oversight and direction. I think the consequences should be paid by the Director and the changes that has implemented. He has forced out several people that did not deserve to be forced out.


    Report abuse

    anon wrote on February 07, 2008 08:53 AM: There is a reason kids are removed from their parents, such as abuse, neglect, and illicit drug abuse. Family service workers do not take joy in removing children from their homes, but if the biological parents are not going to care for their children, then yes, the State has to step in. Why don't you become a foster parent and help solve the problem, instead of complaining.


    Report abuse

    Dave wrote on February 07, 2008 08:41 AM: Sure. The State knows how to raise kids better than anyone else!
    When they come in and take kids from parents, they do so without affording due process. Parents are guilty until they prove they are innocent. Most parents are freaked because their kids are placed with strangers. The kids are freaked too. We read about horrible incidents happening with "qualified" foster parents. My bet is there are fewer post-placement incidents with relatives than there are with foster homes.
    I have never had to deal with issues like this, but I have seen the abuse of power by State Administrators and this looks like a power trip and not what is best for kids.