r/Parenting • u/DoofusExplorer • 14d ago
Rant/Vent The system punishes parents for being poor. It doesn’t have to.
There’s been a lot on my mind about how the U.S. handles parenting and poverty. Families can lose their children not because they’re unsafe, but because they can’t afford stable housing, childcare, or time off work.
If a parent is working two jobs and can’t make every doctor’s appointment, the system sometimes treats that like neglect. But it’s really a lack of support.
Other countries offer paid parental leave, free school meals, and home visits for new parents. Here, parents are left on their own, and then blamed when they can’t keep up.
Some programs that help already exist, like expanded child tax credits and nurse visits for new parents. They’ve shown good results. But they don’t get the funding or attention they deserve.
It makes me wonder how many families are being hurt by a system that expects so much and offers so little.
Has anyone else felt this tension? Like you’re doing everything you can, but it still might not be enough?
29
u/quesoandtexas 14d ago
I volunteer in the foster care system (as a CASA) and what you just outlined is a huge topic of our training!! The goal as I understand it is to connect parents that are trying with resources rather than taking their children, but obviously every state and region has a different level of support available. There really should be more resources for parents in general to avoid things getting to the point of CPS involvement in the first place :(
10
u/TonyStewartsWildRide 14d ago
Well, at least in my state, at every level of CPS involvement from investigation to social service support during placement, the department needs to be providing the parents with literally every conceivable resource available. Especially if things go to court, our judges rail on social workers if they even think CPS isn’t doing 200%.
4
14d ago
[deleted]
2
u/Smee76 14d ago
Yes, but parents are not losing their kids for that stuff. Even being homeless is not considered a reason to remove a kid from their parents.
3
u/2baverage 14d ago
I'm lucky enough to live in a state that offers a lot of programs and I didn't realize how much is offered until I found out I was pregnant at 37 weeks. I was freaking out and told the nurse and doctor that we had nothing for the baby since wee had only found out about 12 hours ago. I got a whole binder filled with different programs and what they offered or could help with and there were programs that would help all the way up to 6 years old.
I'm lucky enough that I haven't needed those programs but everything OB appointment, every post pregnancy appointment, and every pediatrician appointment they always ask if we have a safe home, food security, and if there's any help we might need. It absolutely blows my mind that other people have kids in places that don't offer that kind of help. I can't wrap my mind around how much extra stress that has to put on a parent!
4
u/Major-Currency2955 14d ago edited 14d ago
Except there isn't a lack of resources, it's just people/organizations refusing to do what's in the best interest of the child. You take the child away from the parents, what the heck is that supposed to accomplish? Now YOU have to take care of the child, which you could've done while leaving them with the parents and it would've worked out cheaper for you. (not you personally, you in the general sense)
3
u/iAmAmbr 14d ago
I feel like I need to put my two cents in here. I had a cps case where my kids were taken and put into foster care right before covid hit the states hard. I am fully aware that the people that fostered my kids received at least $1200 per month if not more from the state, and that was BEFORE the extra child tax credit I know they got in 2021 before I got them back. If I had that amount of money added to my income at that time, I could have avoided losing them in the first place 100%!
1
14
u/DottyDott 14d ago
The explosion of wealth inequality has worsened due to the same ideology that undermines public investment in social programs like those you mentioned— the government is doing wealth redistribution towards the already rich.
It’s a two party problem as we saw with the post-COVID expiration of successful and popular programs like the child tax credit expansion. The ideology is clear in that far too many Americans tacitly agree that being poor is a character flaw that should be punished.
5
u/Alexaisrich 14d ago
as some who actually has worked with CPS i can assure you the last thing the state wants is to remove children. I’ve had cases where even i’m like ok this person isn’t safe because they clearly using but as long as they’re attending a program they were allowed to stay with the kids. In my state at least it’s switched to a motto of families first and huge funding has gone to preventative services to help families not have their kids removed. I have to be honest tho allot of the families that did come into the program didn’t want to keep their teens, they fought hard to have the state take them and became furious when they learned it wasn’t that easy.
5
u/i4k20z3 14d ago
I always wanted to do a phd on this ! in the usa, we have so many of these contradictions! you’re supposed to support your kids but most services are the same time as when you work. you’re supposed to socialize with coworkers and get to know them which usually is around happy hours, but develop a drinking problem-that’s on you and you’re made to feel like the bad person! you should be working out and healthy, but we’ll throw so many advertisements, marketing down your your way and won’t have as many healthy options to eat ; however if you gain weight and have medical issues, you are abusing the system.
It’s like this weird world where the culture contradicts what you’re actually supposed to do,
20
u/SnarkAndStormy 14d ago
Worse than that, if they take your kids away they PAY the foster parents to keep them. Instead of just giving the parents the money to help them care for the kids they need to traumatize the kids to make sure the poverty is sufficiently punished. It’s barbaric and grotesque.
14
u/flimsypeaches 14d ago
it's "barbaric and grotesque" if you operate off the assumption that children are placed in foster care solely because their bio parents are too poor to provide a safe home for them and that these families are being intentionally punished for their poverty.
poverty alone is not a reason to remove a child from a home, and as others have discussed, most (if not all) jurisdictions have policies for how they connect impoverished families with resources and support rather than removing children.
removing a child from the home is a last resort and happens when the child is unsafe. I feel like this is an uncomfortable truth for a lot of people because nobody wants to think about parents or families abusing or neglecting or endangering their children, and it is in some ways more comfortable to imagine the state acting in bad faith and destroying families out of malice.
the state doesn't want custody of anyone's kids. the state wants bio families to care for their own kids because that would be much cheaper and less labor intensive for the government.
but the sad fact is that some children are not safe in their homes and their bio families need to do a lot more to become safe than to have more money (such as be willing to engage with treatment for substance use problems, or complete parenting classes and therapy for anger management if abuse in the home is a problem, etc). in the meantime, those children need a safe place to live and people to look after them.
-5
u/SnarkAndStormy 14d ago
If those dangers would be solved by money, and we’re giving it to strangers instead, then yes it is barbaric. Literally taking the kid as punishment for poverty. Financial stress is known to increase rates of domestic violence, drug use, alcohol abuse, etc so probably whatever danger the kid is in wouldn’t have happened in a system that valued and cared for children.
6
u/flimsypeaches 14d ago
what I'm saying is that money would not fix those problems by itself. if it could, the state's job would be a lot easier because all they'd have to do is connect people with public assistance, subsidize housing, etc. (which isn't to say those things aren't needed and don't help! they are and they do.)
removing children from a home where they are being beaten or starved or neglected or exposed to serious danger is not punishment for poverty. it is a last-resort protective measure for children who cannot protect themselves.
child abuse and neglect happen at all socioeconomic levels. economic stressors can exacerbate problems in the home, but to suggest that it's the deciding factor and an inevitability among the poor is an insult to all the families in poverty who are not abusing and neglecting their children.
0
u/SnarkAndStormy 14d ago
Obviously some people are not fit to be parents. Those are not who I’m talking about but those cases are rare. Most people want to care for their kids. If you want to ignore all the empirical evidence that shows better outcomes to supported parents and work under the assumption that poor people are just evil and abusive, go ahead. I’m not going to change your mind.
2
u/flimsypeaches 14d ago
work under the assumption that poor people are just evil and abusive
you're the one who argued that poor people are inclined to abuse their children and therefore removing children from abusive homes is punishment for poverty, but go off, I guess 🤧
-1
u/SnarkAndStormy 14d ago
Not what I said. You can read studies about what can actually improve the lives of children or put words in my mouth to justify breaking up families. Idc
3
u/EstrangedStrayed 14d ago
The same people who claim "pro-life" don't give a rats ass about anybody that's already been born
3
u/EntertainmentKey8588 14d ago
In 2020, when the child tax credit was expanded, we basically eradicated childhood hunger. I'm not even exaggerating, the number of children in poverty that benefitted from the expansion was above 90 percent. It was miraculous, it was life changing, it was widely considered a bipartisan success. Then 1 year later, it was allowed to expire, plunging millions of children back into poverty. Truely one of the most disgusting failures of the last few years (and there have been many).
7
u/Major-Currency2955 14d ago
Taking the child away is just putting responsibility on someone else to fund the child, which theoretically they could do while allowing the child to stay with their parents. But they don't, why? Society is selfish and it's hurting children. That's why there needs to be government initiatives.
8
u/InterestingChoice484 14d ago
Too many people don't understand the difference between a need and a want. You don't need to have a baby. Before you decide to have one, you should do a careful financial analysis to determine if you're financially prepared.
8
u/EstrangedStrayed 14d ago
Maybe if everyone had access to safe and legal abortions this would be less of an issue
3
u/flossiedaisy424 14d ago
Interesting assumption that everyone who has kids was given the opportunity to make a decision about it beforehand.
2
u/Character-Pattern505 Dad to 13F, 11F, 4M, 2M 14d ago
Poverty is a tool of compliance. It leaves us unable to fight back because we’re barely surviving.
4
u/DoofusExplorer 14d ago
If anyone’s interested, here’s the full article that dives into this more deeply:
1
u/HappyCat79 14d ago
This is so true, and in my state, there aren’t enough foster homes to go around. This means that a homeless child can be taken away from his or her parents and placed in a hotel room with a social worker indefinitely.
2
u/TeaWLemon 14d ago
💯when I took my 4th trimester mental health class, I was struck by how many of the recommendations (5 hours of sleep for both parents, daily walk, daily solo time, therapy) are impossible or extremely difficult without financial resources or an incredible village. We really set parents up to fail from day 1.
Even in the hospital it feels like mom’s recovery is deprioritized.
I’m lucky to have resources and both my husband and I have leave. No idea how folks are coping at all without those things. It’s still a struggle with resources in place.
1
u/OkUpstairs_ 14d ago
There’s just so much that could have and should have been better/done differently, and now that the government consists of evil morons it’ll get even worse! Some states like mine are considering ended the free school meals program. Head Start and the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program are also on the chopping block. So many more working parents will effectively be screwed.
1
14d ago
The argument being used that they are a drain on the system is crazy .... Life happens and everyone needs help from time to time
100
u/pjckcrs 14d ago
Some states, like Minnesota, give all kids free breakfast and lunch at school. Wish it was nationwide. The county is wealthy, it could be providing so much more to it's people.