History

   The earliest known official supplanting of a group of children occurred in 1854, when the first Children's Aid Society secretary, the Reverend Charles Loring Brace, moved the group from New York City to the Midwest (Whittaker & Maluccio, 2002). Thirty-two years later foster homes were pioneered to serve as a resource for returning children to their own family (Whittaker & Maluccio, 2002). Quite possibly since that time, the actions of those who work under the guise of what is in the best interest of children has been questioned.
   The well being of children and families has long been a centerpiece for child advocates, social workers and other social service professionals. American politics and public policy history reveal that the forerunners of child welfare advocated for societal changes in the name of protection, justice, and stability for parents and children. In 1889 Jane Addams was heavily caught up in the idea of keeping families intact with her active role in the development of the Hull House in Chicago (About, n.d.), created partly to provide daycare for single working mothers. Addams also supported women's suffrage, the founding of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the American Civil Liberties Union.
   But the issue of child welfare was of particular interest to Addams. She worked to bring about the Juvenile Protective Association, the juvenile psychopathic clinic (later called the Institute for Juvenile Research), and was a key player in America's first juvenile court (About, n.d., para. 3). This pioneer, considered no less than one of the early founders of the discipline of social work, was involved in a great number of firsts in her pursuit of, and passion for, change. Thus, the evolutionary process of child welfare is more than a century old, and the notion of change is embedded in its very foundation.
   Early in child welfare history the federal government became involved in children's issues. Long before the term permanency planning was coined, public figures placed value on the idea of keeping families together, and asserted the importance upon giving children stable homes. In 1909, just ten years after Hull House came about, the first White House Conference on Children issued a family oriented goal of keeping children with their parents; removing children from homes was to be only a temporary matter, and in rare cases where children were taken out of their homes, they were to be quickly returned (Schorr, 2000).

Present Circumstances

   It is reported that nearly one million children are victims of child abuse or neglect each year; an estimated 80% of the abuse cases are attributed, at least in part, to parental alcohol and other drug (AOD) abuse factors (Lavato & Mack, 2003). The complexity of AOD issues, the legal policing and investigations of abuse reports, the need to protect children, and the increased goal of permanency planning make child welfare a dynamic system. One of the down sides to a far reaching and multifaceted child welfare system is that the system is often divided among many different departments and agencies, simultaneously involved in a single case. Unfortunately, the best interests of the child are not always the goal of every department and every agency; issues over jurisdiction, authority, treatment, and planning can be culprits that interfere with a family's overall progress (Lavato & Mack, 2003).
   But defining what actually equates to a child's best interest has been somewhat difficult and its materialization is as complex as the human condition. Even while public policy, societal awareness, and legal mandates have supported the idea that children need stability, consistency, and permanency, the system has been struggling to meet these demands. Years and years of child welfare practices have been implemented, and years and years of research questions its success. And in a close review of history, programmatic practice, and research there may very well be, as Schorr (2000) states, "a bleak prospect for public child welfare" (p. 124).
   The youth of today's child welfare system have been placed there largely due to the neglect and abuse the children have received at the hands of their caregivers. In the past twenty years there has been a decline in community-based services such as supportive daycare, after school programs and mental health clinics (Association, 2002). As a result, the efforts at providing care for foster care youth is presently strained.
   A central question for those who work in child welfare is whether or not the system of care can provide safety and security for abused children. The answer is multi-dimensional. On one side of the issue are those who claim abusive parents are such a threat to children that removal of the children is the only and best option; and finding alternative placements, such as foster homes, is considered primary in assuring a child's immediate safety. Differing from foster care are those who promote adoption as a good and permanent method for stabilizing abused and neglected children. Others say that keeping related family members together is most important; these family preservationists posit that abusive parents, if provided adequate supportive services and education, can become and are the appropriate caregivers to their children. In more recent times innovative programs have surfaced within child welfare such as shared family care and family drug courts. Still others, who are thinking eclectically, call for the qualities of multiple perspectives to be united under an entirely new kind of child welfare system.
   There is something to be said for each program and perspective that currently comprises America's child welfare system. And in an effort to appreciate what is effective, and what is ineffective, a look at each program and perspective is needed. In the following pages a review will be made of foster care, adoption, family preservation, shared family care, family drug courts, and an eclectic view.

Foster Care

   There are conflicting numbers as to just how many foster children there are in America. In 1961 there were 245,000 children in care, but by 1999 that number had jumped to 500,000 (Schorr, 2000). One study indicates that in 1994 nearly one million children were residing with a total of 577,000 foster families (DHHS, 1997). The United States Department of Health and Human Services reported that in a 10-year period the number of children cared for under the foster care system jumped from 340,000 to 520,000 spanning the years from 1988 to 1998. In 2001 the number of foster children was estimated at approximately 588,000 children being cared for, with an expected 600,000 in the year 2003 (Association, 2002).
   Removing children from abusive environments requires that alternative living arrangements be made. If it were not for the existing foster care system, hundreds of thousands of children could easily find themselves placed into temporary shelters, or worse yet stuck in a home life that is hardly fit for a child. Because foster families are just that, families, the family environment is the preferred placement for abused and neglected children. Foster care is a good system in that it removes children from neglect and ill treatment.
   Foster care also affords many people, who cannot otherwise adopt or give birth to children, the opportunity to parent and love a child. Single mothers, infertile couples, and retired people, all can potentially become foster parents. Some states have laws that inhibit people's ability to parent abused and neglected children. One such law exists in Florida, and it prevents lesbians and gays from adopting children based upon their sexual orientation (American, 2003). Paradoxically, and in that same state however, gay and lesbian people are allowed to serve as foster parents. And like all other hopeful parents, foster parenting can be a temporary solution for the gay or lesbian community. Gay and lesbian foster parents can model parenting skills for the larger part of a child's young life; in one case three children have been in foster care with a gay couple since each of the children were infants; two of the children are now well into their middle teens (American, 2002). And whether or not one agrees with the ability of gays and lesbians to be adoptive parents, it is clear that they can and do serve as foster parents. It should be noted here that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed lawsuits against Florida in 1998 and in 1999, contesting the gay and lesbian adoption ban, and the legal wrangling continues to this day.