by El Zorro Viejo (aka; Jim)

I'm sorry, but this article (aka "rant") over on Blue New Jersey is symptomatic of one of the major problems facing our political system. It is, in fact, written in the same vein as the negative attack ads which are now characterizing our electoral process. The author recites a number of instances where DYFS failed in its mandate to protect the children of this state. Of course, the author does not mention the thousands of children who have been removed from potential harm--nor does she mention the thousands of able, caring foster families who do their best to succor and heal their small charges. Also, the author does not look to the larger cause of the problems at DYFS; namely the politicians in Trenton who use DYFS as a pawn in their political maneuvers.

After holding the agency's feet to the fire for not preventing the deaths of a few of its charges, the author goes on to say,

However, DYFS spends the majority of its resources--both monetary and personnel-- responding to the numerous child welfare crises(empahsis mine) that arise on a daily level. New Jersey has a limited network whose purpose is preventing child abuse as well as a limited family preservation network.

While I am sure that there are a few "bad apples" at DYFS, I am also sure that the majority of the agency's employees are both caring and hard working. In truth, the system the caseworkers have to work within has been set by those lawmakers. Also, for the most part, the strata of society DYFS has to deal with is near the bottom both educationally and economically. The fact that one of her prime examples of foster parent abuse was originally noticed by a "... neighbor delving through another neighbor’s waste-disposal bins at daybreak in search of food ..." should tell us all something about the conditions DYFS is forced to work with.

So, rather than excoriate DYFS, perhaps the author should first turn her attention to the lawmakers who enact the regulations which govern how DYFS works. Then, she should examine the social parameters prevailing in the places where the worst of the agency's failures have taken place. Finally, the author needs to recognize that the only thing that will really help is to allocate more money for both foster parents (in an effort to attract more qualified people for that role) and more money for more caseworkers to reduce the case load per caseworker. The real questions are whether we, as a state, are going to pony up more money in the form of new taxes or if we are going to take funds currently earmarked for other purposes and reallocate them to DYFS. Of course we could always reduce the size of the bureaucracy administering DYFS, but that would leave all those caseworkers without the supervision that the politicians currently seem to think they need. Sure, DYFS could do a better job, all it needs is adequate funding and staffing, and those are our responsibilities (which we fulfill by electing lawmakers who will make those things happen.)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. ©El Zorro Viejo 2002-2005