Human Trafficking in the Foster Care System

Author(s):  
Catherine G. Coughlin ◽  
Robyn R. Miller ◽  
Selina Higgins ◽  
Kidian Martinez ◽  
Christine Dipaolo ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (02) ◽  
pp. 215-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica R. Robinson ◽  
John N. Mordeson ◽  
Sunil Mathew

Human trafficking is a present danger for youth in the foster care system. However, little research concerning states in the US has been done to address this issue. A body of literature has examined aspects of the link between human trafficking and foster care. However, few studies have explored the efficacy of state policy and practice in keeping children safe from being trafficked while in foster care. In this paper, we apply techniques from mathematics of uncertainty to examine the problems of the foster care system in the US and their implications for human trafficking.


Author(s):  
Lindsey M. Weiler ◽  
Edward F. Garrido ◽  
Heather N. Taussig

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zachary Strassburger

Youth in the foster care system often have no one person who isclearly authorized to make medical decisions for them. From acaseworker insisting upon a vaccine to a birth parent refusingpermission for psychotropic medication, this paper argues that thequestion of who makes these decisions matters for children’s rights.This paper reports the results of a survey of 132 stakeholdersrepresenting all U.S. states, 17 qualitative interviews, and a reviewof relevant laws and policies. The stakeholders and legal researchrevealed that in sixteen states, common practice disagreed with thewritten laws and policies about who should be making medical decisionsfor youth in the foster care system. Most often, foster parents aremaking medical decisions despite note having legal authority to do so,and birth parents are rarely making decisions even when they arelegally allowed to do so. This paper proposes that following federallaw about promoting family reunification, birth parents should be incharge of medical decision making for the first 12-24 months. Afterthat time, the foster parent, if one is available and has showncommitment to the child, should become the medical decision maker.Such a policy would promote birth parent involvement and familyreunification while acknowledging the need of young people in care fordecision makers who can make long-term commitments to their care.


2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 209-228
Author(s):  
Larisa Maxwell

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (“LGBTQ”) youth in the foster care system often face a multitude of discrimination, harassment, and abuse because of their actual or perceived homosexuality or gender identity. Mistreatment ranges from taunting to physical and sexual assaults by both other youth and staff. Certainly, this mistreatment is quite the antithesis of the safe haven that foster care placements are designed to be. There is very little legislation in place to specifically address these issues. In 2004, California’s Foster Care Nondiscrimination Act became the first act to provide explicit statutory protections from grievances based on sexual orientation or gender identity, among other protected classes. Recently, the Every Child Deserves a Family Act was proposed for the third time in the United States House of Representatives. The Act was designed to bar inequity in adoption and foster care placements due to either the prospective parent’s or child’s sexual orientation or gender identity, or the prospective parent’s marital status. Unfortunately, the bill died in committee, meeting the same fate as its predecessors. This Comment describes the strengths and shortcomings of both Acts and illustrates the immediate need to enact comprehensive statutory protections for youth in the foster care system who face discrimination and harassment based on their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity. Legislation should be enacted to help insulate these already marginalized youth from continuing harm.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document