What’s Fair in Child Welfare? Parent Knowledge, Attitudes, and Experiences

Parents play a critical role in the progression and outcomes of juvenile dependency (child welfare court) cases. Yet, very little is known about these parents’ knowledge, attitudes, and experiences. We examined legal understanding and attitudes among 201 parents involved in ongoing dependency cases in California and Florida via semi-structured, in-person interviews. We expected parents’ understanding to be low and attitudes to be negative, particularly among parents of color and low SES parents. We expected greater dependency understanding to be related to more positive justice attitudes, and procedural and distributive justice attitudes to be indistinguishable in this population. Findings partially confirmed expectations. Parents’ understanding of the system was low, especially among parents of color and less educated parents. Parents felt less than satisfied about the fairness of procedures and decisions. However, procedural and distributive justice attitudes were distinguishable. Finally, and unexpectedly, parents’ knowledge and attitudes were negatively related. The consistently low levels of knowledge across CA and FL suggest the critical need to increase parental knowledge. It is also important to promote fair court procedures and decision-making to improve parents’ attitudes about procedural and distributive justice, which were found to be distinct and important factors among parents navigating juvenile dependency cases.

Harsh environments promote alloparental care across human societies

Alloparental care is central to human life history, which integrates exceptionally short interbirth intervals and large birth size with an extended period of juvenile dependency and increased longevity. Formal models, previous comparative research, and palaeoanthropological evidence suggest that humans evolved higher levels of cooperative childcare in response to increasingly harsh environments. Although this hypothesis remains difficult to test directly, the relative importance of alloparental care varies across human societies, providing an opportunity to assess how local social and ecological factors influence the expression of this behaviour. We therefore, investigated associations between alloparental infant care and socioecology across 141 non-industrialized societies. We predicted increased alloparental care in harsher environments, due to the fitness benefits of cooperation in response to shared ecological challenges. We also predicted that starvation would decrease alloparental care, due to prohibitive energetic costs. Using Bayesian phylogenetic multilevel models, we tested these predictions while accounting for potential confounds as well as for population history. Consistent with our hypotheses, we found increased alloparental infant care in regions characterized by both reduced climate predictability and relatively lower average temperatures and precipitation. We also observed reduced alloparental care under conditions of high starvation. These results provide evidence of plasticity in human alloparenting in response to ecological contexts, comparable to previously observed patterns across avian and mammalian cooperative breeders. This suggests convergent social evolutionary processes may underlie both inter- and intraspecific variation in alloparental care.

Juvenile Dependency Court

The juvenile dependency court is designed to ensure children’s safety and best interests, primarily by providing services to families and reunifying children and parents, when possible. However, the dependency system’s informal and discretionary policies may perpetuate racial disproportionality and contribute to disparity. Historically, the system perpetuated bias by exerting control over poor and minority, particularly Black, families. Remnants of this past are still seen today in the disproportionate number of low-income and minority families involved in the system. Key to understanding this disparity and identifying interventions is greater knowledge about dependency professionals’ decision-making and better understanding of parents’ experiences, which are crucial to courts’ decisions. This chapter describes important differences in minority parents’ understanding of dependency cases, which may impact their perceptions of justice, engagement, and case outcomes. Implications of these differences and recommendations for improving juvenile dependency practice and policy for all parents, especially low-income and minority parents, are also discussed.