Monday, December 3, 2012

A Guide To Investigation Procedures

http://www.dss.virginia.gov/files/division/dfs/cps/intro_page/publications/B032-01-0974-06-eng.pdf

 

Child
Protective
Services
A Guide To
Investigative
Procedures
What Is Child Abuse And Neglect?
Section 63.2-100 of the Code of
Virginia defines an abused or
neglected child as any child under 18
years of age whose parent, guardian,
or other person responsible for the
child’s care:
1) Causes or threatens to cause a
non-accidental physical or mental
injury.
2) Causes or threatens to cause a
non-accidental physical or mental
injury during the manufacture or
sale of certain drugs.
3) Neglects or refuses to provide
adequate food, clothing, shelter,
emotional nurturing, or health care.
4) Abandons the child.
5) Fails to provide adequate
supervision in relation to the child’s
age and level of development.
6) Commits or allows to be committed
any illegal sexual act upon a child
including incest, rape, fondling,
indecent exposure, prostitution, or
allows a child to be used in any
sexually explicit visual material.
7) Knowingly leaves a child alone in
the same dwelling with a person
who is not related to the child by
blood or marriage and who is
required to register as a violent
sexual offender.
In addition, the law requires physicians
to report to CPS any newborn infant
who tests positive for drugs.
The purpose of this brochure is to
help you understand the Child
Protective Services (CPS) reporting
and response process. Please
contact your CPS social worker if
you have additional questions that
are not answered by the information
provided in this brochure.
What Is Child Protective Services?
Child Protective Services, which
operates under the Virginia
Department of Social Services
(VDSS), has the responsibility under
the Code of Virginia to respond to
reports of suspected child abuse or
neglect.
Local departments of social services
are required by the law to:
Act in response to valid reports of
suspected child maltreatment.
Evaluate child safety.
Support and strengthen families,
whenever possible.
Facilitate services to families to
help ensure the safety of their
children.
Prevent future abuse or neglect.
t t t t t
Certain professionals who work with
children are required by law to
immediately report suspected child
abuse and neglect.
What Happens After
A Report Is Made?
Local departments of social services
will respond to valid child abuse and
neglect reports by conducting a
family assessment response or an
investigation response. The goals of
both responses are to:
Assess child safety.
Strengthen and support families,
whenever possible.
Prevent future child maltreatment.
Investigation Response
A child abuse or neglect
investigation is conducted when
there are immediate child safety
concerns, or the report is required by
law to be investigated. The following
reports must be investigated:
Sexual abuse.
Death of a child.
Serious injury.
Hospitalization due to suspected
abuse/neglect.
Injuries requiring medical
evaluation/treatment.
Abandonment.
t t t t t t t t t
Why Has A Child Protective
Services (CPS) Worker
Contacted Me?
You have been contacted because
the Department of Social Services
received a report of possible abuse
or neglect of a child or children in
your care.
Why Would Someone
Make A Report?
The purpose of reporting is to
identify abused and neglected
children as soon as possible so that
the child’s safety and well being can
be addressed.
Some signs that people notice and
may report to CPS include, but are
not limited to:
A child with questionable injuries.
A young child who is left alone.
A child who has unattended health
care problems or medical needs.
A child who is consistently hungry
or appears malnourished.
A child who has a sexually
transmitted disease or other signs
of sexual abuse.
Who Made The Report?
Anyone can make a report of
suspected child abuse or neglect.
The person making the report is not
required to provide his/her name.
t t t t t
Abuse/neglect occurring in
out-of-family settings, such as
schools, day care programs or
residential programs for children.
What Happens During
An Investigation?
During an investigation, the CPS
social worker will:
Conduct an initial safety
assessment and develop a safety
plan for the child, if needed.
Talk face to face with the child, the
parents, and the alleged
abuser/neglector.
Look for signs of injury, abuse, or
neglect.
Observe the child’s environment
and/or where the alleged abuse or
neglect occurred.
Interview or observe the siblings.
Check for prior reports of abuse or
neglect.
Contact other persons who know
the child such as doctors, teachers,
or relatives.
Complete a risk assessment with
the family and determine what
services, if any, are needed to
prevent future abuse or neglect.
Request your assistance in
identifying other individuals who
may be able to help your family if
services are needed to keep your
child/children safe.
t t t t t t t t t t
If needed, arrange for services to
support your family.
The Code of Virginia requires a CPS
investigation be completed in 45-60
days from the date of the report.
What Right Does CPS Have
To Talk With A Child?
In order to provide an objective child
safety assessment, Section 63.2-1518
of the Code of Virginia allows a CPS
social worker to speak with a child and
his/her siblings without parental
consent and outside the presence of
the parent/caretaker.
If the CPS social worker talks with the
child or siblings without the
parent/caretaker’s prior knowledge, the
parent/caretaker will be notified about
the interview as soon as possible.
All CPS interviews conducted during an
investigation with alleged victim children
are required to be electronically
recorded. There are some exceptions to
this requirement when the CPS social
worker determines that:
The child’s safety may be endangered
by electronic recording of the
interview.
Electronic recording is impractical
due to the child’s age and
development level.
The child refuses to participate.
The investigation team, which may
include law enforcement, determines
that electronic recording is
inappropriate.
t t t t t
What About Examining The Child?
The CPS social worker will observe
the child/children for injuries or signs
of abuse or neglect. Under Section
63.2-1520 of the Code of Virginia,
the CPS social worker is permitted to
take photographs and make the
necessary arrangements to X-ray the
child/children as part of a medical
evaluation. This can be conducted
without parental/caretaker consent.
Photographs of the living conditions
in which the child/children resides
may also be taken with the consent
of the parent/caretaker, or under the
direction of the local Commonwealth
Attorney’s Office.
What If I Don’t Want To
Be Investigated?
In most investigations, there is
cooperation between the family and
the CPS social worker. The interview
process provides an opportunity for
your family to express concerns
about your child/children, to identify
family needs, to ask questions, and
to obtain feedback from the CPS
social worker.
If your family chooses not to
cooperate or allow entry into the
home, the CPS social worker is
obligated to proceed with the
investigation, as required by law. If
there is sufficient cause to believe
that the child/children are not safe,
the CPS social worker may contact
law enforcement for assistance or
petition the court to order your
cooperation.
Will My Child Be Taken Away?
The CPS social worker will assist
your family in providing for the child’s
safety in your home. Most of the time,
a plan can be made that will ensure
the child’s safety in his/her own
home. If the child’s safety cannot be
assured, then a determination will be
made as to whether the child may
need to be separated from the family.
This may include having the alleged
abuser or neglecter temporarily leave
the home, placing the child in the
care of relatives, or in a foster home
until it is deemed safe for the child to
return home.
What Are My Rights?
Parenting is both a privilege and a
responsibility. If you are involved in a
CPS investigation, you have the
following rights:
To be notified in writing that you
are the subject of a report.
To meet with the CPS social
worker assigned to the case to
discuss the report, ask questions,
and obtain feedback.
To talk with or be represented by a
lawyer or other person.
To refuse entry into your home by
the CPS social worker.
To tape record the communications
between you and the CPS social
worker, provided all parties are
aware of the recording.
t t t t t
What Happens After An
Investigation?
Once the investigation is completed,
the CPS social worker will determine
if the report is founded or
unfounded.You will be notified in
writing of the disposition.
Unfounded Disposition
An Unfounded Disposition means
that information gathered during the
investigation did not support a
founded disposition. Records of
unfounded complaints are kept by
local departments of social services
and the VDSS child abuse and
neglect information system for one
year from the date of the complaint.
This information is confidential and
used only by local departments of
social services.
An unfounded disposition may be
kept for more than one year if
additional CPS reports are received
during this period.
If you believe the report was made
in bad faith or was malicious, you
may request that your record be
kept for an additional two years from
the date of the complaint. Section
63.2-1514 of the Code of Virginia
allows you to petition the Circuit
Court for access to the CPS record,
including the identity of the reporter.
Founded Disposition
A Founded Disposition means the
information gathered during the
investigation has revealed a
preponderance of evidence to
To accept or decline services.
To appeal the investigation
findings if you are named as the
person who abused or neglected a
child.
Will Criminal Charges Be Filed?
CPS is required by Section 63.2-
1503 of the Code of Virginia to report
certain types of suspected child
abuse or neglect to law enforcement
and the Commonwealth’s Attorney.
These include:
Death of a child.
Sexual abuse.
Serious injury.
A drug offense involving a child.
Abduction.
Acts contributing to the
delinquency of a minor.
The decision to file criminal charges
or prosecute is made by local law
enforcement and/or the local
Commonwealth’s Attorney.
The CPS investigation is an
administrative proceeding and is
separate from any criminal
proceeding.
t t t t t t t t
for a judicial record review. The CPS
social worker will provide you with a
written explanation of the appeals
process.
May I See The
Investigation Report?
After the investigation is completed,
you may request to see a copy of
your personal information in the CPS
report.Your request will be granted
unless there is an ongoing criminal
investigation or criminal proceeding;
or the personal information in your file
could endanger the well-being of your
child or other persons.
What Kinds Of Family Services
Are Provided?
A local department of social services
may:
Develop a service plan with you,
designed to ensure the safety and
well being of your child/children.
Link your family to community
services such as family counseling,
parent support groups, parenting
classes, substance abuse services,
children’s programs, child care,
home visits by a CPS social
worker, etc.
You may decline services for your
family and your child. However, if the
CPS social worker believes your
children are unsafe, he/she may
petition the court to require your
family to receive services on behalf of
your child/children.
t t
support that abuse or neglect
occurred. Section 63.2-1514 of the
Code of Virginia requires that
records of founded dispositions be
kept by local departments of social
services and the VDSS Child Abuse
and Neglect Central Registry.
These records are kept 3 to 18
years, depending upon the severity
of the abuse or neglect. Information
contained in the Child Abuse and
Neglect Central Registry is
confidential. With the exception of
local departments of social services,
the information can only be released
with your signed, notarized
authorization or by court order.
How Do I Appeal A CPS Finding?
If you disagree with the findings of
the investigation and want your
record changed, you must submit a
written request to the director of the
local department of social services
within 30 calendar days after you
receive the written notice of CPS
findings. If you are dissatisfied with
the outcome of the meeting, or if the
local department of social services
fails to send you a written decision
within 45 days of your written
request to change your record, you
may request an administrative review
before a Hearing Officer by writing to
the Commissioner at the Virginia
Department of Social Services.
If you are not satisfied with the
Hearing Officer’s decision, you have
the right to petition the circuit court
Date:_______________________________________
To: ________________________________________
___________________________________________
A report of suspected child abuse or neglect has
been received about:
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
(Child or Children)
The concerns are:
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
(Type of abuse/neglect)
Please call:
___________________________________________
(CPS Worker)
at: _________________________________________
___________________________________________
(Agency Name & Telephone)
to discuss the report, answer your questions, and
discuss your family’s need for services.
B032-01-0974-06-eng (01/07)
Child Abuse Hotline
1-800-552-7096
(Language Line available)
Virginia Department of Social Services
7 North Eighth Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
www.dss.virginia.gov

Substance Abuse

http://www.comtrea.org/adult-substance-abuse

 

Substance Abuse

Alcohol or other drug abuse tears a family apart. COMTREA has established a highly effective treatment program which involves a combination of outpatient, day treatment, and family counseling and education. The program name for all of our substance abuse treatment is “Athena Outpatient Substance Abuse Services.”

We began the program by making some original but not earth shattering assumptions:
  • Alcohol and other substance abuse is a symptom more than a problem in and of itself;
  • Neither our educational system nor our criminal justice system can effectively deal with the most difficult abuser;
  • Our society sends "mixed messages" to children regarding sex, drugs, smoking, etc.;
  • Adults who are "in trouble" with alcohol and other drugs need a comprehensive, holistic approach to recovery;
  • The family of the cleint (person with diagnosed substance abuse disorder) must be involved with the therapy for there to be much of a chance of success; assisting the family may bring major benefits to the client which are unexpected;
  • The adoption and reinforcement of positive values, principals, and healthy and adaptive coping skills.  
  • Services offered must assist the adult in learning how to acknowledge and set realistic goals, and objectives and accept personal responsibility for the choices they make in their life.

The need for substance abuse treatment remains constant in the COMTREA service area. The United Way helps fund the program as well as Medicaid and the Missouir Department of Mental Health.

We have made substantial changes to our program which make it easier to obtain psychiatric services - as the majority have co occurring, complex diagnoses (mental health and substance abuse issues). This ability allows us to deal with the whole person and not just the drug-affected part.

Drug Testing

COMTREA staff will provide "chain of custody" alcohol and other drug screening tests for individuals, schools, businesses, or for the legal system. Rates are available through contacting any of the COMTREA locations. Drug testing is also a part of our treatment programs and are conducted on site or referred out to local labs.

Family Drug Court

The Family Drug Court Program, in conjunction with the 23rd Judicial Circuit (Jefferson County, Missouri), is a twelve-to-fifteen month intensive outpatient program for parents who have had their children placed into Child Protective Services due to alcohol and/or other drug abuse or dependence issues. Components of the program include alcohol/drug education, individual and group therapy, family therapy, coping, and parenting skills. The emphasis of this program is to reunite the family in a safe, drug-free environment.

Adult Drug Court

The Adult Drug Court, in conjunction with the 23rd Judicial Circuit (Jefferson County MO), is for first-time offenders facing felony drug charges. It is a court-supervised, comprehensive treatment program for nonviolent participants and is a voluntary, diversionary program that includes regular court appearances before a Drug Court Judge. Treatment includes drug testing, different levels of treatment based on assessed degree of need, individual and group counseling and case management. The Drug Court Treatment Team and COMTREA take a holistic approach to the participant’s needs, and refer to other needed programming and services beyond the current treatment intervention if required.

DWI Court

The DWI Court Program, in conjunction with the 23rd Judicial Circuit (Jefferson County, Missouri), is a self-pay treatment program for repeat and persistent DWI offenders in lieu of incarceration. This program is a twelve-to-fifteen month intensive outpatient program for offenders with clear indicators of alcohol and/or other drug abuse/dependence.

Integrated Treatment Services

Intergrated Treatment for Mental Health and Substance Abuse for Adults
COMTREA recognizes the need to provide holistic, integrated treatment for those persons and families experiencing co occurring, complex (mental health and substance use) disorders. The services are provided by professional and paraprofessional staff with significant training in the areas of mental health and substance use disorders.

We are treating them together as a “co primary” disorder and working to engage clients and their families in the recovery process for 12-24 months initially. Staff work with clients/families to establish a support network within local communities as well as the 12 Step Community to best meet their individual needs for success and support.

  • Co-occurring disorders are characterized by different levels of functioning
  • Co-occurring disorders are reported to have a 50-75% prevalence rate among clients in substance abuse treatment programs and a 20-50% prevalence rate among clients in a mental health setting. (TIP 42, SAMSHA)
  • It is not clear which disorder causes the other and that should not be a focus area.
  • COMTREA is going to offer group, individual, and family related co-occurring disorder services because we understand the need of co-occurring disorder services for our clients.
  • Co-occurring disorders are not new; we are just changing our treatment approach.
  • Specialized and integrated services will be offered.
  • Using evidence-based co-occurring practices will allow us to achieve better outcomes with our clients.
  • The following services will be offered at our locations to meet both client and family needs:
  • Individual Therapy, Medication management
  • Case management/ Community support
  • Group counseling, Psycho-educational groups
  • Psychiatric services, Multidisciplinary treatment team approach
  • Health Services are now available through COMTREA's Health Center

For more information or to set up an assessment, please call our offices at 636-931-2700 and ask for Intake Screening for Co Occurring Disorder Treatment Services. Screenings are free of charge.

Important websites for reference:

http://www.aastl.org/

http://showmerso.org/

http://www.samhsa.gov/

http://www.samhsa.gov/treatment/index.aspx

https://www.ncada-stl.org/

https://www.ncada-stl.org/pdfs/treatment_manual.pdf

http://www.bhrstl.org/

http://www.drugabuse.gov/

http://www.drugfree.org/

http://www.abovetheinfluence.com/

http://www.methproject.org/

New Protocols for Addicted Pregnancies

http://www.qualityoflife.org/tasks/sites/memorialcms/assets/File/protocols.pdf

 

 

 

In the year 2000, community partners from Memorial Hospital's Newborn Intensive Care Unit,
the Perinatal Exposure Prevention Project (PEPP), the Prosecutor's Office, and Child Protective
Services came together to talk about an issue of growing concern. At the time, this issue had
been highlighted in national news as a controversy for community organizations and courtrooms
alike. What was the best way to reduce the incidence and harm done to babies born to women
who use drugs? It's this question that inspired the creation of an important protocol in St. Joseph
County, a document which provides an additional tool for addressing the issue. The story of this
protocol's development is also the story of Memorial's investment in the well-being of infants, of
the growth of PEPP, the evolution of a Prosecutor's approach, and the expanded commitment of
local Child Protective Services. More than that, it's a story of proactive community involvement,
an effort of ongoing cooperation and partnership.
The Case
In June 1999, St. Joseph Prosecutor Christopher Toth filed charges of child abuse against a
mother whose baby tested positive for cocaine at birth. New to the Prosecutor's Office, Toth had
taken an unprecedented step for the community. Julie Sellers, Director of PEPP, a program of
Alcohol & Addictions Resource Center, Inc., says that prior to Toth's election, there had been an
“unwritten” understanding that women who used illegal substances during pregnancy would be
assisted in seeking treatment rather than prosecuted. In filing charges, Toth, who ran on a toughon-
crime platform, had made a strong statement that such an understanding no longer existed.
Sellers, who was actively working with the woman charged to help her overcome her drug
problem, was surprised by this new development.
Meanwhile Dr. Bob White, Medical Director of Memorial's Regional Newborn Program, also
took note of the Prosecutor's charges. “Charging a mother with something that happens to a fetus
is questionable,” says Dr. White. “So, Mr. Toth's office was taking a pretty aggressive stance
toward mothers using illegal drugs during pregnancy. At the same time, we were having
increasing difficulty with Child Protective Services.” In his work with newborns, Dr. White and
his colleagues are required by law to report to Child Protective Services if a child has been
exposed to drugs prior to delivery. The largest proof of such exposure is that the baby tests
positive for an illegal substance. These tests however, are limited in their scope. A urine screen
only picks up exposure if the mother has been using drugs two to three days prior to delivery.
Another screening option, a meconium test, may only show a positive if the mother has been
using particularly large amounts of a drug. “We would get mothers who clearly had been using
drugs during pregnancy, by their own admission often, and by testing done on the mother…but,
when the baby was born we may or may not have been able to get positive tests on the baby.”
Without a newborn testing positive, Child Protective Services wouldn't open a case, citing a lack
of proof as a deterrent in any investigation, which could be frustrating to hospital staff. “We
weren't insisting that all those kids had to be placed in foster care,” explains White. “We were
just asking [Child Protective Services] to open a case and explore the situation so we could see if
the home setting was appropriate and follow-up could be done…So, on the one hand we had a
Prosecutor's Office that was taking a very aggressive stance toward mothers that used drugs and
Child Protective Services was taking a very conservative stance. We thought it was time to get
everybody together and talk about something we could all agree on.”
Sellers came to a similar conclusion. She had talked to Sharon Burden, Director of Alcohol &
Addictions Resource Center, Inc. “Sharon said, ‘you need to talk to Chris [the Prosecutor].' Then
these dialogues began,” says Sellers. At the table were representatives from PEPP, the Neonatal
unit of Memorial, Child Protective Services, and the Prosecutor's Office. “We decided to put
together a team to discuss the issues.” This was the beginning of an effort that would ultimately
lead to a more organized approach for addressing the complex issue of pregnancy and substance
abuse in St. Joseph County .
PEPP: A Voice for Understanding Addiction
An invaluable resource and leader in the events that followed, PEPP's own growth was closely
linked to increasing community willingness to examine how the incidence of drug abuse during
pregnancy might be lessened. Memorial also played a role in PEPP's development, working with
the Alcohol & Addictions Resource Center to share ideas. A key early leader in this work was
Julie Koza, then Director of Memorial's Healthy Babies program, who was extensively familiar
with issues of infant mortality. At the time, infant mortality rates in St. Joseph County exceeded
state and national averages, and many suspected substance abuse could be linked to these
statistics. “We all knew [substance abuse and pregnancy] was a problem,” says Burden, “but it
was hard to find the data to support that. It's still very difficult at times.”
In the early ‘90s, Koza formed and chaired a committee called Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies,
a grassroots effort to make a difference in the area of maternal and child health. Eventually she
and Burden began to talk about the overlap in their missions, discussions that led them to cowrite
a grant for the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. It was their hope that a team of
community leaders would go to Washington , DC for the Community Team Training Institute,
sessions that would focus the group around their identified issue, priming them for action when
they returned to St. Joseph County . In their first year, their application was turned down because
of the challenge of finding hard data to support their claim that substance abuse and pregnancy
was a problem in their community. In 1992, after drawing more concrete conclusions from the
data that was available, their grant was accepted. Along with Burden and Koza, eight local
leaders, representing several community sectors, then spent an intense week in the nation's
capitol, talking about drug use around the time of pregnancy, the harmful effects such use caused
to the health of mothers and children, and how that harm could be prevented. When the team
came home, they secured funding from the United Way to gather some of the research that hadn't
yet been done, the first step to exploring the issue locally.
Burden speaks to the struggles inherent in collecting information about how many women might
be abusing substances during their pregnancy. Although healthcare providers often have a
system in place to identify such women, it's not always applied consistently. Stereotypes, along
with the sensitivity of the subject, add to the difficulty of getting an accurate picture of the scope
of the problem and who it affects. “There are a lot of misconceptions,” says Burden. “People
make decisions based on gut feelings that often will take into consideration ethnicity and age,
whether a woman's married or had prenatal care. We saw there were all these biases. We were
asking hospitals, ‘how do you decide to do this [test for drugs]?'...Many of us had personal
experiences of never being asked [about substance use]. Through prenatal care, it never came up.
There's an assumption made that because we went to doctors' appointments, we had health
insurance, and maybe our age and race or whatever, that it was a non-issue—to the point that the
forms would be check marked without it even having been brought up for discussion. It was just
a real learning experience for us.” This research process was the beginning of the Perinatal
Exposure Prevention Project (PEPP), a program under the auspices of the Alcohol & Addictions
Resource Center . Julie Koza, in becoming the program's first director, brought her background
with Memorial as an additional benefit to the project. Today Reg Wagle, Vice President of the
Memorial Health Foundation, serves on the board of the Alcohol & Addictions Resource Center ,
one of many ongoing ties between Memorial and PEPP.
Sellers, the current PEPP director, carries on the dedication of its founders. As the program's
only employee, her commitment sustains a difficult job. She tells how the early research Koza
completed from five clinics serving pregnant women in town showed an 11% substance use rate,
which was higher than the national average. When Sellers came on, PEPP was just beginning to
look at what outreach services the program could provide. Currently, Sellers monitors the
referral phone line, one way in which potential clients or doctors concerned that a patient might
be using drugs, can contact her. She meets with women trying to address their drug problem,
often finding them at a doctor's office after an appointment, or even in the hospital after they've
delivered. Making this initial contact is only the very beginning however, of what can be a long
relationship. Sellers helps women find treatment options, even assisting clients in identifying
friends or relatives their children would be safe with while they themselves are in treatment, if
necessary. “PEPP looks at each case individually and holistically,” says Sellers, a process that
might consider the circumstances at a woman's job, or in her home life, whether those around her
abuse substances, and the kind of treatment program she's best suited for. “The real work begins
once they complete treatment,” says Sellers. “Once somebody's out of treatment they may not
want to do the aftercare work. And that's were the real work begins, when they're living back in
their environment, trying to go to meetings and develop a lifestyle that will keep them clean and
sober.”
PEPP receives referrals from both Memorial and St. Joseph hospitals, as well as several clinics
and doctors' offices, and organizations like Women, Infants and Children (WIC). Another part of
Sellers' job is to educate these community partners and others about the program, and ways they
might better identify potential clients. Sellers cites increased understanding among new doctors
about issues of addiction as a sign of greater general acceptance about the importance of facing
the issue. Burden points to the fact that she and another staff member spent two hours with
Family Practice Residents from Memorial recently, talking about how doctors can intervene with
substance abuse, as indicative of Memorial's openness in addressing the complexities of
addiction. “I think they [Memorial] recognize how pervasive this problem is. I mean, on any of
their floors, no matter what the problem they're admitted for, there's a significant number of folks
who are dealing with addictions. They've really been a partner with us, and it's not that I don't
feel that way about St. Joe. I think we've just had more contact with Memorial because typically
a lot of these babies, who are really, really sick, end up in the regional unit.” She says that Dr.
White, in his role on this unit at Memorial has been a notable advocate for these infants.
PEPP finds itself in the unique position of offering support specifically to pregnant women and
mothers fighting substance abuse. The stigma of “being an addict” is compounded by pregnancy,
a circumstance that might leave a woman with very few supporters. Burden speaks to the
distinction of PEPP's purpose: “Nobody wants to see a baby who is born with alcohol or drug
related birth defects. And so the focus is on the baby. Typically providers, and all the people
around, are very angry with the mom. And we're not. We're not mad at her. And if she tries to be
abstinent and she relapses, we're still not mad at her, which is why a lot of the moms call back.
They do have setbacks and ask for more help, because we're not going to holler at them, we're
not going to get mad at them—we understand their addiction. So, we really are the advocate for
the woman…It's hard to be nice to someone whose baby is down at the neonatal unit really
struggling because of that person's addiction. Julie is the person who can strike that balance.
While Child Protective Services is in there, and the social workers are taking the baby away, and
all these things are happening, Julie's the one who can say, ‘what are we going to do for you?' so
that there's some care there. Because that woman's probably going to have more babies, and if
we don't do something now, we're just going to be back in a couple years to try and help her
then.”
In 2001 PEPP served 95 clients, a number Sellers says continues to grow the longer the program
is in existence. What she hopes might also grow is the access to treatment options for women and
children. “It's always a battle finding the best form of treatment for clients,” she says. The
specific requirements of facilities can make it difficult to find the right treatment placement for
every person. Sellers describes the case of one woman who had been drug-free for years, lived in
a half-way house, and was working regularly. When she became pregnant with twins and the
doctor ordered bed rest, she couldn't keep her job. Without a job the half-way house wouldn't
allow her to stay, and despite the great progress she'd made in overcoming her addiction, there
were very few choices available to her. In working with unique circumstances like these, Sellers
tries to link clients to the services that support their health and success, but when the services
aren't there her job becomes even more challenging. She points to a lack of funding in this area
as one possible cause. “Addiction is just not a real popular thing to put your money in, because
the relapse rate is so high and people say, ‘why should we put the money there when we can put
it into building blocks for little children and teach them to read?'—that's a warm fuzzy.” It's also
a reason why the work of PEPP is so critical. When Dr. White and the Prosecutor's Office took
up the issue of substance abuse and pregnancy, like today, PEPP was the only program in the
area like it—a natural starting point for solutions.
Child Protective Services: The Balance of Authority and Accountability
Chuck Smith, Director of the St. Joseph County Division of Child Protective Services, says with
a smile that his involvement with the origins of “the Protocol” as it has come to be called, came
from “mild confrontation, for lack of a better word.” He speaks to the difficulty of Child
Protective case workers in assessing a case of substance abuse during pregnancy, when the baby
didn't test positive for drugs in his or her system. “We would get calls relating to these types of
cases and they are not as straightforward as most of our complaints about abuse and neglect are,
and as a result were initially…rejected by our Child Protective Service folks because they did not
meet the usual criteria for the kinds of cases that we deal with. And of course those rejections
brought concerns from the folks at the hospital…as a response [Dr. White] called me to sit down
and talk about it.”
Smith points out the unique position of Child Protective Services at the heart of any abuse or
neglect complaint: it's that Child Protective Services has been given substantial power by the
law, but with such power comes, rightfully, the pressure of accountability. “For us to get
involved [in a case] at any point, we always have to present our information to the court. In other
words, we have to show cause in court…We have some pretty significant authority through the
law. That is, we have the ability to remove a child from their parents' custody and place that
child in an alternative…situation. Removing a child from their parents is a pretty heavy
authority. As a part of that authority comes the responsibility to go to court within 48 hours of
any contention to show cause to the judge as to why we took that action. And as you know, in
court, you've got to have facts.” For this reason, a new mindset was required if caseworkers were
going to look more closely at abuse and neglect complaints centered around the claim that a
mother had taken drugs during pregnancy, but no test showed conclusively that drugs were in her
infant's system. “Our authority begins with a complaint of abuse or neglect,” explains Smith,
“and the first thing we have to be able to do is substantiate or unsubstantiate that complaint. If it
is unsubstantiated, our authority ends. We no longer have support of law to take any action.” In
Fiscal Year 2000, Child Protective Services in St. Joseph County substantiated 59% of claims for
child abuse, and 55% of neglect charges, numbers very close to the state averages for
substantiated claims.
“We are not a prevention agency, and nobody likes to hear us say that,” says Smith. “We're like
law enforcement. Law enforcement is not a crime prevention agency as such. They hope that
they prevent crime, but they're there to investigate and arrest the culprit.” Like many people
involved in initial discussions about the Protocol, Smith recognizes that in the area of substance
abuse and pregnancy, there's still much that needs to be defined—definitions, no doubt, that
would help Child Protective Services in its role. He points out that debate remains about whether
a mother's admission of drug use during her pregnancy means that her baby has been harmed.
“Philosophically we can all agree that's always a problem….you can even go so far as to say that
shows some willfulness on the part of mom,” Smith says, adding that by and large society today
recognizes that any drug use during a woman's pregnancy is bad for the baby. “But the result is
not always that…drugs are also in the baby's system. Now, there are those who believe it always
results in problems for their child, but there's really no factual evidence…Absent the specific
drug test we're left with a little more tenuous situation in court.” With these concerns in mind,
Smith became involved in the discussions that followed.
Finding Common Ground
Diana Dibkey, Director of Special Projects at the Prosecutor's Office during this time,
remembers Toth's initial reaction to the local woman whose baby had tested positive for cocaine.
“When the case came through for review, he made some strong statements about the mother, that
we needed to prosecute her. Dr. White took exception.” She describes a few articles in the paper
that went “back and forth” about the issue. In the end, Dibkey acknowledges that Toth and White
“wanted the same thing. They were both upset by the same thing.” Recognizing that the fields of
law and medicine by their nature use different tools to address similar issues, Dibkey says that
from a prosecution standpoint the likely tool for her office to apply was the filing of charges.
When different stakeholders in the process came together, it shed light on the potential to look at
the issue of pregnancy and substance abuse from several perspectives simultaneously. The
question that could then be posed, says Dibkey, was, “Instead of being angry about it, was there
a way we could fashion a response that would involve everybody?” She cites the helpfulness of
Dr. White especially in making the problem clearer for the Prosecutor's Office. “I don't think
[Toth] was fully aware how bad this problem was before he started seeing the cases come
through his office,” says Dibkey.
Much of the discussion that followed in the next months centered on the critical component of
awareness. “I found that [Toth] was very open to understanding the cycle of addiction,” says
Sellers. “We did a lot of education.” Dr. White describes why he thought it was important to
increase understanding between the Prosecutor's Office and other organizations that come in
contact with pregnant women who use drugs: “If mothers knew during their pregnancy that they
were going to get charged if someone found out they were using, they'd just quit coming in for
prenatal care. The goal of protecting the baby would be counterproductive, because we wouldn't
find out about any of those moms anymore—they would just disappear until they came into
deliver their baby. [Prosecutor Toth] realized, I think, even before the state Supreme Court threw
out the original case, that the punitive approach was going to be counterproductive…he just
wanted to make sure the babies did get protected, and he was happy to support this more
constructive, supportive approach.”
PEPP became a coordinating body for several meetings discussing a better approach, gatherings
which came to involve a large cross-section of the community. “Everyone was so interested that
we ended up assigning committees,” says Dibkey, describing the impressive community
involvement. “The really interesting part to me was that once we had that first
meeting…everybody enthusiastically embraced the idea to do something about this.”
People close to the project always mention the vital component of their open and committed
work group, a surprising outcome to some extent considering the sensitivity of the issue. Dibkey
says, “I kept thinking, ‘oh, okay, now it's going to get tough.' But it didn't. Everybody went in
focused with the idea that we had to something on this. There was no defensiveness…people just
seemed genuinely interested in facing this problem.” Now living in LaPorte, Dibkey cites her
experience with this project as an example of healthy community development that she's carried
with her. “I was very in awe of the way St. Joe County just came together.”
From these meetings and discussions the “Protocol for Processing of Cases Involving Prenatally
Exposed Infants” was drafted. A long name for a four page document, the Protocol spells out a
series of steps that all parties who took part in its creation agreed would be a more cohesive plan
for identifying mothers or expecting women who use drugs, both holding them accountable and
prioritizing treatment, all the while finding the best options for their children as well. “We
probably met over the course of two or three months, and developed a protocol that basically
said that if women are using and they seek assistance for their substance use, they would go into
something like a deferred prosecution,” says Sellers. “And then, if they stayed clean and sober
for that year, the case would be closed out.” For Dr. White, the involvement of Child Protective
Services in the protocol's development was crucial. “It was not going to be good for the
Prosecutor's Office to be charging moms on one hand, and Child Protective Services turning
them loose on the other… We agreed that if we had any evidence that the mother was
using…then Child Protective Services would open up a case…Among other things they would
require that mothers get treatment, and the PEPP program is the primary place in our community
where that's available.”
Smith points out that Child Protective Services caseworkers have become more knowledgeable
about the wide variety of signals that might indicate an infant has been effected by his or her
mother's drug use. “The baby might not test positive,” he says, “but may have behaviors that
[hospital staff] can say to us are not normal.” Carolyn Wilson, who works in Memorial's Social
Services Department names a few of the warning signs medical staff consider in determining if
drug use might be a factor in a pregnancy: an abruption in the placenta, no or little prenatal care,
or a particularly low birth weight with no other medical explanation. Along with maternal factors
like level of prenatal care and whether the mother has previous known alcohol or drug abuse, the
Protocol lists clinical signs and symptoms “typical of withdrawal in newborns,” such as tremors,
convulsions, abdominal distention and vomiting. Having a clearer idea about the symptoms that
point to withdrawal allows Child Protective Services to continue to gather evidence, even if an
infant's drug test be negative. “The existence and signing of the protocol has not eliminated the
need for communication,” says Smith. “It's still a process of people talking to each other, making
sure that all of the information available is shared. The reality is that there's nothing automatic
about it just because that protocol exists. People from the hospital and we ask the same questions
we've always asked. The difference is that there is no haste to judgment, there is the effort to
communicate more fully, to make sure we ask a few more questions and we don't come to that
quick conclusion, ‘Oh, this is not a case we deal with'…It has raised the level of awareness to the
point that we take more time to communicate, we recognize and have learned the right questions
to ask that will give us more information, our counterparts have all learned the right information
to gather initially. It really has been a framework in which to work. It hasn't solved all the
problems—the problem's not that simple, and the solution's not that simple—but practically it
works to set a standard of communication that goes well beyond what it used to. It means too,
that when we make a decision not to take a case, that decision is based on a lot more information,
a lot more detail, than it was prior to the protocol being in place.”
Smith admits that some of the process might, early on, have even be “painful,” but he points
clearly to the final outcome as a success. “It was an interesting process because it seemed that at
each meeting we came a little closer to understanding everyone else's position…We finally got
to the point where we able to make enough concessions to actually come up with the Protocol
itself and feel good about it.” Smith mentions the wide cross-section of community involvement
as a sign of genuine local investment. “There were lots of folks involved giving input. It really
turned out to be one of those things that you do, where it starts out to be very uncomfortable and
ends up being something you feel good about. That's kind of where I was with it. It really was
one of those very positive moments for all of us in that we were able to come to some agreement,
in that we were all able to recognize the need to step outside of our comfort zones, where
everything is a little more black and white, and to take a stand that's maybe more gray, and say,
‘Okay, these [cases] that don't fit in one way or another—we're going to work with those.' And I
think maybe that's all the Protocol does…it provides an environment in which we can work with
those cases that are not black and white…it allows us a framework in which to deal with those
cases were there may not be a positive drug test on the child, but there's an admission from mom
[or other indications of drug use]…and it gives everyone a chance to kind of have a new start.”
Smith says the new start a parent might get is crucial, and he's grateful for the work of PEPP,
saying that the more opportunities there are for “folks to work through their own problems and
use the agencies that are there” the less Child Protective Services will ultimately have to become
involved. “It really creates an environment in which people get a second chance. Because they've
already made a mistake, a pretty serious one. But you know, we all make mistakes and this gives
people a chance to try and change that, to move beyond that mistake.”
Wilson knows from working in the hospital that sometimes a second chance isn't enough, and
she's seen many mothers return to the hospital to have additional children who might also be
born effected by drug use. She recognizes that it comes with the territory to some extent, and that
the Protocol is simply another avenue to try and address the problem. “I think it's been very
helpful,” she says. “It gives us a tool to help parents look at the possibility that they even have a
drug problem.” She says that mothers feel comfortable with Sellers, and that in having one
central contact person the logistics of finding assistance for a mother who uses drugs is made
easier at the hospital.
The Protocol at Work, Today and In the Future
In the spring of 2000, the Protocol made its debut to a crowded auditorium at Memorial hospital.
“We had tons of people,” says Burden, “a tremendous crowd.” Met with positive media and
community attention, the Protocol was officially accepted at this event. The creation of the
Protocol also inspired other positive developments. Prevent Child Abuse, another organization
involved in discussions about the Protocol, sponsored an education campaign about issues of
substance abuse and pregnancy in the following year. Many of the original work groups
continued to meet, even after the Protocol was in effect. “It was another opportunity for
community learning,” says Burden.
PEPP developed fliers and cards, asking in one, “Prosecution or Help? You make the CALL!!!”
The program tries to emphasize the better choice to the threat of prosecution—dealing with the
problem of substance abuse. Sellers works to educate mothers using drugs that through treatment
they can avoid prosecution, and, even more importantly, be a much better parent. “You can only
be as good a parent to your children, as you are to yourself, and if you don't take care of yourself,
you can't be there for your children,” says Sellers. “Taking care of yourself is getting clean and
sober, and then doing those other pieces [attending meetings, evaluating life choices]. That's my
philosophy.”
Since the development of the Protocol Sellers says there have been no further cases of
prosecution against woman using drugs during pregnancy. This could be for a variety of reasons
besides the Protocol—the fact that the state Supreme Court never held up Toth's initial case, or
simply that the Prosecutor's Office became very busy as the year went on. “We really haven't put
it to the true test yet,” says Sellers. Dibkey acknowledges that putting it to that test may be
difficult. She points to what she sees as perhaps the only weak spot in the Protocol from a
Prosecutor's viewpoint, which is that prosecution doesn't seem to be successful in these cases,
given the controversy surrounding the question of whether a mother can be punished for harming
her unborn baby. For this reason, child abuse charges can be filed against a woman who uses
drugs during pregnancy, but it's unlikely they'll be upheld. Burden points out that women still
have the threat of being prosecuted under regular possession or use charges, and of course, they
have the stigma of being a mother who harms her baby, both factors that might encourage a
woman to seek treatment. Regardless of what might motivate clients to get help, there's no doubt
that the Protocol has made that help easier to attain, from a provider and a client standpoint.
This fall a new St. Joseph County Prosecutor was elected. Sellers points to the Protocol as a
template to start discussions about the issue with him. “I think that the lines of communication
have really opened up,” says Sellers. “We as a community are addressing addictions in a much
more holistic, proactive manner than punitive, so that's real positive. For clients, it opens doors to
supportive networks for them that they may not know existed. For me, it gave credibility to the
program…I think it's been a win-win.”
Excerpts from “Protocol for Processing of Cases Involving Prenatally Exposed Infants”
Mission Statement
To develop a coordinated approach for the education, prevention, treatment, intervention and prosecution of mothers
of prenatally exposed infants in order to enhance the safety and welfare of the children of St. Joseph County .
Purpose of Protocol
…To encourage coordination and cooperation among agencies who serve women to increase the effectiveness of
these agencies to promote healthy birth outcomes by encouraging prenatal health care and appropriate substance
abuse treatment for expectant mothers, particularly those who are or have been using illegal drugs.
Goal
…To eliminate prenatal maternal use of controlled substances as defined by Indiana Code 35-48-1-9.
Objectives
Launch an education and informational campaign regarding the negative consequences and effects of using illegal
substances, particularly during pregnancy.
Encourage expectant mothers to abstain or seek treatment for abstaining from using illegal substances or be subject
to criminal charges of neglect of a dependent (I.C. 35-46-1-4).
Develop and enhance community resources to provide treatment and assistance for women who are addicted to or
have used illegal drugs before, during, or after pregnancy.
Develop treatment options for women and women with children, both residential and nonresidential.
Process
The professional and ethical standards of the health care profession require a physician to be steadfastly loyal to the
patient's best medical interests. The mandate forms the core of the physician-patient relationship. Recognizing this
ethical mandate coupled with the physician's concern for the well being and health of both the mother and the child,
the following is outlined.
Patients should be made aware of the increased likelihood of a beneficial clinical outcome of treatment for substance
abuse and the importance of success in the treatment program. The pregnant woman should have no doubt her
interests are foremost in the physician's mind, within the boundaries of the law. However, patients should be advised
that if the child is born with an illegal drug present in their system, criminal prosecution and/or removal of that
dependent is possible if they fail to adhere to the criteria of any treatment program that is required of them by the
judicial system.
Health care will educate women about the benefits of reduction/abstinence of illegal drugs during pregnancy. They
may refer the mother to an appropriate program for drug education, treatment, referral and assistance.
One purpose of this protocol is to provide a consistent approach to the identification of factors, which would suggest
the likelihood of drug abuse during pregnancy so as to aid in both the specific medical management of the newborn
and in the initiation of an appropriate developmental and social follow-up. These criteria may include a combination
of the following:
1. Clinical signs and symptoms typical of withdrawal in newborns:
NEUROLOGIC GASTROINTESTINAL
Restlessness Poor feeding
Tremors Vomiting
Sleep Disturbances Diarrhea
Convulsions Abdominal distention
Irritability Increased sucking
Hypertonicity
Hypotonicity
AUTONOMIC
Hyperactivity Clonus
Staring Episodes Nystagmus
Sneezing Unexplained rapid breathing
High-pitched cry Nasal discharge
Skin abrasions
2. Other maternal factors which may be considered:
A positive maternal drug screen
Presence of maternal indicators for drug abuse:
• Suspicious maternal behavior consistent with drug usage
• Unexplained placental abruption
• No prenatal care
• Late or limited prenatal care
• Pre-term labor of no obvious cause
• Pre-term labor of no obvious cause IUGR with no obvious cause
• Previous known drug or alcohol abuse
This is not to be considered an all-inclusive list and other signs/symptoms/findings may initiate a newborn drug
screen depending on the specific clinical situation and current literature.
Whenever a child tests positive for the presence of illegal substances, a report will be made to Child Protective
Services for investigation.
When appropriate, the hospital will refer the mother to an appropriate community-based service for assistance and
treatment options.
Child Protective Services will act to protect the child according to their administrative guidelines. This process will
include encouraging and referring the mother for assistance with her illegal drug use.
All reports to Child Protective Services of a positive test for drugs will be reported to the appropriate law
enforcement agency. The law enforcement agency will either conduct a joint investigation with Child Protective
Services or forward the case to the Family Violence Unit for a joint investigation with Child Protective Services.
Child Protective Services and the medical team will include in their reports the mother's degree of cooperation and
willingness to get assistance regarding the use of the illegal substance.
The Family Violence Unit will present the case the Criminal Division of the Prosecuting Attorney's Office.
The Prosecuting Attorney will present each case to the Child Protection Team for Feedback.
The Prosecuting Attorney or his designee will decide whether criminal charges for neglect will be filed against the
mother.
The Prosecuting Attorney may, when appropriate, request Deferred Judgment and referral to Drug Court or Deferred
Prosecution.
Upon successful completion of programs mandated by the Court or the Prosecutor the original charges could be
dismissed.
Failure by the mother to complete treatment and education programs as ordered may result in the incarceration of
the mother.
The prosecuting attorney's office will work to create a community network of services to provide treatment and
assistance to women who are at risk to use or have used illegal substances particularly during pregnancy.
Agreed to and signed on March 21, 2000

Chapter 4 - Psychosocial Services for Drug-Exposed Infants and Their Families

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK64751/

 

 

A broad range of psychosocial services is required for an extended period of time to address the needs of the infant for a nurturing and safe environment and the mother's multiple needs as a recovering addict, parent, and perhaps, head of household.

This chapter addresses key components of psychosocial services and the assistance needed to obtain them. Strategies for keeping families intact are explored and emphasized. Despite these strategies, drug-exposed infants often must be separated, even if temporarily, from their parents. Accordingly, the panel makes specific recommendations regarding referral to child protective services, followup for infants in child protective services and foster care, and assuring the quality of services provided to them.

Public child welfare agencies (in each State, county, or city) are mandated to perform a broad array of services for infants who have been abused, abandoned, or neglected, including foster care placement and managing family unification after separation. It is often the child welfare worker who coordinates this unification.

Go to:

Comprehensive Psychosocial Services

In the absence of a stable, nurturing home environment, the infant already compromised by drug exposure probably will be at increased risk of adverse outcome throughout infancy and childhood. A comprehensive range of social services can promote stability and nurturing.

Several factors should be kept in mind when developing comprehensive social services for drug-exposed infants and their families.

  • Efforts should be made to guarantee that services are sensitive to the cultural and racial backgrounds of the women using the services.

Innovative means of accomplishing this cultural competency, including extensive community involvement, should be explored.

Community involvement might include participation from: concerned families and residents in the community, community organizations, and church groups, and current or former patients in the program and their families. Community involvement can go a long way toward addressing not only issues of cultural sensitivity, but also concerns about lack of resources and funding through the contribution of volunteer services.

  • Utilization of outreach workers can provide programs with an important way to augment a wide range of services, encouraging more "one-on-one" contact with the mother and her family. Program administrators should work to ensure that sufficient funding is available to hire and maintain outreach workers as key personnel in program operations.

  • Community-based organizations (CBOs) should be utilized to support the range of social services that can be offered to the substance-using woman and her family.

Programs operating out of large institutions (such as hospitals) should strive to develop collaborative relationships with CBOs. Efforts should be made to establish ongoing mechanisms for networking between institutionally based programs and CBOs serving drug-exposed infants.

  • Whether provided at a single site or at a number of agencies throughout the community, services available to women and families caring for drug-exposed infants should be accessible, coordinated, and comprehensive. Linkages among agencies are crucial.

Many experts in the field urge that comprehensive services be provided by interdisciplinary teams at a single site. This concept is consistent with the policy recommended by the National Commission on Infant Mortality.

However, this "one-stop-shopping" approach may not be feasible in many communities. Because of the variety of services required to appropriately serve drug-exposed infants and their families, many community-based agencies often provide these services. Specific agencies in the community can offer a unique approach or focus that might be difficult to achieve in a single agency. Due to lack of effective networking mechanisms among agencies (as well as overburdened workloads), problems often arise when one agency is unaware of services provided by another. For these and other reasons, accessing services from one agency to another can be problematic. As previously mentioned, programs receiving Block Grant monies set aside to treat women and women with dependent children are required by law to provide women and their children with a comprehensive range of services, either directly or through referral.

Thus, when multiple sites are involved, the sites or agencies should carefully coordinate with one another so that needed services are provided without duplication of effort. Case management is crucial in helping to ensure access to appropriate services. Agencies may wish to consider the establishment of structured mechanisms to foster effective interagency communication regarding the provision of services to drug-exposed infants and families.

Other approaches might also be taken into consideration such as home-based nursing and counseling. Access to treatment may be enhanced if services are decentralized and close to the people being served. Easy access to public transportation is important. Decentralized services in the form of home-based nursing and counseling can also facilitate collaboration with CBOs.

Comprehensive health and psychosocial services for drug-exposed infants include substance abuse treatment for the mother, health services, mental health services, social services, and educational, vocational, and employment services. Key features of these services include:

  • Cultural competence

  • Utilization of outreach workers and community-based organizations

  • Accessible, coordinated services with interagency linkage mechanisms

  • Nontraditional approaches, such as home-based services.

Go to:

Treatment For Parents

The best way to help the drug-exposed child is to help the mother (and the father when possible) recover from addiction. Treatment should occur within the context of the mother-child dyad, with particular attention paid to the mother's drug use and its impact on parenting skills. Every effort should be made to include fathers as well as mothers. Treatment should be nonthreatening, nonstigmatizing, and supportive. The treatment team should also work with other siblings and members of the extended family, especially drug-free family members. The treatment team should be culturally competent and well trained and understand how services provided with cultural awareness of the mother's and father's background can play a positive role in recovery.

Pregnant women should not be denied such treatment or have treatment postponed merely because of pregnancy. In fact, since the health and welfare of both the mother and the unborn child are at stake, efforts should be made to give pregnant women priority access to AOD abuse treatment services.

Such priority status is now a requirement for all programs receiving Substance Abuse Block Grant funds. Programs serving an injecting drug use population must give preferential treatment in the following order: (1) pregnant injecting drug users; (2) pregnant substance abusers; (3) injecting drug users; (4) all others.

If the program does not have the capacity to provide treatment services to a pregnant woman, the woman must be referred (with the use of a toll-free number or similar mechanism) to the State. The State is then required to refer the woman to a treatment program that has room to serve her not later than 48 hours after seeking treatment. Thus, the State must have a capacity tracking system to track all open AOD treatment slots available to pregnant women in the State.

Detailed treatment guidelines, including a description of an appropriate continuum of care that includes medical stabilization and detoxification guidelines, are available in the TIP, Pregnant, Substance-Using Women. Many of these guidelines are equally applicable to women in the postpartum period.

Treatment should focus on the dual goals of abstinence from drugs and successful parenting. Within the context of AOD abuse treatment programs, parenting skills should be addressed or reinforced. The program and its staff can serve as a secure base from which the mother can try new approaches to parenting, often ones that she did not experience as a child. The treatment component must acknowledge each woman's role as a mother struggling to rear young children. This parenting role must be supported by all staff, who support the mothers in their relationships with their babies and praise their ability to comfort their children, make their children smile, and know when their children are sick. These daily interactions support the mother in her parenting abilities and allow her to feel successful as a good mother to her children. Please refer to Appendix A for materials on parenting skills.

Treatment options should include residential and intensive day care treatment. Whatever the modality, the infant - as well as the woman's other children - must be accommodated.

Substance abuse treatment services should include relationship counseling and relapse prevention.

Halfway and quarterway houses should be available to women completing residential treatment so the transition to self-sufficiency is gradual and a safer home environment can be defined. 1 Ideally, such houses should accommodate infants and older children.

Go to:

Maternal Health Services

Mothers of drug-exposed infants must have their basic health needs attended to if they are to function effectively in a parental role. These needs include:

  1. Postpartum care.

  2. Treatment of other health problems often attendant upon addiction. These health risks are discussed in Chapter 2 and are fully described in the TIP Pregnant, Substance-Using Women.

  3. Training in infant care (including breastfeeding, if appropriate).

  4. Reproductive health services, including family planning, contraception, and education concerning the increased risk of unintended pregnancy and HIV infection associated with the use of drugs and alcohol. These services should be delivered within the context of the mother's drug counseling to be most effective.

  5. Counseling and testing for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. Active efforts must be made to direct women who are HIV positive or have AIDS to appropriate services.

  6. Educational efforts concerning the effects of illegal and legal drugs, including alcohol and tobacco, on the woman's health, the health of unborn children, and the health of the infant and siblings.

Again, health care services, training, and education should also be provided to the father as much as possible.

Go to:

Mental Health Services for the Parents

Substance abusers in general, and substance-abusing women in particular, often have coexisting mental health problems that must be attended to during treatment. Necessary services include:

  1. Mental health and psychiatric evaluation and treatment services, especially for depression.

  2. Assessment and counseling for physical and sexual abuse, and for the possibility of post-traumatic stress disorder.

  3. Counseling and training in self-esteem and image enhancement.

  4. Training in interpersonal skills.

  5. Training in self-sufficiency and independent living (feeding, housing, preparing meals, locating child care, etc.).

  6. Relationship training between men and women.

Go to:

Parental Educational/Vocational Services And Employment Assistance

Parents of drug-exposed infants are often functioning cognitively at the age at which their own drug use first began. Their education and job history may be intermittent at best. In the absence of economic self-sufficiency, drug abuse treatment and other psychosocial services are unlikely to make a permanent improvement in the family's lot. Parents of infants and young children should be a priority for educational/vocational services. Such services should include:

  1. Job skills assessment.

  2. Graduate Equivalency Diploma (GED) classes.

  3. Vocational skills instruction geared to job opportunities in the local area.

  4. Employment-related services, such as coaching in interview techniques, preparing employment applications and resumes, mentoring by employed persons, and obtaining and reviewing lists of viable job prospects.

Go to:

Other Social Services

To round out the services listed above, an assortment of ancillary services may be necessary. These include, but are not limited to:

  1. Child care and babysitting services in general, and especially during service visits.

  2. Assistance in obtaining safe living arrangements and locations.

  3. Public transportation or taxi vouchers for service visits.

  4. Family support services and training in parenting skills.

  5. Training in life management skills such as personal care, time management, and budgeting skills.

  6. Outreach services, which might include any one of the above-mentioned items.

  7. Legal services, including counsel in cases involving domestic violence, divorce, child custody, and right to treatment.

Each mother should receive an individual service and care plan responsive to the unique needs of her family. Wherever possible, services should be gender-specific, as well as culturally specific, addressing the particular circumstances of the woman and her children. Services should be designed to aid rather than punish women; to this end, focus groups consisting of addicted and recovering mothers might be convened to share information on what they consider to be particularly useful services. Service providers should also make use of recovering mothers as role models and community-based outreach workers to help with visits, transportation, and support.

Incentives should be offered for successful completion of services, including followup. Such incentives could include: donated infant supplies, infant blankets, diapers, formula, baby furniture, toys and educational toys, and coupons for specific food items.

Finally, service providers should be sensitive to the varied cultural and ethnic backgrounds of women who use alcohol and other drugs, and should therefore tailor services accordingly. Such sensitivity has a significant impact on both service utilization and compliance with the recommended treatment.

Go to:

Helping Parents or Guardians Obtain Supportive Services

Mothers of drug-exposed infants display a wide variety of needs and problems that affect their lives and those of their children. These include physical and psychosocial factors contributing to their drug use as well as environmental factors harmful to adequate or healthy lifestyles.

Persons providing assistance to mothers of drug-exposed infants can recognize and work to address the barriers to services that face these women. Such barriers include, but are not limited to:

  • Lack of alcohol and drug abuse programs for pregnant and parenting women.

  • Lack of transportation to and from service providers.

  • Lack of child care or babysitting during service sessions.

  • Cost of services.

  • Insufficient funding available for substance abuse treatment programs directed to pregnant and parenting women, especially programs that are family-centered and include the mother's other children, the father, and the extended family in the treatment process.

  • Lack of sufficient programs that are adapted to the cultural, racial, and linguistic characteristics of the women using the services.

  • Lack of sufficient programs that are based in the communities or neighborhoods where the women live.

  • Nonsupportive or hostile attitudes of service providers toward drug-using women.

  • Stigma associated with drug use, especially drug use by women.

  • Lack of knowledge by drug-using women concerning the service options available to them.

  • Complex and often inconsistent eligibility requirements and application processes that vary by program.

  • Fragmentation of services - lack of a single provider or locale where all needed services can be obtained, including comprehensive health and dental services. (This can be a formidable obstacle when the woman and her children face significant chronic medical problems, such as HIV).

In addition to the above-mentioned barriers to services facing mothers of drug-exposed infants, it is important to recognize several essential components in the development of adequate services for this population of women, as outlined below.

  1. Case Management - An essential element for an effective continuum of care is the case management function. This function can be provided through the auspices of virtually any agency, and is needed by every woman and her family. Case management defines, initiates, and monitors the medical, drug treatment, psychosocial, and social services provided to the drug-exposed infant and its family. Case managers serve as advocates to help the woman and her family negotiate the bureaucracy and qualify for public programs such as Medicaid, WIC (Women, Infant and Children), AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children), food stamps, and housing assistance.
    (Please see the section on referrals in Chapter 3, Followup and Aftercare, for an additional listing of public programs.)
    The multiple services coordinated by the case manager are generally provided by a variety of agencies. Some of these services are initiated during or even prior to pregnancy, and may continue long after delivery. Drug- and alcohol-abusing women and their children are also typically referred to a consortium of service providers that may change over time, depending on a patient's individual circumstances.

  2. Outreach - To help pregnant, substance-using women and mothers of drug-exposed children learn about the services available to them, service providers should develop the following:

    • Outreach efforts to culturally diverse populations. At least a portion of outreach services should be conducted through nontraditional means, such as through churches, beauty parlors, laundromats, and other social settings. Outreach workers must be sensitive to the racial, ethnic, cultural, and socioeconomic concerns of those being served.

    • Public service announcements (PSAs) advertising services available and aired on radio or TV stations that are popular with groups targeted for services.

    • A 24-hour, toll-free hotline for service information and referrals.

    • Videotapes about services that can be used by community and church groups.

    • Pamphlets advertising the services available.
      The outreach worker is crucial to a program's ability to effectively carry out these outreach efforts.

    • Affordability - Discussed below are a number of considerations from the viewpoints of both the patient and the health care facility that can help to ensure that comprehensive services are affordable to all women and families in need of such services.

Services should be provided free of charge - that is, with no out-of-pocket costs - to the woman and her family to the greatest extent possible. There is much that agencies can do to ensure that services are provided at no cost to the patient, including seeking available funding and assisting patients in accessing Medicaid, as described below.

Federal and State programs can assist agencies with funds and / or resources to facilitate the provision of accessible, affordable services to drug-exposed infants and their families. (See Appendix A for a listing of Federal and private agencies that can provide the latest information on possible funding sources).

For example, as of 1993, there is a federally mandated "set-aside" within the Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention Block Grant stipulating that not less than 5 percent of the grant will be expended to increase the availability of treatment services for pregnant women and women with dependent children. Local programs serving AOD-using women might wish to investigate whether their State has met this obligation under the block grant set-aside provision. In sum, agencies should make sure that they are up-to-date on the availability of funds and grants from various sources and work to take advantage of them.

Agencies should also be aware of what services are Medicaid-reimbursable in their State. (Services reimbursed under Medicaid vary significantly from State to State.) If there are services currently not covered under the State's Medicaid program that agencies consider essential in the provision of care to drug-exposed infants and families, then communicating the need for this coverage to the appropriate policymakers is essential.

Agencies providing care to drug-exposed infants should also establish mechanisms to facilitate the patient's Medicaid application process so that all women who may be Medicaid-eligible apply for and receive Medicaid. Special advocacy or followup services may often be needed to guarantee that women who are Medicaid-eligible receive their Medicaid determination in a timely fashion.

Specific Medicaid advocacy mechanisms may also be needed for special populations of women for whom there may be particular obstacles in accessing Medicaid, including women who: speak little or no English; are refugees, immigrants, or illegal aliens; are deaf, blind, or mentally or physically disabled; are homeless; are HIV-infected; are incarcerated, etc.

Designated agency staff should receive initial and ongoing training in MedicaID--including covered services, eligibility and determination procedures and requirements, and the various appeals processes and procedures. (Such training often may be available through special arrangements with the State Medicaid office, upon request.) Agency competency in the Medicaid process not only assists the woman and her family, but the agency as well, enabling the agency to maximize potential reimbursement for services and patients covered under Medicaid.

When agencies do not have the funds to cover costs for women who are not Medicaid-eligible, services might be provided on a sliding fee scale, based on the woman's ability to pay. Again, agencies should familiarize themselves with the available services offered by the community, region, State, or Federal government.

Go to:

Keeping Families Intact

A comprehensive and individualized assessment of the family's needs may prevent inappropriate placement of drug-exposed infants and children in foster care. To achieve the goal of keeping families intact, the drug-exposed infant and his or her family should have access to the following services:

  • Availability of case manager services on a 24-hour, on-call, basis

  • Quality day care

  • Individual / family counseling and crisis counseling

  • Housing assistance and emergency shelters

  • Procedures and arrangements for access to emergency financial assistance

  • Arrangement for provision of temporary or respite care

  • Availability of outreach workers who may be able to visit the woman and her family in her own environment.

A new program in New York City provides intensive supervision and counseling to substance-using women who have been permitted to take their babies home from the hospital. Under the program, social workers visit families at least once a week to help ensure that mothers remain in treatment and assist them in other areas, including health care for the infant and housing and other social services (Treaster, 1991).

Go to:

Referral to Child Protective Services

In most jurisdictions, child welfare services are responsible for a broad array of activities including preventing unnecessary separation of children from their families, restoring children who have been removed from their natural families through provision of appropriate services, placing children in suitable adoptive homes in cases where reunification with the biological family is inappropriate, and assuring adequate care of children not living with their families.

Within the child welfare system, child protective services (CPS) is the administrative unit responsible for investigating allegations of abuse and neglect. The focus of CPS is on strengthening and empowering families who are at risk of child abuse and neglect; removing children from their homes is seen as a last resort when continued work with the family has failed. 2 Regarding the referral of a drug-exposed infant to child protective services, the following guidelines are offered:

  1. Reasons for referral - Prenatal drug use or a positive drug test should not be an adequate reason in and of itself for referring an infant to CPS. Referral should be made only when there is some question about the health and safety of the child. However, in some States, by statute, evidence of drug exposure or a positive urine toxicology is, by itself, grounds for making a child abuse report. Therefore, although a mother's presumed drug use is not an adequate reason for an infant to be referred to protective services, referrals are sometimes made on this basis.

  2. Placement decisions - The decision to remove the child from the home should be made if a child is endangered or if the parents cannot adequately provide for the child's health and welfare. Such decisions should be made only after thorough assessment of the infant's family situation. The mother's ongoing substance use, by itself, should not be a criterion for mandating removal from the home. Occasional relapse is a normal part of the recovery process and, as such, should not be the sole criterion for removing the infant from the home. By both Federal and State law, child welfare agencies must make "reasonable efforts" to prevent the removal of a child from his or her parents through the provision of services for the family, unless a child would be endangered even with the provision of such services. In some jurisdictions, the caseloads of child protective workers are so large that the goal of strengthening and empowering the family has been difficult, if not close to impossible, to achieve.

  3. Placement with relatives - If the child is to be removed from the mother, the first priority should be to place the child with responsible grandparents or other family members, rather than making an immediate placement to foster care. This recommendation should be tempered by the realization that a large proportion of substance-using mothers may themselves be children of substance-using parents. Placement of an infant with grandparents or other family members who have problems with AODs is clearly inappropriate. However, where appropriate, placement of a child with family members can result in significant benefits to the child. Such a placement may be less disruptive and stressful because the child is not separated from family.

  4. Special programs and funding for drug-exposed children - Because foster care systems are receiving increasing caseloads of drug-exposed children, there is a necessity to develop special training and other programs for meeting their needs. In addition, special funding should be procured to help meet the increased costs incurred by the adopting parents of drug-exposed infants. Most drug-exposed children qualify as "special needs" children. Both foster and adoptive parents may be able to receive special subsidies to help care for the child. In addition, children in foster care receive Medicaid, and Medicaid follows the child after adoption. Thus, children who were Medicaid-eligible before adoption can continue to be eligible to receive Medicaid after adoption, up to adulthood. However, it is a good idea to obtain verbal and written agreements regarding both the special needs subsidy and Medicaid eligibility before the adoption or foster placement is finalized.

  5. Foster placement - Given the specialized needs of the drug-exposed infant, efforts should be made to develop special foster homes with a limited number of children placed in such homes. (Child welfare agencies often provide special foster homes and / or residential facilities with additional financial reimbursement and other support.)

    1. Family reunification - If an infant is placed in foster care, the ultimate goal should be reunification with the mother at the earliest possible time, as soon as the health and safety of the infant and mother can be assured, in the best judgement of the caseworkers. This goal should be clearly communicated to foster parents. It must also be acknowledged that reunification may not be possible or practical based on the best interests of the child.

    2. Stability - Wherever possible, serial foster care placements of any infant should be avoided. Such placements weaken an infant's ability to bond with caretakers and threaten his or her emotional, physical, cognitive, and social development, with effects often lasting into the adult years.

Go to:

Followup of Infants In CPS or Foster Care

The recommendations in this section are built upon those found in Chapter 2 on followup and aftercare services for infants, and are focused on the psychosocial needs of the infant.

  1. Case management - Followup services for drug-exposed infants and children in foster care should be provided using a case management model. The advocate for the infant could be a public or private case manager, a community caseworker, an outreach worker, or a recovering woman working under direction of a designated case manager. The continuing assessment and treatment needs of infants placed in foster care can be met best through case conferences, where all allied professionals provide input into the service needs of the infant and family. Telephone case conferences may be an expedient method for achieving this goal.

  2. Training - Ongoing training should be provided to all service providers working with drug-exposed infants and their foster families. Such training should include information about the effects of drug and alcohol use in general, information concerning the child protective services system, and information concerning the unique service needs of the drug-exposed infant. Initial and ongoing training should also be conducted on HIV-related issues. Foster parents themselves and other caregivers need to receive special training regarding the unique needs of drug-exposed infants and mothers. In particular, they should be trained to provide stimulation to the infant at a level appropriate for that particular infant.

  3. Reunification - Foster parents should be made aware that the ultimate goal of child protective services is to reunite the infant or child with the biological family, whenever possible.

  4. Attitudes toward substance use - Child protective service caseworkers and foster parents should evaluate their attitudes about substance-abusing women as well as their own use of substances, including alcohol and tobacco, and the example it provides to children placed in their care. Ongoing training and values orientation should be provided to caseworkers and foster parents as much as possible.

Go to:

Assuring the Quality of Services For Infants in Foster Care

Quality assurance standards for child protective services, foster care agencies, and foster parents are important to ensure adequate and appropriate levels of care for drug-exposed infants in foster care. Standards of practice must be reviewed and updated on a regular basis.

Such quality assurance standards should include but not be limited to:

  1. Caseload limits - In the current era of escalating social service needs and shrinking budgets, child welfare workers are often forced to handle ever increasing and complex caseloads, prohibiting the provision of effective child protective services. Administrators and service providers working with drug-exposed infants and their families should be familiar with public and private child welfare standards, which seek to address quality assurance issues such as caseload size. Both the private and public sectors are involved in the establishment of standards or goals for practice in the field of child welfare services. For example, the Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) develops and publishes child welfare standards to be used in planning, organizing, administering, and improving services; in establishing State and local licensing requirements; and in determining the requirements for accreditation. These standards include the development of recommended caseload and workload ratios for different types of services. (For example, in the area of child protective services needed for abused or neglected children and their families, CWLA standards describe the recommended number of active and new cases per month per social worker and the recommended ratio of supervisors per social worker.) Licensing provides basic protection for the well-being and protection of children. Through the licensing of child-placing agencies, residential group care facilities, foster family homes, and child day care facilities, States exercise their power to protect children. 3

  2. Number of infants or children per foster home - Child welfare agencies establish standards regarding the maximum number of high-risk infants to be placed in a foster home or residential facility. Drug-exposed infants in need of placement should be assessed to determine the intensity of services required to adequately care for the child. Due to inadequate staffing of child welfare agencies, established standards are not always followed and placement assessments are not always accurate. Programs serving drug-exposed infants should work closely with the child welfare agency to help guarantee that an appropriate foster care placement has been made.

  3. Recruitment and training of foster parents - Agencies should be able to show evidence of ongoing recruitment of foster parents willing to accept drug-exposed infants. Prospective foster parents should receive special training concerning unique needs of drug-exposed infants. Training will also be needed regarding HIV infection and drug-exposed infants. 4

  4. Interagency agreements - Foster care agencies should develop memoranda of agreement with other service agencies to coordinate and avoid duplication of services to drug-exposed infants and children. These agencies should hold quarterly meetings to review existing standards, resolve problems, and recommend changes. Within the consortium of agencies, a single agency should be assigned responsibility for quality assurance compliance.

  5. Foster parent review - The case plan of a drug-exposed infant placed in foster care should be reviewed every 6 months, with a mandatory home visit within the first month of foster care.

  6. Cultural issues - Extensive efforts should be made to recruit foster parents from the same racial and cultural backgrounds as the infant. Effective efforts in this arena usually require extensive engagement with the community in the recruitment process. For example, ongoing or periodic foster home recruitment campaigns can be launched in coordination with local churches, sororities and fraternities, the media, civic organizations, and other grass-roots organizations familiar with the cultural nuances within the community. Many such organizations are eager to help recruit foster homes from the same racial or cultural background as the infant in need of placement. However, in addition to extensive community-based recruitment campaigns, consideration might be given to relaxing regulations that require placement of infants with parents from the same racial background. Such measures should be considered only when other efforts have failed to ensure the placement of drug-exposed infants in qualified foster homes. Such foster parents should receive initial and ongoing training around the need to understand and respect the racial and cultural background of the infant.

  7. Followup surveys of client satisfaction - Followup surveys should be conducted with the biological parent(s), the foster parents, and the coordinating agencies to determine their satisfaction with the process and any recommendations for improvement.

  8. EAPs for professional and volunteer workers - Employee assistance program components should be mandated and integrated into all agencies involved in child placement and foster care services. This will provide treatment and counseling services to caseworkers and other service providers who may themselves be substance users or abusers.

  9. Professional attitudes and behavior - All professionals working with drug-exposed infants and their mothers and families should examine their own knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding use of drugs, alcohol, and tobacco and should receive ongoing training on these subjects.

  10. Stress management - Stress management training must be provided to workers involved in the care of drug-exposed infants and their families. Likewise, sensitivity training should be provided to caseworkers concerning their attitudes and behavior toward drug-using women so that a nonpunitive, supportive approach is maintained. Foster parents with drug-exposed infants also need stress management and sensitivity training. Whenever possible, such programs should be provided for these caretakers.

Go to:

Footnotes

1

There is anecdotal evidence that some halfway houses turn away women maintained on methadone. Efforts should be made to reverse this trend. Women on methadone should be supported in their efforts toward self-sufficiency and should be admitted into transitional housing.

2

Unfortunately, available resources to provide some of these needed comprehensive services are frequently insufficient. For instance, although many service providers might agree that 24-hours case management services would be quite helpful, funding for such round-the-clock services is often lacking. In the long run, the provision of comprehensive and individualized assessment services to drug-exposed infants and their families is more cost-effective to society (and to the individuals involved) than the costs incurred when substance abuse remains untreated, families are broken, and children are placed in foster care. In the short run, agencies and programs serving drug-exposed infants and their families must be innovative in acquiring the needed funding and resourceful in linking up with existing community services to provide comprehensive services.

3

For a summary discussion of the background, purpose, and definition of child welfare standards, see Child Welfare League of America Recommended Caseload / Workload Standards excerpted from CWLA Standards for Child Welfare Practice. Prepared by Robert R. Aptekar, Director, Institute for the Advancement of Child Welfare Practice, Child Welfare League of America, April 1992.

4

Although beyond the scope of this TIP, it is advised that child welfare agencies develop protocols and policies regarding drug-exposed infants, HIV infection, and foster care placement. Agencies seeking additional information on this topic should contact the Child Welfare League of America at 202-638-2952.