Earlier this year, Jermaine Reed hosted the Color of Child Welfare conference as he has since 2010, which included a keynote by Dorothy Roberts, the author of Torn Apart, from which Bregetta Wilson read in our first season. Ms. Roberts wrote an article last year titled, “Why End Mandated Reporting”, in which she makes this foundational statement: “By federal edict, every state must identify people who work in professions that put them in contact with children – such as teachers, health care providers, social services staff, and day care workers – and require them by law to report suspected child abuse and neglect to government authorities.” Consequently, she states, “Poor and low-income families are more likely to come in contact with professionals who are mandated to report child maltreatment. Receiving social services, relying on welfare benefits, living in public housing or shelters, and using public clinics all subject parents to an extra layer of surveillance by government workers who are quick to report when they suspect maltreatment or a family’s needs for services.” As we shared in season 1, this system has led to the deeply troubling reality in which 53% of all Black children and 1 in 3 of all children in the United States are subject to a child maltreatment investigation. How does our current system of mandated reporting discourage overloaded families from seeking the help that they really need due to fear of ending up in the child welfare system? How does it create moral dilemmas for the many helpers in our community – teachers, social workers, doctors and nurses – who feel compelled to report a family under the weight of the potential consequences if they don’t? So how might we transform our mandated reporting system into community support and collaboration that lifts overloaded families up and over their challenges? How might we confront the biases that influence reporters’ decisions as to who to report and who to support? And how might we improve our systems and service coordination so that our helpers know who can help and how to connect them to the families that need them when they need them? I invited Jermaine to have this conversation today to share his expertise and explore these questions. As an added bonus, Jermaine and I begin this conversation discussing his journey as a child welfare professional, which covers some of the topics we explored in the Workforce Inclusion and Innovation discussion we had last week with Tim Grove.
Host: Luke Waldo
Experts:
:00-:36 - Jermaine Reed - “If we were talking about 53% of White children coming to the attention of the child welfare system, 65-67% of our White children being in our local child welfare system, something would change. There would be a transformation. All hands on deck.”
:37-5:44 – Luke Waldo – Jermaine Reed’s bio and Welcome
5:45-5:59 – Jermaine – Greetings
6:00-6:52 - Luke – Gratitude and recognition for Jermaine’s commitment to Milwaukee and Black children and families through the Color of Child Welfare and his agency. What did you hope to inspire and accomplish with the Color of Child Welfare conference?
6:53-9:51 - Jermaine – We needed a platform locally and nationally to explore the many issues that Black children and families experience, especially as they relate to child welfare. Impact others across the country by promoting reflection on these issues.
9:52-11:16 - Luke – What is the evidence telling us about what is causing the disproportionality in our child welfare system?
11:17-12:59 - Jermaine – Administration for Children and Families acknowledged that racial discrimination exists in our child welfare system in 2021 due to bad policy and systemic racism, which lead to over-representation of Black families in our child welfare system. We must rid ourselves of policies and practices that allow or promote structural racism.
13:00-13:40 - Luke – How might we address disproportionality to achieve equity?
13:41-18:53 - Jermaine – It will require a paradigm shift. We must humanize Black people, so that our workforce and our systems understand that Black families can care for their children. The US has a history of profiting on separation of Black families. We can’t fix a system that is not broken. We have to be brutally honest about the fact that child welfare has not produced good outcomes for Black children and families. “The ACF would not be investing $30 billion into programs that are not producing the results that it intended.”
18:54-21:03 - Luke – Jermaine, you don’t need to apologize for your passion. Will mental models shift, will we achieve greater equity by addressing disproportionality through Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts that increase diversity and inclusion in our workforce?
21:04-26:34 - Jermaine – It is important that Black people are visible and present, and sitting at the tables in our systems. But it’s more important that the right Black people are at the table, so we avoid tokenism that simply advances the predominant ideology of White supremacy. There have been Black leaders who have perpetuated the harm of these systems because they were an extension of it. Having a Black person on your board or in leadership does not necessarily mean that they are committed to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. Fresh Start Today was the first and only talk show that focused on child welfare and Black families. And yet, Fresh Start Today, Color of Child Welfare Conference, and Fresh Start Family Services did not receive funding or support from state or local agencies that were led by Black leaders. “I don’t want to confuse position with power.” I want to see allyship that humanize Black children and families.
26:35-28:13 - Luke – If we are to achieve our goal of SFTCCC, we will have to significantly reduce the number of Black families that come into our child welfare system. Where have you seen change that makes you believe that your vision that you laid out can be achieved?
28:14-32:26- Jermaine – I haven’t seen any meaningful changes. Black children and families still have dismal outcomes in the child welfare system. Black children are being placed all over the state rather than with family. Black children are aging out of the system and are faring worse than other children that age out. Still seeing Black children being abused in the system. Black men are invisible in the system. Fatherhood initiatives have been going on for 20-30 years, but very little has changed. At around 31:50, Jermaine pauses and shares that this is hard, painful, and traumatizing because of his own experience as a Black man.
32:27-33:36 - Luke – What inspires the fight and gives you hope that motivates you to host Color of Child Welfare?
33:27-38:24 - Jermaine – In August 2022, UN calls for US action to address racial injustice in child welfare system. “If we were talking about 53% of White children coming to the attention of the child welfare system, 65-67% of our White children being in our local child welfare system, something would change. There would be a transformation. All hands on deck.” “Black families are valuable. Black families are capable.” Resources have been denied. Access has been restricted. Divestment in our communities. Disproportionality would go away if Black families access to economic and social resources was the same as White families.
38:25-40:59 - Luke – I hope that this platform will not only amplify the voices that have often been silenced, but that it will also lead to change in mental models that have perpetuated disproportionality. What do you believe the role of mandated reporting is?
41:00-45:57 - Jermaine - Mandated reporting is the main artery of the child welfare system. What it is and what it should are not the same thing. It is not evidence-based, nor does it show that it protects children. It is not an evidence-based policy or practice. It discourages our families from seeking support from social workers, teachers, and doctors because they know that they are mandated reporters. We may keep our sick kids at home rather than take them to the doctor. 30% of children in our system have a parent that is struggling with addiction, and yet they are expected to overcome their addiction in 15 months. It’s not realistic.
45:58-47:23 - Luke – The mandated reporting process discourages overloaded families from engaging with supportive systems that could help them overcome their challenges. What do we need to do to change that reality? Differential response?
47:24-52:15 - Jermaine – CAPTA requires that we define neglect, and yet we don’t have a national definition. Wisconsin’s definition excludes poverty as a reason for removal. Our definition includes the inability to provide for our children. Inability should be removed as many Black families don’t have the resources that make them able to provide for their children. If parents refuse to care for their children, then the system may intervene. “We are criminalizing poverty.” Trauma-induced care.How do we create good policy that eliminates racism? Racism cannot be embedded in the law. Screening tools and the screeners don’t bring experience with having been investigated or surveilled by the system.
52:16-54:37 - Luke – Remove “inability” from the neglect definition, which means that we need to address the fact that our systems have failed in empowering families to be able to care for their children. How might we create a collaborative approach to address the deficits that families experience due to lack of access to supports and resources? How do you see the current state of our collaboration of our systems to support overloaded families? What are the barriers?
54:38-58:56 - Jermaine – Dr. Joy DeGruy says “It’s the secrets that make us sick.” We need to be honest about the state of our collaboration. We need to have a paradigm shift after recognizing that some organizations have profited off the separation of Black families. We can’t collaborate if we don’t agree that Black families are valuable, that they can care for themselves. We have to also recognize that “help is not always help.” In 2016, 2017, we covered the expense of families that had been involved in child welfare so that they could attend the Color of Child Welfare conference. That’s collaboration.
58:57-1:01:35 - Luke – What do you believe authentic community collaboration would look like?
1:01:36-1:05:39 - Jermaine – I believe many of the right partners are already at the table. Housing Authority, Legal Aid Society, mental health partners, etc. are there. How do we strike a balance between paid folks and community members? How do we fund that so community members can show up? We have a lot of great people at the table, now we need to define what we are trying to accomplish together. How do we hold our organizations and systems accountable? “If we aren’t willing to work ourselves out of a job in child welfare, then we shouldn’t be in this space.”
1:05:40-1:06:36 - Luke – What might a mandated reporting to mandated supporting shift look like?
1:06:37-1:11:18 - Jermaine – We need to train assessors and reporters differently, and provide them with different tools. We need to address the resource deficits. We need to change the definitions of abuse and neglect so that reporters have what they need to support families. 70% of reports made are unfounded, but the damage has already been done. We need to work with schools and law enforcement so that reports are made appropriately. Joseph Reed is a double-amputee, but had an allegation against him that he kicked his daughter. His daughter was removed from his care. “Impossible.” Unnecessary trauma. We need to give money and resources to families so that they can care for themselves and families.
1:11:19-1:14:28 - Luke – The data illustrates the impact that a report can have on families.
1:14:29-1:17:39 - Jermaine – “I have never met a rich kid in foster care. Why does that not happen? Mental health, domestic violence, substance abuse occur in rich families. Why do they not enter the child welfare system? Because poverty is not an issue. I’m concerned about ASFA as it has led to the termination of parental rights. Families First Prevention Services Act may lead to more families in the child welfare system as they will be working with mandated reporters, so changes in reporting standards need to change.
1:17:40-1:18:39 - Luke – Language informs our behaviors, so language in our policies matter. What makes you optimistic about the future of this work?
1:18:40-1:20:47 - Jermaine – I’m optimistic about conversations like this with the Institute and Children’s as you have influence and power to drive us towards equity and fairness.
1:20:48-1:21:13 – Luke – Closing Statement
1:21:14-1:21:18 – Luke and Jermaine – Thank you and goodbye
1:21:19-1:23:33 - Luke – 3 Key Takeaways
1:23:34-1:25:02 - Luke - Gratitude and Closing Credits
Join the conversation and connect with us!
Jermaine Reed 00:06
If we were talking about 53% of white children coming to the attention of the child welfare system, if we were talking about 65, 67% of white children being in our local foster care system, something will change. There will be a transformation without question, all hands on deck.
Luke Waldo 00:42
Welcome to season 2 of Overloaded: Understanding Neglect, where we explore the Critical Pathways that lead to child and family well-being and reduce family separations for reasons of neglect.
Hey everyone, this is Luke Waldo, your host for this podcast series and the Director of Program Design and Community Engagement for the Institute for Child and Family Well-being, our partnership between Children’s Wisconsin and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee’s Helen Bader School of Social Welfare.
Luke Waldo 01:25
Earlier this year, Jermaine Reed hosted the Color of Child Welfare conference as he has since 2010, which included a keynote by Dorothy Roberts, the author of Torn Apart, from which Bregetta Wilson read in our first season. Ms. Roberts wrote an article last year titled, “Why End Mandated Reporting”, in which she makes this foundational statement:
“By federal edict, every state must identify people who work in professions that put them in contact with children – such as teachers, health care providers, social services staff, and day care workers – and require them by law to report suspected child abuse and neglect to government authorities.” Consequently, she states, “Poor and low-income families are more likely to come in contact with professionals who are mandated to report child maltreatment. Receiving social services, relying on welfare benefits, living in public housing or shelters, and using public clinics all subject parents to an extra layer of surveillance by government workers who are quick to report when they suspect maltreatment or a family’s needs for services.” As we shared in season 1, this system has led to the deeply troubling reality in which 53% of all Black children and 1 in 3 of all children in the United States are subject to a child maltreatment investigation.
How does our current system of mandated reporting discourage overloaded families from seeking the help that they really need due to fear of ending up in the child welfare system? How does it create moral dilemmas for the many helpers in our community – teachers, social workers, doctors and nurses – who feel compelled to report a family under the weight of the potential consequences if they don’t?
So how might we transform our mandated reporting system into community support and collaboration that lifts overloaded families up and over their challenges? How might we confront the biases that influence reporters’ decisions as to who to report and who to support? And how might we improve our systems and service coordination so that our helpers know who can help and how to connect them to the families that need them when they need them?
I invited Jermaine to have this conversation today to share his expertise and explore these questions. As an added bonus, Jermaine and I begin this conversation discussing his journey as a child welfare professional, which covers some of the topics we explored in the Workforce Inclusion and Innovation discussion we had last week with Tim Grove.
Jermaine Reed was born and reared in Milwaukee. A 22 year child welfare career veteran, Jermaine is the first African-American person and foster parent in the history of Wisconsin to privately own a foster care agency. In 2011, he was one of two child welfare leaders in the state chosen to serve on the First Lady of Wisconsin’s “Fostering Futures” Steering Committee focused on advancing trauma informed care in child welfare and other child-and family serving systems. In 2009, he was designated by Gov. Jim Doyle’s administration to lead a focus group on family support in the Governor’s Summit, Building Bridges to Family Economic Success.
Jermaine has committed his life to working on improving the quality of life for abused and neglected children and youth. He does so by partnering with and advising birth, foster and adoptive families, state and local officials, and other stakeholders. Jermaine is committed to boldly addressing racial disproportionality and disparities in Wisconsin’s foster care system. Since 2010, Jermaine organizes and convenes the only child welfare conference in the nation that solely focuses on the needs of Black children, youth, and their families involved in foster care and juvenile justice systems. Each year there are over 450 participants in attendance from across the child welfare spectrum.
Since beginning his speaking career in church at the age of 9, Jermaine has become a respected public speaker in a variety of circles. He infuses comedy, practicality, passion, and truth in all of his presentations. He is masterful in creating safe spaces to have hard conversations. He is also a community advocate, playwright, and biological and adoptive parent.
Jermaine, thank you again for joining us for this conversation, your partnership in this important work, and your commitment to the well-being of children and families of Milwaukee and our state. Welcome, Jermaine!
Jermaine Reed 05:44
Hello, Luke, how are you doing? Thanks for inviting me to be a part of this very important initiative, this project that you and your organization has undertaken. I'm looking forward to having a very, very engaging conversation with you today.
Luke Waldo 05:59
Well, thank you again, Jermaine. I'm doing well. I'm, I'm grateful for your participation in this as well. I've been looking forward to our conversation for quite some time and have invited you today because of past conversations we've had, and more importantly, the commitment you have shown to your community, to Milwaukee, and to the children and families that you've served for now decades, here in Milwaukee and in the state. So I'd like to, first and foremost, start by recognizing you for your tremendous work with the Color of Child Welfare conference that I mentioned in the intro, and then ask you to share why you chose to create the conference. And as a follow-up, ask you what you hope the conference inspires and accomplishes.
Jermaine Reed 06:54
All right, that's a really good question there, Luke. Well, when I think about it, I created the Color of Child Welfare conference because we needed a platform both on a local level, as well as a national level, that brought critical issues facing black children and their families whose lives are impacted by the child welfare system in so many ways. You know, over the years, I would attend many conferences, and whether we're talking about a local level or national level, and would deeply be offended by some of the subject matter that was presented, you know, it just didn't seem like issues that were being presented, related or connected to what was going on. And the realities that black folks were having lives were greatly impacted by child welfare. And black people who, in many jurisdictions across the country, make up an overwhelming majority of the children and families who are represented in those child welfare systems. And so to have national and local conferences that, you know, talk about a lot of important topics, you know, interesting topics, but they were not relative to the issues that my people were facing in this system. And so I wanted to be able to create that platform, that space, so that we could recognize our needs, and not only just our needs, but our humanity, that was critically important for me, you know, and we need to be able to talk about issues that were prevalent in child welfare, you know, root cause issues, and not just, you know, talk around some of these very, very critical pieces. So, that's what I want to do, I want to create that space and, and use it as a catalyst, you know, to go across the country to encourage other jurisdictions and I have been in conversation with other jurisdictions about how do we bring the Color of Child Welfare conference to our state? So that's what I want to do I want to impact others to make them pause and say, you know, wow, we really do need to be focused on meeting the needs of our target core population, anytime you make up a majority of the client base or consumer base, or, you know, that's your target population. So I think we need to have child-specific, families-specific trainings that's going to speak to their needs. Now, you know, and again, when I think about those topics that you know, I was, what was customarily seen or heard in these trainings, oftentimes dealt with topics like how to care for the black child's here. And, you know, that topic after 10 years after 15 years, got a little old and said, you know, we really need to be able to bring these real issues at the table.
Luke Waldo 09:52
I appreciate you bringing this very clearly to kind of the core underlying root issues right? Why we have such significant disproportionality of children of color, particularly Black children here in Milwaukee, in the state of Wisconsin, to the foreground, right to the center of these conversations, as I shared in your intro, and what you and I've talked about in preparation for this conversation is that you are interested in having challenging and constructive conversations about the issues that most directly impact the families that we serve. Right/ And as you pointed out, and we can't, can't dance around this, the families that we serve predominantly here in Milwaukee County, especially are Black families, right? And so I do want to kind of stay on that theme. As you have centered so much of your work around equity and justice, right? In particular, through boldly addressing the racial disproportionality and disparities in Wisconsin's foster care system. I'd like to ask you as, as a community and organizational leader, what is the evidence telling us that is causing the disproportionality and disparities?
Jermaine Reed 11:17
What is the evidence that's causing the disproportionality and over-representation of Black children, youth and families in the foster care system? But this is what I would like to do, I would like to look to what the United Nations, I'm sorry, but the Administration on Children and Families, the federal agency that is responsible for overseeing national child welfare policy. Well, back in 2021, the ACF acknowledged that racial discrimination exists in the child welfare system. The agency, if you may be familiar with this, but they publicly acknowledge and agree that Black children and other racial minorities are disproportionately represented in the child welfare system, and the cause that the ACF found was due to bad policy and structural racism. So I would like to adopt that position, because I absolutely believe that racism and structural racism plays a significant role, a significant part in the number of Black children who are overwhelmingly represented, and again, also bad policies. And so we talk about well, what is the antidote of what do we need to do to minimize the number or reduce the numbers of Black children, youth and their families who are making up an overwhelming amount of our child welfare community? Well, I will say we have to create good policy, and we have to rid ourselves of this institution of structural racism.
Luke Waldo 13:01
So when we, when we approach the reality that ACF has shared in 2021, and that you've just laid out for us at a workforce at an organizational and at a systems level? How might we accomplish what you've just laid out to address disproportionality and achieve equity? What might those policies look like? How might we authentically address structural racism in those different settings? Workforce, organizational and systems level? I know it's a big question.
Jermaine Reed 13:41
the first thing that we need to do, and I don't know if it's going to be done, because it has not been done for hundreds of years, as it relates to black folks position in this community, in this country, it is certainly is going to take a paradigm shift, you know, and part of that shift in value has to be centered around is that black folks are human, we have to humanize black people. We need child welfare community whether you're talking about on an individual level, a system level, a program level, whatever level organizational level, we need people who are working with black people to understand that black people are human, and that black people are capable of taking care of our children, rearing our children. And as you know, in child welfare, there is a position or an attitude of frame of mind that we need other people and mainly white people to come in and rescue and save our children. And so we need to shift that thought process, we need people to understand that yes, we can, we are capable of caring for and rearing our children and also to that you don't have to protect us, our children, will protect our children from us, excuse me. And we see this played out. In the courtrooms we see it played out, at family team meetings, we see it played out, you know, on so many different levels, you know, where it seems as sometimes in child welfare, we position the children, the parents, yeah, the children against the parents. And so it's like everybody on the team is here to support the child, we're an ally of the child, and you have to watch out for your parents. No, we don't need the government. We don't need nonprofit organizations, we don't need child welfare to come in and protect our children from us. We love our children. So I think there certainly has to be an attitude adjustment, that attitude change, that black people are capable. We can do this. And I don't know that in the history of America, it's kind of hard to talk about child welfare, because when you talk about child welfare, mandated reporting, you're talking about a system, a tool that has been used to, to promote family separation, to perpetuate family separation. And as far as as long as we've been here, as a people in this country, in this community, family separation, black family separation has always been profitable. So I don't know that there is an interest in taking away something that is profitable to some entity or to some systems. So you know, and I hope I'm answering the question that you've asked Luke, If I get a little passionate, you forgive me, you know, but I think about what Dorothy Roberts talks about in her book Torn Apart, where I believe it's on page 181. I love that page where she talks about that the system, you can't fix what's not broken. And so in child welfare on all these different levels, and we talked about a paradigm shift, how we change our view, our perception, how we see things, I think we have to speak truth, because all healing lies in truth, we have to call things and name things as they are. And in the system after 20 and 30 years, so many different initiatives and projects we've been breaking through break through this series and break through that series. And after 20, 30 years, we still haven't broken through. We've invested a lot of money into funding programs and providing services, but we still are seeing the dismal outcomes, black children, youth and family fare the worst in child welfare systems. So you know, we've fared the worst outside of the child welfare system. And then when we get into the child welfare systems, we have the worst outcomes. And so if the child welfare system is not in a position to really help black children, youth and families, maybe perhaps we have to leave black children and families alone, because I don't see how it's a win situation. So when we talk about shifting perspective, and our perceptions and how we view things, I'm calling things the way they are, I think we have to be brutally honest about the outcomes, we have to be brutally honest about our methods, our strategies and say, hey, something is not working, or isn't really working. We have to answer that question. Because the nation or the Administration of Children and Families, they will not funnel $30 billion into any type of agency or program that is not producing the results intended, you defined was not working? If that's making sense, you know.
Luke Waldo 18:53
Yeah, that makes that makes a lot of sense. Jermaine, and I want to go back to your earlier statement about asking forgiveness for your passion, you certainly don't need to do that. That's, that's why we're having this conversation today. So I appreciate you bringing both your passion and your knowledge of the reality that is facing so many black families here in Milwaukee, in the state of Wisconsin. I do want to explore a bit further because what I did hear, as a very direct answer to my question, that what needs to happen to really address this disproportionality and achieve equity is a shift in what we talk a lot about as mental models, right? You talked about perception, perspective, attitude shifts towards black parents, black families, right. And the belief that black families can care for themselves, right, we can get that black parents can care for their children. We've talked recently about right the kind of recent systemic and organizational shifts towards the diversity and equity and inclusion of models or frameworks, right, particularly in the light of the George Floyd murder a few years ago. And as as an African American leader of an organization, the founder of the children of the Color of Child Welfare conference, I'm curious if you believe that achieving greater diversity, greater representation of black families by communities in our workforce can be a potential solution to achieve what you talked about when it comes to the mental model shift, right? Is it more likely that our organizations and our systems will begin to see black families the way that you've proposed if we achieve greater diversity and inclusion in our workforce?
Jermaine Reed 21:05
This is what I believe. I believe that. Yes, as you indicated, potentially. I think it's important that black people are visible in, present in certain spaces that they're sitting at certain tables. But it's critically important to make sure that is the right black person. Because when we talk about child welfare, the child welfare system, when we're talking about government system, government systems have a long history of being deeply racist. Racism perpetuates and flows through the system, thrives on the system, that the system thrives and are built on racism. So we have to be very careful because there is a thing called tokenism in symbolism in figurative leadership. And so you can have a black person biologically and racially coded as black person who is in a position, but they can be a biggest white supremacist that you will ever meet in your life. So a black person can be a white supremacist, a person who promotes the ideology. And I might add the false ideology that white people are white thought, white process, white psychology, white beliefs, white values, is the standard. It you know, and so we have to be very careful with that. There are black people who have entered certain spaces that have caused more injury and harm, because they are part of an establishment and a system that perpetuates harm. And for that black person in that position. Sometimes it comes down to, I need a paycheck or wages so that I can support my family, that so just having black people and people of color in certain spaces sitting on your board, or a black face to an organization does not necessarily mean that that organization is committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion. So we can get excited about things like that, right? I know from personal experience that I have worked in this industry for over 20 years. And as you indicated, start at the Color of Child Welfare conference, the only conference in the country that focuses solely on the needs of black children, youth and families. In addition to that conference, we used to also have a talk show called Fresh Start Today, they came on WNOB, before podcasts became very popular, we were on the radio, the only radio program in the country that was talking solely about foster care to do what, to educate the community about what goes on foster care policy, practices, but also to bridge the gap between the child welfare community and black folks and brown folks, we were the first to do that. And then, as you indicate, is starting the only or the not only, I'm sorry, but the first privately owned black foster care agency in Wisconsin history. So we did all of these first. And you know, we've always been very clear about what our focus and our mission was. And again, that is to humanize black folks, that is to raise our voice and to give our input into what matters to us. So when we talk about potential, is there a potential in improving outcomes if we promote more diversity, and if I may just say very clearly, we bring more black people into this space and if black people just are proportionately represented, were represented in leadership roles as we are in the consumer base, you know, if we had black folks who are working as case managers, supervisors, program managers filling these positions, would we see different outcomes, would outcomes look differently? And again, I will say that all matters, it all depends on who is the individual. My experience has been that, you know, creating these first, you know, these platforms, you know, we had black people who were in very key positions in child welfare, I received a lot of pushback, and, and no support from those individuals during their tenures, even with the Color of Child Welfare conference. So we have never received that kind of support, even from African Americans in positions. So I don't want to confuse position with power. And so we can, you know, so we talked about DEI, and you know, you hire somebody to become a diversity equity inclusion officer or to be a program manager, for organizations that might be considered to be white organization or white-led organizations. You know, this could just be a token or a means to secure funding for grants, we have so many African Americans or people of color, who are part of our workforce. And now that makes us eligible to receive more funding, but it does not mean that we're going to see different outcomes, even with all these prominent African American leaders who were in child welfare. The outcomes were dismal. So I'm not really concerned about if someone is Hispanic, White, Asian, Mexican, or Black in certain positions, I'm concerned about are these individuals allies to black people? Do they see the humanity in black folks? That's what's important to me.
Luke Waldo 26:34
Thank you for clarifying that. And I think it's really important to provide those sorts of examples, to really demonstrate, as you pointed out, that, at the end of the day, what we're really interested in here is meaningful systems change that will lead to meaningful outcomes for children and families. Right. And, so this initiative, that is the purpose behind this podcast, our Strong Families, Thriving Children, Connected Communities initiative is really focused on reducing family separations for reasons of neglect. If we are to achieve that goal, our outcomes will have to include a significant portion of black families here in Milwaukee, that do not come into the child welfare system. So you've talked a lot about the real threat of tokenism within the context of creating a more diverse and representative and more thoughtful workforce when it comes to the historical racism that exists in this country. And that has impacted black and brown families, specifically in the child welfare system. Where have you seen meaningful change remain within our workforce or within our systems that lead you to believe that there's optimism for the sort of change that you have proposed here? Right, the mental model shift, the perspective shift? Are there any examples that you can speak to other than the fact that while you may have been the first in many cases, hopefully, there have been seconds and thirds? And if there haven't been then let's talk about that as well?
Jermaine Reed 28:14
Wow, that's, that's that's probably the hardest question you've asked me so far, what positive changes have I seen in our local child welfare community over the past 22 years that I've been involved in what powerful outcomes, positive outcomes? I haven't seen it. Because the outcomes are still showing that black children are more than likely to be placed into our local foster care system. The services that they receive looks different. They're more likely to age out of the system, less likely to be reunified with their families. I'm still seeing the same outcomes. I'm still seeing, like children being said, all across the state being placed in non-black homes and black families who are eligible to give their children and their relatives into their care being overlooked. I don't see positive outcomes. I don't see transformational change, a lot of initiatives, a lot of reforms, a lot of money being spent. But the outcomes, if we look at the data is the same. Black children, youth who age out of the system are faring worse, worse than any other youth who age out of the system. ut like children whose lives have been impacted by the child welfare system, I'm still seeing abuse, emotional, psychological, and physical and sexual abuse of children who have been removed from their families and placed into the system's care is I don't, I don't see a lot of positive, I can only see what I see. And so that is what motivates me to continue to fight the way that I fight, continue to put on the Color of Child Welfare conference to continue to have the radio station even after the Secretary said, You need to shut it down. So I'm going to continue that fight and hope that others will join in so that we can get to a better place. I still see black men are invisible, whether we're talking about black fathers, black male employees, or black male contractors. We are invisible in this space of child welfare. We've been talking about fatherhood engagement for 20, 30 years. And we still have not significantly engaged fathers in a real meaningful, productive manner. So I've seen a lot and I'm hopeful that we are going to move into a space and in a time where people are very genuine about their efforts to I would say, quote, unquote, assist black families and assist black children black families. And it's not because I just this is a very hard topic for me. Because I'm black, let me say that because I'm very connected and close to these issues, having had family members in the system, having to fight the system, to get my family members out of the system. Interracial foster care placements where you know, when there are parents of different racial backgrounds who have our children, we can't get them back, I keep seeing all of this, and it's painful, is traumatizing.
Luke Waldo 32:28
Thank you Jermaine for sharing that. And being open about your own experience and the pain that you've experienced through the many years of this fight. And the experience that your family has had, I want to circle back to two words that you shared, to kind of round out this conversation. Before we move into another space, you talked about the fight right, over these past 22 years, that you continue to fight. And you also talked about hope. So I'm curious, what inspires the fight, and what gives you hope, to continue to put together the Color of Child Welfare conference? What motivates you to continue to do this work that you've just laid out, has not made the sort of progress that you would have hoped for in the past 22 years?
Jermaine Reed 33:37
So when I think about trying to honor the humanity of my people, and I certainly hope that other people in child welfare will join in this fight to protect the humanity of black children, youth and their families. When I think about in August of 2022, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which is a group of international experts, who are charged with monitoring state compliance with human rights obligations, on racial discrimination, express concerns that United States has a problem has a problem with the number of black children and families and people of color who are coming to the system. So much so they declared it a human rights violation. What we're talking about is a crime against humanity. I want child welfare, American child welfare, Wisconsin child welfare, Milwaukee to honor the humanity of black families and to stop causing harm. And the CPS system, the mandated reporting system is a tool that is used by the government to funnel vulnerable poor black families into a system that historically is known to cause harm and injury. Historically, its roots are connected to slavery and genocide. If we were talking about 53% of white children, coming to the attention of the child welfare system, if we were talking about 65,67% of white children, being in our local foster care system, something will change. There will be a transformation without question, all hands on deck. I need everybody to understand that black families are valuable. Black families are capable if we're giving equal access to resources, because that is what this whole issue is about poverty, what kids coming into care, it's not about black folks neglecting their children. It's not intentional. This is about that resources have been denied. Access has been restricted. housing, employment and divestment in our community, of resources, of jobs. It's not that black people don't care. It's that we have been discriminated against, even with TANF funds. What the data shows is that black people are 50% less likely to receive benefits than non-black people than white people. We have been denied services. But if we were to receive the same support and the same resources and the same help that white families receive, yes, the number disproportionality will go away, over-representation will go away. The solution is not that difficult. We know the answer. We know what the child tax credit can do. We saw what it did. Housing vouchers. Childcare is expensive. Childcare vouchers, we know what it can take to turn this around. But because it's black children, and America has never valued black children, black families. So that's what I want from Child Welfare. That's what I'm here on this platform to say, at the Color of Child Welfare. And any space that I walk into is yes, the black families matter, that black children matter. And we didn't have to wait until the death and the brutal murder of George Floyd to talk about, We have a crisis here. That discrimination and racism, the injustice here in this system.
Luke Waldo 38:25
My hope, Jermaine, is that, as you've mentioned, that this platform will continue to elevate the message that you've just shared with us, and that it will continue to reach more and more people. And that more and more people will take the time to not only reflect on what you've just shared, the reality of our city and our country, but will also begin to really challenge the mental models, right, that you've talked about throughout our conversation today that have led to the disproportionality of children of color, particularly black children in our child welfare system. So I appreciate everything that you've shared, I share your hope that these conversations will not only amplify, right, the voices that have oftentimes been silenced, but that they will also lead to meaningful change in our behaviors and in our kind of systems change efforts. So thank you, for everything that you've shared, shared and I do want to build off of what you've just talked about from a reporting perspective. And really, what's underlying many of the reports that bring families to the attention of the child welfare system, right, we oftentimes, don't think of the child welfare system as an extension of our community, who is serving our kids and families, in our schools, right, in our communities, in our hospitals, in our clinics, but the child welfare system, the entryway into the child welfare system starts in all of those other systems. Right. So I'm, I'm curious from from a reporting perspective, right. So I'm curious in your experience, Jermaine. What do you believe the role of mandated reporting is? And how do you see it impacting overloaded families, and you talked about overloaded families, underserved families, families that have been denied access to things like affordable child childcare, et cetera, et cetera. So, again, in your experience, what do you believe the role of mandated reporting is? And how do you see it impacting overloaded families?
Jermaine Reed 41:00
I often say to folks that the mandatory reporting system is to child welfare, what the aorta is to the human body, it is the main artery. And as I stated earlier, in this conversation, mandated reporting, carries or brings or funnels, vulnerable, poor, black children into a system you know, again, that is rooted deeply rooted into slavery and genocide. And it's so important I, I continue to stress that because it's the basis, the origin, where this is coming from this sort of survival thing, this family separation, this legacy of black family separation, and it's so important to say that black family separation, and so mandatory reporting what it is, and what it should be, are not the same thing. What it is, is a system, a tool rather that is not evidence-based in policy. There's nothing, nothing on a national level, nothing on a local level, that shows that mandatory reporting protects children, that child protective services protects children. There's no national data that shows that children who come to the attention of child welfare system are going to fare better than they were before they came into the system. It's not an evidence-based policy or practice. It does not benefit our families. But what it does, it discourages our families to seek out help in support from those entities or those services that you talked about spaces like social workers, teachers, black families are going to be very reluctant to take their children to the doctor. Why? Because we know that the folks who are reporting who are required who are mandated by state law, who on the one hand are supposed to be helping professionals. But on the other hand, if we access or we, if we revealed or we engaged, these entities, we are putting our families at risk of loss and separation. So we'll keep the child home who is sick, the child who accidentally fell down the stairs, because if I take them, they're gonna say I did it. The baby had a cold. And so we see these kinds of things happen. And so we're reluctant to engage. So mandated reporting discourages families to get the help that they need. And when I think about, you know, for example, DV is a big issue in the area of child welfare. When we think about mothers who are involved in legitimately dangerous type of relationships, where their lives could be at stake, those mothers often would choose not to go to Sojourner Family Peace Center because of mandated reporting. If I go there and tell them what's going on these folks, the system may end up taking my child away from me. So I will risk staying in this relationship and be killed, then suffer the death of the loss of my child. There is nothing that is motivating about having to go to a place where they might accuse you of failure to protect your child. So you know, it's just too much to be asking. It's so unrealistic. See, this thing is not difficult. We know what to do. When we think about mothers and fathers who are grappling or struggling with drug addiction, if they were to reveal or to engage themselves to some of these programs in these entities, they could fear losing their children. And we have a great number of children, 30 plus some percent of children who are involved in child welfare system, they have a parent who is addicted to some type of illegal substance. With that being said, when those children come to the care of the system, our approach as a system is so, so unrealistic. We don't really understand addiction. We expect for folks who are addicted to crack, cocaine and heroin, to beat those addictions in 15 months. Where does that happen? See, see these unrealistic expectations. Nobody, nobody can meet them.
Luke Waldo 45:58
So with that in mind, Jermaine, right? You've laid out very clearly that one of the real failures or challenges of the mandated reporting system or process or tool is that it discourages vulnerable families, families that are overloaded with stress, whether that's addiction or domestic violence, or right, the many symptoms of poverty, right, like potential of eviction, and so on, that it discourages those families from engaging with the supportive systems, or the resources that would be needed for them to overcome those challenges. Right? What, what might we do differently? Right, from a family support perspective, that would help us overcome those particular challenges? Does that involve changing mandatory reporting standards altogether? Does that involve some sort of community collaboration, kind of community response, differential response to our system? What would you propose that we do differently, that would support families rather than report families?
Jermaine Reed 47:24
Well, what I was saying, you know, the Child Abuse Prevention Treatment Act, you know, they have procedures in place that every state needs to require certain individuals, we talked about who those individuals were, you know, teachers, doctors, lawyers, helping professionals, that they needed to report suspicions of child abuse and neglect. So we need a uniform definition across this country. What neglect is so that we're not confused or conflating that with poverty. On a state level, in Wisconsin, we know that child welfare cannot remove or can remove children for any other reason, but poverty. The inability, and we talk about that the inability, not the ability to provide housing, food, shelter, clothing, but the inability, we have to take that out. Now, when we're defining here in Wisconsin, no matter what they do on a federal level, in Wisconsin, we can say that we're modifying or changing the definition of neglect to exclude inability because a lot of black people don't have the resources to provide the ability to meet the needs of their children. And so it becomes a tool then, to usher in bringing in black families of children into the system. And a lot of people are eating off of the separation of black families. So we got to change that definition on a local level, ideally, on a state, on a federal level where we had a uniform definition. And if we change on a federal level, take out inability. But when we talk about the inability or the refusal, the refusal to care, yes, I can understand that you know, that some parents are in a space, whether because of mental illness or some other things that are going on, where, you know, they refuse to give their child, they have the means and the ability to resources but they refuse to do it. I think we address and we deal with that a little differently than people who are just poor. We're criminalizing poverty. So to me, to me, it's just the reverse when we talk about what can we do, what would you like to see? Yes, like the Administration for Children and Families said Okay bad policies we create the policies. We bring all these brilliant, well-paid, well-funded organizations, we bring folks in the community, we come down to the table, we look at policy and say this policy right here is injurious to black children, youth and their families, and brown folks and poor white folks. And we need to change this policy, because this is the extent of harm or irrepairable damage is causing to trauma, not trauma-informed care, but trauma-induced care. Paradigm shift here, we're talking about bad policies to create good policies. If you talk about structural racism, then we have to talk about how do we deconstruct your racism? How do we take it out of our palette? How do we take it out of our practice? What would Child Welfare look like if we were to eliminate racism? We have the solutions. We change the law. So that racism is not embedded in the laws that govern us, policy that drives practice, that ultimately ends up with more black families overrepresented in the child welfare system. It's little simple things. So we just have to figure out, you know, what our ideas are, what's gonna require legislative action, what's gonna require for us to sit out with our board of directors and say, Hey, this practice that we're doing here, we don't have to pass law here. To move this, we just need to have a consensus here that we're going to stop ABC. When we look at screening tools that they use in CPS, and the folks who are screening, their experiences, what people of color, a lot of people who are screening black folks and brown folks who come to the attention, child welfare, their lives have never been impacted by CPS. But this is our reality. So we got to look at how we train people, the tools that we're using that create this crisis that we're in.
Luke Waldo 52:16
So Jermaine, you've talked about the importance of policy change, I think you've laid out a very clear policy proposal, which is to remove the single word of inability, which I think is powerful. To your point, right? So if we're talking about overloaded families, who do not have the ability to provide what they need to provide to their children, to nurture them, and to keep them safe, then we as a system or a set of systems, right, have either failed those families or as you've talked about, throughout, throughout this conversation, in some ways have intentionally marginalized that parent in that family. Right. So if we are to make those policy changes, if we are to make those efforts to shift, you know, hearts and minds through things like training, how might we then build a collaborative kind of approach within our communities to really address those deficits that many families are experiencing because of lack of access? Today, right, so you've mentioned things like childcare in this conversation, you've talked about issues of poverty. You've talked about substance abuse, you've talked about domestic violence, and mental health. So I'm curious how you see, Jermaine, the current state of our collaboration between these many systems, organizations, communities and the families in particular that we need to support and empower, overloaded families. And and then I'd really like you to talk a little bit about where you see the barriers to more meaningful and constructive community collaboration between these different actors.
Jermaine Reed 54:38
Luke, overloaded families are under-resourced families. That's what this comes down to. And that under resource, again, is dealing with poverty. So we talked about collaboration, how do we collaborate and so that we can get to a different place? I think we have to again all wellness and healing. And health begins with honesty and truth, Dr. Joy DeGruy often says, that is the secrets that's making us sick. We are at such a crossroad at a point where we have to be brutally and totally honest, no matter how ugly it is, we have to be honest. And so we talk about collaboration, I want to bring some truth or what I believe to be some truth there. You know, Jermaine Reed is an agency owner, a private agency owner. And so we talk about collaborations, we have to look at structure of organizations and who's at the table. I have more latitude and freedom, where I can make certain decisions that's based off of my vision, my values. And what I would like to see happen for black children, youth and families who are coming to the attention of the child welfare system. But we're talking about collaboration, we have to make sure that folks who are at the top, no longer see black families as a commodity, as an income stream or funding source. And I'm not quite sure that we all see black people the same way. And that's why I began this conversation about having a paradigm shift, changing our focus how we perceive our perspective of black folks. And so we're talking about collaborating, I think it's critically important that we all sit down and we assess, analyze, you know, how do you see black people? Because that's where all meaningful collaboration because if you see black people differently than I see black people, or if you show up in this space, and motivated by other reasons, or other intent that's in conflict with mine I can't collaborate with you, it's gonna be hard, how can two walk together except they agree. And we don't agree that black folks are human, that they have a humanity, that they're capable of caring for their children, that they don't always need intervention from the government, because a lot of times your help is not help. Going to domestic violence shelters not always help, going to clinics, it's not always help. And so we have to make sure that one a collaboration with system partners, and then we have talked about how do we collaborate meaningfully with the folks in the community. And that might require a different level of working. And, and here's collaboration, here's his collaboration, because we talk about it. And we've been selective about the people that we bring to the table, you know, to be champions, or ambassadors or folks with lived experience, we need we even need for them to be as polished a certain way. You know, I think we really have to allow folks in the community trust, again, that black people, black parents know what they want for their children, even if they're even in instances where they feel they can't provide that they still want better outcomes for their children. So I think we have to bring in collaboration and bring parents in, in very meaningful, powerful way. When I think about collaboration, it was a couple years ago with the Color of Child Welfare conference, I believe, is 2016, 2017, somewhere in that area. And we were putting on this conference, and I was on the radio at the time, and I was inviting families who had been involved in the child welfare system, or who are currently involved in the child welfare system to attend the conference, and we will provide or cover their expense.
Luke Waldo 58:57
So Jermaine, I started this this season with a conversation with two mentors of ours from from Canada, who have led collective impact efforts across their country, specifically for the most part, in addressing poverty. And they have been instrumental in advancing the framework or the methodology of collective impact, which I'm sure you're aware of as a model or as a framework. But what we've always valued about their work and their approach is this understanding that if collective impact, if that meaningful community change is going to happen, then there has to be an authentic balance of lived experience and professionals at the table. So I'm curious based on what you've just said, as to what you what you imagine that balance would look like, and what partners really need to be at the table if we're to have authentic community collaboration. And let me just expand on that for a moment. So we're talking really within the context of our community collaboration pathway. And our objective here is to develop authentic collaboration between community partners, that means systems partners, like child welfare professionals and leaders, like systems, partners in the many systems that we've talked about today, right, so the anti-poverty systems, the housing systems, the substance abuse systems, et cetera, et cetera. And the community partners, the community members, the families that are most impacted, both adversely and hopefully, in many cases, in a positive manner as well, to be able to inform one another as to what is working, what is not working, what needs to change, what needs to be invested in more, and so on. And so I, I am curious, from your perspective, how do you think we might increase that form of community collaboration that supports and empowers overloaded families, so we can ultimately decrease the number of reports made to CPS?
Jermaine Reed 1:01:36
Look, in terms of what systems, the services that need to be at the table? I do think that a lot of the right agencies you know, I've been at many tables, or some, not many, but some tables, I've been a part of many workforce groups and task force over the course of this 22 years, I think we have a fair representation. The systems in, you know, community assets that need to be at the table. When you talk about the housing authority, whether you're talking about Legal Aid Society, whether you're talking about somebody from the mental health community, you know, we have the right people at the tables, I don't know that that is an issue. And how do we increase or improve our outcomes? You know, we've been a part of these sessions over and over and over and over and over. And I do think that most folks who are working in the space of child welfare are well-intended individuals, I want to say that, you know, but something else is going on that I can't quite put my finger on, to name it. To say this is what's exactly happening best preventing this one thing where there's presenting us with all this brilliance, paid brilliance at the table. For the most part, we're talking about those professionals, you know, who are whether it was DCF, or they were DHS, or some other D, other departments were paid folks, contractors were paid folks, you know, and there is value to have paid people at the table. And how do we balance that with non-paid folks or community folks? You know, I don't know what that ratio looks like. But I do know that initiative and change is going to have to be community-led. And if this government and programs in the community aren't willing to help fund or underwrite that, then we have to figure out a way how to get it funded or get the job done outside of the system. So I don't know that we need a new convening. I don't know that we need to try to invite somebody else to the table. We have a lot of great people at the table, great organizations at the table. We just got to figure out what intent is and what is our mission here. What are we really, truly committed to? And when we identify that I'm working for an institution that is causing harm to black children, youth and families, do I have the boldness and the audacity and the morality to approach my leadership and say, this particular policy, this particular practice is causing problems how do we hold the organizations we work for accountable and then in cross multi systems collaboration is holding one another accountable? We can't continue to look the other way because helping black folks is an inconvenience. Because helping and truly honoring and supporting Black families, youth who make up the majority of the foster care system, that that is going to hurt our bottom line. If we're not committed as a child welfare community to support our system and saying we are willing to work ourselves out of a job, then we shouldn't be in this space.
Luke Waldo 1:05:40
Right, right. Right. Yeah, if we're talking about this paradigm shift, which has come up throughout our conversation today, there has been a growing kind of movement around this paradigm shift of moving from a mandated reporting mentality to kind of a mandated supporting process, right? What might that look like? Jermaine, if we were to achieve that, right? And that starts with, as you've said, right? It starts with seeing families as one that is caring for their child to the best of their ability, right? Seeing their humanity, and wanting to help them through a process that is not going to lead to harm, right? And so what might that look like from your perspective, moving from mandated reporting to mandated supporting?
Jermaine Reed 1:06:36
Well, one thing that can be done and again, I think it goes back to the training tools that are being used, how folks are being trained, folks who are assessing or initial assessment workers, what does that look like? Who are those folks in that space, and what type of training they receive, what tools they're using? But I also think, you know, when it comes down to, again, remember, this is talking about resource deficits. So if teachers are calling into 220-SAFE, which is our CPS helpline, I think teachers reframing and re-educating the community around what is abuse and or neglect, but it begins with the state changing its definition of what abuse and neglect is. So there's that piece, we're talking about going for mandated reporting support, you want to support me, change the definition, will support my community, change the definition. But also, I think there's a miseducation. And, you know, oftentimes, people are 70% of the calls that are being made to wait 70% of the investigations that happened in Child Protective Services are unfounded. 70%, but the damage is still there. And the damage can be generational. So when we talk about, there certainly is a need to reduce this. So I will say that with regards to not just the definition, but educating the community, we really got to work with schools, because teachers, I think they're like the number one reporters, and then even law enforcement. And then people use that over your head, I'm gonna call CPS and they're calling over all type of, you know, insignificant things that's, you know, wasting time and resources, and it's causing trauma. So I do think that if we're going to kind of move from a mandated reporting to a mandated supporting, we've got to be very clear about, you know, certain calls, we're not even you're a screener to deal with. I'm gonna give you an example. You know, I'm a storyteller. So I have someone who has the same last name as me and, and they have given me permission to share their story when I'm on different platforms, but right here in this city, within the last year, there's a gentleman who has the same last name as myself, but they're not related. His name is Joseph Reed. And so some reason and his family and Joseph actually was in foster care in Illinois when he was a child. But Joseph is a double amputee and he has no arms or legs, snubs. Snubs he calls himself well, his child made an allegation that he kicked her. The family came to the attention of the child welfare community. And this child was removed and placed in groups homes and other settings, I think was about 7, 8, 9 months something to that effect. Whoever conducted the assessment on this father, who has no legs, it stops at the waist. He has no arms. He was the subject of the allegation. The allegation was that he had worked hard and that he had kicked her. Impossible. Some things don't even warrant a full investigation, removal of kids. And when we start going to spaces like that it looks like exploitation, child exploitation only for that child to be returned back to that father, and that child's mother's care. Unnecessary. Give people support. Overloaded families are under-resourced, underserved families, give families what they need, we have to get rid of the notion that if we give certain parents money, that they got to spend it on drugs, no, they got to go pay their rent, they got to pay their car notes. They got to take care of the children and families like other people do, other people with drug addictions, other people with mental health issues. Humanize black folks, give black families a chance.
Luke Waldo 1:11:18
I appreciate you, you bringing up the data. Right that illustrates the impact that a report can have on a family, particularly those reports that fall in the majority, which leads to no family separation, right? That in some cases, people might look at that and go, Well, that's a good thing, right that that family was reported to CPS, but their family was not found to have committed some act of neglect or abuse, however, right, that brings attention, surveillance to that family. Right, that makes them vulnerable to potentially future incidents, as you've mentioned earlier in the conversation, such as my child fell down and bumped his head, I want to take this child to the hospital or to the emergency room. But I've had a call made on me in the past. Right? That wasn't substantiated. But now that record is there, right? And the breadcrumbs can then lead to these really, really traumatic incidents of family separation, in cases where it's not warranted. So I think that's really important, as you pointed out, Jermaine that school staff, whether you look at individual counties, generally speaking across the state, the top three reporting professionals are law enforcement, school staff, and social workers with kind of a mix of health care and social workers. Right. So you're spot on there. And yes, the majority of reports to CPS ultimately do not lead to substantiation and, and child's removal. Right. And so that begs the question, how do we right shift this this mentality of dialing 220-safe, Wisconsin, CPS helpline, as you've mentioned, and diverting those families, to the actual supports that they need to address the particular need that they've they've brought, brought to the school, brought to the social worker, brought to the hospital, et cetera, et cetera? So I appreciate you providing some examples, right. We've talked a lot about training, talked a lot about kind of shifting the language of policy, so that we have a much clearer direction. You've also talked about, right, the importance of continuing to build off of the people have the kind of the community knowledge and strengths and assets that have existed at the tables for a long time, right? And I appreciate you acknowledging that as well. So I do want to, to kind of bring us to a conclusion here because we've had a really, really fruitful conversation. I'm deeply appreciative of all that you've shared. I want to give you an opportunity to share any other thoughts that you might have, and then we're going to finish with some optimism, so go ahead.
Jermaine Reed 1:14:29
Wait a minute, Luke, it's all optimism, changing our perspective, our perspective of black folks, how we perceive them, restoring the humanity, honoring the humanity, all of that is optimistic, optimistic. That is hopeful. That's powerful. That's all we've been talking about, through this whole conversation. But in my, you know, semi-closing thoughts, you know, and the reason why I had to correct it because which is power. Perception is powerful. But I don't know if you've noticed, but I've never known of a rich kid in foster care. I've yet to meet one out of 22 years, I've never met a rich kid in foster care. I never met a rich kid in foster care. Why does that not happen? Suddenly, rich families have or wealthy families have mental health issues, have drug addiction issues, domestic violence issues. Why are they not coming to the attention of child welfare?
Why is the presence of child welfare oversaturated in certain communities and zip codes? Because those communities are isolated. And there, they have an overwhelming amount of resources at their disposal. And poverty is not an issue. And the reason why I bring that out, because when we talked when you're talking about the change and what needs to happen, you know, we talked about some things locally, but on a federal level, I am concerned about the Adoption and Safe Families Act has done more harm for black children, youth and families. Expediting termination of parental rights. When we think about the Families First Prevention Services Act, and the harm is eventually going to cause to communities of color, because of the preventive services. And the agents who work for those preventive service service corporations or programs who are more than likely going to be mandated reporters. And that's why we got to talk about changing the definition of mandated reporting. To give families, poor families a fair chance, a leg up. If we don't change the definition, in law, it makes no difference what I tried to do as an independent private program, or what task force we join, if it does not result in the law changing, we will continue to see an influx in over-representation of black children, youth and families in the system.
Luke Waldo 1:17:41
Thank you for that. Jermaine, I think it again, helps clarify the importance of language, the importance of language in our policies, in our laws, and how that influences in many ways our behavior, right and our perspective on the children and families that we're serving. And the ultimate outcomes for those families, in many ways are dependent upon how we as professionals and as systems, see the family as either deserving or as undeserving as in many ways you've you've kind of laid out today, right? So Jermaine, we'd like to finish our conversation today and on a high note, and so I'd love it if you would share what you are optimistic about when it comes to this work.
Jermaine Reed 1:18:39
What I'm optimistic about Luke, let me think, well, what gives me hope about the future of child welfare in Wisconsin in Milwaukee, is what Children's Wisconsin Institute for Child and Family Well-being is doing, via their Strong Families, Thriving Children, Connected Communities Initiative. And just as a project like this will be critical having these very hard conversations but necessary. You know, early in this conversation, I talked about how important it is not to conflate position with power. With Children's not only occupying an important position in Milwaukee child welfare community, but they possess power. Children's is probably more powerful than the Division of Milwaukee Child Protective Services, some might even argue even DCF. When you think that DCF will override their procurement policies to ensure that Children's retain some contracts says that Children's is powerful, and that the Division of Milwaukee Child Protective Services, so Children's touches what hundreds of, 1000s of poor, black and brown children, whether it's through your hospital, clinics, case management services, you all have the capacity probably more so than any other organization that I know of to really impact change, to move the dial, to really challenge the systems, the child protective system, the child welfare system, to live up to our creed, to do what is right by these families. And so I am optimistic. I'm just I'm just elated that you all are having this conversation. And I encourage you all to continue to use your vast resources to bring about equity and fairness, and also to humanize black children, youth and families who are involved in the child welfare system. So again, I want to say thank you, Luke, for allowing me to be a part of this conversation. And I just salute Children's for doing this.
Luke Waldo 1:20:47
Thank you Jermaine. It is important that we recognize our power and influence and I hope that this initiative and podcast demonstrate how we hope to use that influence to change the systems and conditions that have for too long overloaded and then separated families. I hope that we can bring together and elevate our many networks and partners such as you, along with the voice of families who are too often not at the table, so that we may achieve our goal of reducing family separations for reasons of neglect.
Jermaine Reed 1:21:13
Absolutely.
Luke Waldo 1:21:15
Thanks, Jermaine.
Jermaine Reed 1:21:16
Take care.
Luke Waldo 1:21:23
I want to thank Jermaine again for having this courageous conversation with me. I hope that today's episode and insights from Jermaine have you thinking more about how we might confront our history and the injustices that remain from it today, so that we might achieve the paradigm shift that he discusses that may lead to a better today and tomorrow for overloaded families. As always, I want to highlight three key takeaways to reflect on before we move on to our next episodes. One, there must be a transformation, a paradigm shift all hands on deck that humanizes black families, we can no longer accept the devastating reality that 53% of black children are subjected to a child protective services investigation. This involves actions like ending systemic racism and our policies, changing our mandated reporting laws so that families can seek help rather than fear it and confronting our biases to how might we redefine both neglect and mandated reporting, so that we strengthen relationships between helping professionals and overloaded families. As Jermaine shared, there's a stark difference between an inability and refusal to care for one's child. If a caregiver is unable to care for their child, we must examine what systems services and resources have failed to reach and support them. If mandated reporters are empowered to support families in accessing services and resources that strengthen their ability to care for their children, then they may feel less compelled to report a family to Child Protective Services out of fear that they will get in trouble if they don't. And three, when it comes to child welfare. Let's make rich kids realities, all kids realities. As Germaine pointed out, he's never seen a rich kid in child welfare, even though wealthy families struggle with domestic violence, child abuse and neglect, substance abuse and mental health challenges just as families living in poverty do. So how might we ensure that families living in poverty have access to quality treatment and services and a support network that rich families have come out we make the paradigm shift, so that we no longer see some people as deserving, and others as undeserving.
Thank you for joining us for today’s conversation. We hope that you will come back and listen next week as we continue to explore the Critical Pathways that lead to child and family well-being and reduce family separations for reasons of neglect.
If you enjoyed today’s episode, please share with friends, family and colleagues. Also, if you rate us on whatever podcast platform you listen to us on, it makes it easier for others to find us.
To learn more about the experts that you heard today, visit the Show Notes, which is where you will also find links to sources or information that were mentioned in today’s episode.
Thank you again for joining us. See you next week.
This podcast would not have been possible without the support and talents of Carrie Wade, who is responsible for our technical production and original music composition. I can't express my gratitude enough to Carrie for all she has given to this project. I'm also grateful to my team at the Institute for Child and Family Well-being at Children’s Wisconsin, who drive the Strong Families, Thriving Children, Connected Communities initiative and contributed to the ideas behind this podcast. Finally, I would like to thank all of our speakers that you have heard today and throughout the podcast for their partnership, their willingness to share their stories and expertise with me and all of you and their commitment to improving the lives of children and families. I'm Luke Waldo, your Host and Executive Editor. Thanks again for listening and see you next time.