Check out our new unplanned pregnancy community website. Find support and informative articles about unplanned pregnancy.
Ready for Adoption?
Adoption Network Law Center
Adoption Network Law Center
Want to Adopt? Click here.
Click here to be helped in California!
Adoption Network Law Center
Pregnant? Click here.
Adoption Network Law Center

advertisement
Click Here to Learn More
advertisement
Click Here to Get Started

Juan F. v. Rowland: Connecticut

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
You may use the stars on the left to rate and leave feedback for the current article. No registration is required. Waiting for 5 votes 0.0 of 5 stars (0 votes) — Thanks for your vote

Please fill out the following optional information before submitting your rating:



When Children's Rights first became involved with this case, Connecticut's under-funded and overburdened Department of Children and Families (DCF) routinely put children at risk of harm. DCF failed to provide appropriate placements and basic services for foster children and failed to adequately investigate reports of abuse and neglect. Social workers carried caseloads twice the national average. Training for workers was grossly inadequate and the Department lacked the ability to track basic data and information on children in state custody. The lawsuit, filed in 1989, resulted in a comprehensive consent decree in 1991. Since then, Children's Rights has been working with a court-appointed monitor to watch over DCF's performance. Children's Rights has addressed non-compliance through negotiations and, when necessary, through court proceedings to enforce the Consent Decree. While considerable improvements have been made in areas such as overall funding for DCF, the creation of a comprehensive training program and an information system that can accurately track critical information concerning children, the state and DCF have repeatedly failed to comply with numerous areas of the Consent Decree.

advertisement
  Adoption Services

In February 2002, the court approved an 18 month transition plan, which shifted emphasis from the specific "process" requirements of the Consent Decree to a more flexible management system, under which DCF agreed to meet specific outcome measures. If DCF met the measures, and if they could sustain their success, the plan would have allowed the state and DCF to exit from the Consent Decree and Court involvement. In the Summer of 2003, the Monitor released several reports which concluded that DCF had failed to meet Court-ordered goals in most of the fundamental areas, found that DCF was routinely depriving foster children of opportunities to be adopted, and found that, rather than improving children's lives, "multiple traumas associated with long lengths of stay in DCF custody, such as multiple placements, separations from siblings, abuse in custody, and multiple social workers, worsened their emotional and mental health."

As a result of this dismal performance, and in light of over a decade of the state's making and breaking promises to its children, on October 7, 2003, Children's Rights obtained an extraordinary court order approving a new agreement reached with the Governor and DCF Commissioner that avoided a contempt hearing and possible court-ordered receivership. Under the new Agreement, the state admitted its longstanding non-compliance and failures. For the first time ever in the nation, management authority over the state foster care system has been transferred to the federal court through the Court Monitor, with the consent and cooperation of the Governor and DCF Commissioner. The Agreement created a three-member Task Force including the Monitor, the senior state budget official and the DCF Commissioner, with ultimate power over the Department in the hands of the federal court. By early 2004, the federal Monitor will develop a new set of mandated outcome measures to be met by November of 2006. If DCF can meet these measures by then, federal court oversight will end; if DCF fails to comply, oversight will continue until the improvements are made. The federal Monitor under this new agreement has the powerful potential to bypass political and bureaucratic barriers that have prevented change for so many years. Plaintiffs are hopeful that this will allow for the kind of sweeping changes in management and accountability - and, most importantly, improvements in the lives of abused and neglected children - that have been lacking in Connecticut for so long. Children's Rights will continue to be a watchdog over the State's compliance with the new Agreement.

Pregnant? We Can Help.
Click here to visit Adoption Planners
At Adoption Planners, our focus is you. We are dedicated to helping women with an unplanned pregnancy who are considering placing their baby for adoption. We specialize in private domestic adoption and are here for you 24/7.
Adoption Planners
(877) 903-7526  
advertisement
Sponsored Links
Parent Profiles
We're Sam and Gayle. We both come from large families with lots of love to share. Our hope is to continue our families' tradition of love with children of our own. [more]

[about us]  [contact us]  [waiting couples near CA]  [all]

Adoption Tips
Add a blog to your professional website. It can increase your search engine rankings as you add fresh, updated content.
Adoption Photolisting
Sophia (CA / 15 / F)
Meet this sibling set of three! Sophia is the oldest sibling. She is a peacemaker. She is loving and assertive, and able to ask for what she wants and needs. She does well in... [more]

[about me]   [search]   [waiting kids in CA]   [all]   [share]

Adoption E-Magazine
Help
Feedback
Template Settings
Width: 1024     1280
Choose a Location:
Choose a Theme: