Child welfare policy has long been characterized by massive pendulum swings between child protection and family support. This creates a false choice. After a period of growing the scope of child welfare to become a “child well-being system,” overcorrecting failed policies might send the pendulum back too far in the other direction. Instead, the child welfare field is starting to reject the dramatic pendulum swings in favor of a more productive approach. Rather than forcefully pushing back on the idea of family supports in favor of child protection, there’s a more nuanced, “yes to family supports, but not through child welfare agencies,” being voiced by many.
As Naomi Schaefer-Riley highlights in her recent City Journal piece, Why Mamdani’s Foster Care Cuts Make Sense, it appears that this same nuanced position is starting to show up in policy.
“Mamdani’s administration is reportedly planning to cut almost $3 million in ‘foster care prevention services’ provided through the city’s Administration for Children’s Services (ACS). Those services include mental-health counseling, addiction help, and parenting classes, as well as less obvious functions like helping clients apply for housing vouchers and food stamps…it’s not at all clear that ACS was the right agency to provide these services, since doing so can conflict with what should be the agency’s paramount goal: protecting children, not providing social services to families.”
Whether an intentional move to right-size child welfare, a budgetary trade-off, or something else, this reduction reflects what families have consistently said: they want to access the services and supports they need to promote the well-being of their children and families, but not through the same agency that has the authority to remove their children. Notably, while there has been ample pushback on the proposed cuts, it doesn’t appear to be coming from families or community-led groups.
It’s important to recognize these opportunities for the potential they present: to right-size and refocus child welfare services on child protection and to situate family support in more appropriate agencies and community institutions. Child welfare agencies and state policymakers should capitalize on these opportunities in this moment to best safeguard children when they need protection.
New York City’s cuts are a welcomed step toward smarter and more efficient child welfare and family support policies. We celebrate the states, counties, and communities across the country who are leading the way on key principles of this work including responding quickly when risk is identified; ensuring transparency in outcomes and performance; and utilizing tools that support better decisions.