Lies my child welfare system has told me: The critical importance of centering families' voices in family policing legal advocacy

Abstract

The web of law, regulation and policy which forms the modern day “child welfare” system is organized around one central unifying principle: the notion that these laws, regulations and policies are necessary to protect and save children. Yet an ever-growing and overwhelming chorus of “lived experts” – individuals who have been impacted as a parent and/or child by what is more aptly called the family policing system – as well as by advocates and scholars, are drawing attention to the degree of harm the system causes to the families it purports to help. Even though the harms the family policing system causes are well known, the family policing system continues to justify these harms as warranted in the name of protecting children. More concerning, even well-meaning advocates and scholars who acknowledge the harms, implicitly and explicitly continue to perpetuate the big lie that the family policing system's intention is benevolent and caring. The impetus for any law is a story; law identifies a problem and seeks to resolve it. But what happens when the story is false? The stories we tell about the need for family policing perpetuate harm and replicate systemic racism. Most importantly, the impact of these false narratives can be felt through generations of families leaving devastated communities. The stories, perspectives and opinions of those most impacted by the system historically have been, and continue to be, intentionally left out of the making of law and policy, and even in the teaching of the law. Unless the actual perspectives of families are present to challenge the stories that are woven into the law, these narratives will continue to create significant obstacles to critical thought about the law, prevent meaningful legal change, and ultimately cause continued harm to families and communities. In this essay, in the tradition of participatory law scholarship (Note: Rachel Lopez, Participatory Law Scholarship, 123 Colum. L. Rev. 1795 (2023) [“Participatory Law Scholarship or (PLS)… is an emerging genre of legal scholarship written in collaboration with authors… who have no formal training in the law but rather expertise in its function and dysfunction through lived experience.”]), the authors, a parent and professional advocate, and a clinical law professor and attorney, seek to unpack the myths which are built into the laws of family policing. In reckoning with these myths, the paper seeks to propose a critical framework to both acknowledge the intentional trauma and harm caused by the family policing system, and to disrupt and dismantle the fictions that are the underpinnings of the laws and regulations that continue to perpetuate these harms. Ultimately, this paper argues that by centering the lived expertise of families' voices and perspectives in legal advocacy, we can form a cogent vision for true safety for families and communities.