Amber's Case Study

* Baby social worker visited. Plan is to initiate care proceedings ASAP reasons; history of substance misuse, concealed pregnancy, poor engagement with treatment and services

This amicus brief reflects the balance between psychology and law by applying them both to decide which is the best option for child placement. The law states that the child should be place with a relative when possible. However, the attorneys are also reaching out to see what effect this could have on the child psychologically. They are using them together to decide what location would be the best for Arnes. The law does state that they should place with a relative when available, while also referring to the fact that a preexisting attachment to a family could also be the same. They refer to what type of damage could occur, if it is short term or would cause long term complications. The law itself is written to allow for interpretation

A report was received on 06/05/2017 alleging that the mother (Hermionne) left Ashante (C-V 17) with a non-relative since 02/2017 without any legal rights. According to the report, the mother refuses to take her child back home and will not engage with Ms. Aarons (caretaker) to provide legal documentation for the child to be enroll in school and taken to a Primary Care Physician. Ashante has not been is school for the past 4 months and are unable to enroll in school without paperwork. According to the report, Ashante self mutilates her arms, and the mother refuses to get counseling. The report indicates Ashante was to follow-up with a Cardiologist for a chest pain and the mother refuses to take her to the doctor.

Furthermore, further support would be provided by means of referral to appropriate service and following up Emma's case regulary to ensure and evaluate that adequate care is being received within the context of the family centred approach. The following subheadings will provide a description of care that may be to provided including referrals, to address those issues cited above (London et al 2011 and Crisp J, 2004).

The client Suzanne is a seven year old girl placed in a treatment center for emotionally disturbed children. This center helps children ages six through twelve years old. Suzanne has been diagnosed with an attachment disorder and has been placed in a group home for two years. There are two types of attachment disorders, attachment and reactive attachment (Smith, 2014). She has been meeting with a facility caseworker weekly for the last eight months. Her three year old sister, Cindy, is also placed in the facility with her. Parental rights are currently being processed to be terminated. The caseworker is looking into alternative long-term placement for the sisters. Each sister has a

whether the child is of sufficient age to independently consent to treatment. 2. How the release of information may impact the therapeutic treatment relationship. 3. Whether there are active concerns about abuse or neglect by the parent requesting the information. 4. Whether the child’s treatment was provided in individual sessions or conjointly with the custodial parent; and the purpose of the request. In the state of Florida, in most cases the non-custodial parent has the same right to visitation and shred custody as the custodial parent. The non-custodial parent has access to all the same information and documents pertaining to the child’s welfare. This happens unless the courts say otherwise. The ethical issues addressed in this case are the fathers trust that the medical records would not be released. The worker would be going against the fathers wish, but if they didn’t give the mother access to the records, they would be denying a worried mother the right to know about her child. Either way the worker could feel somewhat guilty (NASW,2006).

Accounts of neighbors, bystanders or the child themselves need to be considered, and in some cases, more heavily than a visit by the caseworker. Emotions can be staged, it’s easy to lie, and a bystander could a valuable witness- they offer an objective evaluation- clearly impossible while following the family preservation model, and a family member may see the family more often than the caseworker, and therefore have a better evaluation of the situation. An important aspect is objectivity. Yes, the caseworker is going to become attached, but the main operation is to understand the situation, establish if abuse or neglect is occurring and find the best solution for the child. The family preservation model is not ineffective, but it produces an obligation for caseworkers to operate in the interest of the whole family, which can overlook certain problems for the betterment of the whole. As much as the model needs clear and precise guidelines and procedures, it restricts the ability to operate in a variety of situations. For me the problem resides in the contradictory job of being a mediator and enforcer. One would think that being a mediator helps to understanding how to effectively enforce, but the overlap produces inconsistencies, as you can never equally fulfill both roles. The caseworker is asked to too much at once, abuse is abstractly developed and enforced and sometimes rooted in more than

EREPORT # 19021 stated the following: The incident happened last night, 2/8/2016. Destiny's mother has "taken off" as evidenced by empty drawers and closets. Destiny stayed home alone all night by herself. The concern is that Destiny is not supposed to be alone with her dad, per DHS. Dad never came home last night, but the concern is 1) dad comes home and she is alone with him or 2) dad doesn't come home and she is alone again by herself all night. I found out abou the situation because the teacher told me. estiny disclosed to her teacher about being home alone, mother "taken off" and that dad may come home and she has to be alone with him. During the Summer of 2014, father sexually abused her. The prior abuse/neglect was reproted but I do

At 0824 this clinician met with the patient who reports her weekend was not unpleasant. She reports she is continuing to have problems locating housing. She reports her family members continue to refuse to allow her to live with them specifically her father and her uncle. She reports she has one friend who is considering allotting her the capability to reside with her under the condition that she speak with her Child Protective Services (CPS) caseworker first. She reports she does not want to reside in a homeless shelter with her son as she has done this before and the experience was not up to her standards.

On this date, Matthew Mitchell APS supervisor conducted a meeting on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Beaird well-being. In the meeting, Mr. Mitchell presented Mr. Joey Beaird and Mrs. Julie Johnson with solutions that would allow Mr. Gail Beaird to return home. However, both Mr. Joey Beaird and Mrs. Johnson declined to take care of their parent independently. Each stated their home was not handicap assessable and they had jobs and could not dedicate that much time to their parents care. The other option discussed was hiring another service besides Visiting Angels since they are refusing to continue services if Mr. Beaird returns home. However, this is the only service offered in Jasper. When the discussion of Mrs. Johnson and Mr. Beaird hiring sitter independently they stated they had tried this before and it never worked out.

In the case we are asked to look at with the two little girls, the office was alerted due to neglect and issues of locking the children away in order to not have contact with them and avoid physical discipline. Again having a large amount of experience with this personally I can speak on several different instances in which the agency needs to be involved. My middle son, again who is not my biological child, has 4, soon to be 6 other half siblings by his biological mother. None of which she has custody of. They have all been removed by CPS. In her case it was for the use of narcotics, in and around the children as well as during pregnancy with 4 of the 6 children she has. She is currently pregnant with number 5 and 6 of her living children though technically they are 9 and 10. She has previously had two singleton abortions and an abortion of a set of twin girls. She has had 4 other boys removed now, ages 5, 3, and a set of twin boys who are 18 months. CPS has already stated that the children she is pregnant with now will be removed as well upon their birth. So in a case such as hers, she was given a year to prove to the courts that she wanted to work towards keeping her twins, they set up visitation for her at the cps office, as well as classes for her to attend, weekly drug screens, parenting classes, and set financial goals she had to meet.

Action: MHP and MHS discuss Donovan’s behaviors in the home and community. MHP and MHS review monthly paperwork that is needs to be submitted. MHS and MHP complete a walk-through of Donovan’s bedroom and play room. MHP and MHP discuss upcoming medical appointments. MHP email Ms. Greene at the MUSC Foster Care Support Clinic to assist MHS with verifying upcoming medical appointments. MHP and MHS discuss MHS contact with Donovan’s DSS worker.

An Amber Alert was issued in Tennessee for 15-year-old Mary Catherine Elizabeth Thomas of Columbia, Tennessee. The girl has not been seen since Monday, March 13, after being dropped off by a friend at Shoney’s in Columbia, Tennessee.

SSCM contacted Sandy Black via phone in reference to the response 24.0hr investigation received on-call. She was informed that SSCM had to come out and make a visit to the home. A home visit was scheduled and SSCM interviewed everyone in the home, and confirmed that everyone was safe in the home. SSCM addressed the allegations that were listed in the report. SSCMS did a walk through the home, and didn’t find any concerns regarding safety hazards in the home. SSCM discovered that the children are happy with their parents, and their basic needs are met based on the collateral contacts that were contacted throughout the investigation of the case.

Amber lives in her smoke free household in East Brookfield, Massachusetts. She resided with her boyfriend and she owns two large dogs, which are kept in the home. Amber has been diagnosed with Vigitlio Dr Harris and is currently being treated for this condition at University Medical Center in Worcester. Dr. Harris is the head of a team of Doctors a UMass Medical which is conducting a study on Amber’s condition. Amber does part take in this study.