The Most Dangerous Scenario for NYC Foster Kids: Visiting Their Birth Parents

From 2020 to 2023, New York City recorded 2,154 incidents of verified abuse and/or neglect involving foster children.

When New Yorkers come across this figure — sourced from a recent audit by the City Comptroller of the Administration for Children’s Services — they might be taken aback.

This statistic may reinforce their previous beliefs about the dire state of foster care, that those who work in the system are primarily motivated by financial gain, and that foster care can be more damaging than the situations children faced at home.

However, concerned individuals may want to delve deeper.

It turns out that over three-quarters of these cases were committed by someone from the child’s biological family during “visits” back to their homes.

Comptroller Brad Lander mentioned to NY1 that “the primary responsibility of government is to ensure the safety of our children.”

Regrettably, it appears that the leadership at ACS and the family courts in New York City have forgotten this principle.

Instances of foster children suffering harm during family visits are not new.

A 2018 report from New York City’s Department of Investigation revealed that most maltreatment cases involving foster children occurred while they were visiting their biological parents.

In 2017, only 19% of maltreatment instances were attributed to foster parents.

It remains unclear whether these incidents occurred during supervised or unsupervised visits, or if they were mandated by the courts or arranged through caseworkers.

The recent audit emphasizes, “Gathering and tracking such data would aid ACS in evaluating the agency’s efforts to decrease these incidents.” Indeed.

If these visits are supervised, it glaringly suggests a lack of effective oversight. Last year, a foster couple in Portland, Ore., shared that the child they were caring for was exposed to fentanyl during a supervised visit when the father brought the substance in his bag.

This raises serious questions about the depth of his addiction and the neglect faced by these children. Signs at the entrances of visitation centers in New York explicitly prohibit knives, drugs, alcohol, and firearms.

And as evidenced by the Portland case, there is a substantial reason for these stringent measures, according to caseworkers.

If the incidents reported in the Comptroller’s audit involve unsupervised visits, it indicates that caseworkers and courts may be relying on the assumption that parents have achieved rehab — which may not be the reality.

This issue is unfortunately common.

In the pursuit of reuniting children with their parents, agency personnel and judges frequently miss key warning signs.

Last year, Ella Vitalis tragically died from cardiac arrest following a reunion facilitated by Family Court Judge Erik Pitchal with her abusive parents.

At only 3 weeks old, she endured a brain hemorrhage, a fractured skull, and two broken ankles. Although ACS had removed her from her home, visitations with her parents were still allowed.

The outcome was dire: Ella suffered a lacerated tongue when her father was left alone with her during a visitation.

Still, Judge Pitchal returned her to her parents shortly after.

As a former Legal Aid lawyer, Pitchal argued for what children wanted: “Children wished for their parents to receive help and support to improve their parenting, but they did not want to be separated from their families.” At less than a month old, how could Ella possibly convey this desire to Pitchal?

While some children may yearn to return to their parents, many do not.

However, it is the responsibility of ACS and family courts to guarantee that reunifications happen only when it is genuinely safe.

Given that a significant number of these cases involve substance abuse or mental health issues among the parents, it’s not surprising that rehabilitation for these families may be neither quick nor easy.

Despite the advocacy for the “abolition” of child welfare systems or suggestions that neglectful and abusive parents merely need financial support instead of intervention from child protective services, it’s crucial to acknowledge that some parents struggle to control their destructive behaviors even during the span of a visit.

Perhaps the decision to place their children into foster care was, indeed, the correct one all along.