Don’t give privatized Kansas foster care agencies a license to abuse kids | Opinion

The Kansas Legislature is considering House Bill 2521, which would add Child Placement Agencies — commonly referred to as foster care agencies — to the definition of a governmental entity under the Kansas Tort Claims Act.

This change would give placement agencies the same strong protections against lawsuits for their bad actions as the state receives, despite being private contractors that are entrusted with the care and supervision of vulnerable children in foster care.

Although the bill has already passed the Kansas House of Representatives, there was bipartisan opposition.

Foster care agencies are not public entities. They are private organizations operating under contract.

When children experience abuse, neglect, or systemic failures while in the custody of a foster care agency, their ability to seek redress through the courts is one of the few mechanisms available to ensure transparency and accountability.

By reclassifying foster care agencies as governmental entities, HB 2521 would make it harder for foster youth to seek justice.

Kansas’ child welfare system has a history of glaring concerns in performance and safety, that have led to trauma, harm, and tragedy among foster youth.

In one instance, a child was removed from the mother’s home and placed in the father’s custody by a foster care agency, despite strong objection from the mother out of fear that the father would abuse the child.

Unfortunately, that’s exactly what happened. The child was found dead at the father’s hands, less than a month after being placed with him.

In October 2008, a 9-year-old was placed with a foster family with a seven-year history of abuse and neglect. Despite continued reports of abuse against the new foster child, a full year passed before the child was removed from that home.

Another documented example of negligence by a foster care agency occurred when a child suffered a catastrophic traumatic brain injury in a foster home, that doctors considered “non-accidental.” Emergency medical services responders noted an older bruise on the child’s neck when responding to the call.

Limiting the legal liability of foster care agencies would disincentivize action that could fix the ongoing problems in the state’s foster care system.

Foster youth are moving on average every five months, with some living in offices until a new placement can be established.

In addition, a third of foster youth with mental health needs are not receiving appropriate care, partially due to placement instability.

And foster care agencies are doing such a poor job of managing the child welfare system that some kids are being sent to foster homes hours away from their families, making it even harder, if not impossible financially, for families to bring their kids home.

Extending governmental immunity to private foster care agencies sends the wrong message at a time when performance data demonstrate ongoing instability and safety challenges.

Rather than strengthening oversight and accountability, HB 2521 reduces incentives for corrective action and diminishes the rights of children who are failed by the system.

Foster youth should not bear the cost of insulating contractors from liability.

Kansas’ kids deserve safety, stability, and meaningful access to justice when they are harmed. They deserve the opportunity to seek unconstrained justice for any maltreatment they face while under the supervision of foster care agencies and their foster families.

HB 2521 moves in the opposite direction by narrowing avenues for accountability in a system that urgently needs stronger safeguards, not expanded immunity.

— Kelm Lear is the Policy and Legal Research Analyst and Nicki Rose is Legal Director of Kansas Appleseed, a statewide advocacy organization and party in the class action lawsuit M.B. v. Howard, seeking to force the state to establish benchmarks for correcting systemic failures in the foster care system.