Poverty Should Not Be A Driving Reason For Parents to Lose Custody of Their Children

Do you think the government's judgments are fair? Judges and social workers are often the main people taking care of custody cases. Judges are confusing poverty with neglect and that should not be a reason for having a parent lose custody of their children. Analyzed data shows that the lower class has more chances to lose their custody compared to any other social class, affecting children and parents' mental health in the long term. This issue conveys that poverty should not be a driving reason for parents to lose custody of their children.

To begin with, the issue focused on the lower class having more chances to lose their custody compared to any other social class is true. In the eyes of a judge, they expect that any social class other than the lower class will be better for the kid being removed from their parents. This response is an assumption made out of their lifestyle. The Parental Rights Amendment was established to protect every citizen with no discrimination of wealth, color, or age to parent as they feel like is best for the child. Unfortunately, this issue works differently in each state, Elizabeth explained, “They are governed by standards set at the federal level but operate independently in each state, and city-level jurisdictions set their own policies to manage reports of neglect or abuse” (Brico). Elizabeth Brico is the mother of two daughters who lost custody and lost them due to bad living conditions with her in-laws. In addition, an organization called Bronx Defenders, which defends low-income parents, said, “A parent in Park Slope, where I live, can deal with depression or anxiety privately. A parent in the South Bronx cannot… A parent in Park Slope can smoke marijuana or lose her temper and still be considered a good parent” (Ketteringham). This proves that parents of any social class other than the lower class are seen as good.

Long term effects of separation of parents and children can be significant. Developmental regression, difficulty sleeping, depression, and acute stress, are all impacts of separation seen in children. Professor Alan Shappiro is a clinical professor of Pediatrics at Albert Einstein College of Medicine and identified how children are affected by separation. He states, “The younger you are when you’re exposed to stress... the more likely you will have negative health outcomes caused by dysregulation of stress response.” (Goudarzi). Often, parents are discussed less, but they can also be affected by separation. Losing control, depression, and suicidal ideation are noticeable among adults who have lost custody of their children. “I heard mothers disclose suicidal ideation and feelings of loss of control. There were very deep levels of depression, and feeling that their children couldn’t depend on them.” (Goudarzi) It’s devastating how a mother can go through this and no policy has been made or altered.

Moreover, poverty should not be confused with neglect, meaning failing to care properly. For example not having the best house or simply having the presence of poverty does not mean the child is unloved or unsafe. *Some people may agree that just because a family is poor, they don’t have the responsibility to take care of their child. On the contrary, poverty can make things seem difficult for parents to please their children's needs, but there is no need of removing the child from the parents,

“We remain stuck as a system and society that focuses on the harmful aftereffects, often casting blame on vulnerable families for their very vulnerability. Rather than trying to prevent poverty, be and the many challenges associated with poverty, such as social isolation and lack of meaningful opportunities and support, we search for increasingly sophisticated evidence-based interventions to treat the trauma or “fix” the symptoms arising from a family’s inability to meet their children’s fundamental needs.” (Milner & Kelly) 

Milner & Kelly provided a real example that happened to a young couple who were in debt by attending classes, to earn an education to get better jobs. The couple was working in low-paying jobs while attending school, so the couple could not meet the needs of their children, “children were removed from their parents due to chronic homelessness or housing instability” (Milner & Kelly). Financial instability is fine, but because instability is present, it should not mean to investigate or assume that the kids are unhappy and they must be removed from their parents. Changes should be done to fix that mindset. 

The happiness of a family should not be dependent on the income level and be threatened with losing custody, which will affect the separated children and parents long term causing issues for themselves. Understanding that poverty is a risk factor for neglect, but poverty does not equal neglect and should not be a driving reason for parents to lose custody of their children would create a fair system.