Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Parents and advocates urge data, transparency and accountability in public comments to USCCR advisory committee
Loading...
Summary
During public comment, multiple parents and advocates described alleged wrongful removals, called for independent data review and algorithmic-bias audits, and urged stronger complaint processes and reunification priorities.
Public comment at the Aug. 7 briefing highlighted a pattern of personal accounts alleging wrongful removals and an absence of transparency in local child-welfare actions.
Etopia Lane, a “lived experienced family advocate,” asked the committee to review algorithmic bias in case‑tracking and recommended the committee “hire an AI consultant that is an expert in bias algorithms” to examine the new tracking tools referenced by DHHS. Lane also asked the committee to review recommendations from the New York Advisory Committee’s May 2024 report on mandatory reporting and algorithmic pattern recognition.
Multiple speakers gave case-level allegations. Jeter Anderson described his sister’s case and said staff “snatched our child” and that the family received no clear reasons for removal. Another commenter, Yvonne Pollard of New Hanover County, said her granddaughter was taken at “barely 3 months” and that social-worker turnover and inexperienced staff led to mistakes in decision making.
Advocates called for improved complaint procedures and more accessible data. Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, summarized data points he said he would provide in written testimony: he said that in 2022—he will provide sources—“83 percent [of children placed in North Carolina foster care] were placed there even though there was not even an allegation of either physical abuse or sexual abuse,” and that a high share of investigated cases do not involve abuse but still carry traumatic consequences.
DHHS staff responded in the briefing by offering to review constituent concerns through the department’s constituent-concern channels and pointing to regional staff who can intervene on case problems. Committee staff reminded commenters that written testimony will remain part of the public record and reiterated the Sept. 23 deadline.
The public‑comment period underscored the committee’s stated need for more numerical data and case‑level information to reconcile anecdotal accounts and systemwide metrics.
Next steps: the committee will accept written testimony through Sept. 23 and requested DHHS provide requested numerical detail on the decision-flowchart for CPS assessment and outcomes.
