Spring 2001

Darrin, age 4, and Corrinne, age 3, attend a child care center while their mother, Shawna, age 22, works at a dry cleaning business. One afternoon the teacher in the center noticed bruises on Darrin’s buttocks. She reported this to the center’s social worker, Lisa. Lisa contacted the hotline of the Missouri Division of Family Services (DFS), the CPS agency. This call was the fifth report to DFS on this family; the fourth was just a few months ago concerning unsanitary conditions and continual violence in the home. The father of these children, Doug, age 25, has a history of gang involvement, incarceration, and domestic violence. Doug and Shawna were evicted from their apartment due to frequent calls to the police about their constant fighting. When Shawna separated from Doug and moved to public housing, the case was closed. But Shawna had fears that her children could be taken away from her. Based on the hotline information, DFS placed the case in the “family assessment” track. That evening Diane, the caseworker, met with Shawna and her children at their apartment to ensure that the children were safe and to offer them emergency services. Diane and Shawna discussed how Darrin became bruised. Shawna readily admitted “whipping” him for misbehaving and showed Diane his bruises. Shawna openly discussed with Diane her difficult living conditions and problems including the lack of money, transportation, and support from relatives who were no longer willing to help her. During their discussion, Doug arrived. He was defensive and refused to answer questions. He was tired of the “police” telling him what to do and wanted people out of his personal business. He stormed out of the apartment. Diane offered Shawna and her children emergency shelter and family preservation services to avoid outof-home placement for the children. Shawna accepted. She also agreed to meet the next day at the nearby Family Resource Center. After this first meeting Diane became convinced that the case belonged in the family assessment track. There was no immediate threat to the safety of the children nor any criminal violation, and Shawna showed a cooperative attitude by accepting services that would stabilize the family. Before the dual-track approach was instituted, Shawna would have been Meeting Each Family’s Needs