A Walking Contradiction, Partly Truth and Partly Fiction

Abstract

This article is a critique of David Stoesz' descriptions of organizational issues in child welfare, and more specifically, the relationships between the U.S. Children's Bureau and the National Child Welfare Workforce Institute. The focus is on Stoesz perspectives and assessments of sub-entities (cartels) that are currently influencing funding and programmatic efforts to prepare child welfare employees. The critiq ue also includes Stoesz' perspectives of current child welfare training efforts and issues related to child welfare as a profession. The review ends with a set of summary conclusions about the merit of the Stoesz article.

The Child Welfare Cartel, Redux

“…CAST provides certificates for students who have completed courses and simulation training involving mock residences and courtrooms. That Briar-Lawson et al (2016) as well as Ellett (2016) appear ignorant of CAST is symptomatic of the insularity of The Cartel. Briar-Lawson asks, for example, “what other professions are as aligned with the issues of abuse and neglect, poverty, mental health, addictions, domestic violence, disabilities, family-centered practice, and family capacity building?” echoed by Ellett, “To my knowledge, I am unaware that other disciplines are actively promoting and preparing students for employment in CW agencies or have completed studies demonstrating that their graduates perform better than social workers” (2016, p. 491).…”

“…“The reality is that even the most elegant RCTs are extremely difficult to implement in child welfare settings, often for logistical and ethical reasons” (Clark & Yegidis, 2016, p. 513). “Perhaps ideal, RCT studies in any discipline (including medicine) are rare and difficult to design and implement … the ethics of research and practice in the social sciences makes the design and implementation of RCT studies quite questionable, especially in cases of child abuse and neglect” (Ellett, 2016). Yet, the impossibility of RCTs in child welfare is a canard.…”

“…. the ethics of research and practice in the social sciences makes the design and implementation of RCT studies quite questionable, especially in cases of child abuse and neglect'' (Ellett, 2016). Yet, the impossibility of RCTs in child welfare is a canard.…”

“…Daniel Patrick Moynihan's quip, ''You are entitled to your opinions but you are not entitled to your own facts'' (Penny, 2003), is apropos of comments by Briar-Lawson et al (2016) as well as Clark and Yegidis (2016) and Ellett (2016) to ''The Child Welfare Cartel'' (Stoesz, 2016). Absent data about the efficacy of social work education as a sound basis for child welfare service, they resort to professional authority-opinions, however well credentialed-to justify exclusive federal funding to schools of social work through the National Child Welfare Workforce Institute (NCWWI).…”