
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, October 23, 1994                   TAG: 9411160034
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: D2   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

CHILD ABUSE

THE FIRE department has to respond to every alarm, though some of them are false. If it has to respond to too many false alarms, the trucks could well be out of the station when a fire does break out, delaying the response to a legitimate emergency.

Yet the department cannot quit responding on the chance a report might be false.

If this is what a governor's strike force committee is suggesting that the state's Child Protective Services do when one member grumbles that "all of this taxpayer funding is going into investigating" unfounded reports, the committee had better think harder.

It is not only admirable, it is essential that government at every level start measuring the outcomes of its programs to ensure they are as effective as possible at the lowest possible cost. In doing so, it is equally essential to be sure whatever measures are set up are providing the information needed to make good decisions on how the programs are to operate.

In the case of Child Protective Services, the committee developing reforms for the state Department of Health and Human Resources notes in its report that 72 percent of the cases in which abuse or neglect is reported prove to be unfounded. Could it be, wonders committee member Walter E. Barbee, that agencies are "bending over backward" to investigate any claim?

Let's hope so. Which would he have them ignore?

But let's take a closer look at the 72 percent of complaints that are unfounded. Sometimes, an agency supervisor responded, no abuse is found, but the family does need help that workers provide. This is a positive result that might fall into the area of prevention, a goal the strike force committee would like to emphasize. Intervention may well keep a bad situation from deteriorating into neglect or abuse. Other times, workers suspect abuse has occurred, but lack enough evidence to classify an allegation as "founded."

Perhaps there should be ways to record such results. This would not be a useless paper exercise done merely to improve the statistics. It would give a truer picture of how much time actually is spent investigating reports that are a pure waste of time. These are the complaints that must be targeted for reduction.

If they can be reduced without endangering an extremely vulnerable part of the population, it will not be by workers sitting at their desks making seat-of-the-pants decisions on what will or won't be investigated, or by the state mandating reduced responses. The number of false reports must be decreased.

Parents who think they are the targets of malice can take action against their accusers in court - but malice must exist. Reporting rules should not discourage people who suspect that something is wrong, and make an unfounded complaint in good faith. And anonymous reports cannot be ignored, either. Are children to suffer because those in a position to report their circumstances are afraid to do so?

So how does the state reduce the number of false reports? That would be a worthy task for the strike force to tackle - as long as members realize they should not hope to eliminate them all.

Sometimes, depending on the weather, steam that is released from buildings is visible and looks like smoke. Passersby unaware of the nature of the billowing clouds sometimes call 911 and report a fire. The trucks roll. There is no fire. Was the fire department's response a waste of tax dollars? No.

by CNB