Published in Children’s Voice, Volume 33, Number 2

 

by Paul DiLorenzo 

Among the most compelling individuals I’ve met in my career was the child advocate Andrew Vachss, who died in 2021. Andrew was a celebrated author of fiction and nonfiction, a New York attorney who represented survivors of child maltreatment and exploitation, and a speaker who would energize an entire room with his stories. Small in stature, he wore an eye patch—the result of a childhood injury from an older boy—and was pugnacious enough to remind you that keeping your distance was wise. His writing often brought his readers into the darkest realms of human behavior.

I met Andrew when I was leading a Philadelphia agency that provides legal and social services to kids in the family court system. I heard him interviewed on a national radio show, then reached out to him with an invitation to speak about his latest novel and his courtroom work. He came to Philadelphia twice; I had several phone conversations with him over the next few years. Though we lost contact, his influence on my thinking has endured—especially when I am called on for an opinion related to a child maltreatment fatality. Andrew’s observations were unadorned in an August 2004 essay (Vachss, 2004), originally published in Parade, titled “What Are You Going to Do About Child Abuse?” His words were prescient—and, in the lead-up to the 2004 presidential election, were intended to catch the attention of those seeking elected office and those who elect them. He wanted us to be as outraged as he was regarding the dangers facing kids. In that essay, he wrote:

“…Recently, my friend asked me, ‘Is child abuse increasing or decreasing? Everything I read seems to have a different message. What’s the truth?’ I told my friend he was asking the wrong question. What he should be asking is, ‘Who cares?’ Does that seem harsh or unfair? After all, aren’t children ‘our No. 1 priority?’ Aren’t they ‘our greatest natural resource?’ Don’t all Americans agree that child protection is our most important obligation—not just as citizens in a democratic society but as human beings? The answer to those questions cannot be found in studies or statistics. The essence of a culture is in its performance, not its proclamations… Soon, the Presidential candidates will meet to debate. But we know from… experience that child protection will not be on the agenda. All we ask of the candidates is a declaration that they ‘love children’ and ‘support the American family.’ The candidates tacitly agree to a mutual nonaggression pact, never challenging their opponent’s pro forma platitudes. So, the question, ‘What are you going to do about child abuse’ never gets asked, much less answered…Politicians get away with this because the public demands nothing more.”

In a recent expert witness case, I read through the files of a deceased two-year-old child whose body was crushed by her parent after she was beaten and harshly disciplined. While I was reading the records, the television in my office was reporting on the upcoming presidential election. I immediately thought of Andrew and what he would be saying.

The Wrong Starting Point
Every year, the number of child fatalities in the United States rises. Very few presidential candidates are sufficiently addressing this or the factors that can lead to these deaths: chronic neglect, caregiver substance misuse, untreated mental health issues, poverty, and the social isolation and marginalizing faced by many families. If we believe that children and families are a priority, we must understand the complex and nuanced issues related to the stress, anxiety, and desperation that many parents live through every day—and then speak in clear terms about supporting families.

Starting at the point of child fatalities is not strengths-based, nor does it play into the one-dimensional narrative that our system is hyper-intrusive and that family issues can be resolved through economic support alone. I’m thinking about my most recent case review, in which the family already was known to the system. A postmortem medical exam of the toddler mentioned old injuries and a previously reported punch to the side of the child’s head. Fatalities are the tip of the social, economic, emotional and generational iceberg that led to this one fatality—and the other 1,990 reported in 2022 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2024).

After decades of discussion, we still don’t have a coherent method of understanding fatalities of kids known to our system. There is dissonance between the pressures facing families and our antiquated practices. We’re now debating how many fatalities occur for families receiving an alternative response. We’ve evolved enough to have community pathways for families on a larger scale, but our grasp of what that means over the long term is still loose. The child death and near-fatality cases in our system require a smarter balance of facts, feelings, and faith. Fewer platitudes, more practicality.

We need to set an aspirational goal of zero child fatalities. That takes political will and commitment—and a means to reach an audience beyond our child welfare bubble.

Andrew Vachss wrote in 2004, “…the hard, cold truth is that the protection of children has never been a political priority. We all rage about special interest groups influencing government, but when it comes to child protection, it has yet to occur to us to become one.” Twenty years later, and on the cusp of another presidential election, kids and families are still waiting for us to get our act together.

Paul DiLorenzo is a CWLA Senior Fellow.

 

References

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2024). Child maltreatment 2022. Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children’s Bureau. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ cb/cm2022.pdf

Vachss, A. (2004, August 22). What are you going to do about child abuse? Parade. http://www.vachss.com/av_dispatches/parade_ 082204.html