{"id":421,"date":"2026-05-04T10:37:08","date_gmt":"2026-05-04T10:37:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/?p=421"},"modified":"2026-05-04T10:37:08","modified_gmt":"2026-05-04T10:37:08","slug":"child-protective-services-and-the-disparate-impact-on-black-communities","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/2026\/05\/child-protective-services-and-the-disparate-impact-on-black-communities\/","title":{"rendered":"Child Protective Services and the Disparate Impact on Black Communities"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
  1. Introduction<\/strong>\u00a0<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    There are more than 115,000 investigated reports<\/a> of child abuse or neglect in North Carolina annually. Over 33 percent<\/a> of child abuse victims in North Carolina are Black children. In contrast, Black individuals make up only 22 percent<\/a> of the state\u2019s population.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    There is no question that the state has a duty to protect these children from abuse, but this process is easier said than done. The state\u2019s primary mechanism for protecting child victims is Child Protective Services (CPS), which is managed by the state\u2019s Department of Health and Human Services (NCDHHS). While CPS remains a crucial tool in the protection of children, North Carolina should seek to decrease the need for CPS through developing programs that help low-income parents before the abuse begins, specifically parents in the Black community. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    1. Current State of CPS and Termination of Parental Rights<\/strong> <\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

      The stated purpose of Child Protective Services (CPS) in North Carolina is \u201cto ensure safe, permanent, nurturing families for children by protecting them from abuse and neglect while attempting to preserve the family unit.\u201d CPS seeks to accomplish this goal through a variety of means such as in-home counseling and arranging other supportive services through community and agency resources. If necessary, CPS may petition the court for the child to be removed from the home, and in more extreme cases, CPS may seek to terminate parental rights (a TPR). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Termination of parental rights<\/a> is \u201cthe state\u2019s ultimate interference with the constitutionally protected parent-child relationship, severing all legal ties between the parent and the child.\u201d For a TPR to occur, a district court judge must determine that there is clear, cogent, and convincing evidence to support the finding that there is at least one statutory ground for termination, and that the TPR would be in the best interest of the child. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      The statutory grounds for a TPR are codified in N.C.G.S. \u00a77B-1111<\/a>. These grounds include, but are not limited to, situations in which a parent has \u201cabused or neglected\u201d the child, has \u201cwillfully abandoned\u201d the child for at least six months, has been deemed \u201cincapable of providing for the proper care and supervision\u201d of the child, or has \u201cwillfully left the juvenile in foster care or placement outside the home for more than twelve months without [\u2026] reasonable progress [\u2026] in correcting the conditions which led to the removal of the juvenile.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

      1. Impact on Black Communities <\/strong> <\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

        When looking across the United States, CPS is substantially more likely<\/a> to affect Black families than their White counterparts. This difference is not due to one race being more abusive than the other, or more instances of abuse<\/a>. Studies<\/a> have shown that low income is a key predictor of CPS contact for White families, but the same is not true for those in the Black community. Poverty itself was not a key predictor of CPS contact for Black families; rather, the \u201cconsequences of poverty\u201d such as depression and health issues were significant predictors.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Disparities in CPS contact can be partially attributed to racialized poverty. Racialized poverty is defined as \u201cthe institutional policies and practices that have historically and continue today to harm Black families\u2019 economic wellbeing due to their racialized group membership.\u201d These policies and practices include housing policies (redlining and racially restrictive covenants), public assistance program requirements, tax privileges given to two-parent families, and the employment barriers that occur following mass incarceration.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

        This racialized poverty does not merely lead to CPS intervention but makes the termination of parental rights far more likely. Black children are 2.4 times more likely<\/a> than white children to have their parents\u2019 rights be terminated.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

        1. Next Steps and Conclusion<\/strong> <\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

          Determining the next steps is not an easy task.  The focus should be on what is best for the children, but it is not always clear what that looks like. While CPS is a heavily flawed system, completely dismantling CPS would only endanger more children by preventing CPS from fulfilling their stated mission. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

          However, justice clearly requires that the current system evolve. One way to make the system more equitable is to focus on preventing child abuse<\/a>, instead of merely intervening once a child has been harmed. While CPS should continue to play the crucial role of working with families once abuse has been reported, states should recognize that CPS is only one pillar in a larger scheme to support Black communities in the fight against racialized poverty.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Public resources such as cash assistance, affordable housing, tax credits, and subsidized childcare have been proven to reduce the need for CPS involvement. Similarly, supporting programs that combat the effects of poverty, such as substance abuse and mental health problems, can minimize the need for CPS and the termination of parental rights.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

          By pouring into Black communities and focusing on these programs, the need for CPS in North Carolina will hopefully diminish, and fewer parents will have their rights terminated.\u00a0Casey Family Programs<\/a>\u00a0describes the urgency of the current racial disparities, \u201cThe seeds of systemic racism will try to change the conversation to a focus on law and order and cause many across America to once again forget that what we are witnessing is the collective cry for equal justice and equal protection under the law for all people in America.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          <\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Katie\u00a0Schoulda\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Class of 2027, Staff Member<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

          Introduction\u00a0 There are more than 115,000 investigated reports of child abuse or neglect in North Carolina annually. Over 33 percent of child abuse victims in North Carolina are Black children. In contrast, Black individuals make up only 22 percent of the state\u2019s population.   There is no question that the state has a duty to protect these children from abuse, but this …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[9],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/421"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=421"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/421\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":422,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/421\/revisions\/422"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=421"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=421"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/nccivilrightslaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=421"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}