The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) DENIES States Funding if they promote reunification of a child with a registered sex offender parent

1-16-2012 National:

First I must admit I do not know much about the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) (see also its manual), and if not for Maryland's Children’s Law Center testimony in their legislature which I learned of because it contains a reference to the Adam Walsh Act in it, which I always search for in the news, I would be oblivious of this denial to registered sex offenders, and do not know if it extends to those convicted of a sex crime who no longer have to register.

Rather than trying to explain here is the sentence in the testimony which caught my eye:

The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) is one of the federal laws governing funding for child welfare programs. In 2010, Congress amended CAPTA to include several additional eligibility requirements that states must meet in order to receive CAPTA funds. Bill 19-466, the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Amendment Act of 2011, addresses two of those additional eligibility requirements: the requirement to address the needs of infants with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders and the requirement not to require reunification of a child with a parent who must register in a sex offender registry under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2005. I commend the Child and Family Services Agency (CFSA) and the Council for acting in a timely manner to bring DC law in line with the new federal requirements.

It appears -as worded- that this is a 100% denial of CAPTA funding if a State supports reunification with a parent who is registered under the Adam Walsh Act.

With that said, and tongue-in-cheek here goes, if CAPTA means for a state to DENY reunification in every case, without court intervention, then I am against this provision. I am sure there are cases where reunification should not happen, but it seems the issue should be left to the discretion of the state with some form of court hearing.

We cannot forget the Adam Walsh Act is over-broad in many respects, and cares little about families of registrants, in fact, their is no mention or consideration of "the family" of registrants AT ALL within AWA! Why do we have COURTS? What is their PURPOSE? Does Congress want to destroy families of registrants? The effects of AWA is already doing that today!

Again, like in the Adam Walsh Act, we see Congress CONTROLLING state legislators, implying they are not able to make such decisions for children in their state. Accordingly, let this post be a wake-up call for folks who are involved in this CAPTA law, and look to have Congress allow states to make their own decisions.

For now have a great day and a better tomorrow.
eAdvocate