Riverwork vs. Bridgework

Patricia,

Yes, my comments do come from my 20 years working in social services and the past ten working directly with incarcerated parents. Don't get me wrong. I see flaws in the system and have heard stories that have broken my heart many times and could see the unfairness from the parent's view.  I think it is very sad if Wisconsin child protection system does not provide clear reunification plans in cases where children are removed. That has not been my experience in MN. I have watched parents become overwhelmed navigating the plans and feeling they are unfair. I spend a lot of time with parents using the old "eating an elephant" analogy. One small bite at a time.

Again, my issue isn't with the view the system unfairly "criminalizes" the parents. It is the blanket statement that ALL those who work in those systems do not care about the parents. That is simply not true, and those people should be embraced as a part of the healing vs pointed out as the problem. We are stronger with all voices at the table; even those we disagree with.

Lori,

I appreciate your comments as I assume they are from your perspective and experience. I would hope that you will respect mine as they come from my perspective and experience over the last 10 years.  If you have the pleasure of working with those in the system who work with both parents and child equally, I am happy for you.  In Milwaukee that is the exception, not the rule.  Parents are told in manner or directly that they do not count.  The agencies tell them that they  are only interested " in the children".  However, if they are interested in the children, then they should make every effort to "help the families help the children".  The case that I spoke of which is now being investigated by the Office of Civil Rights is not the exception, it is all to often the normal behavior of those in the system.  I am very aware of the cause and impact of secondary trauma, but it should be dealt with by the system and not allowed to inflict trauma on families.

Patricia,

The very first sentence of your post forced me to step back and think before reacting. I absolutely disagree that "There is no interest in assisting those families/communities that are most at risk for ACES. "  Honestly, I believe that statements such as this set us back every time they are typed or spoken. I love the bridge work vs river work visual.  But why must we think focus and work has to be on one or the other? Or that one is a more noble cause than the other? Why can't bridge workers support river workers rather than trying to pull the other down?

Child protection is not an easy issue to deal with. The adults I work with who have come out of that system often have the highest ACE scores I have ever encountered.  Many agree that their parent's rights should have been terminated long before they were.  Others feel the termination made things worse. It is a complex issue full of human beings who are all trying their best to do what is best for the child involved. Now, their thought process may not align to yours, and it may not align with the moms, but to say that those involved in the process do not care is completely unfair, and again, divides all of these resources instead of binding us all together. 

Patricia:

Check out the work of this group I just learned about.  Rise. They address many of the things you wrote about. I'm so glad they exist. Have you heard of them?

Dear David:

I love your metaphor or bridge work vs. river work. As someone who has been wet in the river, I'm glad people do both. I agree that a lot less river work would be needed if more bridge work were done. I agree that some industries profit off the pain of others and that some medical models help practitioners more than the people being helped. 

Where I differ is in the role ACEs science can and does play. All of us, are in the process, of shaping the narrative right now (and over the last few decades). I think, in fact, that the reason the ACEs study and test didn't penetrate the mainstream more quickly, is in fact, because it is such a paradigm shift. I think it's because it does challenge many of the ways a lot of healing and recovery and helping professions and organizations operate. 

I started out doing social work, in college, working at a shelter for homeless families. I didn't share that my father was homeless and that i had more in common with the residents than the staff. Or so it seemed. Because, at that point, none of us, as staffers, were talking about our own experiences, our own ACEs. And I ended up very discouraged because it was a lot of middle class reform of the poor and working class. The idea that simply "modeling" parent child interactions would make a parent "absorb or notice better parenting." But there was no concept that the people on staff, "modeling" the behavior were being paid and sometimes didn't have kids. That's not a real-life model of real-life experience. Anyone who has vacationed with kids or visited relatives with kids, even if not homeless, knows NOT being in a home, while parenting, is a challenge for all. 

There was no explaining or sharing or even a lot of understanding about why parents weren't able to be present, attentive or more responsive (or who at least seemed that they weren't being so). There was little insight into the harm done by scrutinizing parents and watching and judging and not asking them what supports they needed, craved and wanted and instead others, while at work, deciding what they needed in their personal lives. 

How many of us, at any stage of life, enjoy anyone assessing our lives and giving advice about how it could all work better if we just modified this, that or the other thing without having a clue about our experience or context? Few of us welcome, enjoy or find this helpful. But for many people, it's forced and required and what happens in exchange for any kind of support or help.

Anyhow, I'm going off on a tangent. But all of this is to say, that I stepped away from social work which I came to feel had a lot of racism and classism that was actually hurting people more than helping. But the reason I came back, in the last few years, to advocacy is because now, with ACEs and with social media, our voices are much more central and we can shape the ways ACEs science is used and understood. We can be doing bridge work, so to speak, and it seems, at least in some places, our voices and experiences, our expertise, is welcome, sought out and considered. I know this isn't done enough yet and often in ways that can be patronizing vs. true partnering. But I actually think ACEs are a way to do bridge work. 

And we can also, arm ourselves and go into our own communities and grow a lot more compassion and solidarity for ourselves by directly referring to the same studies, info. and resources as are shared here. We don't know that mediated or translated for us by others and to me, that's incredibly hopeful and powerful. 

I do think there's a lot of reflection that needs to happen, about what has NOT worked in the past and how there are people who are hurt or feel betrayed because services have been harmful. Actually harmful. I'm not sure how much reckoning has happened there yet and I think it's why large groups are cautious and hesitant and weary of any reforms. There's a long history of horrible reforms or treatments or help that was less than helfpul. 

But to me, us being involved with ACEs keeps that from happening more and again. Just my two cents. I think ACEs sciences help lay a lot of bridge work and I know just for my own self, it has helped me find an alternative to thrashing in the water. And for that I'm so grateful. 

Thanks for bringing up this topic. I'm glad to hear the views and experiences of others. 

Cissy

Thanks for posting this, David. I don't agree that the ACE Study is being co-opted in the way you describe. There are SO many people, organizations and communities that are taking steps to integrate trauma-informed and resilience-building practices in schools, families, courts, etc. Here are examples of just a few:

https://acestoohigh.com/2012/0...-expulsions-drop-85/ -- This is one school among about a couple of hundred; and the number is growing. The work in schools prevents ACEs in the children that these kids will have. 

https://acestoohigh.com/2015/0...ve-health-of-babies/ -- This is one pediatric clinic; thousands of pediatricians are in the process or have already integrated ACEs science into their practice and their work is preventing ACES. 

https://acestoohigh.com/2015/0...-safe-babies-courts/ -- Many courts, including some family courts, are integrating practices based on ACEs science, and preventing parents passing on more of their ACEs to their children. 

We probably all want this knowledge to be integrated faster than it is, but it's happening at a pretty good clip!

It is great to hear someone else speak about this issue.  There is no interest in assisting those families/communities that are most at risk for ACES.  The narrative is to rescue the children and treat the parents/families like criminals. There is no thought to the increased trauma that children endure by being separted from their families in the first place.  There is a general agreement that that truma is ok because of the expected outcome.  However, where is the data on children who are returned after adoption because of a disconnect between the birth families on race, class or both.  Many of those who are patting themselves on the back for all the adoptions they facilitate have made a great deal of money along with it.  Many of these rescued children end up incarcerated and/or have children themselves who continue the cycle.  There is little to no resources targeted at helping to build capacity in those communities for primary prevention.  I am no bleeding heart who feels that foster care and/ or adoption serves no purpose.  I have seen children who should never go back to their homes, but I have also seen too many who do not get the support and resources needed for them to go home.  

I have filed an Office of Civil Rights complaint against the Wisconsin Bureau of Children and Families and Children's Hospital of Wisconsin for a mother who was not given the support she needed.  She kept telling me that the women who had her son did not really want him.  She felt it was done for others reasons since she had refused serveral times to agree to be an adoptive resource and asked to have the child removed.  What haunted me was the birth mother saying " she does care about my son".  Now we find out that the adoption did not take place because she has been charged with intentional child abuse.  My client who cannot talk about her son with out crying,  cannot find out anything about his current status and how he is because her rights were terminated.   I am so glad that the Office of Civil Rights has agreed to review this case.  This case is only one of many.  Its what I call ACEmania!!!  It has taken on a life of its own and too many people are feeling good about themselves as they do the work.  That should tell you that something is wrong.