The Devastating Consequences of Confusing Poverty with Neglect in Child Welfare Cases

Kimberly Blaney*

The child welfare system—tasked with ensuring the safety and well-being of children—frequently faces complex cases that require discerning judgment.¹ However, one persistent and devastating issue within this system is the conflation of poverty with neglect.² Mistaking economic hardship for parental failure can lead to unnecessary family separations, long-term trauma for children, and systemic inefficiencies that perpetuate injustice. To address this, we must reevaluate the definitions of neglect and recognize the socio-economic realities that many families face.³

It is important to understand the distinction between poverty and neglect.⁴ Neglect is commonly defined as the failure of a caregiver to provide for a child’s basic needs, including food, shelter, clothing, education, and medical care.⁵ While on the surface, this definition seems clear, it becomes murky in practice when poverty—a lack of financial resources—is mistaken for willful disregard of parental duties.⁶ Families experiencing poverty often struggle to meet basic needs not out of neglect but due to systemic barriers, such as inadequate wages, lack of affordable housing, and insufficient access to healthcare and childcare.⁷

According to a report from the Children’s Bureau Express, poverty is the single greatest predictor of child welfare involvement.⁸ Rather than providing support to alleviate financial strain, the system frequently penalizes parents by categorizing their inability to provide as neglect. Additionally, this mischaracterization disproportionately affects marginalized communities, exacerbating existing inequities.⁹

I. The ramifications of confusing poverty with neglect are severe and far-reaching:

1. Unnecessary Family Separations: Many children are removed from their homes not because they are unsafe but because their families lack resources.¹⁰ Such removals can cause emotional and psychological harm to children, disrupt familial bonds, and undermine parental confidence.
2. Intergenerational Trauma: The trauma of family separation often has lasting effects on children, including difficulty forming relationships, mental health challenges, and academic struggles.¹¹ For parents, the removal of a child can lead to profound grief and a sense of helplessness, perpetuating cycles of poverty and instability.¹²
3. Resource Misallocation: By focusing on poverty-related cases, child welfare agencies divert resources away from truly abusive situations.¹³ This not only wastes taxpayer dollars but also leaves at-risk children vulnerable to not getting the attention they require.
4. Racial Disparities: Indigenous people and families of color (specifically Black families) are disproportionately represented in the child welfare system. Socioeconomic factors—compounded by systemic racism—result in higher rates of poverty among these communities, leading to increased scrutiny and intervention by child protective services.¹⁴

II. Addressing the conflation of poverty with neglect requires a paradigm shift in how child welfare systems operate.¹⁵ Key strategies include:

1. Redefining Neglect: Policymakers should refine legal definitions of neglect to explicitly differentiate between conditions caused by poverty and those resulting from intentional harm.¹⁶ This clarity can reduce unwarranted interventions and foster a more equitable system.¹⁷
2. Investing in Preventative Services: Providing families with access to affordable housing, childcare, healthcare, and financial assistance can prevent many cases from entering the child welfare system. Initiatives like family resource centers and community-based support programs can strengthen families and reduce systemic involvement.¹⁸
3. Training for Child Welfare Professionals: Social workers, judges, and other professionals need comprehensive training to recognize the signs of poverty versus neglect.¹⁹ This training should include implicit bias education to address the racial and socioeconomic disparities within the system.
4. Policy Advocacy and Community Engagement: Communication with the general public and collaboration with affected families can lead to policy reforms that center on equity and prioritize keeping families together.²⁰ For example, the Bipartisan Policy Center has highlighted the importance of creating child welfare policies informed by lived experiences and cross-sector input.²¹
5. Data-Driven Accountability: Collecting and analyzing data on family separations, including the reasons for removal, can illuminate patterns of systemic bias and help drive targeted reforms.²² Transparency and accountability within child welfare agencies are crucial to fostering trust and improving outcomes.²³

The confusion between poverty and neglect is not just a policy issue; it is a moral one.²⁴ Every child deserves the opportunity to thrive, and every family deserves to be treated with dignity. By shifting our approach from punitive to supportive, we can build a child welfare system that truly serves its purpose: protecting children while empowering families.²⁵

This transformation requires collective action from policymakers, practitioners, and communities. There is an opportunity here to create a society where economic hardship is met with compassion instead of condemnation. Focusing on nurturing children within the loving care of their families, rather than separating them due to circumstances beyond their control, could be the transformative shift our society needs to improve the child welfare system.

---

* Kimberly Blaney, J.D. Candidate at the University of St. Thomas School of Law Class of 2026 (Associate Editor).

1. See generally Hope Cooper & Tiffany Allen, Child Welfare Systems’ Challenges: Differentiating Between Poverty and Neglect, Bipartisan Pol’y Ctr. (Oct. 8, 2024), https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/child-welfare-systems-challenges-differentiating-between-poverty-and-neglect/. ↩︎
2. See Jerry Milner & David Kelly, It’s Time to Stop Confusing Poverty With Neglect, The Imprint (Jan. 17, 2020, 5:12 AM), https://imprintnews.org/child-welfare-2/time-for-child-welfare-system-to-stop-confusing-poverty-with-neglect/40222 [https://perma.cc/2CV8-TZAB]. ↩︎
3. Id. ↩︎
4. See Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
5. See Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
6. Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
7. Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
8. See Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
9. Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
10. See Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
11. Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
12. Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
13. Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
14. Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. See also Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
15. See Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
16. Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
17. Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
18. Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. See also Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
19. See, e.g., Cooper & Allen, supra note 1; Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
20. See Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
21. See Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
22. Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
23. Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎
24. See Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. ↩︎
25. Milner & Kelly, supra note 2. See also Cooper & Allen, supra note 1. ↩︎