Clark County needs to insure foster parents

This action violates federal law, and any disruptions in placements will cause serious harm to foster children.

Within the past two weeks, Clark County DFS mailed a two-paragraph memo to all foster parents notifying them that as of midnight Dec. 7, the liability and property insurance that the agency provides to them will be cancelled. Most foster parents did not receive this notice until Monday — less than a week before the cancellation date. Under Nevada law, cancellation or non-renewals of insurance polices require 30 to 60 days notice depending upon the nature of the policy. The agency has not explained why it waited so late to notify foster parents.

As a result of this impending loss of insurance, several foster parents are considering having their foster children removed from their homes. While these foster parents have made many sacrifices to care for foster children, they cannot take the risk of losing their homes and life savings.

Insurance coverage for foster parents in Clark County has never been more critical than it is now. Recently, a law firm in the county has been advertising for clients — e.g. natural parents of children in foster care — to sue for alleged injuries their children suffered while in foster care.

One foster parent in Clark County has a sibling group of four children in her home. Every one of the children has multiple health problems. They are on different medications and in ongoing treatment. Some of the children have behavioral problems and at least one child has been responsible for injuring another child outside the home.

With such special-needs children, this foster parent is rightfully concerned about her liability. Even though she has an impeccable record of caring for foster children, she knows that anyone can sue and she cannot afford the cost of defending such a lawsuit. These children have thrived in her home. Their re-placement will more than likely result in regression and tremendous loss of the progress they have made while in her home.

There has long been concern about overcrowding and other deficiencies at Child Haven, the Clark County shelter for victims of abuse and neglect. As children are returned to the agency by foster parents who cannot take the risk of having no insurance, they will overwhelm the system’s capacity to find alternative foster home placements. The population of Child Haven, which has diminished significantly, will once again increase and exceed its capacity. Most likely, the children placed at Child Haven will be those children and youth with multiple special needs. Since the population now remaining at Child Haven is particularly demanding, the health and safety risks to all children will be exacerbated.

Under federal statute, liability insurance with respect to a foster child in the home must be provided to foster parents. The policy of the federal Children’s Bureau outlines the extent of the coverage that must be available:

— Coverage of damages to the home or property of the foster parents, as well as liability for harm done by the child to another party.

— Protection against suit for possible malpractice or situations such as alienation of affection are often realistic concerns of persons who care for the children of others.

Until and unless the agency (1) increases the monthly rate to include a reasonable amount for insurance — one that permits foster parents to obtain coverage similar to what is currently provided under the agency’s policy — and (2) gives the foster parents ample time to secure the coverage, the agency’s failure to provide insurance violates federal law.

This is just the latest example of the management style of DFS Director Tom Morton. He makes decisions that have potentially significant impact on children and foster parents with little or no notice or consultation. This is the same approach he took when he suspended operation of the Children’s Advocacy Center, with no notice to the police or community. Although Mr. Morton professes a commitment to increasing support for foster parents and giving them a voice in the matters affecting them and their care of children, his actions say otherwise.

Bill Grimm is a senior attorney with the National Center for Youth Law in Oakland. He is currently involved in a lawsuit against Clark County.