Policing or Protecting? Exploring Workers Experiences of Joint Investigations with Black Families in Ontarios Child Protection System

Background and Purpose

Child protection services in Canada are governed by various federal and provincial legislations. Although there are some consistent child protection services across provinces, many statutes differ significantly. For instance, when a child protection agency receives a severe allegation of child maltreatment, which may also constitute a criminal offence against a child, the police must be notified, thus initiating a joint investigation. However, provincial policies which articulate the requirements of a joint investigation vary considerably. These inconsistencies in statutes are concerning, particularly for Black families, given their disproportionate encounters with the child welfare system and increased rates of criminalization when police are involved. Despite joint investigations offering an opportunity for interdisciplinary collaboration between workers and police, some research has indicated that for Black families, they are experienced as a mechanism of surveillance and control. Presently, there is a gap in Canadian literature exploring the experiences of child protection workers and how joint investigations shape their practice and decision-making for Black families. As such, this research study aims to fill this gap in knowledge by investigating the following research questions: 1) What are workers’ experiences conducting joint investigations with police for Black families?; and 2) How does this context shape their decision-making practices?

Methods

The data of this study was collected as part of the Mapping Disparities for Black Families Project (MDBF). MDBF is a research study aimed to better understand child protection workers’ experiences and decision-making processes for Black families navigating Ontario child welfare agencies. Using interpretative phenomenology analysis (IPA), the objective of this research is to map how anti-Black racism manifests across the child welfare continuum to address racial disparities for Black families. IPA engages the researcher in an analytical process where they attempt to gain an ‘insider perspective’ utilizing in-depth qualitative analysis. This study explored the experiences of child protection workers, agency leaders, lawyers, and equity, diversity, and inclusion specialists who participate in decision-making across the child welfare service continuum. This study analyzes fifty-nine in-depth semi-structured interviews and five focus groups comprised of 28 participants.

Results

Three main themes were identified: 1) The parallels and distinctions between child protection workers and police roles and responsibilities; 2) Concerns with police controlling child maltreatment joint investigations; and 3) The impacts of inconsistencies, biases, and discretionary decision-making by workers and police. Many workers were conscious of the mandated inconsistencies and how this created tensions between child protection and policing practices. Workers described that police would often control joint investigations rather than collaborate, exacerbating concerns of arbitrary and biased decision-making. Workers were also aware of how both institutions approached joint investigations forensically, which mirrored intrusive police activities for Black families and worsened their mistrust of both systems.

Conclusion and implications

This study highlights how the discrepancies in policy and practice informing joint investigations reproduce and exacerbate harm for Black families in Ontario’s child protection system. There is a need to reconsider how joint investigations can negatively impact marginalized communities. Recommendations for policy amendments and transformative shifts in practice are discussed.