Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12202/4666
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | MacIver, Andrea | - |
dc.contributor.author | Pollack, Daniel | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-09-11T20:18:49Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2019-09-11T20:18:49Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | MacIver, A.; Pollack, D. (2016). Ministerial versus discretionary acts or omissions in child welfare ligitgation. Capital University Law Review, 44(1), 103-126. | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0198-9693 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/capulr44&i=113 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12202/4666 | - |
dc.description | Peer-reviewed scholarly article | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Too often the child welfare system fails our children, especially foster children, leaving our most vulnerable population at risk of harm. Many children in the welfare system are injured or even killed because “[t]he system frequently fails to provide children with stable, secure care” and “fails to meet foster children’s basic medical, psychological, and emotional needs.” This system-wide failure is the result of several recurring problems, which are on the rise, including: inadequate investigation of prospective foster parents and their families, placing children in inappropriate homes, overcrowded foster homes, placing children with first-time foster parents who are inexperienced and become overwhelmed, and inadequate supervision of foster homes. These recurring problems have resulted in harm to those children under the care of the child welfare system, leading many of them to seek redress in the courts. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | Capital University Law School | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Capital University Law Review;44(1) | - |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/ | * |
dc.subject | ministerial acts | en_US |
dc.subject | discretionary acts | en_US |
dc.subject | child welfare litigation | en_US |
dc.subject | official immunity | en_US |
dc.subject | tort liability | en_US |
dc.subject | Walker v. Gilbert | en_US |
dc.subject | Williams v. Horton | en_US |
dc.subject | Mississippi Department of Human Services v. S.W. | en_US |
dc.subject | James ex rel. James v. Friend | en_US |
dc.subject | Georgia Department of Human Services. v. Spruill | en_US |
dc.subject | County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court | en_US |
dc.subject | Ortega v. Sacramento County Department of Health & Human Services | en_US |
dc.subject | AE v. County of Tulare | en_US |
dc.subject | Scott v. County of Los Angeles | en_US |
dc.subject | Brodie v. Summit County Children Services Board | en_US |
dc.subject | Political Subdivision Tort Liability Act (Act) | en_US |
dc.subject | §2744.02(A)(1) | en_US |
dc.subject | civil liability | en_US |
dc.title | Ministerial versus discretionary acts or omissions in child welfare litigation. | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.contributor.orcid | 0000-0001-7323-6928 | |
local.yu.facultypage | https://www.yu.edu/faculty/pages/pollack-daniel | |
Appears in Collections: | Wurzweiler School of Social Work: Faculty publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
art Ministerial v Discretionary Acts or Omissions in Child Welfare Litigation.pdf | 156.77 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License