- This topic has 4 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 1 day, 2 hours ago by
.
-
Posts
-
We’ve noticed a trend here of AMBER Alerts being requested for children that Department of Social Services have been trying to locate after a judge issues an order for removal from the home.
Our criteria is:
Child is abducted
Child is 17 or younger
Child is in danger of serious injury or deathHow are your states navigating this? It seems like it can be a gray area. What level of neglect determines serious risk? Often times, there are not warrants issued for abduction. Do your states require warrants?
Hi Morrissa,
We have a few things that deter those type of requests here in Montana. The first and I imagine you guys have it as well, as that AMBER Alert requests must come from law enforcement. They cannot come from CPS/DPHHS, they can’t come from prosecutors or judges. They must come from an investigating agency.
The second is that we’ve had some education of our CPS/DPHHS type folks on AMBER Alerts. We’ve met with our state’s Health & Human Services Centralized Intake and spoke with their personnel on the difference between a “status change” “mom had custody two weeks ago but no longer is allowed to have custody” versus the “kick the door in and take the child.” We remind DPHHS they must reiterate what is the imminent endangerment the child is facing where the believe the life of that child is at risk.
That usually helps, especially because they unfortunately deal with these situations on a regular basis. I usually ask them how often do they deal with this and reiterate that if we launched an alert for every custodial interference case, people would tune out very quickly. That has helped tremendously.
As far as documentation, I created reference cards for those social service personnel simplifying our criteria just to say “Child (under 18) has been abducted under life-threatening circumstances and enough information exists to request public assistance in searching for the child/suspect.” Unlike the reference cards we give to law enforcement, I did purposefully remove our contact information on those cards.
I also occasionally recommend our lesser alert (Missing Endangered Person Advisory) for situations like this where the abductions murky but they’ve got a relative credible threat to the child. More than “dad failed a drug test 45 days ago.”
Brian
We’ve had similar requests in Kansas for a child that cannot be located and is to be in the state’s custody. We adhere to a judge alone cannot determine or order that a child is in imminent danger and cannot direct the release of an AMBER Alert. Often times these requests do not fit the criteria for us as an abduction since the child was lawfully with the parents/guardians until a judge ruled otherwise. The child was not taken through threat, force, or coercion. We have had a child that was in state custody and the father took the child (while making comments towards the child’s safety) during a supervised visit that became an alert, but we have not alerted for Social Services attempting to locate a child that they are actively trying to gain state custody of.
We follow the DOJ criteria:
There’s been an abduction (Kings English definition, not statutory <- where some get hung up on)
Child is 17 years or younger
Imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury – must be an imminent threat
Enough information to release to the public that would aid with the recovery of the child and/or apprehension of the suspect.Hi Morrissa,
In Delaware, we use Gold Alerts for missing children when their situation doesn’t meet the requirements for an Amber Alert, but there’s still a serious concern for their safety. If a child under the Department of Social Services goes missing and meets the criteria, we issue a Gold Alert. Amber Alerts, on the other hand, are reserved strictly for cases of abduction. This distinction ensures that Amber Alerts retain their impact and urgency, preventing desensitization to their critical purpose. Here is a link to the criteria for Delaware Gold Alerts. “Missing Child” is listed under 8580- subsection 7. I hope this helps.
-India
Pennsylvania echoes all three of the responses listed so far. Related to criteria: we also adhere to DOJ criteria. Our requests must also come from Law Enforcement.
Echoing Montana, we train Child Service Workers as often as we can. Often times here, these issues are created by half measures taken by courts and child services. Finally, when the party(s) disobey, they want the AMBER. Criteria rules the day.
Finally, to Delaware’s point, we have a step down alert (Missing Endangered Person Advisory) that could cover circumstances related to the child being in danger but not due to an abduction.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.