Mandated Reporting and Early Childhood

 In this episode, Educational Resources Specialist, Charissa Darland, talks with Child Welfare Leader, Tawan Stokes, from the Department of Child Services. Together hey explore how mandated reporting can be approached with confidence, compassion, and a focus on supporting families. They discuss how early childhood professionals can make informed decisions while building trust and promoting the best outcomes for children and families. 

Transcript

0:04

Welcome to the Early Childhood On-The-Go podcast, where the Early Childhood Center team shares ideas and strategies for professionals and families. Dream big. Start early. A little bit about the background of this podcast series. I've been working in the early childhood field since around 2011. I've been a clinic-based worker as a child life specialist, been a home visitor through Early Head Start, service coordinator in early intervention, a supervisor, and now my role here at the Early Childhood Center, focusing on research to practice. And one thing that affects all of those and every early childhood program is mandated reporting. And I really wanted to shift our mindset from one that's maybe overly fearful. I mean, no one likes calling Child Protective Services. We're dealing with the lives of children and families and what will happen to my relationship with the family. All of those are very common and very valid concerns, but we want to shift from that mindset to how do we support families and each other across early childhood programs to get the best outcome for the families we serve and the families in our communities. So with that, I want to introduce my guest, Tuan Soaks. You are the regional director of Lake County Region. Is that correct? That area? I am of Lake County is one of the 20 counties that I am the regional director over. So I usually just define it as Northwest Indiana. You bring a really important perspective because you're right in the middle of this work every day, supporting families, making those tough decisions, helping people navigate how systems actually play out in real life. So thank you so much for being here for this conversation. Can you tell us a little bit about yourself before we jump in? Yes, thank you for having me today. My name is Tawan Stokes. I am the regional director. Over the 20 most northwest counties in the state of Indiana, I've been working in child welfare since 2002. I started out as a case manager myself, as an investigator that went out and assessed child abuse neglect allegations. And then I proceeded from there to work as a supervisor. From there, I was a division manager, which also encompassed at the time me being over foster care and licensing, along with our department that gains permanency for children once they have been involved in our care. And then I became the local office director in Lake County. And then I was promoted to regional manager in the St. Joe, Elkhart, Kosciuszko, and Marshall County area. And from there, I returned to Lake County as regional manager. And then I became a regional director after we realigned our regions this past 2025. And let's ground our listeners into the basics a little bit. When we say DCS, what do we mean? The Department of Child Services is the governmental entity that is charged with investigating allegations of abuse and neglect, attempting to work with families to rehabilitate them, and then finding overall permanency for children, which means that when that reunification is not something that we can be successful in, that we are looking to have a forever family for that child, either through guardianship, adoption, or some other alternative plan. Let's talk a little bit about the basics of the law itself, because you hear a lot of times sort of like unwritten rule of one in doubt report, which I understand where that comes from. It feels safe. It feels like you're doing your due diligence, and that's great. But we're also seeing is its mindset can lead people to act based on their own biases and discomfort instead of grounding decisions in legal definitions of abuse and neglect. And I see this in myself too. I gave a presentation, for instance, at the National Division for Early Childhood Conference last year on biases and mandated reporting which we'll discuss a little bit later but my goal was to get people to say that yes we all have biases myself included you know i gave an example a simple one of if you were with a mom and her son and the son were redoing something like i don't know pushing the parents buttons as kids do you know the mom were to say like oh you stop that right now don't make me beat you you know that's in my mind i would be like oh that's probably a figure of speech you know mom's trying to get her rowdy little boy to listen she's not actually gonna hurt him but then if a little girl were pushing her dad's buttons and if he were to stay stop right now don't make me beat you that might make me pause nothing's changed it could have been said in the same way yet I'll be more lenient to mom probably because I'm a mom myself or maybe I'm projecting you know society and like that dad should be catering to his little girl or with whatever reason um mom's comment I would probably assume I would not be overly worried but dads would probably stick with me and I might even go back to my supervisor and be like you know this didn't really sit well with me. So how would you describe mandated reporting and who is considered a mandated reporter in Indiana? Well, I thank you for that question. And some of the example scenarios that you've given, I would like to talk, and I know we'll get there eventually, about how biases do creep into that and how we can process those. As far as the law, The Department of Child Services will assess whenever a call is made and those allegations lead to a person believing that a child's physical or mental condition is seriously impaired or seriously endangered based on a result of that parent's either physical allegations of abuse or based on their neglect to provide the child with several things, which include food, clothing, shelter, medical care, education, and supervision. In the state of Indiana, one of the unique things that we have is that everyone in the state is a mandated reporter. So it doesn't just apply to those that are professionals. It applies to our neighbors, maybe our church members, our friends. anyone and everyone that is a resident of the state of Indiana is considered a mandated reporter when it comes to child abuse or neglect allegations. And walk us through what abuse might look like in clear-cut situations and maybe some of those gray areas that professionals sometimes struggle with. And normally we could even normally give like a 45 minute to an hour session just on talking about this topic. And several of me and my peers go into schools and hospitals to discuss what this does look like, as well as law enforcement or anyone that asks. So some of the things that can be looked at for child abuse is unexplained injuries to a child. These are not clear cut, even in that. I mean, a child may have a black eye. That black eye may be because a child reports to a teacher or to someone else that their parent hit them in the eye in the eye when they were upset with them. It could be that a child maybe ran into a doorknob while getting the use of corporal punishment. Or it could be that the child was on a soccer field and it had nothing to do with the parent. The distinguishing characteristics for us there, according to the laws that the child is under the age of 18 and the person that is being alleged to have committed this injury or caused this injury is acting in the role of a caregiver or a parent or a guardian. And that is the biggest difference for us, because if that injury was caused by a neighbor or stranger, that would be something that would be a police matter that the Department of Child Services would not get involved with. The only other area in which the department would become involved when that alleged person that committed that injury, which we call alleged perpetrators, is if there was sex abuse. the Department of Child Services does investigate or assess all allegations of sexual abuse against children, whether or not that person is a caregiver or not. So a few statistics to throw in there as well for our listeners, and this is from a 2017 study. Black children in the U.S. are reported to CPS at significantly higher rates than white children, even when controlling for poverty. In fact, half of all black children in the U.S. experienced a CPS investigation by the age of 18. So the actual number is 53% of Black children compared to only 28% of white children. So Black children are reported at almost double the rate. However, substantiation rates are lower for Black children than they are for white families. Children with public health insurance are also more frequently reported for maltreatment than and those with private insurance, and that's across all racial and ethnic groups, which suggests that families living in poverty are more heavily scrutinized regardless of actual risk. So what we're seeing here is a gap between what people perceive as abuse and the actual law. So when professionals hear statistics like the higher reporting rates for Black children or families on public insurance, what kinds of reflections do you hope that brings up in their work with families? Oh, that's a great question, Carissa. A lot of what we see is still that, like you just stated, about poverty correlating with allegations of abuse and neglect. Most any family that is in the midst of crisis or stress could be potentially at a point where there's crisis and there's limited resources or assistance, regardless of racial makeup or economic status. What we do see, though, is that there tends to be more services that are in areas where poverty is an issue. There may be more services through aftercare programs or more services through hospitals and community care, which tends to be more prevalent on being focused on child abuse or neglect. And so there's more opportunities of reporting is what I'm saying there. There is more opportunities for families that may be in crisis or are needing assistance to have those situations occur, as you've said, where based on someone else's perception that there might be abuse that is occurring and feel the need to call. I would also like to say with that is that when there are those situations that occur, one of the biggest things that we look at as Department of Child Services investigators is what the actual facts are. And I'll talk more about that later. But what it is that a person actually has seen or heard or that they are aware of within their own witnesses or things that have happened to which they are reporting to us. And so that substantiation rate does reduce because after going out and assessing oftentimes, and this is in general as well, that we don't find that there are actual allegations that as it relates to the law would cause us to substantiate. One of the biggest factors I would also like to add is the perception of the department. I think that there is a lot that the department is doing and that we're continuing to try to do to raise a better understanding that we're not here to punish families. We're not a punishment for families and we're not here to automatically remove kids from their homes. We are often, well, our charge is to make sure that all kids are safe, so children are safe, but that's balanced within that family. Our other charge is to preserve the family and strengthen the family. We're mandated to be the least restrictive at all when it comes to us becoming involved. So what way can we keep that child safe while maintaining that family? And of course, we do know about the situations that likely do are the ones that reach media attention are those where they are the most severe and we have no recourse but to remove a child just to ensure that they're safe. But oftentimes that is not the outcome, even with the department becoming involved. One of the things that when I was the local office director of Lake County, we spent a lot of time focused in right in that area. So we engaged communities. We were out with families, not just when a report was made to DCS, but we may be partnering with a church that's doing a local community outing event. We may go to a resource fair or we are constantly or even things like mental health walks so that people can ask questions. We can have those conversations about what we really do and how we're involved. And our purpose overall is to ensure safety and help families. It is not to try to remove children from the home. So this next question that I have is kind of grounded in personal experience with a friend of mine. I had a friend who was from Sweden, and one thing that I did not realize in Scandinavian countries, it's just completely normal, is for them in the middle of winter to bundle their babies right up and put them outside alone in a stroller to sleep. And I think coming from, you know, white American culture, I would go there and be like, is child okay? I mean, it's winter, it's snowing outside. how, and I would, I might make a call at that point, you know, so how can early childhood professionals make sure that they're aligning concerns with legal definition of abuse and neglect rather than personal expectations or cultural differences? And I say that both for over-identifying and even under-identifying concerns. So if I think I'm like, oh, that's probably just their culture, you know, I'm not going to say anything. Or if you are really just in an experience that is completely different from your own that you might misinterpret as abuse and neglect? Cultural differences and even our own biases, we all come into this world with our different viewpoints based on how we were raised, our norms, our belief. The biggest thing that I can encourage any child care or early childhood interventionist is to simply, when making that call, stick to what they see as factual. Oftentimes we will have, for example, that someone may say, oh, the home was deplorable. And so I need to make that call. Well, what's deplorable to me and what's deplorable to you can look a lot differently. So if we can have specifics about what was seen what was observed uh the baby's bottles were on the floor um there was no milk available the more that we can have about the details of what has been seen strong smells of odor of marijuana or other substances that i might not be able to identify um there's a lot of open alcohol bottles. If we can have those descriptors, one, it lessens us from us, meaning anyone who calls the Department of Child Services, to have to make any judgment calls on what is this, what is it not. And then two, it also allows us to be able to stick with completely what we see as factual rather than us trying to determine for ourselves is this legal or not or does this meet the criteria for abuse or neglect. Our hotline uses a very sophisticated diagnostic tool to make sure that when those calls come in and it doesn't reach our level that we do not become involved because the same laws that keep us out of your house or mine are the same laws that keep us out of anyone's house should someone make a call. And then from that call, there's the determination of whether or not it meets the legal sufficiency for us to come out and investigate. So many people wonder, how do I even make that call? What kind of information what I need when I have that call. So can you kind of walk us through what that would look like? Sure. When calling our hotline, the hotline worker will try to obtain as much information as possible about the demographics of the family, how many children are in the home, relationships of the children, how many caregivers are in the home, because no two families are the saying. Is there a mom? Is there a dad? Is there two moms? Is there three? Is there animals in the home? What is it that the person that's calling has observed? What the address is, if their address is unknown, maybe where it might be located, proximity. Even though we like to have as much information as possible, if there's not a lot of information, that call can still be made and we will still do our best to try to locate that child where safety may be of a concern. Actually making the call for the child, how do early childhood professionals decide whether to talk with a family before making that DCS call and when it may or may not be appropriate to be up front with a family? So yeah, I really love this question because it's one that's asked by a lot of people, like you said, no one has a very good feeling about making that call. I would say that it is always better to start out a relationship, a trust-building relationship with families by informing them that you are a mandated reporter, that everyone and anyone in the state of Indiana is charged with making that call should there be concerns for a child's safety. Some of the things that I think that that helps with is being honest from the very beginning, that this is a part of my role, and also that we're all here to try to ensure the safety of children, whether it's the primary family of origin, or if it's me that is a neighbor, or if it's you that is coming out as an early interventionist, that ultimately we're seeking a partner together to ensure that we can make the most safe outcome for this child. And so I think that that helps often with parents to realize, oh, yeah, they do have to make a report. There are times, though, that there may still be hurt feelings afterwards. And I think just being dependable, citing the wins as DCS is involved, really does help to make that difference. One of the things that I think is also helpful for everyone to know that is, as I previously said, that we are not always, or even we don't, remove children from the home the majority of the time, oftentimes we are required to work with the family to try to resolve whatever those issues are. So partnering with the family and DCS does believe it comes from a practice model of family driven services. So being able to bring in that early interventionist along with any other supports that the family has, and getting us to a place of resiliency or strengthening of that family is a common goal that we all can share and partner along with. One best practice that I wanted to touch base on was, as a supervisor, I would get calls from families who had a report made against them that was unsubstantiated. And at times, these reports were made based on an early childhood professional not completely understanding a parenting practice. And it wasn't that they felt the child was in immediate danger, but they did see something that didn't quite sit right with them or that they didn't understand. One thing that I would like to share with your listeners is that the Department of Child Services, when we come out to assess child abuse or neglect, our workers are very trained into asking those questions, probing and seeing, is this a situation that warrants our involvement? Or oftentimes, like more times than not when we come out, situations aren't substantiated. And we do make every effort prior to getting involved with families to ask those questions. So when the community is maybe concerned about should I have or should I haven't, that is one thing that we are absolutely grounded in training our team. Our team goes through an initial three months of training straight and then ongoing training thereafter to be able to ask questions along that family functioning assessment. Ask whether or not this is an opportunity where a parent may need educating or not to follow up and go back out again to see, to discuss with supervisors or others to get feedback and maybe some coaching. if necessary. But there is that key component that calling into the hotline does not mean automatic involvement by the department. And those evaluations are taking place and should be taking place so that we can make sure that ultimately, again, that we are getting in the least restrictive of involvement and that we are making sure that we are finding solutions or looking to assess whether or not this is a situation where there is abuse or neglect or if it is a miseducation of some sort or maybe just an unawareness of things and we'll then proceed and take measures from there. One of the great things about calling our hotline too is that if you press one sent to a prevention specialist in your community. So maybe what you're seeing isn't something that reaches to the level of abuse or neglect, but maybe that family still needs some help and some support. So that's why our hotline also has a warm line attached to it so that persons that may be calling for resources or supports or assistance can be able to get that as well. I did not know that existed. So thank you for bringing that up. I don't think a lot of people are aware. And then the hotline, is it all just one number as well? Yes. Yes. That same number of 800-800-5556 will allow you when you immediately call to ask if you are looking for services or support or help to press, I believe it's one. And then if you are calling to make an abuse or neglect report, then you can hit the two. That is something that is not new, but it's not old either that we added that warm line. So I want to say that it occurred probably within the last five to 10 years. I've been here a really long time. So what may be considered old to some may not be old to me, relatively speaking. And you work with a lot of families, obviously, who are in the system. What are some helpful things to say or maybe avoid saying when a family learns that a report has been made? I think that it can be very helpful should the provider or interventionist decide that they are going to share, that they inform the parents that they made this report if they are choosing to. And I'm not saying that they have to. One thing I should note is that the department cannot release who has called in reports of abuse and neglect. So that person's confidentiality is protected. So it's really up to that provider whether they choose to share. Yes, I did make that call or no, I didn't make that call. But should you decide to inform the parent that you have made that call, one of the things to really want to hone in on is that you are informing the parent of the factual things that require that call to be made and that intention of sticking throughout the process with that family to ensure that the child is safe because that's all of our responsibility. And when you initially were speaking about thinking about whether to call or not to call, I really loved hearing that because the biggest thing that we know leads to ensuring child safety is when everyone feels to that child and to making sure that that child is safe. And so as we kind of collaborate as a community and we're thinking in that scope, it may not always lead to a call of child abuse neglect, but it does lead us all to feeling that sense of responsibility and ensuring that child is safe. So can you walk us through what happens on DCS's end after a call is made to the hotline? After the call is made, then the hotline will determine whether or not it reaches the legal sufficiency for DCS to assess. If it does, then that call will then be, that report will be sent to a local office, depending on where the family resides, and then a worker will come out And a worker will make sure that they are interviewing all relevant parties, including the parents, any alleged perpetrators, the children, any witnesses, gathering any cooperating information, such as if it was a hospital, making sure that medical documentation is obtained. obtained, if it's school, making sure school records are obtained, just holistically assessing the situation to make a determination whether or not child abuse or neglect has actually occurred. If at the point that a decision is made and say that decision is the least likely, which is a determination that child abuse has occurred, then we're looking at what needs to be done then. And there are several things that can take place at that time. Sometimes the situation has already remedied itself, so there's no need for involvement. Sometimes, and I hate to kind of give scenarios, but I will just say for your viewers that may be thinking, well, what could that be? But say, for instance, in the state of Indiana, any child that has more than 10 unexcused absences, it is required to be reported to the Department of Child Services. But maybe that family was running into a situation that maybe, and I'm not saying this is always going to be the case, But just to give a frame of reference, if the family's car was down or didn't have a car and the child missed several days of school and then they have a car now and this hasn't happened before and there's no history of it, then those are situations where maybe the department does not have a need at this point in time to get involved in the situation. car is now secured working child's going back to school that may be a situation that does not warrant involvement if there was a situation that did warrant the department's involvement then we could take a look at is this something where we are able to work with the family the safety of the child can still be maintained in the home environment then we have what's called an informal adjustment, if it looks like maybe the family may be a little bit more resistant to services, maybe we, but we're still able to maintain that safety in the home, then we could do what is called in-home services, which is called a CHANZ for short, but it's Child in Need of Services. That's where services are court-ordered. the child would become involved as a ward of the state, but placed at home. And then there's the situation that most people are familiar with that happens the least amount of time when a safety situation warrants a child's immediate removal or removal from the home. And we call that out-of-home child in need of services or out-of-home CHINS. In all of those scenarios, We are always required to work with the family to reunify. So reunify in this case, if out of the home means returning home, if already in home, it means getting that family the services and supports that are needed to strengthen the family so that they can, so that they're only involved, excuse me, with the department for as long as necessary to remedy that situation and then to exit from the family's life. See, this is helpful for me, too, because I've been in this field for 15 years and I had no idea there was an in-home option. I guess this is not necessarily the best term, but this is really informative. Absolutely. And this is why we do these discussions, because we do know that through awareness, people can have a more informed understanding about contacting the department. it. And I think one of the most common scenarios, just overall, people have come to me with a situation like, how dirty is this home? You know, if I do end up calling CPS and they come out and nothing, you know, they determined that there wasn't abuse or neglect, then what am I supposed to say to that family? How do I keep them engaged during those services? And from your perspective, what are some of those reasons families might disengage when DCS is involved? And what have you seen that kind of helps families feel more safe to stay connected to services after that trust has been shaken? I think that the engagement is the key for both scenarios. And if a family has been involved with a provider and the provider has been completely upfront from day one, that This is a part of my role in providing intervention services is that if I see something that is of concern that rises to that level of abusive lack, I'm mandated by the state of Indiana to call and make that report to DCS. I do think that it is very helpful for families to know that does not mean that you have received a punishment or that you're criminally. The department is not a criminal entity. And that's another thing that we like to let people know, because automatically people ask, am I going to jail or this? We are not involved with law enforcement. However, if a situation does become substantiated, we do refer those situations to the prosecutor's office who will make a decision about whether or not they would like to get involved with that, as well as some of the situations we get involved with do have law enforcement involved with them. Sometimes law enforcement is the entity that contacts us. What I have seen that is disengaging for parents is not being a part of that from the beginning to the end of those discussions, partnering with the solutions. Our agency does have a practice model of involving the families and their supports every step of the way throughout the process. So what I've seen successfully work is those that are engaged and are consistent in providing those services that they are there to provide for the family and willing to partner along and come along with the department in making sure that that family has the supports and the services that they need to sustain themselves while we're involved as well as beyond. Families are more likely to embrace the provider that maybe have made that report when they are there prior to DCS, during DCS, and after DCS's involvement. when we're talking about dcs involvement and if a child is removed from the home and you're kind of navigating multiple caregivers so the you might have a bio family you might have foster families you might have kinship based maybe the bio parents are split up so you're trying then to deal with multiple people's schedules your own schedule um what are some i guess relationship-based approaches to working with both biological and foster families at the same time? That's a great question. When I say our practice model, I'm referring to the practice that DCS recognizes as the most positive way to provide outcomes for families, to bring families back together. And we do that through our foundation. It's called the Child and Family Team Meetings. it's a meeting that we have where we bring all of the entities together. So mom, dad, if the child is old enough to participate, the child, the foster parent, any therapist or interventionist such as early childhood providers that are involved with the family, all of these entities that help to maintain the family and make them successful, we bring together. And we start from the very inception, talking to each member as a whole with a shared understanding of what it is we're trying to accomplish. Families decide what that is that we're trying to accomplish, how we'll get there, who will do what, when, where, and that guides our practice moving forward to DCS, moving out of this family's knife and in hopes of them being sustainable. I would like to say though, this does not just occur when we're out of the home or we've removed a child in foster care. And I want to keep pressing that because I think that that's the issue that many people that hear about child protective services may not be aware of that we work with families and sometimes when people believe that we didn't get involved we may be involved but it doesn't look like it from the outside because the child's still at home and the parents are still heavily the primary caregivers for the child and DCS is just providing that assistance and that support to strengthen that family up. So regardless of the situation, we believe in bringing all of those that may be in this family's life together to try to work towards whatever the outcomes are that we're seeking. The other thing that I would like to emphasize is that we utilize co-care where foster parents and biological parents can come together and have an interchangeable relationship for the betterment of the child. So whether that's in helping to have lasting relationships while the child's in care and the bio parent or the parent from which the child was removed from is providing advice of how to put that child to bed or how to get the child to be motivated in school or the foster parents sharing ideas with the bio parent upon the child's return home of what worked for them and providing some tips and tricks. And then even after DCS involvement, one of the things that we really like about co-care is that long after we're no longer involved, oftentimes foster parents become that support to that family and they build a very close relationship that can go well into the child's older years i love how that's being tied to daily routines like he really loves this book absolutely i think that that kind of communication even from you know early childhood professionals would be and that's a great way to keep that communication clear and supportive in an ideal world obviously everybody would be able to communicate super smooth and there would be no hiccups, but I know working in early childhood systems, it can be difficult to work across systems as in, I'm just thinking of an example of a, you know, if you're trying to do early intervention sessions and you definitely want to involve bio parents, but only foster parents schedule work with yours. What's kind of the best way that you can think of to to work through that, get that communication supportive when there's multiple caregivers involved? Sure. Yes. Like you said, ideally we'll be able to all come together. We'll be able to develop a plan together and get a plan that works for everyone. Doesn't always work that way. Our agency often will have a meeting if it doesn't work that foster mom is able to make that meeting when bio mom or vice versa. We will have separate meetings or maybe there are some unresolved issues that foster parents and bio parents that maybe not want to come together. We definitely will seek to still maintain those meetings so that we can all work around what's best for the child. So maybe parents can't do it until this weekend. Foster families can do it at the beginning of the week and we may have to have those meetings separately. But then that's when that case manager can kind of bring things together for an overall plan based on feedback from the early interventionist, therapist, any other PT or OT that might be working with the child to get these needs met and try to see if the plan that comes out of those meetings is a plan that's doable for everyone. I can think specifically of a situation where there was some real strong feelings between divorced parents and the department had to have meetings separately. And then once we were able to speak to those that were involved with mom, those that were involved with dad, then we were able to have a meeting where we brought everything together and develop that plan based on the needs around the children and their families went in those separate homes. And so that is something that we'll continue to strive to do, even when we can't bring all parties together. And speaking of those emotionally charged situations, they find themselves kind of being the middleman between the parents and the foster parents, the kind of badmouthing each other. And how would you suggest people navigate those situations. That's what's most helpful, just speaking in general terms, would be for us to all refocus on being here for the child and what's in the best interest of that child. So if we're there and the child is receiving maybe some speech and needs to focus on words that we kind of just all redirect, because I think we all have the same intentions, whether it's the family of origin or it's the foster family or even the provider or the professional that is bringing in services for the child. We all may look through a different lens, but the same thing we're looking at the end of that lens is a child that needs care and support. And so I think when we are rerouted back to focusing on the child and the child's needs, it brings us all back to that common ground. More of a systems lens question. What are some things that early childhood professionals may not fully understand about the day-to-day worker of a role of a DCS worker? That's a great question. I think that some of the things, and we may have hit on a little bit before, is that the Department of Child Services is limited in their scope of what they can or cannot get involved in based on the law. So there may be situations such as you stated before where maybe you heard parents say, oh, stop before I do this or do that. The department may not be able to get involved in a situation because the law does indicate that a child's physical or mental condition has been seriously impaired or seriously endangered. And so one of the things is that by following the law, there may be things that someone calling in may think they're definitely going to get involved in and then the department isn't involved in and wonder, well, I really don't know why the department didn't get involved with that when they should have. Some other things is that situations may be involved that we're working with or maybe that we refer to that may not have been shared with that intervention specialist to know that, yes, there are things being done to try to address the situation, but because it's not apparent that the kids aren't out of the home, it doesn't look like it's being addressed. So I would say those are the biggest too, is that the agency can only operate within the confines of the law. And so our scope is limited to those items that we assess based on our child in need of services statutes and that the department could be involved with a family. And just from surface level, it's not known because of confidentiality that the department is working with this family, but they could be working on an informal adjustment or an in-home basis. And then if you can improve one thing about how DCS and other early childhood professionals work together to support families, what would it be? I think it is always helpful when we can work from a lens of understanding and empathy. I think that throughout engaging and building relationships with our families, with our kiddos, and with one another that we understand what the goal is, how we can support that goal as an agency, knowing that supporting that goal supports the child and that the interventionist that is providing that care is understanding that the DCS worker that is there is trying to ensure the safety of the child and how we each can meet those needs and find common ground to meet those needs. This one's more specific to disability itself. You know, at the Early Childhood Center, we are one of seven centers. I use that with a focus on disability and communities across the lifespan. And we were the early childhood part of that. How can early childhood professionals distinguish between behaviors or developmental differences related to child's disability and indicators of true abuse and neglect? That's a really great question because oftentimes our children that have higher levels of need can be more susceptible to child abuse or neglect just because of the demand for time and attention from the parent or caregiver. One of the things that your viewers definitely can look at is any changes. If the provider knows the child and knows their typical repetitive behaviors or they are aware of some of the developmental issues that are going on. And then all of a sudden there's something different that is happening at regression or even advancement at times, but oftentimes regression that maybe has mastered a certain milestone that is now not engaging or showing that they have the ability to perform that. And I hesitate to say that these are automatic signs of abuse or neglect, But they can be indicators. And so I would say that should they see repetitive bruises or things that aren't explained or are having concerns with the explanations that are given are some of those key indicators that there may be abuse or neglect going on here. I love that you kind of understand that family over time. You know, there can be a very different situation between, for instance, a child that has severe sensory aversions and does not want to wear clothes and the parent is trying to get clothes on them, or a child not wanting to wear anything but shorts during the winter is very different than a parent who is not providing for that child. Absolutely. The shorts during the winter, I would say that's that's one of those things that and, you know, looking at ages of children and things like that, we find a lot of kiddos that love to wear shorts in the wintertime. Final question. What are you hoping that people take away from this podcast? I'm hoping that people have a better understanding of the Department of Child Services, how abuse and neglect gets reported, what happens after it's reported, and that hopefully they have a clearer picture of when to make a call to the department and what's going to happen after that call, just to give them an understanding of what's done to try to ensure child safety in our community. And then if somebody were to reach out for some specific training, how would they reach you? Going online to our communications department and definitely being able to, from there, have someone that would talk about abuse or neglect. Our DCS communications team will filter those out based on the area you're calling from so that you can get someone that can give specific information to your area. and our agency is always looking and enjoy the opportunity to be able to discuss the department and what we do and the mandating laws that guide our state well thank you so much for taking the time to come somebody who actually knows the system inside and out and to be able to reach out to other early childhood professionals and help us to understand these aspects so thank you so much appreciate it absolutely anytime it was a pleasure speaking with you clarissa Pleasure speaking with you too. You have a good afternoon. And that concludes our interview with Twan Stokes. I thought she was great. And I just wanted to take a minute to pull together some of the things that she mentioned, because there was a lot in there and honestly, a lot to reflect on. One of the big takeaways is that this really comes down to how we show up with families, not how we show up for families, but how we show up with families. She talked about the importance of being open and honest, even when it feels uncomfortable, and that families are more likely to trust us when we're transparent rather than feeling like something has happened behind the scenes. She also talked about staying present after the call, not pulling back, not creating distance, but continuing to show up because that's often when family needs that support the most. Another thing that stood out was we're really treating families as partners, not as people were monitoring or judging, but as experts in their own lives and including them in those decisions, listening to the perspectives and the family meetings and working with them instead of doing things to them. And along with that, you know, keeping a strength-based lens. I loved how she talked about even in really hard situations to really understand that families love their children and they want to do what's best for them and to working towards what we all have in common. She also emphasized empathy, you know, taking a step back and asking ourselves what must be going on for this family instead of just jumping straight into conclusions. And what I hope you get out of this podcast as well is that we can't ignore the role of our own biases and assumptions. We need to be aware of how our experiences and comfort levels shape what we see and making sure we're grounding our decisions in the actual definitions of abuse and neglect. And then finally, just remembering that relationships are built over time. It's not one perfect conversation. It's how we show up over and over again in those small everyday interactions. And at the end of the day, this is not about whether to call or not. It's about how we think about that decision, how we support families before, during, and after, because that part matters just as much as the call itself. Thank you for joining us today. Thanks for listening to the Early Childhood On-The-Go podcast from the Early Childhood Center team at Indiana University. Learn more at iidc.indiana.edu.