Report on Child Welfare Incidents in Washington State in the Context of Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A report from Washington State’s Office of the Family and Children’s Ombuds reveals a significant increase in critical injuries and fatalities among children involved in the state’s welfare system during the first half of 2025. The data indicates a severe challenge to the state’s commitment to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The rise in incidents, driven by factors including drug exposure, abuse, and neglect, highlights systemic vulnerabilities and underscores the urgent need for interventions aligned with global development targets for child safety and institutional efficacy.

Analysis of Critical Incidents and Impact on SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The reported increase in child fatalities and near-fatalities represents a direct failure to meet the targets of SDG 3, which aims to ensure healthy lives and end the preventable deaths of newborns and children. The opioid crisis, specifically the prevalence of fentanyl, is a primary driver of this trend.

• Incident Rate: At least 92 children died or suffered near-fatal injuries in the first six months of 2025, an increase from 78 during the same period in 2024.
• Fentanyl Exposure: Accidental fentanyl exposure was responsible for 20 critical incidents involving children aged 0-3 in the first half of 2025. This follows a total of 33 such cases in all of 2024.
• Historical Context: In 2024, over 40% of all critical incidents were linked to accidental drug ingestion and overdose. Of the 38 child deaths attributed to maltreatment, more than half were infants under one year of age.

The state’s capacity to provide essential health services for this vulnerable population, a cornerstone of SDG 3, has also been questioned following the defunding of the only medical facility in western Washington dedicated to caring for drug-exposed newborns.

Institutional Framework and Challenges to SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The effectiveness of state institutions in protecting children from violence, abuse, and neglect is central to achieving SDG 16, specifically Target 16.2. The current crisis raises questions about the legislative framework and the performance of the Department of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF).

Legislative Impact

• The 2021 “Keeping Families Together Act” raised the legal standard for removing children from parental care to reduce the trauma of removal.
• Some lawmakers now contend the law is being misapplied, potentially leaving children in unsafe environments with drug-addicted parents, thereby failing to uphold the protections outlined in SDG 16.
• However, the Ombuds office reported it did not find conclusive evidence that the act was the definitive factor preventing child removal in many of the reviewed cases.

Agency Oversight

• Data from 2024 shows significant prior or current involvement of the DCYF in cases of fatal maltreatment.
• 42% of children who died from maltreatment were part of an open case with the agency at the time of their death.
• Nearly 40% had a case that was closed within the preceding 12 months.

Socioeconomic Drivers and Alignment with SDG 1 and SDG 10

The report identifies several underlying socioeconomic factors that contribute to family instability and child endangerment. These issues are directly related to SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), which call for robust social safety nets and the protection of vulnerable populations.

• Economic Hardship: State officials cite increased economic stress as a significant contributor to the rise in incidents.
• Social Safety Nets: The potential for increased hardship due to tariffs and cuts to social programs threatens to undermine the goals of SDG 1.
• Systemic Inequality: The crisis disproportionately affects families with high needs, highlighting a failure to reduce inequalities as mandated by SDG 10. The Department of Children, Youth and Families acknowledged that an increase in families with complex needs is a major factor.

Official Recommendations and State Responses

In response to the alarming trends, state agencies and the Ombuds office have implemented or recommended several measures aimed at strengthening child protection systems. These actions represent attempts to realign state efforts with SDG commitments.

1. Legislative Response: In 2024, legislation was passed requiring courts to give greater weight to the presence of opioids in a home when determining child placement.
2. Agency Protocols: The DCYF has mandated “safe child consults” for all welfare cases involving children under three and known opioid use. The department has also increased caseworker training.
3. Ombuds Office Recommendations:
   • Expand substance abuse treatment services for pregnant women and mothers, supporting SDG 5 (Gender Equality) and SDG 3.
   • Increase efforts to engage fathers in child welfare cases.
   • Investigate the feasibility of court-ordered, in-home state supervision as an alternative to removal.

Relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being – This goal is central to the article, which focuses on the increase in child fatalities, near-fatalities, and injuries due to drug exposure, abuse, and neglect.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions – The article discusses the state’s child welfare system, legislation like the “Keeping Families Together Act,” and the role of agencies like the Department of Children, Youth and Families and the Office of the Family and Children’s Ombuds. This relates to creating effective and accountable institutions to protect children from violence and abuse.
• SDG 1: No Poverty – The article mentions “increased economic stress” and “cuts to social safety net programs” as contributing factors to the rise in critical incidents, linking child welfare to economic stability and social protection.

Specific SDG Targets

1. SDG Target 3.2: End preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of age.

   • The article directly addresses this target by reporting on the significant jump in deaths and near-deaths of children in Washington’s welfare system. It specifies that “Of the 38 maltreatment deaths in 2024, more than half of the children were under a year old,” highlighting the vulnerability of this age group. The defunding of a facility for drug-exposed newborns also connects to this target.

2. SDG Target 3.5: Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol.

   • This target is relevant due to the article’s emphasis on the opioid crisis’s impact on children. It states, “The highly potent opioid fentanyl has driven increases in fatalities and near-fatalities,” and notes that “20 of the cases involving children ages 0 to 3 stemmed from accidental fentanyl exposure.” The recommendation to “expand treatment services for pregnant women and mothers” is a direct call to action for this target.

3. SDG Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children.

   • The article’s core subject is the failure to protect children from harm. It reports that critical incidents stem from “abuse and neglect.” It also discusses the effectiveness of the child welfare system and legislation aimed at protecting children, analyzing whether these institutions are succeeding or failing in their mandate to prevent violence against children.

4. SDG Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all…

   • The article implies this target by linking the rise in child welfare incidents to broader economic issues. State officials point to “increased economic stress” and “cuts to social safety net programs” as contributors. This suggests that the weakening of social protection systems is a factor in family instability and child endangerment.

Implied or Mentioned Indicators

1. Indicator for Target 3.2 (Child Mortality):

   • Number of child deaths and near-deaths: The article provides precise figures, stating “at least 92 children had died or nearly died” in the first half of the year, up from 78 in the previous period. It also gives annual totals: “140 child deaths and near deaths” in the last year, compared to 147 the year before.
   • Under-5 mortality rate (by cause): The article specifies causes like “drug exposure, abuse and neglect” and notes that of 38 maltreatment deaths, “more than half of the children were under a year old.”

2. Indicator for Target 3.5 (Substance Abuse):

   • Number of child fatalities/injuries due to drug exposure: The article quantifies this, stating “20 of the cases involving children ages 0 to 3 stemmed from accidental fentanyl exposure” in the current year, and “over two-fifths of the episodes were tied to accidental drug ingestion and overdose” last year.

3. Indicator for Target 16.2 (Violence Against Children):

   • Number of children experiencing abuse or neglect resulting in death or critical injury: The article’s main statistic of “92 children had died or nearly died” from causes including “abuse and neglect” serves as a direct indicator.
   • Proportion of children in the welfare system who are victims of maltreatment: The article states that of children whose deaths were related to maltreatment, “42% were part of an open case with the Department of Children, Youth and Families at the time of their death.”

Summary of Findings

Source: seattletimes.com