Immigration detentions push dozens of children into foster care, including in Vermont – VTDigger

Report on the Impact of Immigration Enforcement on Children Entering Foster Care in the United States

Introduction

This report examines the consequences of immigration enforcement actions on children of immigrant parents, focusing on the increase in foster care placements due to parental detention or deportation. The analysis emphasizes the relevance of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-being), Goal 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and Goal 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions).

Background and Context

• Over the past year, at least 32 children of immigrants have entered foster care across seven U.S. states following the detention or deportation of their parents.
• States reporting cases include Vermont (4 toddlers aged 1 to 3), Kansas (10 children), Maryland (at least 9 children), Idaho (4 children), and Virginia (4 children).
• The Trump administration’s immigration policies have resulted in a record 71,000 immigrants in detention, reshaping family separation dynamics.
• Comprehensive federal data on children entering state custody due to parental immigration enforcement is lacking, with state-level data being inconsistent or incomplete.

Challenges in Data Collection and Privacy Concerns

1. There is a significant tension between protecting minors’ privacy and the need to track their whereabouts to provide necessary services.
2. The federal government began requiring tracking of foster care entries related to immigration enforcement in 2022; however, only half of the states reported this data in fiscal year 2024.
3. Data reliability is currently limited due to the nascent nature of tracking systems and the need for social worker training.
4. Concerns exist about the potential misuse of data to target immigrant families for deportation or detention.

State-Level Findings

• Eight states (Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont, Virginia) confirmed at least one child entering foster care due to parental detention.
• Five states withheld specific numbers citing privacy; eleven states do not track immigration enforcement as a factor in foster care placement.
• In Minnesota, most children remain in the care of family or friends despite parental detention.
• Oregon and Illinois have implemented internal monitoring systems to assess the impact of immigration enforcement on foster care.

Impact on Children and Families

• Family separations negatively affect children’s mental and physical health, undermining trust in institutions designed to support families.
• Federal directives require Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to facilitate arrangements for child care before parental detention and to involve child welfare agencies if necessary.
• Approximately 170 children are detained daily with their parents by ICE, raising concerns about prolonged detention conditions.
• More than 6 million children in the U.S. are at risk of separation from at least one parent living without legal status.

Policy and Legal Considerations

1. The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) mandates tracking of foster care entries related to immigration enforcement, aligning with SDG 16 to promote just, peaceful, and inclusive societies.
2. Legal settlements limit the detention of immigrant children in unlicensed facilities to no more than 20 days, supporting SDG 3 by safeguarding child health and well-being.
3. Advocates stress the importance of data privacy to prevent harm and ensure that child welfare agencies do not inadvertently contribute to family separations.

Recommendations for Sustainable Development Goals Alignment

• Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-being): Enhance mental health support and healthcare services for children affected by family separation.
• Goal 10 (Reduced Inequalities): Address disparities faced by immigrant families through inclusive policies and social protection measures.
• Goal 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions): Improve data collection transparency and protect privacy to strengthen trust in child welfare and immigration systems.
• Develop coordinated federal and state strategies to monitor and mitigate the impact of immigration enforcement on children and families.
• Increase training for social workers and child welfare professionals to identify and assist children affected by immigration-related family separations.

Conclusion

The intersection of immigration enforcement and child welfare presents complex challenges that require comprehensive data, privacy safeguards, and coordinated policy responses. Aligning efforts with the Sustainable Development Goals can promote the protection, well-being, and rights of children affected by these circumstances, fostering more equitable and just outcomes.

1. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Addressed or Connected

1. SDG 1: No Poverty – The article highlights the vulnerability of immigrant families, particularly children entering foster care due to detention or deportation of parents, which relates to poverty and social protection issues.
2. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being – The mental and physical health impacts on children separated from their parents are discussed, emphasizing the need for health and well-being support.
3. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities – The article addresses inequalities faced by immigrant families, including legal status issues and the impact of immigration enforcement on children.
4. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions – Issues around legal protections, child welfare, privacy, and the role of institutions in managing immigration enforcement and child custody are central themes.
5. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals – The article mentions partnerships between media, nonprofit organizations, and government agencies to address and report on these issues.

2. Specific Targets Under Those SDGs Identified

1. SDG 1
   • Target 1.3: Implement social protection systems and measures for all, including vulnerable groups such as children of detained or deported immigrants.
2. SDG 3
   • Target 3.4: Promote mental health and well-being, addressing the detrimental effects of family separation on children’s mental and physical health.
3. SDG 10
   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including protection of immigrant children and families from discrimination and unjust separation.
4. SDG 16
   • Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children, relevant to the protection of immigrant children in foster care and detention.
   • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels, including child welfare and immigration enforcement agencies.
   • Target 16.9: Provide legal identity for all, including birth registration and protection of children’s rights regardless of immigration status.
5. SDG 17
   • Target 17.17: Encourage effective partnerships between government, civil society, and media to improve data collection, transparency, and child protection.

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied to Measure Progress

1. Number of children entering foster care due to parental detention or deportation – The article provides data from several states and federal agencies tracking this number, which is a direct indicator of the issue’s scale.
2. Percentage of states reporting data on children affected by immigration enforcement – The article notes that only half of the states report this data to federal agencies, indicating data coverage and transparency.
3. Duration of children’s detention with parents – The article references the number of children held in detention and the length of detention, relevant to measuring compliance with legal limits.
4. Incidence of family reunification after detention or deportation – Implied through discussion of efforts by organizations helping reunify families, this could be an indicator of social support effectiveness.
5. Reports of child welfare agencies contacting immigration enforcement – Implied as a negative indicator showing potential risks to children’s privacy and safety.
6. Number of immigrant children detained in unlicensed facilities beyond legal limits – The article cites over 1,300 children held longer than 20 days, which is a measurable indicator of policy enforcement.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: vtdigger.org