U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

70–889 2011

CHILD DEATHS DUE TO MALTREATMENT 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JULY 12, 2011 

Serial No. 112–HR5 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means 

( 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
ii 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES 

GEOFF DAVIS, Georgia, Chairman 

ERIK PAULSEN, Minnesota 

RICK BERG, North Dakota 

TOM REED, New York 

TOM PRICE, Georgia 

DIANE BLACK, Tennessee 

CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, JR., Louisiana 

LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas, Ranking 

JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington 

JOHN LEWIS, Georgia 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
iii 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Advisory of July 5, 2011, announcing the hearing ................................................ 2 

WITNESSES 

Kay E. Brown, Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security, U.S. 

Government Accountability Office ...................................................................... 7 

Tamara Tunie, Actor, ‘‘Law and Order: SVU,’’ and Spokesperson, National 

Coalition to End Child Abuse Deaths ................................................................. 18 

Theresa Covington, M.P.H., Director, The National Center for Child Death 

Review ................................................................................................................... 21 

Michael Petit, President and Founder, Every Child Matters Education Fund .. 32 

Carole Jenny, M.D., Director, Child Protection Program, Hasbro Children’s 

Hospital ................................................................................................................. 45 

Jane McClure Burstain, Ph.D., Senior Policy Analyst, Center for Public Policy 

Priorities ............................................................................................................... 52 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

American Public Human Services Association, statement ................................... 97 

Andrea Kivolowitz and Ayla Annac, statement .................................................... 108 

Childrens Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, statement ........................................ 116 

National Association of Social Workers, statement .............................................. 118 

National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, statement ................................. 125 

Skipper Initiative, statement .................................................................................. 135 

Tiffany Conway Perrin Organization, statement .................................................. 152 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

CHILD DEATHS DUE TO MALTREATMENT 

TUESDAY, JULY 12, 2011 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in 

Room B–318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Geoff Davis 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

[The advisory announcing the hearing follows:] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

ADVISORY 

FROM THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: (202) 225–1721 

Tuesday, July 5, 2011 

HR–5 

Chairman Davis Announces a Hearing on 

Child Deaths Due to Maltreatment 

Congressman Geoff Davis (R–KY), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means, today announced that the Subcommittee will hold a hearing on child deaths due to maltreatment. The hearing 

will take place at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 12, 2011, in room B–318 of the 

Rayburn House Office Building. 

In view of the limited time available to hear from witnesses, oral testimony at 

this hearing will be from invited witnesses only. Witnesses will include the U.S. 

Government Accountability Office (GAO) as well as other experts on child abuse and 

neglect and child fatalities due to maltreatment. However, any individual or organization not scheduled for an oral appearance may submit a written statement for 

consideration by the Committee and for inclusion in the printed record of the hearing. 

BACKGROUND: 

According to State reports, over 1,700 children died nationally in FY 2009 due to 

maltreatment. However, research has shown that these reports may substantially 

understate the number of child victims each year. To gain a clearer understanding 

of this issue, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has reviewed what is 

known about the circumstances of child deaths and near deaths due to maltreatment, State approaches to gathering and reporting this information, and what the 

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is doing to support the collection 

and accurate reporting of this information. GAO will testify about the findings of 

their review at the hearing. 

There are currently several sources of data about child deaths due to maltreatment. First, since the 1970s, States have participated in a voluntary national data 

collection system reporting data on investigations of maltreatment and information 

on abused children. This system, called the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data 

System (NCANDS), is used by HHS to prepare annual reports on child maltreatment. Second, the nongovernmental National Center for Child Death Review 

(NCCDR) acts as a resource center for State and local teams that review cases of 

child deaths. These teams collect and report information on child fatalities from all 

causes, and 37 States currently report data to the national database. The NCCDR 

uses this data to focus attention on child fatality risks and to develop strategies to 

prevent fatalities in the future. Third, States also have data on child fatalities from 

sources such as law enforcement reports, death certificates, or medical records. 

In announcing the hearing, Chairman Davis stated, ‘‘Any child’s death is tragic, but the death of a child from abuse and neglect is especially troubling. 

Current data on the number of child deaths from maltreatment appear incomplete, and the difficulty in even compiling complete information undermines States’ ability to develop effective strategies to prevent these tragedies from repeating. I look forward to hearing from GAO on the findings 

of their report as well as other experts on how we can improve our understanding of both how many children die from maltreatment and more importantly how we can use this information to do a better job preventing 

such tragedies in the future.’’ 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

FOCUS OF THE HEARING: 

The hearing will review data on child deaths due to maltreatment, determine how 

to improve the accuracy of this data, and review how improving the accuracy of this 

data may help prevent future fatalities. 

DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: 

Please Note: Any person(s) and/or organization(s) wishing to submit for the hearing record must follow the appropriate link on the hearing page of the Committee 

website and complete the informational forms. From the Committee homepage, 

http://waysandmeans.house.gov, select ‘‘Hearings.’’ Select the hearing for which you 

would like to submit, and click on the link entitled, ‘‘Click here to provide a submission for the record.’’ Once you have followed the online instructions, submit all requested information. Attach your submission as a Word document, in compliance 

with the formatting requirements listed below, by the close of business on Tuesday, July 26, 2011. Finally, please note that due to the change in House mail policy, the U.S. Capitol Police will refuse sealed-package deliveries to all House Office 

Buildings. For questions, or if you encounter technical problems, please call (202) 

225–1721 or (202) 225–3625. 

FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS: 

The Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing record. As always, submissions will be included in the record according to the discretion of the Committee. 

The Committee will not alter the content of your submission, but we reserve the right to format 

it according to our guidelines. Any submission provided to the Committee by a witness, any supplementary materials submitted for the printed record, and any written comments in response 

to a request for written comments must conform to the guidelines listed below. Any submission 

or supplementary item not in compliance with these guidelines will not be printed, but will be 

maintained in the Committee files for review and use by the Committee. 

1. All submissions and supplementary materials must be provided in Word format and MUST 

NOT exceed a total of 10 pages, including attachments. Witnesses and submitters are advised 

that the Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing record. 

2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material will not be accepted for printing. 

Instead, exhibit material should be referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material 

not meeting these specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for review and use 

by the Committee. 

3. All submissions must include a list of all clients, persons and/or organizations on whose 

behalf the witness appears. A supplemental sheet must accompany each submission listing the 

name, company, address, telephone, and fax numbers of each witness. 

The Committee seeks to make its facilities accessible to persons with disabilities. 

If you are in need of special accommodations, please call 202–225–1721 or 202–226– 

3411 TTD/TTY in advance of the event (four business days notice is requested). 

Questions with regard to special accommodation needs in general (including availability of Committee materials in alternative formats) may be directed to the Committee as noted above. 

Note: All Committee advisories and news releases are available on the World 

Wide Web at http://www.waysandmeans.house.gov

f 

/. 

Chairman DAVIS. The hearing will now come to order. But before we begin, I would like to yield to the Chairman of the Ways 

and Means Committee, Dave Camp, who asked that the report 

from GAO that is the basis of our hearing be commissioned in the 

first place. He has long been a champion of these issues regarding 

children. And with that, I would like to yield to the distinguished 

Chairman, Mr. Camp. 

Chairman CAMP. Well, thank you very much, Chairman Davis. 

I wanted to thank our witnesses for being here today, and also a 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

special thanks to GAO for completing this report on abuse and neglect and maltreatment of children. And having gotten a little bit 

of what the report may say, I understand that the reality is even 

more dramatic than the official estimates that we are getting. 

The purpose of this hearing, obviously, is to focus on child deaths 

due to maltreatment or abuse, neglect, however you want to describe it, and what government policies might be able to try to deal 

with this very critical issue. 

I want to thank all of our witnesses here, and Tamara, especially 

you, for highlighting this issue in a very public way and a very 

positive way, so we can hopefully make some progress on this. 

And I won’t delay the hearing any longer, but appreciate the 

hard work that you and Mr. Doggett are going to be doing today. 

So thank you very much. Thanks a lot. 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With that, we will 

return to regular order. I thank the distinguished gentleman from 

Minnesota for yielding his chair to the Chairman, too. 

This is somewhat of a historic hearing in a couple of ways. One, 

I think the topic is certainly important. But for those of us that 

grew up in the era of black and white cathode ray TV tubes, this 

is the first Ways and Means Subcommittee hearing done in high 

definition. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman DAVIS. I was told I had a great face for radio by my 

first media consultant. So some of us are going to have a particularly challenging experience here today. 

But with that, I appreciate all of the witnesses who have come, 

those concerned citizens, advocates from many different streams of 

thought with one common concern. 

When children die from maltreatment, it makes international 

headlines, as in the Caylee Anthony case that drew the focus of 

millions around the world in recent months. Unfortunately, the 

transience of the hype and passing interest of the population belies 

a much deeper challenge. 

And sometimes the death of a child from maltreatment gains attention due to the shocking details of the treatment while alive. 

That is what happened in the case of 13-year-old Christian Choate, 

an Indiana boy killed in 2009 after years of abuse, including being 

allegedly locked in a 3-foot-high dog cage. 

After his death, police found letters he had written about how he 

wondered when anyone would check on him or give him food or 

water. Christian asked why nobody liked him and how he just 

wanted to be liked by his family. It is hard to fully comprehend the 

death or the sadness this boy must have experienced during his 

too-short life. 

And sometimes the death of a child from maltreatment does not 

make headlines at all, possibly because it is not recorded as a 

death from maltreatment for a variety of reasons we will learn 

more about today. 

It is hard to know which child deaths are more tragic, those we 

know about or those we do not. But our job today is to make sure 

that all deaths of children due to maltreatment are recorded, so we 

can learn from all of them and use that knowledge to work with 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

State and local partners to prevent more of these tragedies from occurring in the future. 

Our role here today is to be a voice for the voiceless, especially 

those children whose deaths are missing from official data today. 

The Federal Government estimates that 1,770 children died due to 

maltreatment in 2009, the most recent year of data we have. But 

as we will learn today in today’s hearing, that official data understates the total number of children who die due to maltreatment 

each year for numerous reasons. This undercount could be significant. 

GAO indicates that 24 States only report the deaths of children 

who had previous contact with a child welfare agency. Another 

study found child welfare agency records undercounted deaths by 

55 to 76 percent. The bottom line is States are not reporting each 

child maltreatment death, and that makes it harder to prevent 

these deaths in the future. 

We welcome a range of experts today to help us understand how 

we currently count the number of children who die each year due 

to maltreatment, as well as to discuss flaws in the current system. 

These experts will also help us to determine how these systems can 

be improved, and how better information can help us better protect 

children, which is our ultimate goal. 

I want to commend Chairman Camp, who last year asked GAO 

to review and report on these issues, based on his concern that we 

are unfortunately not getting it right today. That GAO report is 

being released today, and is the backstop of GAO’s testimony this 

morning. 

We also welcome experts from the broader community who have 

worked for years to prevent child deaths due to maltreatment. Our 

panel today includes Tamara Tunie, the spokesperson for the National Coalition to End Child Deaths, who has worked to raise the 

profile on this issue and better protect children. We look forward 

to all of our witnesses’ comments, and thank them for their commitment to better protecting children from abuse and neglect. 

And I would say in the time that we have worked together on 

the Subcommittee, Ranking Member Doggett and I have had a 

commitment to correcting broken information processes, to be able 

to integrate sources, to remove obstacles and silos. And we are continuing to hold hearings like this to identify constraints that prevent the service providers, the caregivers, from doing their very, 

very critical job. 

Without objection, each Member will have the opportunity to 

submit a written statement and have it included in the record at 

this point. 

And now I would like to yield to my friend and distinguished 

Ranking Member from Texas, Mr. Doggett, for an opening statement. 

Mr. DOGGETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your 

commitment to this issue. Each weekend that my wife and I are 

back in Texas, we try to devote a little time to our three preschool 

granddaughters. The joy of being with them, their growth, their 

learning, their creativity, and also their innocence and vulnerability are in such contrast in homes where they are surrounded 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

by love, with what we see played out in national TV with the abuse 

and death of too many young children. 

And so, today we conduct a bipartisan exploration of what we 

can do about the gap between those children, the many children in 

our country that are surrounded by loving and supporting families, 

and those who are not. And I think we recognize that the death 

of even one child due to abuse or neglect is just too many. 

We are aware that there are so many, many children across the 

country who lose their lives or are permanently scarred by abuse 

or neglect from a caretaker. We know that there are many reasons 

why this happens. But the goal of today’s hearing must be to improve our understanding of these causes, and what we can do to 

prevent this kind of maltreatment of children. Certainly poverty, 

teenage parenting, substance abuse, and mental health challenges 

are among the considerations. 

We must ensure that we don’t make matters worse than they are 

today by slashing services that are important to assure child protection, even though there are many gaps in those services. Nor 

can we afford to slash the wider safety net for our families. 

As my neighbor in Austin, Dr. Jane Burstain, eloquently states 

in a written testimony, ‘‘To cut programs that support struggling 

families in tough economic times is the very definition of penny 

wise and pound foolish, and is a choice that our children could pay 

for with their lives.’’ 

Regrettably, the lives of children have not always gotten top priority. They are not necessarily, despite the full house today and the 

many effective advocates who are here, they are not necessarily the 

best lobbied force in the country. In my home State of Texas, the 

legislature just concluded with a 40 percent cut, actually more than 

40 percent, in certain child abuse prevention programs, even 

though my home State of Texas has one of the highest rates of 

child abuse and neglect deaths in the country. 

Here in Washington, I have concern about the proposal here in 

the House, the House Republican Budget Resolution, to eliminate 

the Social Services Block Grant program, which provides some 

funding that is very important in child protective services. 

And I am also concerned that the child welfare programs that we 

studied in our last Committee hearings, as well the TANF program, which is important in so many States for providing assistance to low-income families—those programs are about to expire. 

And we hopefully, as a result of the work of this Committee, can 

come up with bipartisan legislation to continue them, and learn 

from the experience. 

I have just recently filed legislation concerning the TANF supplemental grants, which were part of the original 1996 law that are 

very important in Texas and 15 other States in providing services. 

So, I hope that out of today’s hearing we can gain more insight 

from our expert witnesses, and out of this can come together with 

effective legislation to try to respond to some of these matters that 

concern all of us so deeply. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Doggett. Before we 

move on to our testimony, I would like to remind all of our witnesses to limit their oral statements to 5 minutes. All of your stateVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:37 Dec 07, 2011 Jkt 070889 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\70889.XXX 70889

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

ments will be entered into the record, and we will allow more time 

for discussion and for question. 

On our panel this morning we will be hearing from: Kay Brown, 

Director of Education, Work force, and Income Security, the U.S. 

Government Accountability Office; Tamara Tunie, actor from Law 

and Order: Special Victims Unit, and spokesperson for the National 

Coalition to End Child Abuse Deaths; Theresa Covington, the Director of the National Center for Child Death Review; Michael 

Petit, President and Founder of Every Child Matters Education 

Fund; Carole Jenny, M.D., Director of the Child Protection Program at Hasbro Children’s Hospital in Providence, Rhode Island; 

and Jane Burstain, Senior Policy Analyst at the Center for Public 

Policy Priorities in Austin, Texas. 

Ms. Brown, please proceed with your opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF KAY E. BROWN, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION, 

WORKFORCE, AND INCOME SECURITY, U.S. GOVERNMENT 

ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Ms. BROWN. Chairman Davis, Ranking Member Doggett, and 

Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me here 

today to discuss our work on this very important topic of child 

deaths due to maltreatment. My remarks are based on a GAO report that is also released today. I plan to cover three issues: the 

number of children who die from maltreatment; State reporting 

challenges; and HHS assistance to States. 

First, on the number of child deaths. Every year, children in the 

United States die after being physically abused, severely neglected, 

or otherwise maltreated, frequently at the hands of their parents 

or other trusted care givers. Unfortunately, we don’t know for sure 

how many have died. Based on data reported by State child welfare 

agencies to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System, or 

NCANDS, we know that there were at least 1,770 deaths in fiscal 

year 2009. 

But this is likely an undercount. Almost half of these State agencies reported only those cases that were already known to them. 

Yet these agencies don’t necessarily know about all children who 

die from maltreatment. Some children may not have been previously maltreated, or their earlier maltreatment may not have 

been reported. 

However, these deaths may be known to other sources, such as 

law enforcement agencies, medical examiners, coroners, or health 

departments. To illustrate this point, studies in a few States have 

combined information from several of these sources, and found that 

using the State child welfare records alone undercounted known fatalities by from 55 to 76 percent. Further, a national sample of 122 

counties across the country—again, using multiple sources—estimated 2,400 child deaths from maltreatment. 

Understanding the numbers and circumstances surrounding 

child fatalities from maltreatment can help inform prevention efforts. HHS prepares annual reports on the NCANDS data, which 

include a wealth of information on the children who have died, the 

perpetrators, and many other factors. However, we found that HHS 

does not include all of the potentially useful information it collects 

in its reports. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

In addition to NCANDS, State and local multidisciplinary child 

death review teams assess the causes of child fatalities, with an 

eye to improving investigations, services, and prevention. These 

teams, found in all but one State, don’t review every death, but 

their reviews can provide more and richer detail on each case. 

Many States are now submitting data from these reports to the 

HHS-funded National Child Death Review Center, and the Center 

is beginning to analyze the data specific to fatalities from maltreatment. 

For my second point, States face multiple challenges that make 

it difficult to collect and report these data. For example, without 

definitive evidence, it can be difficult to determine that a child’s 

death was, in fact, caused by maltreatment, rather than by natural 

causes. Further, resources are limited for autopsies and other tests, 

which can be expensive. Officials investigating fatalities may have 

differing skills, training, and experience, and coordination and data 

sharing across various agencies and jurisdictions may be hindered 

by concerns about privacy or confidentiality requirements, or by 

differing goals and cultures. 

On my third point, HHS provides a variety of technical assistance to States to help improve the data that they report to 

NCANDS. However, in our survey, State officials asked for additional assistance on collecting child fatality data, using it for prevention, and collaborating across agencies. We have made recommendations to HHS related to these and other issues. 

In conclusion, any child’s death from maltreatment is especially 

distressing, because it involves a failure on the part of the adults 

responsible for protecting them. Policymakers and practitioners 

rely on data to understand the numbers and circumstances of these 

tragic deaths, and to learn from them to prevent other deaths. 

Without improving upon and better sharing these data, we lose 

precious opportunities to protect our children. 

This concludes my prepared statement. I am happy to answer 

any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Brown follows:] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
9 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.001
10 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.002
11 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.003
12 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.004
13 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.005
14 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.006
15 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.007
16 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.008
17 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.009
18 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you very much, Ms. Brown. 

Ms. Tunie, if you could, give your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF TAMARA TUNIE, ACTOR, ‘‘LAW AND ORDER: 

SVU,’’ AND SPOKESPERSON, NATIONAL COALITION TO END 

CHILD ABUSE DEATHS 

Ms. TUNIE. Good morning, Chairman Davis, Ranking Member 

Doggett, and Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Tamara 

Tunie. Many people know me in my role as Dr. Melinda Warner, 

the medical examiner on ‘‘Law and Order: Special Victims Unit.’’ 

However, I am here today in my role as a concerned citizen, and 

as the spokesperson for the National Coalition to End Child Abuse 

Deaths. The Coalition is made up of five national organizations 

that came together over a common concern for the growing number 

of child abuse and neglect deaths in the United States. Those organizations are: The National Association of Social Workers; National 

Children’s Alliance; National District Attorney’s Association; Every 

Child Matters Education Fund; and the National Center for Child 

Death Review. 

I am honored to be able to speak to you today. On ‘‘Law and 

Order,’’ we investigate fictionalized crimes, and often have to deal 

with difficult story lines. But nothing compares to the real and 

tragic cases that we hear about with increasing regularity in the 

national headlines: Caylee Anthony in Florida; Marcella Pierce, 

from my home State of New York; and the gruesome story of Nubia 

Barahona, also in Florida. 

The unfortunate truths about these deaths is how common they 

are. Since becoming the Coalition spokesperson, I have learned 

about the thousands of American children dying at the hands of 

those who are supposed to love and protect them, and I am here 

to say that the need for action is critical. 

Unfortunately, the most startling truth about death from child 

abuse is how common it is. As we have heard and will hear today 

from the experts in this field, an estimated 2,500 children die each 

year from abuse and neglect; that is 7 children a day. 

It is not enough to feel saddened when hearing about the loss of 

innocent lives. We have an obligation, as adults and citizens, to 

protect those who have no power to protect themselves, who have 

no voice to address the powers that be, and obligation to prevent 

these fatalities. 

The first step in ending child abuse and neglect deaths is awareness of the problem, including the accurate collection of data regarding the number and circumstances of child deaths from maltreatment. We are all here today because Chairman David Camp, 

Chairman Geoff Davis, and Ranking Member Doggett, and the 

Members of the Subcommittee on Human Resources believe that 

this important issue deserves attention. 

On behalf of the Coalition, I want to thank you for holding a 

hearing on child abuse and neglect fatalities, and for your efforts 

to bring an end to the preventable deaths of children like Caylee, 

Marcella, and Nubia in the United States. 

Thank you so much for hearing my testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Tunie follows:] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
19 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.010
20 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.011
21 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you, Ms. Tunie. 

Ms. Covington. 

STATEMENT OF THERESA COVINGTON, M.P.H., DIRECTOR, 

THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHILD DEATH REVIEW 

Ms. COVINGTON. Thank you, Chairman Davis, Ranking Member Doggett, and Members of the Subcommittee, for providing me 

with this opportunity to speak to you. I serve as the director of the 

National Center for Child Death Review, with funding from the 

maternal and child health bureau at HRSA, HHS. We assist States 

in improving their child death review processes. 

CDR is a process in which profess—in which professionals from 

many agencies come together to share case records, look at the 

facts in the deaths, and decide what they will do to prevent these 

deaths in the future. Every State, except Idaho, tries to review all 

child abuse and neglect deaths at the State or community level. 

As described by the GAO, our center built and now maintains the 

national CDR case reporting system, which 39 States are using and 

submitting reports on all of the child deaths that they review. This 

allows for the collection of comprehensive information on child 

deaths, because it is a compilation of the information shared by all 

the agencies at a review meeting. 

The system collects data on the child, their care givers, the supervisors, the perpetrators, the investigation, the circumstances in 

the death, and actions taken to prevent other deaths. The report 

tool has over 1,800 data elements, and as of today we have 94,473 

deaths in the system, of which 8.3 percent were due to child abuse 

and neglect, which is 7,894 little children like Casey Anthony’s. 

And the GAO report is right. We know that more children die 

from abuse and neglect than is reported through NCANDS, from 

vital records, or law enforcement databases alone. The CDC had 

funded a child maltreatment surveillance project in seven States, 

and I was the PI in Michigan. In an average year, Michigan had 

reported 16 child abuse deaths through death certificates, law enforcement records, 26, child protective services, 40 deaths. When 

child death review synthesized these multiple sources of data, the 

actual number was at least 100 deaths a year. 

And we just did a quick count of child abuse and neglect deaths 

reported through State child death review annual reports, and compared them to the NCANDS data for those same years: 15 States 

reported 1,029 states [sic], compared with 516 in the NCANDS report. 

I agree with the GAO findings on some of the reasons for the 

under-reporting. Deaths due to neglect are especially under-reported, and most deaths from neglect happen when care givers 

egregiously fail to protect a child from hazards: toddlers drowning 

in bath tubs, children dying in-house fires when left alone, children 

left in cars on hot days, infants suffocated while sleeping with their 

intoxicated parents. 

And different States have different definitions of abuse and neglect. What Mississippi might call abuse, Connecticut might call a 

bad accident, or vice versa. And States even differ on who makes 

the call, whether it is a CPS worker, the coroner, law enforcement, 

the prosecutor. And States have different criteria for how they 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
22 

count the deaths into NCANDS, into our system, and into other 

systems. There is also wide variation in the quality of child death 

investigations across the country, so that when the deaths aren’t 

well investigated, we don’t really know what happened. 

On a positive note, we know that when we count deaths right 

and do reviews well, prevention happens. That is why it is so important that we investigate, count, and review all of these deaths. 

I could spend all day here describing efforts implemented across 

the United States through child death review. Some specific to your 

States include: Kentucky implementing new fire safety education 

for families, because of deaths in which children died and adults 

survived. Georgia, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, 

North Dakota, and Washington implemented major public awareness campaigns on shaken baby prevention and safe infant sleep. 

North Dakota improved death reporting policies to CPS. Tennessee 

developed evidence-based home visiting programs. Texas is training 

all CPS workers in infant death investigation. A number of States 

have changed mandatory reporting policies to CPS, for example, requiring reports even if there are no survival siblings [sic]. 

And I agree with the GAO recommendations to improve comprehensiveness, the quality, and the use of national data on maltreatment deaths. And I look forward to being part of the solution, 

working with ACF, NCANDS and others, to identify how we can 

share and use all of our data to prevent these deaths. 

I also ask that you require national standards and child maltreatment definitions and in reporting. And I ask that you call for 

a national commission to further study this issue. 

But our States also need additional resources. States certainly 

need emergency help now, as—for child protection, as their resource are dwindling while child abuse and neglect is increasing. 

We should not be a nation that fixes its budget at the expense of 

abused and neglected children. Other than the $600,000 in funds 

allocated for our resource center, there is no dedicated funding to 

States for child death review or for the reporting system. Fortunately for us, a private company based near Goddard recently offered to build our new software for us. 

Chairman David, Mr. Doggett, and those of you on this Committee, later tonight please think about the 7 or 8 or maybe even 

10 children who will have died today because someone who is supposed to tuck them in at night killed them instead. And then tomorrow, begin work on your Committee to take action to keep our 

children alive. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Covington follows:] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
23 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.012
24 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.013
25 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.014
26 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.015
27 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.016
28 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.017
29 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.018
30 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.019
31 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.020
32 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you, Ms. Covington. 

Mr. Petit. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL PETIT, PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER, 

EVERY CHILD MATTERS EDUCATION FUND 

Mr. PETIT. Chairman Davis, Ranking Member Doggett, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for convening this hearing 

and for the opportunity to testify on this issue. I am Michael Petit, 

president of Every Child Matters Education Fund. 

I have been involved with child maltreatment fatalities for over 

40 years, and I am sad to say that, despite great increases in our 

overall knowledge about child welfare, the situation facing these 

children has improved very little over that period of time. I was 

formerly with the Child Welfare League of America for a dozen 

years. I served as Maine’s human services commissioner, which 

had responsibility for child welfare and child protection. I am also 

the author of a publication called, ‘‘We Can Do Better: Child Abuse 

Deaths in America.’’ 

I will devote my testimony to an overview of child abuse fatalities. Others will speak specifically to the data issues that are 

raised in the GAO report. 

To start with, child abuse rates are much higher in the U.S. than 

in other democracies, triple Canada’s rate, 11 times Italy’s rate. 

The official tally of almost 1,800 deaths a year we believe is significantly undercounted, that there are, in fact, 2,500-plus deaths a 

year, about 5 times the number of U.S. soldiers killed in 2 wars 

since the beginning of our study. 

Some 80 percent of the children killed are under the age of 4; 50 

percent are under 1. Black children are nearly three times more 

likely to be killed. The vast majority of children are from low-income, low-education families. And of the 51 children randomly selected for our report—some of you may have seen this report; if not, 

we can make it available to you—there are 51 children here. In the 

course of our study period, going back to the start of the AfghanIraq wars, there were 400 children behind each one of these pictures. Of the 51 kids that we selected at random, only 1 was killed 

with a knife or a gun. The other 50 were principally—the principal 

cause of death was being beaten to death. 

Our collective systems of child protection are stretched too thin. 

Too many troubled families, too few social workers and other staff, 

and too little community support. Few of the thousands of child 

protective units in the States are adequately equipped to deal with 

all the families brought to their attention. Consequently, protection 

for many children is a matter of geography. Where a child lives 

may determine whether she lives or dies. Some States appear to 

have a 10 times greater death rate than others. Some States appear to spend five times more than others on child protection. I say 

‘‘appear,’’ because of a lack of acceptance of standard definitions in 

the field. We don’t really know. 

Child abuse flows from extensive child maltreatment in the U.S., 

nearly three million reports a year, and preventable deaths are inevitable when we are drawing from such a large pool of vulnerable 

children. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
33 

A major factor, lack of public awareness about the scope and size 

of the problem, directly related to restrictive confidentiality laws, 

which—we hope one of the things that you will do is examine those 

laws and make modifications in them. They shield the press, public 

officials, and the public from shortcomings. And we made recommendations for—in 2009 that have been presented in this committee; 150 child protection experts met for a couple of days. 

Let me say that I have had extensive personal experience in 

dealing with child fatalities where data interfered with the protection of a child. During my stint as Maine’s commissioner of human 

services, we had a little girl that was presented to us by her family 

at 5:00 on a Friday afternoon. 

Our social worker called the local mental health center and said, 

‘‘Is the father of this child taking his medications? We know that 

he is a mentally ill individual, and he is not taking the medication.’’ They said, ‘‘We are not going to share that information with 

you, there are confidentiality issues for the parent, and we are not 

going to give you the information.’’ 

One hour later, that child was put in an oven, the oven was 

turned on, and the child died in the oven. It was a very tragic incident that put our whole State of Maine in a state of shock for 

weeks. 

And I have provided specific consultation to counties all across 

the country on this business of bringing together the information 

from law enforcement, child protection, the mental community, 

mental health. And I am sad to say that, in most communities, 

there is not a sharing of that knowledge. And, in many instances, 

the civil legal protection system for children is not enough. The 

criminal justice system also needs to be brought into play, and we 

need to afford more progress in that. 

Let me say in my remaining moments that the adherence and 

development of national standards in this area is critical. Are these 

children Texas children first, or are they Vermont children first, or 

are they American children first? That is an issue, the national 

standards. 

The support of a commission to examine these child abuse deaths 

is critical, it is a very complex topic. The increase in—I mentioned. 

And then, I think, a public education campaign is critical in this 

area. 

I will close my remarks with that, and I have submitted more detailed testimony elsewhere. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Petit follows:] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
34 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.021
35 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.022
36 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.023
37 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.024
38 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.025
39 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.026
40 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.027
41 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.028
42 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.029
43 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.030
44 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.031
45 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Petit. 

Dr. Jenny. 

STATEMENT OF CAROLE JENNY, M.D., DIRECTOR, CHILD 

PROTECTION PROGRAM, HASBRO CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL 

Dr. JENNY. Chairman Davis, Ranking Member Doggett, and 

Members of the Subcommittee, I thank you for the opportunity to 

testify on child deaths due to maltreatment. 

I am a professor of pediatrics at Brown Medical School, and the 

director of the child protection program at Hasbro Children’s Hospital in Rhode Island. I have a unique perspective on this issue, because I may be the only person in this room who often has stood 

at the bedside in the emergency department or in the intensive 

care unit, and actually witnessed the deaths of infants and children 

from maltreatment. 

When the death of a child is the result of abuse or neglect, a sad 

event becomes an immense tragedy. The 1,700-yearly child maltreatment deaths officially reported are just the tip of the iceberg. 

As the GAO report points out, counting and tracking the number 

of deaths from maltreatment is challenging. 

Sometimes it is very difficult to distinguish between accidental 

and non-accidental death. For example, when a child is purposely 

suffocated with a pillow or a plastic bag, it can be impossible to distinguish this act from a death by natural causes. 

In addition, many deaths from neglect are not counted as such. 

In Rhode Island, a three-year-old was told by his drunken father 

to go across a busy street to retrieve a discarded lamp from a 

neighbor’s trash. He was hit by a car and killed, and his death was 

ruled an accident. 

And what about deaths caused by the late effects of maltreatment? If a teenage survivor of horrific sexual abuse commits suicide because of her severe depression and post-traumatic stress, is 

that considered a child abuse death? In my opinion, the root cause 

of death in that case is child maltreatment. 

My interest is in providing more accurate primary data to the 

agencies that track child maltreatment deaths. These agencies cannot perform well if the cases they review have not been adequately 

investigated. The pediatric profession has recently made a giant 

leap in improving this process. The American Board of Pediatrics 

has established the board-certified pediatric sub-specialty of child 

abuse pediatrics. 

These pediatricians complete an additional 3 years of fellowship 

training in child maltreatment, becoming experts in the recognition, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of child maltreatment. 

When a child does die from abuse or neglect, these pediatricians 

can help police, forensic, and social service agencies make the correct diagnosis by doing the appropriate medical work-up in the hospital, and by ruling out conditions that mimic abuse or neglect. 

There are—there is currently no Federal support for training pediatric sub-specialists in child abuse pediatrics. We need to expand 

the availability of fellowships, to make sure that these doctors are 

available to all hospitals around the country that care for children. 

The National Association of Children’s Hospitals and Related Institutions has published recommended guidelines for the establishVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:37 Dec 07, 2011 Jkt 070889 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\70889.XXX 70889

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
46 

ment of child protection teams at all children’s hospitals, but there 

are not enough trained, board-certified pediatric specialists in the 

field to provide this expertise. 

Another way to increase the accurate counting of child maltreatment deaths is to increase the resources available to medical examiners and coroners, and to support their performance of quality 

death investigations. Multiple studies have shown that only about 

half of the child maltreatment deaths are actually recognized and 

recorded on death certificates and in State vital statistics. 

In summary, in addition to improving our method of counting 

child maltreatment deaths, we need to improve our ability to recognize and discern when a death is due to child maltreatment. And 

if we have the resources to diagnose abuse and neglect, and provide 

the necessary treatment and services to children and families, we 

can actually prevent the ultimate worst outcome, the death of a 

child. 

It is important to note that strengthening the quality of medical 

and death investigations in child abuse cases adds another protective factor. That is, we will be better able to protect innocent parents from allegations of child abuse and neglect, and to preserve 

and promote families. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Jenny follows:] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
47 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.032
48 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.033
49 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.034
50 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.035
51 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.036
52 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you, Dr. Jenny. With that, I would like 

to defer to the distinguished Ranking Member to introduce the next 

witness. 

Mr. DOGGETT. I am very pleased to have join our panel Dr. 

Jane Burstain. Dr. Burstain is responsible for child welfare and 

child protective service budget issues at the Center for Public Policy Priorities in Austin, Texas. It is located in the same neighborhood that is my home in east Austin. And CPPP is a non-profit, 

non-partisan think tank that has played a vital role in Texas, particularly on State legislative issues committed to improving the economic and social condition of low to moderate-income Texans. 

Before she came to east Austin, Dr. Burstain served as an adjunct professor at Pepperdine, where she taught family policy classes. And she worked as an attorney representing children in the Los 

Angeles child welfare system. So we really have this coast-to-coast 

problem and insight offered by our panelists this morning. 

Thank you, Doctor. 

STATEMENT OF JANE MCCLURE BURSTAIN, PH.D., SENIOR 

POLICY ANALYST, CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY PRIORITIES 

Dr. BURSTAIN. Thank you. Chairman Davis, Ranking Member 

Doggett, and Members of the Subcommittee; thank you for the opportunity to come testify on this important and tragic issue. 

As Representative Doggett mentioned, I have worked in the child 

welfare arena for more than a decade. I started out as an attorney 

in Los Angeles, and during my six-year tenure there representing 

thousands of abused and neglected children, I became interested in 

taking my experience and translating it into systemic improvement. I earned my Ph.D., and in 2008 I joined the Center for Public Policy Priorities in Austin, Texas. 

At the Center, I conduct research, I participate in State and national coalitions, and I educate policymakers on how to improve 

and create better outcomes for children and families. 

Let me start by saying that I absolutely agree with Representative Doggett, that even one child death from maltreatment is too 

many. It is the ultimate tragedy for the family and the community, 

and for the individuals who have to investigate it. But every single 

day in the United States more than four children are reported to 

have died from abuse and neglect. That is one death every 6 hours. 

And those are just the ones that we know about. As all the witnesses have testified here, the number of children dying from maltreatment is probably even higher. 

As discussed in my written testimony, and as adequately and extensively documented by the witnesses here, we do need to do a 

better job with States getting more quality, comprehensive, and 

consistent data on child maltreatment deaths. But with children 

dying every day, we cannot wait for the data to be perfect before 

we act. So I am going to focus on what we do know. 

We know that even taking reporting differences into account, 

some States have higher child maltreatment death rates than others. We also know that poverty and having a teen parent are significant risk factors for abuse and neglect, and that those risk factors are more prevalent in certain States. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
53 

So, I looked at States with high child poverty rates and high teen 

birth rates, which include many of the States represented on the 

panel today in this committee, and I looked to see if those States, 

on average, also had higher child maltreatment death rates. I 

found that States with high child poverty had a 43 percent higher 

death rate, on average. And I also found that States that had a 

high teen birth rate had a 61 percent higher death rate, on average. 

As families struggle and stress levels rise, child maltreatment becomes more of a risk. And this risk is only growing. The great recession has pushed more families into poverty. As compared to 

2008, the number and percentage of children living in poverty has 

increased nationwide in virtually every State. And although the 

teen birthrate has dropped nationwide, some States still struggle 

with the issue. In Texas, in 2008, there were 55,000 births to teenage girls. 

If we want to reduce child maltreatment, now is not the time to 

cut support to struggling families. But as States grapple with huge 

budget deficits, that is exactly what is happening. The number of 

children receiving child abuse and neglect prevention services has 

declined in 17 States, many of which are represented here on the 

Subcommittee. 

In Texas, with more than 1.6 million children living in poverty 

and at risk for maltreatment, there is only funding for about 6,000 

to receive direct child abuse and neglect prevention services. Budgets are so tight that States are even cutting services to children 

who have been subjected to abuse and neglect. 

In 2009, in some States, 2 of every 3 children who are child 

abuse and neglect victims stayed in their home and did not receive 

any ongoing child welfare family support services. 

Early education and child care programs, which have been shown 

to reduce aggressive parenting behavior and maltreatment are 

being cut, as well. Getting children out of the home and into 

daycare reduces parental stress, and makes the children more visible to reporters who can identify a problem before it escalates into 

something serious. But in Texas’s most recent budget, the legislature cut grants to support pre-kindergarten by 100 percent, and cut 

$.20 of every dollar that funds subsidized daycare to at-risk children. That is why Federal programs which help support struggling 

families, like title IV–B of the Social Security Act, the child care 

development block grant, and the supplemental TANF grant are so 

important. 

Expanded health insurance options for adults under the Patient 

Protection and Affordable Health Care Act is important, as well. 

With health insurance, poor parents are struggling with substance 

abuse and mental health, can get access to services, and thereby 

reduce the risk factors for reduce and neglect, get healthy, and 

take care of their kids. 

I know that the budget crisis that is facing States extends to the 

Federal Government. But to cut programs that support struggling 

families in tough economic times is the very definition of penny 

wise and pound foolish. 

And if we make that choice, our children will pay for it with their 

lives. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Burstain follows:] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
54 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.037
55 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.038
56 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.039
57 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.040
58 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.041
59 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.042
60 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.043
61 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.044
62 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.045
63 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you very much. We will move to questions now. 

In today’s testimony we have heard a variety of numbers. I 

know, from my professional experience, whether it was in the military, in business, and certainly in the morass of Washington, D.C., 

you can’t fix what you can’t measure. And this is going to be one 

of the central questions, particularly numbers of how many children die due to maltreatment each year. 

States reported over 1,700 deaths in 2009 to HHS. GAO cites 

this figure, and also a number from the HHS national incident 

study of child abuse and neglect that estimated 2,400 deaths over 

2 years, from 2005 through 2006. 

Ms. Tunie mentions 2,500 deaths from maltreatment per year, as 

does Mr. Petit. Ms. Covington speaks more generally about the 

undercount she witnessed in Michigan and reviewed in Nevada. 

Ms. Brown, your report details a number of reasons to believe 

current data understates the number of children who die from maltreatment. In terms of scale, how many deaths do you believe were 

missing each year? Tens? Hundreds? Thousands? What is a better 

number if the HHS official estimate of 1,770 is an undercount? 

Ms. BROWN. The challenge there is finding good research that 

actually measures these issues. And we did a very careful literature review of all the research that looked at the numbers of 

child fatalities from maltreatment, and none of them are perfect. 

That is the problem. 

You know, the one that has the relatively high percent of child 

welfare undercounts covers only three States. The one that comes 

up with 2,400 reaches across a number of different partners, but 

it is such a small population that they captured, that it is hard to 

be really, really confident in the data. 

So, we know—we have seen differences in hundreds. We have 

seen as much as 1,000. I would like to see a much better process 

for getting this information, so we can actually know. 

Chairman DAVIS. What were the States that—the three 

States—— 

Ms. BROWN. In the study? 

Chairman DAVIS. Yes. 

Ms. BROWN. California, Michigan, and Rhode Island. 

Chairman DAVIS. Okay, thank you. Would anybody else care to 

comment on this issue? Mr. Petit? 

Mr. PETIT. Yes, I would just note that there are three peer-reviewed articles that appeared in prestigious health and scientific 

journals that speak to the undercount being at least 50 percent. 

One is the Journal of the American Medical Association, one is the 

Journal of Pediatrics, and one is the Journal of Public Health. Each 

of them have extensive documentation they put forward that say 

the number appears to be at least a 50 percent undercount, which 

is how we arrive at the 2,500 figure. But no one could defend that 

number as being precise, that being the whole purpose of the GAO 

study, is to help show just how deficient measuring is. 

Chairman DAVIS. Anybody else like to share? Ms. Covington? 

Ms. COVINGTON. I personally believe it is probably 100 percent 

undercount. I think we should double the number, when you take 

into account neglect deaths. Just looking at the 15 States that we 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
64 

did briefly before we came here, we doubled the number of States 

that actually reported—you know, when you looked at that versus 

when was NCANDS, it was double. And I think that that is probably true across the country. So, I personally would double the 

number. 

Chairman DAVIS. Okay, thank you. Any other—— 

Mr. PETIT. May I just say, as an example of what we get at— 

we had a case one time in which it was an open child protective 

case. They lived on a third or fourth floor. The mother experienced 

an overdose. The two-year-old child went down to the street, was 

run over by a car. And in most States that is listed as a pedestrian 

accident, not the child abuse and neglect-related death that it is. 

Chairman DAVIS. So you are saying, for example, connecting the 

different parts of the law enforcement investigation to collate that 

data would be helpful? 

Mr. PETIT. Let me just say that when we have done that with 

law enforcement, the medical community, and others—and district 

attorneys—it is tremendously revealing to see what actually happens, the disposition of cases. 

Child welfare can say, ‘‘Here is 100 certified cases in which child 

sexual abuse,’’ for example, ‘‘occurred.’’ Police might say, ‘‘We can 

identify 75 cases where there was a perpetrator.’’ There may be 25 

cases that are reported to the district attorney. The district attorney may choose to prosecute 10, because they don’t think the data 

is good enough, in terms of supporting the evidence, and you may 

end up 5 convictions and 2 or 3 sentences to prison—which I am 

not saying is the answer to this whole problem—but they are not 

tracking those numbers. They are keeping their information separately. And when it is blended together they can see where the 

structural problems are in the system. 

Chairman DAVIS. Before I yield to Mr. Doggett, something I 

would throw open to the members of our panel, if you have suggested process improvement ideas—particularly as we can tie a 

cost to them, or reduce that cost burden, to get this linkage of data. 

We found, in many institutional settings, a great amount of success 

in removing error, unnecessary cost, and other problems—or quality issues, in a more generic sense—but in this case it might lead 

to a solution to these problems. 

With that, I yield to Mr. Doggett. 

Mr. DOGGETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Burstain has put 

this in terms of one child losing a life every 6 hours. Ms. Covington, 

I gather what you are saying is it could be as much as one every 

three hours, or one every 2 hours. And that is what several of you 

have said with reference to the data, that those figures that are 

widely acknowledged are probably much greater than our understanding. Right? 

And I—— 

Ms. COVINGTON. Yes, correct. 

Mr. DOGGETT. And I gather that for everyone here, if we could 

do something to prevent just one of these horror stories that will 

take place in the next 6 hours or the next 3 hours or the next 2 

hours, we would want to do that. 

As policy experts looking more broadly across the country, beginning with you, Dr. Burstain, what can we do to prevent these tragVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:37 Dec 07, 2011 Jkt 070889 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\70889.XXX 70889

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
65 

edies? We want to have an accurate count, certainly, and I think 

there are measures to get a better count. But we are not counting 

beans here. We are counting precious children’s lives. What are the 

things that the Congress should be doing now, beyond getting a 

more accurate count, to be sure that that rate doesn’t go higher? 

Dr. BURSTAIN. Thank you. Well, in addition to funding the programs that support struggling families, I think one of the things 

that could really be helpful is the title IV–E waiver program that 

has passed through the House. 

Basically, one of the problems with the child welfare system 

overall is, with the funding streams, you have title IV–B, which is 

a block grant, and that is the money that States have flexibility to 

use for prevention programs, and to keep kids safe in their own 

home. Title IV–E basically covers foster care and adoption, so it 

covers the back end. And that represents a much larger part of the 

Federal financing on child welfare. 

And so, if you had a waiver program where States could take the 

money that they would have spent on foster care and spend that 

same money up front to keep kids safe, to prevent child abuse and 

neglect from occurring in the first place, I think it would go a long 

way toward really helping these families keep their children safe. 

I think funding child care is another really important issue. 

Child care is something that can really help—just getting the child 

out of the house relieves parental stress. And I think, most importantly, the parents, when their kids are in child care, know that 

someone is going to be looking at that child. And if there is a problem, and the child is coming with a bruise or seems to be unkempt, 

there is someone who can see that child every day and make a report and have the child protective services system intervene before 

a problem occurs. 

Because one of the problems with child maltreatment deaths is 

a lot of those deaths happen, and the child welfare system doesn’t 

even know about those kids. And so it is not as if the child welfare 

system is investigating these difficult families and not doing a good 

job of intervening. They don’t even have an opportunity to intervene, because most of these are young kids who are not in school, 

and so no one sees them. And if you get child care for these struggling families, you eliminate that problem. 

Mr. DOGGETT. What will be the effect on this problem of child 

abuse, or child deaths, if the Social Services Block Grant is eliminated, if TANF supplemental grants in States like Texas are not 

continued, and they are set to expire within days, and if we don’t 

have unemployment benefits available for families? 

Dr. BURSTAIN. Well, I can tell you with respect to the Social 

Security block grant and the TANF. Those are programs that, I 

know in Texas, they use to directly support child welfare services. 

So those are grants that are not only used to help generally families in poverty, but are specifically used to help families that are 

at risk of abuse and neglect, or have actually subjected their children to abuse and neglect, and they are in the system. 

Mr. DOGGETT. And you are saying—just to interrupt you for a 

minute—that in Texas the cuts have been so severe already, even 

without losing these programs, that some families already identiVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:37 Dec 07, 2011 Jkt 070889 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\70889.XXX 70889

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
66 

fied as actually having had cases of abuse or neglect no longer get 

the services? 

Dr. BURSTAIN. Yes. The services rate for child maltreatment 

victims in Texas is at about 45 percent. So about 4 of every 10 children who have been identified as abuse and neglect victims receive 

ongoing child welfare services. And, as I testified about earlier, in 

some States that rate is even lower, and you’ve got 7 of every 10 

children staying in the home and not getting services. 

Mr. DOGGETT. Ms. Tunie, you represent an impressive coalition 

of social workers and others. Are there recommendations that you 

have, with regard to what steps we can take to prevent this death 

rate from accelerating, from matters getting worse? 

Ms. TUNIE. Yes. In agreement with Dr. Burstain, to simplify 

it—because I am not an expert on this issue—funding is critical, 

and services are critical. And the ability to collect the data accurately is critical. 

Mr. DOGGETT. Thank you. 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

I would like to share with Dr. Burstain that Mr. McDermott and 

I introduced the child welfare waiver bill addressing this IV–E 

issue that passed out of the House in May. I encourage you to call 

your friends in the U.S. Senate, and encourage them to move faster 

than their glacial pace to address these things. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman DAVIS. The chair now recognizes Mr. Paulsen from 

Minnesota. 

Mr. PAULSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Brown, may I 

ask you a question regarding the report? The report explains the 

two primary sources of data that we have on child maltreatment 

fatalities, and the data reported to HHS and the data reported 

through State child death review teams. What does HHS do with 

the data, exactly, other than just publish summaries of the information? 

Ms. BROWN. The NCANDS data that HHS collects is used for— 

because they oversee the State programs—it is used for things like 

checking to see if the States are abiding by their expectations when 

they do their reviews of each State program. 

They also use them to—they have measures that they are expected to meet each year,for example, knowing the number of 

deaths from maltreatment and foster care. 

But the other thing, as far as the more on-the-ground information, is that they have some technical assistance centers, and there 

is one that deals specifically with child protective services. And 

that center has done some training to try to push the information 

out. 

Mr. PAULSEN. And then what do the States do with their child 

death review team data, the States, specifically? 

Ms. BROWN. I am wondering if I am the right person to answer 

that. 

Mr. PAULSEN. Ms. Covington is nodding her head. Okay, 

please. 

Ms. COVINGTON. Forty-four States require that they use their 

data for a—to publish a State annual report on their deaths, which 

would include child abuse deaths, as well as other deaths. Most 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
67 

States are really getting smart about actually creating—they—almost all the States have a State-level advisory board that reviews 

those findings before the report gets issued, and they make recommendations to their Governors and their State legislatures on 

policy and practice. 

Mr. PAULSEN. Okay. 

Ms. COVINGTON. And some of them have been very successful, 

actually, in getting those things—their recommendations implemented. 

Mr. PAULSEN. Sure, Mr. Petit. 

Mr. PETIT. Yes, Mr. Paulsen, if I may say, all together there is about $30 billion spent on the child welfare system, the formal 

child welfare system. About 55 percent of that is State and local, 

mostly State. About 45 percent of that is Federal. 

There is a very weak Federal oversight of the child welfare system. They provide most of the money, and they actually—the Federal Government actually provides the statutory framework within 

which most State child welfare systems operate. 

I would assert flatly that virtually every single State in the country right now is vulnerable to a successful class action litigation 

being brought against them, and States repeatedly lose those when, 

in fact, such class action litigation is brought against them. 

There are very few sanctions ever imposed by the Federal Government, even when States are out of compliance for many, many 

years, in contradiction to what Federal standards and oversight requirements exist. 

Mr. PAULSEN. And, Ms. Tunie, maybe you can just tell me. 

What does your National organization do with the information in 

general, as you collect the info and get the data? 

Ms. TUNIE. Well, our mission, basically, is to raise awareness of 

the issue, and also to urge Congress to take action. 

Mr. PAULSEN. Okay. And, by the way, thank you for helping 

raise awareness on this issue. And, obviously, this hearing is a part 

of that effort. And, I mean, what other recommendations do you 

have for us as individual Members in our own districts, in our own 

States, to also help raise awareness about this issue, other than 

just going through numbers and data. 

Ms. TUNIE. Yes. You know, I think it is really important to put 

a face on it. The book that Mr. Petit put together, where you really 

see the faces of these children, and it really becomes a personal, 

as opposed to just a number or a statistic. I think that is a great 

way to raise awareness. 

Mr. PAULSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. TUNIE. Thank you. 

Mr. PAULSEN. Yield back. 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington, Mr. McDermott. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Thank you very much. I have watched these 

hearings since 1970, when I was in the State legislature. And 

States always lurch forward after a horrible event. It is over, and 

over, and over, and over again. 

And, Mr. Petit, you just sort of said that there is a tremendous 

problem, and most States would be vulnerable. Let’s go on the positive side. Tell me the States where they have the best system for 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
68 

getting these cases and preventing them. Because it seems to me 

the problem is we are always coming in at the back end, looking 

at the problem, when it is already in the hands of the coroner. 

And so, what I am interested in is what States have had the best 

system in place to predict and deal with and prevent? 

Mr. PETIT. Let me—I think that is a more complicated question 

than I am going to spend time answering, in the sense that there 

are literally thousands of child protection offices across the country. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Yes. 

Mr. PETIT. Many States run it through their county system. And 

we have done studies looking at outcome measurements for the 

States, and they vary wildly, so that the differences between virtually any indicator you want to choose, removing children from 

their family, reports of child abuse, fatalities, foster care, et cetera, 

the variations between the bottom State and the top States may 

have multiples of five or tenfold. 

But I will tell you the States that do the best overall are the ones 

that have smaller, whiter populations. So where—which translates 

into less poverty and less complicated issues around domestic violence, around imprisonment issues, around substance abuse. So all 

the States experience it, but some States experience much more 

than others. 

If you take a look at the overall distribution of these issues, they 

are concentrated especially most severely in the States with large 

minority populations. And I say that, saying that that correlates, 

in turn, with high rates of poverty in those communities. 

But if you wanted to look at a State that probably has had a significant effect in dampening down the overall amount of child 

abuse to begin with, which is the ultimate goal that we all have, 

we would say, like, Vermont, where they have comprehensive 

health care services, where there is home visiting for virtually all 

children. There is an extensive safety net that is built around welcoming a child and a family into the community, and people taking 

collective responsibility for overseeing what is happening with 

those children and families. 

There are a number of other States as well, but when you get 

into the big States—Texas, Florida, California—it is very, very 

challenging to manage the huge volume of cases that are brought 

to their attention in the first place. Remember, that number now 

is about three million reports of child abuse. HHS in their national 

incident study says the true number is closer to probably nine million cases of child abuse and neglect each year. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. When you sit at the Federal level, when you 

sit at this dais, and you look out on the United States, and you try 

and figure out what should we do, then the question that—I mean, 

Dr. Jenny raises the question of more pediatric—pediatricians 

trained in looking at the issue. Where are the other gaps in training that we should put money or think about? 

I mean we get into these stovepipe things because we try and figure out how to deal with it. But I would like to hear the other 

areas where you think there is a need. 

Ms. COVINGTON. I think, without question, our death investigation system is—really needs assistance throughout the country. 

In my home State of Michigan there is a number of medical examVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:37 Dec 07, 2011 Jkt 070889 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\70889.XXX 70889

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
69 

iners that tell you if you die in the first half of the year you are 

going to get a really good autopsy and investigation. If you die in 

the second half, it is going to not be so good, because they run out 

of money. And that is a reality. 

And without really quality death investigations, we are just not 

getting the answers we need around these child abuse deaths. So 

I think training and resources for improved death investigations 

would be one area. 

Dr. JENNY. I would like to say that the medical profession does 

a very bad job of recognizing abuse. I did a study and I published 

in Journal of American Medical Association, where we looked at 

131 abusive head trauma admissions to our hospitals, serious 

abuse. And a third of those kids had a previous head injury from 

abuse, went to the doctor, and the doctor missed the diagnosis. 

Eight of those kids died. 

And I think that there is very little education about family violence, about child abuse, in medical schools, in residencies. And I 

think that that is a place where we could really ramp up the prevention by early recognition. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Is there a place for nurse practitioners in 

that kind of a thing? 

Dr. JENNY. Absolutely. Nurse practitioners, PAs, even nurses. I 

did a study in Colorado where we looked at the amount of time in 

nursing school curriculums that was spent on family violence. It 

was less than 2 hours in a four-year curriculum. 

So, I think that this is something that would be relatively easy 

to do, just by putting more emphasis on this in our professional societies and our curriculums in schools. 

Chairman DAVIS. Great, thank you very much. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Thank you. 

Chairman DAVIS. The gentleman’s time has expired. Mr. Reed 

from New York. 

Mr. REED. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the panel. 

I come at this issue—when I first started my law practice we did 

a lot of law guardian work, and represented many abused and neglected children. And there is nothing more touching than that experience, and frustrating, and emotional, and it creates a lot of 

anger in me, individually, to see parents abuse their children. 

So, that being said—and I get the argument from all the testimony—I was reading this last night, and I get the argument we 

need increased funding, we need to protect the funding. You know, 

the environment we live in here in Washington, D.C., so—and I 

don’t want to spend a lot of time on that issue, just to articulate 

that I get it, and I understand that. 

What I would be interested—what I am interested in talking 

about today is kind of a new way of looking at this issue. I think, 

from all the testimony that I have heard and I have read, each of 

the members of the panel here today would agree that poverty is 

a higher indication of child death from the parents from abuse and 

neglect of parents, and substance abuse—would all agree is a higher indication of death of a child. 

That being said, I then—does it not beg the question, a common 

sense question of targeting our resources by requiring parents who 

are on public assistance—i.e. public assistance, the people that are 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
70 

in poverty are more likely to be on public assistance—parents in 

that program, require them to be drug and alcohol tested? 

We are talking about the death of children. And I understand 

there is going to be many parents that are going to be alcohol free 

and substance abuse free, and I get that. But if we are talking 

about saving the death of children, does that not trump the benefit 

that we could receive from identifying the higher-risk children 

through testing their parents for substance and alcohol abuse? 

Dr. Burstain, would you have any comment on that? 

Dr. BURSTAIN. Well, first, I think that I completely agree with 

you, that we should be looking at ways that we can prevent child 

abuse and neglect deaths. 

I will say that drug and alcohol testing is expensive. So if you 

are talking about not wanting the Federal Government and not 

wanting the States to have to spend more money—— 

Mr. REED. So if we can we get the cost taken care of—— 

Dr. BURSTAIN. Well—— 

Mr. REED. I mean you are asking for money elsewhere, so if you 

get the money—— 

Dr. BURSTAIN. Yes, absolutely. And I would say that that 

money would be better spent, instead of drug and alcohol testing, 

all of the individuals who are receiving public assistance, I would 

say that money would be better spent actually getting drug and alcohol treatment. 

Mr. REED. Well, not everyone that is on public assistance, just 

parents that have children in the home be tested. I am talking 

about a very narrow program, trying to narrow it down—— 

Dr. BURSTAIN. Wait—— 

Mr. REED. Just parents. 

Dr. BURSTAIN. I—— 

Mr. REED. Not all those on public assistance. 

Dr. BURSTAIN. I believe the majority of people who are receiving public assistance have children. 

Mr. REED. Okay. 

Dr. BURSTAIN. And so the majority of those people would be 

tested. And what I would say is that money that you would spend 

on testing—because what are you going to do if they turn out positive? The money would be—— 

Mr. REED. We would coordinate that information with CPS and 

with law enforcement, target those individuals, intervene, make 

sure that those parents are getting substance counseling, trying to 

lead them to a substance-free life, and that will lower the risk of 

death to their children, which all of you agree has created a higher 

risk for those children that are living in that environment. 

Dr. BURSTAIN. You would be—— 

Mr. REED. So that would be my—— 

Dr. BURSTAIN. You would be absolutely right, if there was 

money for treatment. But there isn’t money for treatment. And so, 

what I would say is, instead of spending your money on testing 

people who you have no basis to believe are actually abusing substances, I would spend the money on providing services to the people you know are abusing substances. 

Mr. REED. And when they—— 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
71 

Dr. BURSTAIN. So once they become involved in the child welfare system, you need to get them access to substance abuse. And, 

more importantly, mental—— 

Mr. REED. So we have to wait until they abuse their children 

before we get—because once they abuse their children, they are in 

the CPS system—then we can get them the substance abuse treatment that they need? 

Dr. BURSTAIN. Absolutely you do not have to wait. One of the 

things that I highlighted in my testimony is that, under the new 

Health Care Reform Act, getting people health insurance—one of 

the reasons people don’t get treatment, and before they actually become involved in the child welfare system, is poor adults a lot of 

times don’t have health insurance. And so the only way they can 

get treatment is become involved in the child welfare system, and 

get services through the child welfare system. 

Mr. REED. Okay. I notice my time is—Mr. Petit, you are the 

commissioner of—— 

Mr. PETIT. Child welfare. 

Mr. REED. Child welfare in Maine. 

Mr. PETIT. I would just note that the Congress and the Senate 

had legislation introduced more than 10 years ago on making substance abuse treatment moneys available to State child protective 

agencies whenever that was identified as being an issue. And certainly there is a high relationship between the two. But the Senate 

Finance Committee never held a hearing on the bill. It was introduced in three consecutive legislative sessions to provide assistance 

in that case. 

Now, that little girl that was baked to death in an oven that I 

mentioned, I remember the Governor saying to me, ‘‘Stop this. 

Take these children from these families and get—stop this issue.’’ 

I said to the Governor, ‘‘This is the first death we have had in 

four years. There are 12,000 children or so in our open protective 

custody in any given moment. And in the course of a year, 1 or 2 

might die, even though this problem that you just described exists 

maybe in 60, 70, 80 percent of the households.’’ 

So, I think there is a way to target this much more specifically, 

so that you get at what you are talking about. 

May I suggest—I have been doing this for 40 years. This is a 

panel that has been involved with this for a long time. I cannot emphasize enough the need for a national commission that brings together all of the different disciplines. We are talking about nothing 

less than healthy, human growth and development, which is a very 

complex topic, which hasn’t been looked at by this congress, by any 

Administration in decades. The last that I know of was the Rockefeller Commission. That was almost 20 years ago. We have had no 

national White House conferences in this country since 1970. 

This is an issue that has—receives very scant attention by the 

public. And it needs to be opened up. And that is why I would recommend this national commission and, at the same time, lift the 

confidentiality requirements. 

Chairman DAVIS. I appreciate your passion, Mr. Petit. That is 

one of the reasons we are having this hearing today, is to move forward—— 

Mr. PETIT. Thank you, sir. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
72 

Chairman DAVIS [continuing]. On this. And, with that, we will 

recognize the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Lewis, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. LEWIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Doggett, for holding this hearing. 

I have been here for almost 25 years, and attended many hearings. But this has been one of the most painful. What some of you 

have said is almost unreal, unbelievable. But I know it is real. I 

know it is believable. In my own district, in my own State of Georgia, just watching the news, reading the newspaper, seem like 

something happened to some little child, somebody child, somebody 

baby, almost every other day. 

And, Mr. Petit, I would really like to know from you. You mentioned race and poverty. It is not something that we should sweep 

under the rug or in some dark corner. We should face it, and face 

it head on. Could you tell me—maybe some of you have data, information on the State of Georgia—but could you tell me or speak to 

the whole issue of young families where there is a father, a mother, 

a boyfriend, a girlfriend with a child? Reading that something happened to this child. The child was beaten or left alone and died. 

What is happening there? 

Ms. Tunie, I love what you said about putting a face on it. How 

do you dramatize that? How do you make it real? How do you sensitize and educate the American people that this is a major problem and we have to face it? 

I think there is a great undercount, Ms. Brown. I think there is 

a great undercount. 

Mr. PETIT. May I say very directly? The legacy of slavery endures. The behavior that we are talking about is manufactured. It 

is not innate to any particular culture or any DNA. And in the 

black community what you have is a very high out-of-wedlock birth 

rate. You have a very high poverty rate. You have a very high imprisonment rate of young males. 

The family formation in the black community has been extremely 

challenged in the last few decades, and the research that does exist 

shows that children in a home with an unrelated male are almost 

100 times more at risk of dying than when there is a biological-related father in the household. 

So, I have just made some broad-sweeping statements on this. I 

believe it requires a much closer look. But there are realities, in 

the black community in particular, which shows in this report that 

there is a three times higher fatality rate in the black community. 

But it is manufactured behavior that contributes to it. 

Mr. LEWIS. Could you speak about poverty? Ms. Covington, you 

wanted to say something? 

Ms. COVINGTON. I was going to add on to that. There was a 

headline in the Washington Post yesterday. Keith Jackson wrote a 

story, and the headline was, ‘‘Would Anybody Have Cared if Caylee 

Anthony was of a Different Color?’’ And I think that is really important, because when we look at these deaths across the country, 

there is no question that the white, you know, middle-income kids 

who die at the hands of their care givers get a lot of attention. But 

African American kids are really over-representative in the numbers, and poverty is a huge correlation in these deaths. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
73 

In fact, in a lot of the neglect cases, that is one of the reasons 

they don’t get counted, because, you know, people give a little room 

there when there is poverty issues tied in to some of the parental 

responsibility problems, in terms of—they are living in poor families, and so there is—that is one of the reasons they don’t get 

counted as well. 

But then it leaves us with numbers that don’t make a whole lot 

of sense, and it doesn’t give us the ability to actually be able to respond to those cases. 

Mr. LEWIS. Any other member of the panel? 

Mr. PETIT. On the poverty question, if I may say, in 1960 the 

poorest cohort were seniors, the—children were the second poorest 

cohort. In 2010, children are the most poor cohort and seniors are 

the least poor cohort. The Federal Government is spending 7 times 

more per senior over 65 than per child under the age of 18. 

And if you look at the Federal benefits that go to seniors, they 

are the same from one end of the country to the next. They are the 

same in Maine as they are in Texas as they are in Hawaii. That 

is true with Medicare, that is true with Social Security. 

When you look at the income security programs for children, and 

the health care programs for children, they are largely left up to 

the States to shape, which, in fact, is attributable to some of the 

poverty that we are talking about, is that there is wide variation 

among the States in dealing with this issue. 

Chairman DAVIS. All right, thank you. The gentleman’s time 

has expired. I would like all the Members to know that in the back 

of your packets or binders is State-specific information for your 

home States on this data from the Congressional Research Service. 

And with that, I would like to recognize Mr. Berg from North Dakota for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is—you know, has 

to be one of the worst crimes that can be committed, a crime 

against a child. I—you know, these stories you talk about, putting 

a face on it, I mean it is just horrific. 

My wife is a family practice doctor. And one of her most difficult 

days is when she recognizes abuse in a child. And in our State of 

North Dakota, the support for her has been outstanding, to get 

that child in a good environment, a safe as possible environment. 

But, you know, in the discussion—I guess, Ms. Brown, the discussion really relates around this coordination. And I guess I am 

confused that, you know, almost half the States that are reporting 

this data are just kind of regurgitating data that you already have. 

And it seems to me that these States really should be accessing 

other information that they have in their States, whether that is 

a death certificate, medical examination after death, or the child 

death review team structure, which, to me, seems like an outstanding—somewhat volunteer, but again, you can bring some real 

experts into that. 

So, I guess I’m just asking, how do we get more accurate information? Not necessarily recreating the wheel, but how can we get 

more of a response? 

Ms. BROWN. Well, it seems to me that we have two places in 

the count where the response breaks down. And the first one is reVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:37 Dec 07, 2011 Jkt 070889 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\70889.XXX 70889

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
74 

lated to identifying whether a death is caused by maltreatment. 

And we have heard about how challenging that can be. 

And then, the second one is, as you referred to, collecting the 

data from the community in a way that can give a more complete 

picture. And I agree that the child death review teams that are on 

the local level can be very, very useful, because that is a vehicle 

for bringing different organizations together. 

And part of the issue there is trust, and having personal relationships. So, if you have a vehicle that regularly brings them together, that could make a difference, and it doesn’t cost much. 

Mr. BERG. Well, and it—again, our overall objective here is really to prevent this from happening. And, you know, we are gathering this data, and as I look at this data it is—I mean it is as accurate and current as you can get it, but we are years and years 

behind. 

And so, again, it seems to me that what you are talking about 

there on the local area—and again, you have a large State, very 

populous, or a small State—if you could create a system where you 

have local experts that are getting that accurate information, but 

also thinking what steps can be done on the local level and on the 

State level to, you know, again, catch these children. 

So that brings up the other question, and I just am always frustrated by the lack of communications between different agencies. 

And it seems to me, if you took this further in a local, you have 

the child death review committee and they are identifying certain 

trends, or certain things that really stand out—let’s take drugs, for 

example, drug abuse. If they are saying that this is something that 

is a real—it is in almost every one of these cases, how can they access the other agencies within that local community that could 

identify and share that information, so rather than reactively waiting, become more proactive and encouraging these people to get 

treatment or having a higher level of watchfulness over that child? 

Please. 

Dr. JENNY. One thing that I think is very helpful is hospitalbased child protection teams. Because that is a place—in children’s 

hospitals they have teams that meet weekly and go over every case 

that has been in that jurisdiction—not of deaths, but of kids that 

have been abused or neglected. And it is a proactive process. 

And having more support in the children’s hospitals for child protection teams is going to, I think, make a big difference because we 

all talk to each other and we do a lot of preventative work up front 

to avoid those deaths at the back end. 

Mr. BERG. Sure. 

Ms. COVINGTON. I think, too, there is a trend in States for 

more improved coordination of just general child protection investigations. Some States actually require it, even though they don’t 

necessarily follow through on making sure that those investigations 

are done in a coordinated way. 

But in places where they are done in a coordinated way, I think 

there is profound improvements in the way kids are identified, because you have got—you have law enforcement, the prosecutor, 

mental health, education, social services, they are all at the table— 

public health, they are all at the table, looking at this child from 

a more comprehensive—— 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
75 

Mr. BERG. It seems that those are best practices we could share 

with other States, if we had a little more—— 

Mr. PETIT. May I say that, actually, there is a lot of this going 

on right now through the Department of Justice? And one of our 

coalition members is the National Children’s Alliance. And there 

are some 800 local jurisdictions that have district attorneys, child 

protection, law enforcement, medical, that come together, typically 

around child sexual abuse cases. 

And may I just say in your own State of North Dakota, where 

I had the privilege of spending the better part of a year doing a 

project on child well-being for the North Dakota legislature, that 

year North Dakota ranked first or second in the national Kids 

Count survey. But if you had taken the 7 percent of children who 

are Native American and put them in a new State of East Dakota, 

they would have ranked 51st. 

And so, the data kind of misrepresented what the overall wellbeing was. It took us a year to get data from the Native community. It was this question of trust. And they finally put their numbers on the table. It created a new North Dakota Commission on 

Indian Affairs and Child Welfare. And I have been curious—this 

was 15 or 20 years ago—to see what impact finally putting that 

data on the table had, which is what the legislature was looking 

for. They didn’t know how to help the community—— 

Mr. BERG. Right. 

Mr. PETIT [continuing]. Without the numbers, and they didn’t 

want to start spending money without the numbers. 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you very much. The gentleman’s time 

has expired. And Mr. Crowley from New York, you are recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. CROWLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me sincerely 

thank you for holding this hearing today, and my colleague, Mr. 

Doggett, for bringing this issue that really, in light of the Caylee 

Anthony case, didn’t necessarily need to be highlighted, but I think 

in terms of what we, as a nation, are doing to combat the abuse 

of children is certainly needed. 

And I wonder whether or not the attention we have here today 

would be as strong if it were not for this particular case. I—and, 

Ms. Tunie, I appreciate your lending your voice and your face to 

this issue, and all the panelists here today. But this is a disturbing 

yet necessary subject matter that needs to be addressed. And I 

wonder, though, whether or not we would have the same attention 

we have today—I think you would be, and I think all of you and 

the panelists would be, but I am not so sure the media would be 

as strong as it is today. 

Whether or not the death of Caylee Anthony was by means or— 

of—caused by accidental neglect or first degree murder, at the end 

of the day that young child was killed, and may very well have 

been preventable if signs were—and steps were taken—if signs 

were seen, and proper steps were taken to prevent that. And I 

think the death of any young child, if it can be prevented, we 

should be doing everything we can to do that. 

I have been involved in this area for some time, going back to 

my days in the State legislature. I chaired a Subcommittee on child 

product safety. I was concerned by maybe not even accidental neVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:37 Dec 07, 2011 Jkt 070889 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\70889.XXX 70889

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
76 

glect, just the aspiration of small parts in toys, and children dying 

from what appeared to be the cause of pneumonia, when, in fact, 

it was they had aspirated a small plastic piece into their lungs, and 

therefore, only through autopsy later on was this found, to more 

high-profile today of baby cribs. 

I would like to ask the witnesses—you know, because I know the 

GAO report has been focusing on the proper gathering of statistics, 

and questioning whether or not we actually are getting all the reportable statistics and compiling them correctly to really get an understanding of the breadth and the extent of neglect that is taking 

place. But whether or not—it doesn’t really address the issues of 

what to do once we have that information. 

And I know my colleagues have asked this in some ways, but 

what else can we be doing to raise awareness? I know in a State 

like mine, in New York, we have—we have seen success in public 

awareness campaigns, especially as it pertains to the issue of shaken baby syndrome, as well as safe sleeping for children. What else 

can we be doing? What can we be doing to help parents that may 

not be mindfully neglectful? 

If you just—they have tough lives right now. The economy being 

where it is, and the stress that that brings to bear on people’s lives, 

they would never put themselves in the category of being accidentally neglectful, you know. What can we be doing to help those 

folks, as well? 

And other care givers that just may be unaware of the dangers 

in everyday situations—for instance, like bath tub safety and crib 

safety and choking hazard safeties? What could we be doing to help 

those folks? 

Dr. JENNY. One thing that your State has done, has been— 

nurse home visitation to young families, particularly at-risk young 

families. And they have done a randomized control trial where they 

have found actually that over the years it decreases welfare dependency, it increases the educational level of the child in 15, 20- 

year followups, and also, it decreases the abuse rate and also the 

illness rate. 

So, David Olds model nurse home visitation would be an excellent model for prevention. 

Ms. COVINGTON. And that was funded in the Health Care Reform Act, and all States are now going to start doing that. And I 

think that that is really, really important, that that stay there and 

be a large part for every State to be able to have those dollars to 

be able to do those family home visits, because it is one of the very 

few demonstrated evidence-based practices that we know could actually reduce child maltreatment. 

That is part of the things I think we can do, is try to figure out 

what really does work, because the research is limited. Funds to 

figure out what really works for families is limited. So there is little research looking at evidence-based practices, but I think we 

need to keep doing that work. And then, when we find something 

that works, make sure it gets out to the general public and to communities, so they can start implementing these practices. 

Chairman DAVIS. Thank you very much. The gentleman’s time 

has expired. I would like to thank all of our witnesses for your time 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
77 

and preparation, for your staffs, the investment of research, and 

also helping us understand this very critical issue further. 

If Members have additional questions, they will submit them directly to you in writing. And what we, on the Committee, would 

ask is that you also send a copy of your response back to us at the 

Subcommittee, so that we can insert it into the record, as well. 

Thank you again for highlighting this very critical subject. And, 

with that, the Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:26 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Questions for the Record follow:] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
78 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.046
79 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.047
80 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.048
81 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.049
82 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.050
83 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.051
84 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.052
85 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.053
86 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.054
87 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.055
88 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.056
89 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.057
90 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.058
91 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.059
92 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.060
93 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.061
94 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.062
95 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.063
96 

f 

[Submissions for the Record follow:] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.064
97 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.065
98 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.066
99 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.067
100 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.068
101 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.069
102 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.070
103 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.071
104 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.072
105 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.073
106 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.074
107 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.075
108 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.076
109 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.077
110 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.078
111 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.079
112 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.080
113 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.081
114 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.082
115 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.083
116 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.084
117 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.085
118 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.086
119 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.087
120 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.088
121 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.089
122 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.090
123 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.091
124 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.092
125 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.093
126 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.094
127 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.095
128 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.096
129 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.097
130 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.098
131 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.099
132 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.100
133 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.101
134 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.102
135 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.103
136 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.104
137 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.105
138 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.106
139 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.107
140 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.108
141 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.109
142 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.110
143 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.111
144 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.112
145 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.113
146 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.114
147 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.115
148 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.116
149 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.117
150 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.118
151 

f 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.119
152 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.120
153 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.121
154 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.122
155 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.123
156 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.124
157 

Æ 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING70889A.125