Reference no: EM133577886

County A: A report was made that a very young child was wandering alone near a busy intersection. Police immediately responded and found a young child crossing a busy road. The police took protective custody and located the child's home located half a mile away. The child's mother was home with her two older children, ages 6 and 7. She appeared intoxicated. No other persons were in the home. The children were placed with a relative. Later, the older children were interviewed by the social worker (child protection worker) in the case. She also interviewed the child's mother to develop a case plan. The mother said she was sorry for what happened and should not have used drugs while caring for her children. The interviews were not recorded. A few days after that, the police detective in the case interviewed the children and attempted to interview the child's mother who refused to speak with the detective. The prosecutor assigned to the case asked the detective for statements from the mother which the detective did not have. The prosecutor arranged to have the children brought to the prosecutor's office to be interviewed.

County B. A report was made that a very young child was wandering alone near a busy intersection. Police immediately responded and found a young child crossing a busy road. The police took protective custody and located the child's home located half a mile away. The child's mother was home with her two older children, ages 6 and 7. She appeared intoxicated. No other persons were in the home. The children were placed with a relative. The next day the older children were brought to social services (child protection) office by the relative. The children were interviewed separately in a child interview room. The interviews were recorded, and the children were not interviewed about the incident again. The mother was interviewed by the police detective assigned to the case. The interview was also video recorded. A day or so later, the social worker and police detective, and other members of the child maltreatment multidisciplinary team, such as the prosecutor and victim's advocate, met and discussed the case and shared the interview information. The team made decisions on how to proceed in the case and each professional was assigned certain tasks. The next meeting was set for a few days.

Questions:

1. Does either county appear to have a child maltreatment multidisciplinary team? Why or why not?

2. If one of the counties appears to have a child maltreatment multidisciplinary team, who appear to be the team members? Also, what action did they take?

3. Which county did not have the best response to the report? Why?