'For reasons of poverty': Court challenges to child welfare practices and mandated programs

This article contributes to the ongoing debate on the role of poverty in the placement of children in out-of-home care and in family reunification. We examined court cases that successfully challenged policies of child welfare agencies resulting in children's placement into substitute care or in failure to reunite children with their families for 'reasons of poverty.' We briefly describe court mandated programs and evaluate the effectiveness of one of these programs in preventing substitute care placement, facilitating more timely reunification, and reducing agency costs. We conclude that child welfare agencies have removed children from their homes and have failed to reunite children with their families for 'reasons of poverty.' Our analysis also indicates that providing families with economic or material resources can prevent unnecessary substitute care placement, facilitate reunification, and be cost effective. Other child welfare practice, policy, and research implications are discussed.