Families Torn Apart

Language-Based Discrimination at the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families

A report from Massachusetts Appleseed, January 2021

“If an [LEP] client doesn’t have a lawyer with them and is also not understanding what’s going on… then things get held against them that maybe shouldn’t…It makes them less likely to get their kids back by making it look like they’re not complying, when it may be that they’re just not understanding.”

Anonymous CPCS Attorney

The Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF) is failing to provide federally mandated language access to limited English proficient (LEP) families. This failure means families are denied the full ability to comprehend or participate in DCF’s process and therefore face an increased likelihood of separation compared to their English-speaking counterparts.

Language-based discrimination directly impacts not only the parents who might lose custody of their children, but also the children of LEP parents themselves. Children separated from their families often experience complex trauma, grief, and poor educational outcomes.

Massachusetts Appleseed’s report examines the various ways in which the Department of Children and Families violates the civil language access rights of parents, the reasons for this systemic failure within DCF, and steps that DCF, the Massachusetts Legislature, and the Massachusetts legal community should take to prevent the unjust separation of families and ensure the Commonwealth’s child welfare system complies with federal civil rights law.

Our thanks to interns Jackson Barnett, Maya Jackson, Christin Lal, Maya McCann, and Henry Sturm for making this report a reality, our pro bono partners at Fish & Richardson and Paula Minella who provided critical legal analysis and support, as well as our former Research Director Jake Hofstetter. A special thanks to Amy Karp of Committee for Public Counsel Services for encouraging us to investigate this issue, and to all the individuals and organizations who made time to share their experiences and insight.

Report Highlights

Approximately 1 out of 10 families involved with DCF speak a language other than English.
Despite a few individual “superstar” caseworkers, the majority of LEP parents do not receive sufficient interpretation services, document translation services, or social services in their primary language.
A lack of competent and impartial interpretation plagues DCF casework; it is estimated that an interpreter is present in only 25% of the LEP home visits the agency conducts.
LEP families regularly do not receive Action Plans, letters, notices, and agreements translated into their primary languages.
Often LEP parents experience wait times double those that English-speaking parents face when trying to attend the social services (such as therapy, substance use disorder meetings, or parenting classes) that are mandated by DCF.
LEP families are significantly more likely to be denied visitation rights when temporarily separated, and an LEP family’s chances at reunification are significantly lower compared to an English-speaking family.
At every stage of the removal process (from visitation, to temporary removal, and the potential for permanent removal), children of LEP parents are more vulnerable to experiencing increased trauma compared to their English-speaking counterparts.
Recommendations for DCF to adopt internally include: 1) implementing language access trainings for DCF staff, 2) developing robust language access protocols, 3) hiring Regional Language Access Coordinators and prioritizing hiring bilingual staff, 4) ensuring all service providers the agency contracts with provide sufficient language services, and 5) improving and publicizing the process for requesting language access and making language access complaints, with community input and increased oversight from stakeholders to monitor the implementation of all recommendations.
The Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) should increase the number and frequency of trainings it provides staff in meeting the needs of LEP clients, and CPCS attorneys should strongly advocate for their clients’ meaningful access to DCF services through all means available, including the submission of complaints, if necessary.
The Massachusetts Legislature can take action by 1) enacting a language access statute that strengthens and standardizes language access requirements for state agencies and establishes enforcement mechanisms, 2) enacting legislation that provides a right for individuals to sue state-level government entities for disparate impact discrimination.
The Massachusetts public interest and civil rights legal community should explore alternative legal strategies for enforcing the rights of LEP families to be free from language-based discrimination at DCF, including but not limited to impact litigation.