Ethical Dilemmas at the Intersection of Child Protection and Juvenile Justice: Examining the Influence of Youth Race In Child Welfare Systems’ Decision-Making

Background/Objectives: The intersection of child welfare (CW) and juvenile justice (JJ) presents a critical and ethically complex challenge for youth in foster care. Many youth who enter care due to abuse or neglect also experience legal system involvement—a trajectory often described as the “foster care-to-prison pipeline.” Research shows that youth in care face disproportionately high rates of legal involvement and harsher judicial outcomes than peers (Herz & Dierkhising, 2019). These patterns are compounded by persistent racial disparities, with Black youth overrepresented in both systems and facing elevated risks, reflecting structural inequities (Ryan et al., 2007). Given evidence linking legal involvement to adverse outcomes across education, employment, and health, these disparities raise concerns about inequality and systemic accountability. Despite policy efforts, disparities persist, and system-level mechanisms remain largely understudied. In particular, limited research has examined how CW professionals’ perspectives and decision-making shape pathways into the JJ system. Drawing on critical race theory, which emphasizes how systemic racism and racialized social structures shape institutional practices and decision-making, this study examines how CW professionals’ referral decisions to JJ vary by youths’ race/ethnicity.

Method: This study used a qualitative design integrating 90-minute semi-structured interviews and demographic survey data. A total of 60 CW stakeholders were recruited, including private foster care agency workers (n=20), foster parents (n=20), government CW agency workers (n=10), and group home/residential staff (n=10). Interviews explored decision-making processes and the role of youth race in JJ system involvement. A two-cycle coding process was employed, beginning with exploratory coding on a subset of transcripts followed by focused structural coding across all transcripts. Each transcript was coded twice to enhance trustworthiness. Investigators then reviewed analytic memos, mapped patterns to identify themes, and met to refine and finalize themes. Demographic survey data contextualized participants’ responses.

Results: While most CW professionals and caregivers reported that youths’ race did not influence their decisions to call police or refer youth to the JJ system, nearly one-third indicated that race does affect decision-making. These participants described adopting a race-conscious approach to mitigate racial discrimination and systemic oppression, reporting greater use of de-escalation strategies and less reliance on law enforcement when working with youth of color, particularly Black youth. Although many expressed general caution about JJ involvement, this concern was heightened for Black and other youth of color. Common rationales included: 1) fears that police involvement would escalate situations and increase risk of harm; 2) concerns about harsher treatment and sentencing for youth of color; 3) potential negative impacts on youths’ long-term outcomes, including normalization of incarceration; and 4) risks of physical harm, including death, associated with law enforcement encounters.

Conclusions/Implications: Findings illustrate how CW stakeholders’ perspectives and decision-making can both prevent and facilitate JJ involvement among youth of color. Nearly one-third of participants adopted a critical race praxis to shield these youth from structural racism and racialized risk perceptions that inform decision-making. Fostering critical consciousness—the ability to analyze and act against social injustice—among CW professionals and caregivers may help address racial inequities in dual-system involvement.