A recent segment on Léman Bleu TV, a local Geneva station covering the hearing at the Court of Audit revealed systemic failures in how social services handle the placement of children and the support provided to their families. While child protection is under tremendous pressure, these systems seem to prioritize bureaucracy over the well-being of children and families. The findings, coupled with personal experiences like mine, paint a troubling picture of how inefficiencies can destroy lives.
The Court of Audit’s Findings: A System Under Pressure
The segment highlights significant shortcomings in how social services approach the placement of children and their interactions with families. Isabelle Terrier, Principal Magistrate at the Court of Audit, emphasizes the importance of clearly defined objectives for parents whose children have been placed in care. According to her, “it seems very important that the parent knows exactly the conditions they must fulfill to hope for their child’s return home, which is generally the goal.” Yet, the lack of follow-up and clarity leaves parents in the dark, undermining the potential for reunification.
The statistics presented are alarming:
- In 2023, nearly 1,000 children were placed in care for at least one day.
- As of May 2024, 82 children were still waiting for foster placements due to a shortage of available spaces.
These numbers reflect a system stretched to its limits, where children are caught in a limbo of uncertainty.
Carlos Sequeira, Director General of the Office for Childhood and Youth, noted that while more families are being supported compared to a few years ago, the quality of that support remains inadequate. He highlighted a glaring issue: the insufficient number of parent-child meeting points, which further isolates families during an already traumatic process.
Yet, rather than addressing these problems head-on, the system seems to perpetuate cycles of separation and disengagement.
A Mechanism Designed to Help, but One That Hurts
The temporary legal mechanisms, such as mesure superprovisionel (provisional measures), should be short-lived. However, in practice, these measures often drag on for months, adding unnecessary emotional strain to families.
This resonates deeply with my personal story. Following a mesure superprovisionel, I was separated from my child—an experience that was supposed to last only a short time. Instead, it stretched out to a staggering 10 months before I had my first contact with my child. For nearly a year, my child and I were kept apart, with no opportunity to maintain the bond so critical to their well-being and development.
This delay was not due to the complexity of my case but rather the inefficiencies within the system. The waiting list for a simple parent-child meeting during a child’s placement speaks volumes about the system’s inability to prioritize what matters most: the child’s emotional and psychological health.
A Flawed System with Misaligned Priorities
While hundreds of people work within SEASP and SPMi, the allocation of resources and the organization of their efforts remain deeply flawed. Families in crisis face prolonged waiting times, insufficient communication, and an overall lack of individualized attention to their unique circumstances.
Social workers, though likely dedicated, are overwhelmed by excessive caseloads, leaving little room for thorough investigation or meaningful engagement with families. This impacts the quality of their decisions, which, in turn, devastates families. The Court of Audit noted that the lack of adequate facilities, such as meeting spaces for parents and children, only exacerbates these challenges.
A System Rigged Against Fathers
Adding to the dysfunction is the system’s over-reliance on tribunals to resolve disputes. Every case seems to end up in court, regardless of whether the claims have been thoroughly investigated. This creates unnecessary delays and often skews outcomes against fathers, who disproportionately bear the brunt of these flawed processes.
Many fathers, myself included, face systemic biases that result in prolonged separation from their children. The system is often manipulated by those seeking financial gain rather than prioritizing the best interests of the child. Lawyers representing mothers frequently exploit this imbalance, leveraging the system to secure financial support while ignoring the emotional needs of the child and the contributions of fathers. In the process the lawyers are also profiting enormusly.
What Needs to Change
The failures of SEASP and SPMi are not just administrative oversights—they are destroying lives. To address these systemic issues, the following reforms must be implemented:
- Strict Time Limits for Provisional Measures: Mechanisms like mesure superprovisionel must be time-bound, ensuring families are not left in prolonged uncertainty.
- Prioritizing Parent-Child Reunification: Increase the number of parent-child meeting spaces and improve communication between social services and families.
- Improved Resource Allocation: Social workers need more support, better training, and manageable caseloads to handle complex cases effectively.
- Quality Assurance Systems: Implement QA processes to ensure every case is handled fairly and thoroughly, focusing on the child’s best interests.
- Judicial Reform: Reduce the reliance on tribunals by introducing robust mechanisms for pre-litigation resolution based on thorough investigations.
Conclusion: For the Sake of the Children
The findings of the Court of Audit, combined with personal experiences like mine, highlight the urgent need for systemic reform. Children should not have to suffer prolonged separations from their families due to inefficiencies or mismanagement.
If we truly value the welfare of our children, we must demand better from social services. Their primary goal should be to protect and nurture—not to tear apart—the families they are entrusted to help. The stakes are too high, and the cost of inaction is far too great. It is time to put children and families first.