Trial Over Oregon’s Child Welfare System Deferred After $18 Million Spent in Defense

The trial between the state of Oregon and the advocacy group suing the state for maltreatment of children in foster care has been postponed as the two parties work towards a settlement.

The trial, in which the state was supposed to defend its beleaguered child welfare system, was set to begin on Monday in Eugene. After five years and upwards of $18 million in taxpayer money, it appears that settlement talks have finally gotten traction. The final settlement agreement is due May 17. Melissa Roy-Hart, a spokeswoman for Disability Rights Oregon, stated in an interview earlier this week that the amount of money spent on litigating the lawsuit rather than reforming policy inside the child welfare system has been demoralizing.

“Not just money, but energy and time,” Roy-Hart explained.

In 2019, a national advocacy group filed a class-action lawsuit against the Oregon Department of Human Services, claiming that the state mistreats children in its foster care system and has failed to address serious issues. The complaint was filed by the group A Better Childhood, Disability Rights Oregon, and lawyers from Davis Wright Tremaine.

The purpose of Wyatt B v. Kotek, which is expected to begin in federal court in Eugene on Monday, is to hold DHS accountable and improve the state’s child welfare system, according to Marcia Lowry, executive director of A Better Childhood. Lowry has seen comparable actions in other jurisdictions result in large-scale, systemic changes.

The lawsuit argues that the state repeatedly places children in foster care in improper homes and facilities, sends them out of state to for-profit congregate care programs with a slew of issues, or abandons them, leaving them destitute.

“There are thousands of children for whom the state of Oregon has assumed responsibility and, for many, is often their only parent,” the complaint states. “And it is, has been, and continues to be a constitutionally inadequate parent, revictimizing already vulnerable and innocent children.” The state hired Markowitz Herbold, a private law firm, to represent Governor Tina Kotek and the state Department of Human Services in the dispute. David Markowitz did not return a phone seeking comment this week.

When Lowry first investigated Oregon’s child welfare system in 2019, she said she came away with some clarity: there was no doubt the system was causing more harm to already vulnerable and sometimes traumatized children. More recently, Lowry stated that Oregon’s existing child welfare system falls short of federal standards, particularly in terms of the frequency with which children are relocated from one location to another and the rate of abuse.

“The state has a high rate of maltreatment, which is the most serious thing that can happen,” Lowry stated. Lowry earlier stated that it was disappointed that the state and advocacy groups were unable to reach an agreement on critical adjustments before proceeding to trial.

In the weeks leading up to the trial, the law firm concentrated on one senator who has a long history of advocating for change at the agency.

The legal firm issued a broad subpoena seeking state Sen. Sara Gelser Blouin’s communications with journalists, lawyers, foster children, and Paris Hilton for the last nine years. The subpoena is directed at the Democrat from Corvallis who chairs the Senate Human Services Committee. Gelser Blouin was called as a witness in the case and is likely to testify. (The subpoena expressly requests correspondence between the lawmaker and reporters from OPB and The Oregonian/OregonLive).

Roy-Hart of Disability Rights Oregon said the subpoena felt like retaliation.

“It feels like punishing someone because you don’t want them to testify,” said Roy-Hart.

Markowitz Herbold also made another public records request for Gelser Blouin’s legislative emails. When legislative counsel informed the firm that going through the state Senator’s emails would cost $3,400, the firm did not hesitate.

“Please proceed,” said the Markowitz Herbold paralegal.

With only a few days until the trial was set to begin, the state of Oregon’s attorneys attempted to disqualify the judge from presiding over the case. Judge Ann Aiken of the United States District Court dismissed the motion, citing a lack of reason for recusing herself. The state unsuccessfully contended that Aiken should disqualify herself because she has stated that the state’s child welfare system is plagued by flaws.

The public frequently has little knowledge of what is going on in the state’s child welfare system, thanks in part to child privacy rules designed to safeguard children. However, the government has previously utilised the same legislation to either delay or deny public records requests.

This trial was scheduled to be the first time both state officials would testify in the same courtroom as children who had spent decades in the system. Fairborz Paksheret, the head of the Department of Human Services, is scheduled to speak, as are several youngsters.

Roy-Hart with Disability Rights. According to Oregon, this trial will be the first time so many children have had the opportunity to tell their tales.