By Stephanie Ellison

I recently read a post that challenged the phrase, “Reunification should always be the goal.”

As someone who has spent years on both sides of child welfare and the last 20+ working alongside families, foster parents, and children impacted by the child welfare system, I understand why those words evoke such strong emotions. I am uncomfortable with the word “always”.

Not because I don’t believe in reunification or because I don’t believe families can heal. I absolutely do. Not because I don’t believe children belong with their biological families whenever it is safe and healthy for them. I believe that too. I believe every child needs to be considered individually, not through the lens of an ideology or legal battles.

Over the past 20 years, I have watched parents overcome incredible obstacles. I have seen people battle addiction, complete treatment programs, learn new coping and parenting skills, secure stable housing, and work tirelessly to rebuild trust with their children. Those stories matter. They deserve to be celebrated. HEAR ME! Families are worth fighting for. To me, there is nothing like a good underdog win!

I have also watched parents crumble under the weight of trauma, poverty, mental illness, and circumstances that many people could never imagine. Sometimes the parents who are being judged the harshest are carrying wounds that began long before they ever became parents themselves. Compassion matters. Grace matters. Support matters.

There is another person in the story whose voice is often the quietest. The child.

This is the one I relate to the most. The child who has learned not to unpack their suitcase because they aren’t sure how long they will stay. The child who has attended three schools in two years. The child who has learned to explore the world on their tiptoes rather than walk in with their head held in confidence.

Children who feel torn between loving their biological family and loving the people who have cared for them during their hardest days. Children who are trying to make sense of a world they did not create.

When conversations become centered on parents, foster parents, agencies, judges, policies, or philosophies, I worry that sometimes we lose sight of the child standing on their tiptoes in the middle of all of it.

I was reading a case recently where a parent someone said, “Well, that’s not illegal.” They were right. Many things that create instability for children are not illegal. Constant poor decision-making, untreated mental illness, and allowing unhealthy influences around children, and making choices that create chronic instability often isn’t illegal.

But should legality be the only standard we use when considering what a child needs to thrive? I don’t think so. At the same time, I don’t think the answer is to simply dismiss reunification either. Children generally benefit from maintaining healthy connections to their biological families. Research supports that. Experience supports that. Many children desperately want their parents to succeed because they love them.

The goal should never be to punish parents or to reward foster parents. The goal should also never be to prove one side right and the other side wrong.

Maybe THE GOAL should be helping children flourish. Sometimes that means reunification. Sometimes that means extended support services. Sometimes that means kinship care. Sometimes that means adoption. Sometimes helping children flourish means answers that are far more complicated than the slogans we post online or read in a textbook.

Child welfare is rarely black and white. It lives in the gray spaces where compassion for parents and protection for children must coexist. Where we can acknowledge a parent’s humanity while still asking whether a child’s needs are being met. I also think it is when we can celebrate reunification while recognizing that not every reunification is successful.

I believe it’s equally important that we appreciate foster families without viewing them as replacements. The hardest thing is to hold hope for restoration while remaining honest about risk.

I don’t have easy answers but I do believe every child is worthy of safety, stability, healthy attachment, belonging, and the opportunity to reach their potential.

What if instead of asking whether reunification should always be the goal, we ask a different question. Maybe we could ask what outcome gives this particular child the greatest opportunity to thrive?

At the end of the day, child welfare should not be about winning an argument. It should be about the welfare of the child. The actual child standing on their tiptoes in front of you. They are the one in the middle of it all.