That is a very good point, Gordon. My source, who has extensive experience in child abuse prevention, says that while by far most of the child abuse interventions are warranted, the system is really biased against low-income parents who lack the skill of representing themselves before a bureucracy and do not have the resources to hire a lawyer. As it is now, the child protection agency is represented by a lawyer, the child gets a court-appointed 'advocate' (a lawyer), but parents usually have no legal representation. My source witnessed instances of low-income (often immigrant) parents being virtually "grilled" by lawyers representing the agency and the child. My source says that this does not mean that innocent people are routinely framed, most cases are legitimate, and the typical unfairness - if it occurs - is the lawyer spin making things look worse than they really are and the parent inability to defend themselves against that spin.
But the fact remains that if you are poor, uneducated, or got off the boat recently - the system is heavily biased against you. But that is also true of the entire justice system in this country.
wojtek