This Position Statement addresses federal requirements under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) and recognizes the critical on-going need for culturally and linguistically aligned child welfare practices for Deaf families involved in the judicial system. The National Association of the Deaf affirms that Deaf families; Deaf children, Deaf parents and their hearing family members require specialized implementation of child welfare services to ensure equitable access, safety, and due process. This statement establishes a national model for government agencies responsible for serving Deaf families and identifies the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services, Specialized Deaf Services Unit (DCFS-DSU), as the foundational exemplar. The DCFS‑DSU model is intended to guide states in developing standardized, culturally responsive practices that uphold the rights and needs of Deaf families across the child welfare system.

In addition to CAPTA’s federal requirements, Deaf families and their hearing members are protected under multiple federal, state, and local policies, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, California’s Deaf Child Bill of Rights, Education Code § 56000.5), and the Foster Youth Bill of Rights (WIC § 16001.9). The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Code of Ethics further establishes cultural and linguistic competence as a binding professional obligation, anchored in Standard 1.05 and reinforced through ten NASW practice standards and federal civil rights and language access mandates. Together, these protections affirm that Deaf families are entitled to equitable access, direct communication, and culturally aligned service delivery throughout the child welfare process.

Historically, the U.S. Department of Justice, in partnership with the Office for Civil Rights, has acknowledged disability related discrimination within the child welfare system. Despite reported intervention efforts, systemic barriers for Deaf families persist and often extend beyond initial investigations or service planning. These inequities frequently follow Deaf children throughout their entire trajectory in the system, including those who remain in unmatched Resource Homes, Transitional Homes, and other government funded programs intended to support youth as they move toward emancipation. Multiple national published lawsuits under this topic serve as examples illustrating how these longstanding challenges continue to surface across child welfare jurisdictions.

The broader child welfare system is designed to promote child safety and wellbeing by strengthening families and keeping children physically and emotionally safe in their homes whenever possible. Within this context, a “Deaf family” refers to any household in which at least one member is Deaf (Deaf, Deafblind, Deaf Plus, Hard-Of-Hearing and Late-deafened). The presence of a Deaf individual reshapes the family’s communication patterns, language use, cultural identity, and service needs. As a result, child welfare agencies must recognize that Deaf and their hearing family members require distinct, culturally, and linguistically aligned approaches to ensure beyond equitable access and meaningful participation throughout the child welfare process. In many cases involving Deaf families entering the child welfare system, language—specifically American Sign Language—may have already experience absentee or limits to all individual regardless of their hearing status. This absence or limit makes Deaf child welfare workers representation essential, as workers with lived Deaf experience are uniquely equipped to identify language deprivation or needs, ensure or introduce culturally aligned interventions, and connect families to immediate, appropriate services. All of this through their very own Deaf life and professional experiences as a child welfare worker.

In response to longstanding systemic gaps in Deaf child welfare services, early 1990s advocates in Los Angeles County, California, grounded in the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, developed a Deaf child welfare service delivery framework. This framework established qualification standards, outlined specialized recruitment strategies for Deaf professionals, detailed implementation procedures, and set up annual auditing measures to ensure the program’s integrity and purpose. By the mid-1990s, the proposed framework was adopted by the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services and was granted the program title Deaf Services Unit (DCFS-DSU). This initiative positioned DCFS-DSU as the first established national Deaf-centered child welfare program, providing a model and framework for serving Deaf families and their hearing members.

The DCFS-DSU framework recognized that establishing a Deaf-centered child welfare program also required dedicated American Sign Language interpreting support. It included a permanent ASL interpreter position to support Deaf employees, promote consistent peer communication access, and reduce cost as well as reliance on external contracted services. Deaf employees were instrumental in shaping and utilizing these in-house resources, which later supported the development of the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services-Sign Language Specialist program.

As Deaf-led children’s social workers advanced into other positions and service areas throughout the Department, Deaf-led services expanded across a broader range of child welfare programs for children and families. Within the workforce, Sign Language Specialist services remained essential to ensuring workplace communication access for Deaf employees, supporting their ability to fully perform their professional roles and essential job duties.

On a national level, evolving child welfare practice and American Sign Language interpreting standards require Deaf child welfare programs and their workplace accessibility supports to evolve as well. Maintaining a strong partnership between Deaf-led child welfare services and in-house interpreting services is essential to supporting Deaf professionals and sustaining a modern, effective Deaf-centered child welfare model.

Recommended Practice Model for Deaf Child Welfare

The Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services’ Deaf Services Unit (DCFS-DSU) has operated since the late 1990s as a culturally and linguistically grounded program shaped by Deaf leadership and strengthened by committed allies. Service delivery is intentionally led by children’s social workers whose Deaf lived experience informed case practice, while program operations reflected Deaf-centered principles.

The DCFS-Deaf Services Unit is rooted in a Deaf-centered model, intentionally designed and staffed by Deaf professionals whose lived expertise strengthens decision-making and service delivery. Grounded in the linguistic and cultural foundations of the Deaf community, the model integrates ASL fluency, Deaf cultural knowledge, and lived experience into child welfare practice. It moves beyond deficit-based or medicalized views of deafness and emphasizes meaningful and equitable access beyond minimum communication accommodations.

The model also challenges the assumption that assistive technology (e.g., hearing aids or cochlear implants) or reliance on American Sign Language interpreting communication alone cannot fully address the needs of Deaf families under child welfare jurisdiction. While ASL interpreters provide communication access, Deaf-led child welfare practice brings an additional layer of specialized cultural, linguistic, and professional expertise. This approach helps address systemic barriers affecting Deaf families while reducing the potential for those barriers to compound existing trauma.

This distinction is central to why Deaf-led social workers and Deaf-centered child welfare programs are essential. Communication access is one critical component of equitable service delivery, but comprehensive Deaf-centered practice requires cultural understanding, lived expertise, and specialized child welfare knowledge necessary to respond effectively to the broader needs of Deaf children and families.

State Action Recommendation:

Establish a Deaf Child Welfare Advisory Council led by Deaf professionals and supported by allies and representatives from local government, agencies, and organizations with expertise across Deaf Social Welfare/Human Services to develop and propose a Deaf child welfare servicing program within the State’s child welfare system.

Reference Entry: 

Existing Child Welfare Deaf-Centered Model Programs

Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services. (n.d.). Specialized Programs: Deaf Services Unit. The Deaf Services Unit provides specialized public child welfare services to Deaf children and families across the child welfare continuum. Source [dcfs.lacounty.gov]

Federal & State Statutes

Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), 42 U.S.C. § 5101 et seq. See also 42 U.S. Code Chapter 67: Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and Adoption Reform. Source [law.cornell.edu]

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. See The Americans with Disabilities Act, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. Source [ada.gov]

Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA), Pub. L. No. 115-123 (2018). See Congressional Research Service, Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA). The Act expanded federal support for certain services intended to prevent children from entering foster care and made other changes to federal child welfare programs. Source [congress.gov]

California Deaf Children’s Bill of Rights, Cal. Educ. Code § 56000.5 (AB 1836). The law addresses educational and communication considerations for Deaf and hard-of-hearing children, including access to professionals skilled in the child’s language and mode of communication. See California Department of Education, Assembly Bill 1836: Deaf Education. Source [cde.ca.gov]

California Foster Youth Bill of Rights, Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 16001.9. The statute establishes rights for children in foster care, including fair and equal access to available services and protections against discrimination based on mental or physical disability. Source [codes.findlaw.com]

Professional Standards & Federal Agency Guidance

National Association of Social Workers. (2015; 2021). Standards and Indicators for Cultural Competence in Social Work Practice and NASW Code of Ethics, Standard 1.05: Cultural Competence. Together, these professional standards emphasize cultural humility, culturally informed practice, cross-cultural knowledge and skills, responsive service delivery, advocacy, workforce diversity, and language and communication, as well as action against discrimination and inequities. NASW Cultural Competence Standards; NASW Code of Ethics, Standard 1.05. [socialworkers.org], [socialworkers.org]

U.S. Department of Justice & U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2020). Protecting the Rights of Parents and Prospective Parents with Disabilities: Technical Assistance for State and Local Child Welfare Agencies and Courts under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. This joint federal guidance addresses disability civil rights protections within child welfare systems and emphasizes individualized treatment, equal opportunity, reasonable modifications, and effective communication for parents and prospective parents with disabilities. Source [ada.gov]

Child Welfare Litigation and Reporting

The Imprint. (2024, September 30). Lawsuit Over Housing and Mental Health Care for LA County Foster Youth Gets Go-Ahead From Judge. The article reports on litigation alleging systemic failures involving safe and stable placements, mental health care, and supportive services for transition-age foster youth with mental health disabilities in Los Angeles County. Source [imprintnews.org]

Children’s Rights. (2023). Ocean S. v. LA County. Filed August 22, 2023, in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Western Division. The case addresses alleged systemic failures affecting transition-age foster youth, including youth with mental health disabilities, involving access to housing and essential services within Los Angeles County’s foster care system. See also Jackson K. (Deaf), a plaintiff identified by a pseudonym, for an additional case example. Source [childrensrights.org]

U.S. Department of Justice. (2020, November 19). Justice Department Reaches Landmark Agreement with Massachusetts Department of Children and Families to Address Discrimination Against Parents with Disabilities. The agreement addressed findings of disability discrimination in the administration of child welfare services under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Source [justice.gov]

Foundational Deaf Child Welfare Source

Embry, R. A., & Grossman, F. D. (2006/2007). The Los Angeles County Response to Child Abuse and Deafness: A Social Movement Theory Analysis. American Annals of the Deaf, 151(5), 488–498. The article documents the Los Angeles County community advocacy and systemic reform efforts that resulted in linguistically and culturally responsive child welfare services for Deaf children and parents. It describes advocacy for a specialized Deaf unit, sign-language-proficient child welfare workers, staff interpreters, reduced caseloads, and an ongoing advisory role for the Deaf community. Source [jstor.org], [muse.jhu.edu]

Related Deaf and Disability Child Welfare Publications

Ino, V. (2026, October). Deaf-Centered Child Welfare: What the Community Needs to Know About Los Angeles County’s Deaf Services Unit. ADARA Update. This contemporary publication discusses the Deaf-centered child welfare program in Los Angeles County. Source [linkedin.com]

Lightfoot, E., Hill, K., & LaLiberte, T. (2010). The Inclusion of Disability as a Condition for Termination of Parental Rights. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34(12), 927–934. The study examines disability-related language in state termination-of-parental-rights statutes and concerns about emphasizing disability status rather than parenting behavior. [researchon…thomas.edu]

Sullivan, P. M., & Knutson, J. F. (2000). Maltreatment and Disabilities: A Population-Based Epidemiological Study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(10), 1257–1273. The study found a significant association between childhood disability and maltreatment, with children with disabilities experiencing substantially higher rates of maltreatment in the study population. [abuseincare.org.nz]

Additional Resources: For further reference associated with social welfare and related cultural, linguistic, and civil rights considerations, readers are encouraged to review the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) Knowledge Hub and Position Statements. These resources may provide additional context for the principles discussed throughout this report. [nad.org]

Authored by: V. Ino, October 2026