{"report_id":286,"form_id":"22","user_id":81,"organization_id":13,"question_id":"359","question_type":"Free_Text","text_answer":"1.) The two work disciplines follow different definitions of child safety and alleged neglect, based on MN state laws that govern and guide their individual work, influencing the frontline's mental models, depending on which code of law is being referenced, criminal or juvenile law. Additionally, the burden of proof standards are different for criminal law and child protection law. Law enforcement's standard of probable cause and beyond a reasonable doubt is a higher burden to meet than child protection's standard of preponderance of evidence and clear and convincing.\r\n\r\n2.) Using a least invasive approach with the family was used by staff to best reduce the risk of the family continuing to resist child protection involvement, and this approach also mitigated the barrier of not having a formal process (criminal charges and court involvement) available to support child protection involvement at the time. Strategically, the local agency prioritized giving the parent's time to work through the trauma of the critical incident, as there was no imminent concern for safety to the children per law enforcement's safety assessment of the children and family at the time they had contact during the critical incident. Considering the totality of the circumstances, being sensitive to the family's traumatic reality was prioritized as a method of family engagement, and a tradeoff decision to not make timely face to face with the sibling children was made.","created_by":81,"updated_by":81,"updated_at":"5\/26\/2021 11:22:40 am","created_at":"5\/26\/2021 11:22:40 am","id":30148}