Protective Services Corner
March 2012
A Newsletter on Child and Dependent Adult Protection Issues
Small Changes May Make A
Big Difference In Assessments
We all desire to come to an accurate conclusion when making our
findings in child and dependent adult abuse assessments. And, in
the event that the conclusion is appealed, we want our decision
to be affirmed. Accordingly, here are some “best practice”
suggestions that make good use of your limited time when
conducting a protective assessment:
Re-contacting the reporter as a collateral contact. In many of
our assessments the reporter, victim and person(s) responsible
are the only ones with certain knowledge of the alleged abuse.
You can re-contact the reporter and obtain what may be crucial
information to support your report, and still keep your statutory
obligation to protect their identity. When you re-contact the
reporter, document the contact as a collateral one and someone
the reporter thought would have additional information, or
someone DHS records indicate might have important information
regarding the allegations, or contact the reporter only after other
interviews have been conducted. Documenting in this manner
allows you to present the reporter as a collateral contact. In the
event that your assessment is appealed and the reporter’s
testimony appears essential, it minimizes the chance of the
reporter becoming an issue at hearing.
 Appeals on Dependent Adult Abuse Evaluations (or if I wanted
to be an attorney, I would have gone to law school!). Policy is
working on a guide to help you prepare to represent yourself in
an appeal. Consider this section as a guide to the first few
decisions you need to make as soon as you are notified your
dependent adult evaluation has been appealed.
1. Do I feel strongly that I made the correct finding and is my
evaluation strong enough to go to appeal?
o No. Consider whether you can step down a finding
(founded to confirmed not placed) and offer a settlement
to the appellant.
o Yes. I want to go forward.
2. Does my evaluation present a novel legal issue, or will the
appeal decision hinge on interpreting legal issues?
o Yes. Refer to Manual 16G (page 84 Appeal Process) and
request AG representation (this must be done immediately
after receipt of the appeal notice). There is no guarantee an
AG will be available.
o No. Place the telephone appeal hearing on your calendar,
review the appeal notice, decide on your witnesses and
email ALJ to issue your subpoenas.
3. Protect your attorney/client privilege communication.
Not all communication with a county attorney or attorneys
from the Attorney General’s Office belong in your
assessment or evaluation. Be judicious about if and when
you document contacts with either the county attorney or
the attorney from the Iowa Attorney General’s Office. Both
are considered your legal counsel, and strategies,
suggestions or analysis you share with them should be
considered confidential and can be omitted when
preparing the written report. If you enter a contact with
the county attorney or an AG you may lose some or all of
the right to keep your conversation with them confidential.
Generally, inclusion of the communication isn’t going to
cause a problem and you can make the case that the
information constitutes “evidence” in your assessment.
However, in complex, contested or high profile cases, alert
your attorney of your intention to document your
discussion with them in the assessment; follow their advice
on inclusion - you may be very glad you did.
Documenting the Intake…Take 2!
The Service Help Desk has developed information and upcoming
training aimed at writing good child and dependent adult abuse
allegations at intake. Some of this information was already
presented at a previous CIDS but has now been expanded. The
emphasis will be on all child protection intake and assessment
staff writing consistent allegations in a format that contains all the
legal elements necessary to meet allegation criteria.
This format will be used for child and dependent adult abuse
reports and for all allegation types. It will be used for allegations
that will be accepted because they meet the legal threshold and
for those that don’t meet criteria for an assessment.
The format is designed to document only the information that
includes the three required elements, with all other information
being placed in the Additional Information section of the intake.
This means the reported allegation will not be recorded verbatim
but will need to be edited appropriately for use in the legal
document, and will consistently document the allegation without
identifying the reporter. This format will consistently document
the allegation without identifying substance abuse treatment
information, mental health diagnosis or HIV/AIDS information.
The training will also address what and how to document
information in the Additional Information section.
Protective Services Corner
CSIU intake staff will be trained to use the new format by the end
of April. Implementation will begin immediately afterward.
Training for Child Protection workers in the service areas has not
yet been decided but will be discussed by the SWAs and
scheduled for the field as soon as possible.
Drug Testing for Second-hand “Pot Smoke”
If you haven’t it is only a matter of time before you are assigned a
case where there are allegations of children being around parents
or caretakers smoking marijuana. On December 1, at an auto shop
in anywhere, Iowa, around 9:30 a.m., a grandmother comes to
pick-up her two young grandkids from their dad. Dad took his car
in for an oil change and the car is now going to require a brake
service. The grandmother, as she pulls into the auto shop parking
lot, notices a police car and decides to park her car at a distance
from the police vehicle, and quickly rolls down her window. Police
noticed her behavior. The Dad comes out of the auto shop with the
two children and car seats and places the children in their
respective car seats in the back seat of the grandmother’s car. The
grandmother then leaves with the two children.
The police, after determining the smell emanating from
grandmother’s car was marijuana, decided to follow the
grandmother. The police then stop the grandmother’s car 3 blocks
away. Upon questioning, the grandmother admits to having
smoked half a marijuana cigarette prior to pulling into the auto
shop to pick up the children. The grandmother explains she has
severe arthritis and regularly smokes marijuana to help her pain.
She also has a prescription for Hydrocodone. The grandmother
indicates to the officer that she lives in the lower level of the home
she shares with her son and his family. The grandmother still had
half of a smoked joint in her possession, and gets arrested.
At around 12:30 p.m. DHS receives an allegation of abuse
regarding the grandmother denying critical care to her grandkids
by failing to provide proper supervision. The report is accepted for
assessment. A child protection worker makes a home visit around
1:30 p.m. that same day. The CPW finds the two children are
home with mom and dad. Children are observed. The home
appears well maintained. The CPW interviews the parents
separately. Given the allegations, CPW inquires about the
grandmother’s as well as the parent’s drug usage. The mother
denies ever using illegal drugs. The dad indicates that he smoked
“a joint” about two days ago and knows about his mother’s
ongoing marijuana usage to help with her arthritis but assures
that neither he nor his mother “smoke pot” around the children.
Dad indicates that the grandmother will be released later today.
page 2
The CPW requests that the two children and all 3 adults submit to
drug testing. Two days later, the children, the parents, and the
grandmother are tested for drugs. The adults each provide a urine
sample, and the children receive a “hair stat” test. When the drug
test results are received by the CPW, the results indicate that the
mother tested negative for all drugs; the father tested at 1000
mg/mL of THC; the grandmother tested at 1000 mg/mL of THC
and positive of Hydrocodone; the children’s “hair stat” tests were
also positive for marijuana.
So, did the grandmother regularly smoking marijuana cause the
father to test positive for THC? Can a person passively inhale
enough marijuana smoke, when in the company of a marijuana
smoker, to cause them to have a positive urine test? The answer
is NO.
In multiple studies conducted between 1983 and 2010, there
were no instances where passive inhalation of marijuana smoke,
even under extreme conditions, caused urine specimens taken
from non-marijuana users to test positive for THC (the active
ingredient in marijuana) at the current screening and
confirmation cutoff levels mandate set by SAMHSA (the Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration).
These studies also showed that although it is true that passive
inhalation of marijuana smoke results in absorption of THC in the
body, none of the THC levels from the non marijuana users would
be high enough to cause a positive urine test result using the
current screening and confirmation cutoff levels mandated by
SAMHSA; 50 ng/mL cutoff for the screen test and 15 ng/mL for
the confirmation test.
The initial studies were conducted by Perez-Reyes and co-workers
in 19831,2,3. These studies consisted of three different
experiments; one conducted in an automobile, and two in a small
room. Another half-dozen similar studies followed during the next
decade. In fact, the conditions during these tests were so
extreme, that during some studies the subjects wore goggles to
protect their eyes from the dense smoke in the confined space.
The exposure conditions of these studies were more severe than
would be expected under "real world" conditions of passive
marijuana exposure.
In more recent studies4, the conclusion of earlier studies
continues to be supported. Both urine and oral fluid specimens
1
A.P. Mason, M. Perez -Reyes, A.J. McBay, and R.L. Foltz.
Cannabinoid concentrations in plasma after passive inhalation
of marijuana smoke. J. Anal. Toxicol. 7: 172 -74 (1983)
2
M. Perez-Reyes, S. DiGuiseppi, and K.H. Davis. Passive inhalation
of marijuana smoke and urinary excretion of cannabinoids. J.
Am. Med. Assoc. 249: 475 (1983)
3
M. Perez-Reyes, S. DiGuiseppi, A.P. Mason , and K.H. Davis.
Passive inhalation of marijuana smoke and urinary excretion of
cannabinoids. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 34: 36 -41 (1983)
4
R. Sam Niedbala, Keith W. Kardos, Dean F. Fritch, Kenneth P.
Kunsman, Kristen A. Blum, Gregory A. Newland, Joe Waga, Lisa
Protective Services Corner
were collected and tested. In these studies, four non-marijuana
smokers sat next to four persons that each smoked a marijuana
cigarette; they were located in a full size passenger van with the
van windows closed.
March 2012
page 3
hours produced similar results; that is, none of the volunteers test
above the cutoff levels established for blood or urine sample.
200.00
So, how can this research assist or guide the child protection
worker? First, your charge is to gather as much information as
possible regarding usage of the adults in the family, paying
particular attention to timeframes, amounts claimed to be used,
or denial of when they used. Begin with a positive assumption of
the allegation; that is, don’t begin with “Have you ….?”. This is
likely to yield response of “No”. Instead, ASK the “who, what,
where, when, why, and how” about them using marijuana, and
THEN let them talk. Ideally, ask each question at least three times
(in a different manner):
 WHO - Who else was smoking with you? Who saw you
smoking? Who can verify that you smoked/or have not
smoked?
 WHAT - What were you smoking? What type of marijuana
were you smoking? What other types of drugs have you
used? What is testing you going to tell me?
 WHEN - When (date) did you smoke? When (time) did you
smoke? When was the last time before that? When did you
start smoking marijuana?
 WHERE – Where (in general) were you smoking? Where in
home were you smoking? Where else have you smoked pot?
Where were the children?
 WHY – Why were you smoking? Why do you think that
smoking marijuana is going to help? Why do you think is okay
to smoke marijuana?
 HOW – How did you smoke marijuana? How much did you
smoke? How else have you smoked marijuana? How did you
start smoking? How long have you been smoking?
150.00
No matter how obvious a situation may appear to be, reach a
conclusion only after analyzing the information gathered.
In one study the concentration of THC per cigarette was 5.4% (or
39.5 mg THC) and in the second study the concentration of THC
per cigarette was 10.4% (or 83.2 THC). The results of testing the
smoker and non-smokers following the experiment are
documented in the graph below.
500.00
Smoker AVG
Non-Smoker AVG
450.00
400.00
350.00
300.00
250.00
50.00
In the scenario above, the results of the drug test suggests that
the grandmother was using more than she indicated, or used after
being stopped and arrested for smoking. Likewise, the father has
smoked since the grandmother was arrested, or has been
smoking more frequently. Remember, it is about using critical
thinking!
0.00
Thou Shalt Not
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
6.00
8.00
100.00
In one of the latest studies conducted, both blood and urine were
sampled after passive exposure in “real-life” conditions. Eight
volunteers were exposed to passive THC for a 3 hour period, in a
well attended café in the Netherlands, where smoking marijuana
is legal. The results of testing the volunteers between zero and 14
Kurtz, Matth Bronsgeest, and Edward J. Cone, Passive Cannabis
Smoke Exposure and Oral Fluid Testing. II. Two Studies of
Extreme Cannabis Smoke Exposure in a Motor Vehicle, J. Anal.
Toxicol. 29: 607-615 (2005)
o Do not paste in reports verbatim - summarize only the relevant
content. Do not document you got a flat tire, or had a couple of
vacation days, etc. It is not evidence in the assessment.
o Do not document information that puts the victim of abuse or
non-abusing parent at risk. This includes information regarding
victims of domestic violence. Ask your supervisor or the Help
Desk how to record the information.
o Do not document the identity by name of a “minor” victim
who is not a subject in the current assessment.
o Do not contact the Assistant Attorney General (AG) staff
directly unless you are calling an attorney representing you on a
specific appeal, or at the request of the AG staff directly.
Protective Services Corner
page 4
Justification for Placement on the Registry
After the child protection worker makes a finding and determination of whether or not abuse has occurred, they will need to make a
secondary but very important decision. If the worker concludes that abuse occurred, they will then need to determine if the report is
required by law to be placed on the Central Abuse Registry. The following are recommendations on how a worker should document the
rationale for placement on the Registry:
 A determination* was made that child abuse by Presence of Illegal Drugs in the Child's Body occurred. Pursuant to Iowa Code 232.71D,
subsection 2, except as otherwise provided in subsection 3 and 3A, if the Department issues a finding that alleged child abuse meets the
definition of child abuse in Iowa Code 232.68, the names of the child victim and perpetrator and any other child abuse information shall
be placed on the Child Abuse Registry as a case of Founded child abuse. Accordingly, having met this requirement, the assessment is
being placed on the Registry.
 A determination was made that Denial of Critical Care by failure to provide adequate supervision occurred. Pursuant to Iowa Code
232.71D, subsection 2, except as otherwise provided in subsection 3 and 3A, if the Department issues a finding that alleged child abuse
meets the definition of child abuse in Iowa Code 232.68, the names of the child victim and perpetrator and any other child abuse
information shall be placed on the Child Abuse Registry as a case of Founded child abuse…(choose at least one of the following and all
that may apply)
o This report of Denial of Critical Care by failure to provide adequate supervision has been
referred to Juvenile Court and for criminal action. Accordingly, the report will be placed on the Registry.
o There has been a prior confirmed assessment on the perpetrator within the past 18 months of this current report. Accordingly, the
report will be placed on the Registry.
o It has been determined that the person responsible for abuse will continue to pose a danger to the child victim or any other child
with whom they may have contact...(insert evidence that supports your conclusion!) Accordingly, the report will be placed on the
Registry.
o This report of Denial of Critical Care by failure to provide adequate supervision has been determined
not to be minor and is likely to reoccur. Because of this reason, the findings and determination do not meet the exceptions provided
in subsection 3 or 3A, and therefore, the report will be placed on the Registry.
 A determination was made that Sex Abuse occurred...(choose one of the following)
o The person responsible for the abuse is older than 13 years. Accordingly, the report will be placed on the Registry.
o The person responsible for the abuse is less than 14 years old. Pursuant Iowa Code 232.71D, the name of the child victim and other
child abuse information shall be placed on the Central Abuse Registry as a case of Founded child abuse except that the name of the
perpetrator shall not be placed on the Registry.
*Founded – means the report is confirmed and placed on the Central Abuse Registry.
Confirmed – means that the report is confirmed but will not be placed on the Registry.
Not Confirmed – means abuse did not occur and report will not be placed on the Registry.
Child Protection Centers –
Manual 17-B(4) – Topic 5
DHS contracts with “child protection
centers” to assist the CPW in assessing
reports of child abuse. These centers provide
medical evaluations and psychosocial
assessments of the victim when there are
allegations of sexual abuse. Child protection
centers can assist in conducting child abuse
assessments. However, taking reasonable
measures to address the safety of the child
remains the child protective worker’s
responsibility. Some expectations of the
Department child protection workers are
summarized as follows:
o Referrals. When you make a referral to a
child protection center, there should be
allegations of sexual abuse or physical
abuse with bodily injury.
o Scheduling. Try to schedule interviews and
examinations during the regular hours.
o Consents. If no parent or guardian will be
accompanying the child to the child
protection center, secure a consent or
court order to examine the child. Provide
this to the center at the time of the
appointment, or provide verification that
the Department has obtained emergency
custody.
o Registration and intake. At the time of the
appointment, ensure that necessary
consent forms and authorizations are
signed. Be prepared to brief the child
protection center's interviewer, in
coordination with law enforcement, on
the circumstances of the assault or
existing allegations.
o Interview. When staff at a child protection
center interviews a child, you may use that
interview in place of an interview you
conduct. This prevents the child from
having to repeat the history of abuse. Be
present in the observation room to
monitor the interview of the child.
(See Employee Policy Manual 17-B(4),
Topic 5 for complete details)
Have protective issue questions?
Call us at the Service Help Desk.
Tony Montoya @ 515-281-6786
amontoy@dhs.state.ia.us,
Sue Potter @ 515-281-7272 or
mpotter@dhs.state.ia.us,
Jana Rhoads @ 515-281-0350 or
jrhoads@dhs.state.ia.us,
SERVICE HELP DESK – 1-866-347-7782