Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Senator Ossoff-led subcommittee hosts first public hearing in foster care inquiry

Senator Ossoff-led subcommittee hosts first public hearing in foster care inquiry
Getty Images

Gilani is a graduate student journalist for Medill on the HIll, a program of Northwestern University in which students serve as mobile journalists reporting on events in and around Washington, D.C.

Editor's note: This story has been updated to include information from a letter the Georgia Division of Family and Children Services submitted in response to the Senate hearing.


In February of 2023, the U.S. Senate Human Rights Subcommittee Chairman Jon Ossoff launched a bipartisan inquiry following reports that children in the care of Georgia’s state government have been subject to abuse and neglect.

In 2018, the Georgia Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) placed 2-year-old Brooklyn Aldridge in the care of her estranged father and his girlfriend, after the toddler’s mother was arrested. Brooklyn’s mother, Rachel Aldridge, repeatedly objected to the placement, worried that her daughter was put in an unsafe environment.

When Aldridge was released from jail, she visited Brooklyn’s father’s home and reported a bruise on her daughter’s leg. The child welfare agency did not take any action.

After six weeks in her father’s care, Brooklyn was killed by his girlfriend, who was sentenced to life in prison in 2019. The cause of death was blunt force trauma to the head.

The ongoing inquiry, led by Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., and Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., held its first public hearing Wednesday as it examines threats children face in foster care institutions in Georgia and across the country. The ultimate goal of the investigation is to prompt reforms at both state and federal levels.

“Brooklyn would still be alive if anyone at DFCS had just been willing to listen to me, her own mother,” Aldridge said before a Senate subcommittee on Wednesday. Aldridge took her first plane ride to testify at the hearing. She was one of more than a hundred witnesses that have testified during the eight months that the subcommittee had been investigating the foster care system.

Throughout the hearing, Sen. Ossoff repeatedly referenced a grim statistic. The Division of Family and Children Services failed to meet its obligations to assess risks and manage children’s safety 84% of the time. The number came from the agency itself in a 2023 internal audit.

After the hearing, DFCS lawyers sent a letter to Ossoff and Blackburn claiming some of the witnesses' and subcommittee members' statements were inaccurate. The letter said Brooklyn was ordered into her father's care by a Georgia superior court and was not in DFCS custody at the time of her death.

Melissa Carter, a witness and executive director of Emory University’s Child Law and Policy Center, said when a government agency intervenes in a family, it is obliged to continuously assess the safety of the children. For example, in the case of Brooklynn Aldridge, Carter said the Georgia Division of Family and Children Services should have better assessed options for a substitute caregiver by conducting background checks and remaining involved in her case.

“There’s this ongoing responsibility to be checking in, to just make contact with that child, with those caregivers, to continue to take in information, to adjust on the basis of changing circumstances,” she said.

We heard heartbreaking testimony from Rachel Aldridge, a Georgia mother, whose two-year-old daughter Brooklyn was murdered while in care — a proper background check had not been carried out. The reports that she had made about concerns for her daughter’s health and safety had not been heard.

Senator Ossoff spoke passionately of the testimony of Mon’a Houston, an inspiring 19-year-old young woman who had been in foster care and described being locked up like an inmate while she was in care and testified to being overmedicated, while she was in care.

In her time under the state of Georgia’s care, Houston said she was placed in group homes, institutions and hotels more often than in foster homes. “I would often go more than six months without seeing my caseworker. I felt alone,” she said.

Emma Hetherington, another witness at the hearing and a law professor at the University of Georgia, said the overarching structure, internal policies and administrative barriers of the Division of Family and Children Services obstruct its good work, causing her clients to “experience extreme harm.”

Among 35 of her clients, she said most of them made allegations of abuse or neglect against their foster care placement caregivers. All of them experienced “early childhood maltreatment.”

“The foster care system in Georgia has always struggled with systemic challenges and barriers, but I’ve never seen it as dismal as it is today,” she said in her testimony.

The Georgia Department of Human Services, the department that oversees the Division of Family and Children Services, declined to comment in an email to Medill News Service.

Chairman Ossoff hopes the testimony at the live hearing brings results. “Foster care is meant to provide sanctuary for our most vulnerable children,” he said. The first-hand testimony from children and parents who have suffered grievously is the first step in Congress’s effort to provide the facts needed to enact necessary reforms.


Read More

Typing on a computer
person using laptop

America Needs a Digital Equity Policy, Not Just Tech Innovation

The United States invests billions in artificial intelligence research and development‚ semiconductor fabrication‚ and next-generation connectivity. Yet millions of Americans cannot consistently access the internet or afford the devices needed to submit an online application for social services or a job application․ This is not an oversight․ It is a policy choice that is costing the country dearly․

Connectivity is a floor, not a ceiling:

Keep ReadingShow less
The election voting process, bidding, hands raised up with papers

Confidence in U.S. elections has fallen to 55% ahead of the 2026 midterms. The real risk isn't who wins — it's whether the loser accepts it.

Svetlana Shamshurina/Getty Images

The Real Test of the 2026 Midterms Comes After the Vote

Less than three months before Americans vote in the 2026 midterms, a federal judge on August 11 blocked the U.S. Postal Service from implementing part of President Donald Trump’s executive order tightening mail-in voting rules. The ruling came amid an intensifying fight over how November’s elections will be administered. That fight underscores a deeper problem: the real question in American politics is no longer simply who wins the next election, but whether large numbers of people will still accept the result when their side loses.

Elections in the United States were supposed to settle arguments. One side wins, the other accepts defeat, and the country moves on. That quiet agreement is under growing pressure as the midterms approach. Control of Congress still matters, but beneath that contest lies a more consequential question: if the outcome goes against one of the two major political camps, will that camp still trust the process that declared it the loser?

Keep ReadingShow less
 Unrecognizable doctor prescribing pharmacy to patient.

After a 30-year decline, U.S. abortions are rising again. Texas data suggests bans may shift where abortions happen — not whether they do.

Natalia Gdovskaia/Getty Images

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice: Bridging the Gap

Introduction

We have spent decades arguing about abortion policy on ideological grounds. I think we now have an opportunity to step back, look at what actually happened, and ask a more fundamental question: What policies actually reduce the number of abortions?

I believe that is a question on which pro-life and pro-choice people should be able to agree. Whatever our differences about abortion itself, surely, we can agree that fewer abortions would be a good outcome.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol.

A rundown of the House bills most likely to become law this week — from seafood fraud enforcement to a sanctions bill critics call a tariff bill.

Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

Both Chambers in Session this Week

Last Minute Rush

We’re not going to describe every bill the House aims to take action on this week because there’s lots. Instead, we’re going to focus on the ones that will become law if passed by the House and pull a few notable bills at the beginning of the legislative process. We’ll use the same level of discretion at the end of this week when we review what actually happened between today, Monday Sept. 14 and Friday, Sept. 18.

Probable New Laws

In addition to the bills listed below are also a couple of park renamings. All of these will, if passed, then go to the President for signing and once that’s done, become law.

Keep ReadingShow less