So Randy Beaver’s dad Vincent is suing the state over his son’s death. He apparently feels they were negligent when they placed him in foster care with a young female relative.
According to the report in Alaska Dispatch, Randy and his four siblings lived with a variety of relatives in multiple communities but at no point do they seem to have been living with either their mother or father. So one must ask, where were mom and dad and what were they doing that was more important than raising their children in a safe and sober home?
A quick check on the state’s criminal records page shows that Randy’s mom Nancy was too busy drinking and abandoning her children to ensure their safety. She was arrested in 2004 for child neglect and again in 2005, at which time she pled no contest to the charges. She also has been charged with a variety of alcohol related offenses.
A check of that same page shows that dad Vincent has a list of 32 cases that have been brought against him at various times, most of them for criminal behavior. These include disorderly conduct, assault, driving without a valid license, criminal mischief, criminal trespass… oh yeah, and that pesky sexual assault to which he pled no contest. Well, you can see where dad was much too busy to actually raise his child.
So how about the young relative who apparently was the only one to offer to keep Randy? Arlene Galila also has a record that includes minor consuming, a dismissed assault charge and an alcohol charge to which she pleaded guilty. Not a long record but not a sterling one either.
But here’s the thing. As someone who has worked with OCS for over thirty years, I have often seen them trying to walk the fine line between assuring the child’s safety and complying with requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) and village and family pressure to keep the child in a culturally appropriate placement. It’s not easy. Your choices of placement in small villages can be very limited. Removing the child from the village can often lead to a long court fight over deviating from the placement preferences of ICWA.
Should the state be held accountable for this child’s safety? Absolutely. Should the state be held responsible for the fact that at 14 this child was already a dropout with what seems to have been a blossoming alcohol problem? Absolutely not. Galila is quoted as saying that Randy “was angry and confused about why his parents didn’t contact or take care of him.” That’s probably the statement that rings truest in this whole sad story. You can draw a direct line from that statement to the alcohol that played such a significant factor in his death.
If Randy’s father wants to know who was most responsible for his son’s death, he need look no further than the mirror. Because in that mirror he will find the face of one of the two people who should have been the most responsible adults in Randy’s life; the people keeping him from harm, the people teaching him right from wrong, the people caring for the life they created. Neither of the people who should have been responsible for Randy bothered to take the time from their alcohol fueled, violent lives to straighten our and raise him in a sober, kind and loving home.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The state makes a lousy parent. It hardly ever remembers your birthday and never takes its turn in having the family over for the holiday dinner. But when your parents are too busy being drunk, violent and negligent to raise you, then sometimes the state is forced to step in.
The state may not be perfect, but the state didn’t give birth to Randy. The people who did and then abandoned him are at least equally responsible for his tragic death.