Talk:Jugendamt

Two things
1) I found a good source with detailed information (rather than anecdotal info). [League for Children's Rights, that goes into Jugendamt in detail. 2) It seems smart to move this to the Children's right article under International Law.  For instance, there's a section for the United States.--[[User:CaroleHenson|CaroleHenson]] (talk) 10:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

One thing: In Germany about 40.000 children and youths (< 21 y.) are taken into custody by German child protective services each year; only 15.000 of them are taken into custody for longer than 15 days. The overall number of children in custody of German child protective services is 65.000 (Source: Federal Bureau of Statistics). You might find it helpful to compare these numbers with the respective U.S. numbers which are much higher, even considering the different number of inhabitants (320 ./. 80 million). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.12.33.172 (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

POV tag
This article takes a uniformly negative view of the Jugendamt, from the very first sentence pointing out that it was instituted in the Nazi era under Hitler. The rest of the article discusses only claims of violations of civil and human rights on the part of the Jugendamt. This is absurd; while there may be criticism of the Jugendamt, it's no different from Child Protective Services in the U.S. or Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service in the UK (both of which have Criticism sections too). The article needs to be rewritten neutrally, explaining what the Jugendamt is and what it does, not whitewashing over the criticisms but also not giving them undue weight. Angr (talk) 09:27, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

The citation for the founding of the Jugendamt is necessary. If it is true that the remit of the present day Jugendamt stems from the Nazi period, then it is hardly to the credit of the German state. So this reference should be provided.

I don't think the article is particularly negative. Pretty much the same things can be written about the social services in the UK as well, so that doesn't make the German system any better. The UK press has highlighted the fact that the social services operate in a kind of parallel jurisdiction - where the ordinary standards of proofs in law and other legal safeguards do not apply. Perhaps the German press needs to take the cue from their British counterparts, and highlight the abuses of human rights committed by these agencies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geirrif (talk • contribs) 07:59, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Same in the Netherlands with regards to standards of proof, but to some extent there is no other possibility. How can there be proof of something what happens in a house? I mean, there is no webcam with a connection to the Jugendamt in a house with a family. Andries (talk) 20:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I propose translation out of the German version to make it more neutral. Andries (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Saying the article isn't "particularly negative" when the only thing the article does is accuse the Jugendamt of human rights violations is ridiculous. When the German press criticizes the Jugendamt, it's mostly for not having caught abuses by parents/foster parents in time - whenever a child is found to have died from neglect or child abuse or whatever, the press says "Why didn't the Jugendamt realize this was happening and get the children out of that abusive environment?" That's the kind of criticism the Jugendamt is subjected to, and with reason. I agree with the proposal to translate the German article. Angr (talk) 21:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It is not my impression that criticisms of the Jugendamt is confined to these cases, but also for seperating children from their parents without good reason. Andries (talk) 21:22, 6 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I can see that there would definitely be cases where there is fair treatment of children - and actions taken in the best interests of the children. Do you have some reliable sources to show the other side of the coin?--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The point was not that social workers are bad - the point is that there is such great power that the social workers who don't have the family's best interest at heart can abuse their power.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The first priority here is to rewrite the article so it is a neutral description of what the Jugendamt is and what it's there for, before we start worrying about which controversies and criticisms to discuss. Angr (talk) 19:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Taken into account the low standards of proof that the Jugendamt interventions require, I think it is important to list to what extent parents can complain about the Jugendamt interventions and what legal measures they have to challenge decisions by the Judendamt. I cannot find that in the German version. I do not have time to translate myself, though I can understand German. Sorry. Andries (talk) 17:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Agreed. I'm German and was linked to that article by a non-German who wants to learn more about all kinds of aspects of German society and wanted to know if this article was accurate, and it's woefully incomplete. The point isn't whether there are criticisms, and whether they are justified, but that from reading the article one gains no information about what the Jugendamt's actual tasks and responsibilities are, what the legal basis is, in what kind of cases they are called in, and what they do when they don't torture children (which judging by this article one is forced to conclude is their main occupation). Of course criticism should be included, but if an agency is to be criticised for not following its responsibilities, exceeding its legal rights, or for having rights and responsibilities that go too far, one should first establish what those rights and responsibilities are. And before someone asks why I don't translate the German article - I can write English fairly well, but I can't do English-language legalese, or transfer legalese from one language to the other, and I think one needs those sorts of skills for tackling that article. 87.158.11.5 (talk) 08:19, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello. I'm german, too. And my english is not that good, that I could work here properly. But I think there is a good english ressource to update this article. The text can be used as a good quarry to work on this article. It's the brochure Jugendamt - What youth welfare offices do (pdf, Englisch) from the Site www.unterstuetzung-die-ankommt.de. --Groovebox(de) (talk) 20:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

It would seem that the answer to the charge that this page is negative, is to fill it in with positive incidents regarding the Jugendamt. If such positive incidents can be found, then balance is achieved. If they cannot be found, then it would seem to be proof that the organization is almost entirely negative. It is incumbent, therefore, on those who believe the article is too negative, to find and report on such positive incidents, or stop disputing the balance of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.247.72.151 (talk) 09:01, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * As with other organisations or public services, as long as the Jugendamt does what it's supposed to do (which they do in a large number of cases), you won't find much information on it in the press etc. Apart from things working as they are supposed to work not being newsworthy, interactions between the Jugendamt and individual families are supposed to be private, and privacy of children is especially protected in Germany. You're unlikely to find press articles on individual cases that say "Overwhelmed family X with several children receives help in organising their life better and raising their children responsibly", or "child saved from abusive or incapable family X by being taken out of their custody" beyond general statistics (according to the German article, that happened in over 11,000 cases in the largest state alone in 2012). And as I said above (I'm one of the IP's), I wasn't disputing the neutrality as much as pointing out that the article had at the time no factual information on what the Jugendamt does, but went straight into asserting that the Jugendamt is a Nazi organisation to this day and exists to torture children and their parents. Before inserting criticism, such facts should be established. 87.153.33.24 (talk) 13:13, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * What could be added is that standard of proof is based on civil law, not on criminal law. (If it is the same as in the Netherlands). Yes, and mistakes do happen and by its nature more in civil law than in criminal law. And sometimes they are irreversible. E.g. if a young child is placed in a home of foster parents then even if it has been proven that there was never anything wrong with the biological parents then the child will not go back to biological parents. This is how it works and documented in the Netherlands and I guess it works the same in Germany. The reason for this seemingly illogical and cruel rules are to prevent trauma for the child by breaking attachment. Andries (talk) 15:54, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Up to now I didn’t even know that Jugendamts already existed before 1945! Thought they were an invention of the post war era. :-) Best regards from Germany, Robert 93.195.205.141 (talk) 19:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

They did existed and took part in Holocaust (and many more war crimes for example: kidnaping of 130 000 Polish children). The lie is in lack of information about racist practics of this organisation (example: forbiding Polish parents to speak with their children in Polish - Mr. Pomorski did not seen his doughter 9 years because of doing it). I think, that defending Jugendamt is clearly defending Nazim - because this organisation was and is a nasi, racist machine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.238.227.141 (talk) 13:12, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Anti-Jugendamt organisation
http://dyskryminacja-berlin.de/?page_id=17 Xx236 (talk) 07:25, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

The article is biased, it doesn't mention any real problem

 * http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B8-2018-0546&language=EN] Xx236 (talk) 07:54, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * They name it German Youth Welfare Office.Xx236 (talk) 11:08, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Perhaps Youth Welfare in Germany and Austria would be more understandable for English speakers?Xx236 (talk) 08:07, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Polish TV documentary Getaway from hell
https://vod.tvp.pl/video/ucieczka-z-piekla,ucieczka-z-piekla,24959171 Xx236 (talk) 12:48, 6 May 2019 (UTC)