When the government removes children from the custody of their parents, it assumes responsibility for their safety. The state then becomes the child’s legal guardian until a court determines the family can safely reunite.
But what happens when a child is seriously injured while living in foster care and the injury is initially dismissed as a minor accident?
That question now sits at the center of a child welfare case in Indiana.
The child, about 10 years old, had been “hit in the eye in the bouncy house,” the foster caregiver wrote in a text message to the parents. A police officer had looked at the injury and believed an ice pack should help, and that a visit to the emergency room was “probably not necessary.”
The child experienced symptoms from the injury for months before eventually seeing a doctor.
Medical records reviewed by Redress South Bend show the child had been kicked in the orbit, or eye socket, and later developed symptoms consistent with a concussion. Physicians documented persistent headaches, dizziness, and sensitivity to light and sound. Specialists later recommended neurological evaluation, an MRI, therapy, and accommodations at school. Clinical notes described headaches so severe that light worsened the pain. Doctors reported the child often preferred sitting in a dark room because of that sensitivity. Medical records also show the child has autism and other developmental conditions that physicians said could complicate recovery.
At the time of the incident, the child was living in a foster home during an ongoing child welfare case overseen by Indiana’s Department of Child Services, or DCS. The placement was meant to be temporary. Court records show the goal of the case was reunification, meaning the child would return home once the parents completed court ordered services and a judge determined the family could safely reunite.
Although this article centers on one child’s injury, the family’s case involved two brothers. When asked for comment, the father said both children repeatedly asked to return home. “My 11-year-old and 8-year-old sons were pleading with DCS contractors to reunite the family,” he said. He also said his younger son directly asked a state contractor to reunify the family and that, in his view, the children’s wishes were not meaningfully heard during the case.
Redress South Bend requested comment from DCS on March 16th, 2026, and asked the agency to address general foster care policies involving religion, medical care after injuries, vaccinations, and communication between foster caregivers and biological parents. DCS provided written responses to our inquiries on March 20th, 2026.
In its response, DCS addressed those questions as matters of general policy rather than commenting on any specific child or family. On injuries in foster care, DCS said anyone in Indiana who suspects a child has suffered an injury as a result of abuse or neglect should immediately notify the department. Citing 465 IAC 2-1.5-19, DCS said that in an emergency, foster parents must arrange emergency care at a nearby hospital, clinic, or doctor’s office and then notify the department as soon as possible afterward. When asked whether foster caregivers or caseworkers are required to ensure a child receives a medical evaluation after a reported head injury, and how soon, DCS referred back to that same answer and did not provide a more specific time frame.
The dispute in this case extended beyond medical care.
Text messages reviewed by Redress South Bend show repeated disagreements between the foster caregiver and the child’s father over the child’s religious (Hindu) upbringing.
In one message, the foster caregiver told the father that religious materials connected to the family’s faith should not be brought into the foster home.
“We have our house and we have our religion here,” the foster caregiver wrote. “When the boys are home you can teach them and read what you wish.”
The foster caregiver later added: “We have repeatedly asked you to keep your religion at your house.”
The father responded by asking whether the child was being prevented from practicing the family’s religion.
“Are they not allowed to pray like their parent, grandfathers,
and forefathers before them?” the father responded.
Records also show the father objected after learning his Hindu child had been required to participate in Catholic religious practices, including receiving communion during church services. Indiana’s Bill of Rights for Youth in Foster Care states that children placed in foster care have the right to celebrate their cultural identity, traditions, and beliefs and to follow their own spiritual path. The policy also states foster youth cannot be discriminated against based on religion. More broadly, the DCS policy manual states that local offices must ensure no one is denied benefits or subjected to discrimination in federally funded services on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, or handicap.
Asked whether foster caregivers may restrict a child from practicing the child’s religion, DCS cited 465 IAC 2-1.5-15 and said foster parents “shall not prohibit the child’s participation in the child’s religious faith nor prohibit related religious activities.” DCS added that foster parents must make reasonable efforts to accommodate a child’s participation in religious activities consistent with that child’s faith. The agency also said foster parents may not have a child baptized or admitted into a religious organization without the child’s consent and the written approval of the department and the child’s parent. Asked whether DCS investigates allegations of religious discrimination involving foster caregivers, the agency said it takes “any allegation of discrimination seriously” and follows current state and federal law.
Disagreements about vaccinations
In one exchange about vaccination, the foster caregiver wrote that the foster placement might end if the child received a COVID vaccine.
“If we are told that (Redacted) will need the Covid vaccine we will have to part ways because we could not just watch a sick child because of an experimental drug,” the foster caregiver wrote, adding that many people had “a bad experience” with the vaccine.
When asked whether foster caregivers may refuse to vaccinate children in their placement because they view the COVID vaccine as an “experimental drug,” DCS said Policy 8.29 governs routine health care, including immunizations. The agency also cited foster parent qualifications requiring cooperation with the department and the child placing agency in the overall plan for care of the child, which DCS said would include a parent’s wish to vaccinate the child. DCS further said Policy 8.01 requires the department to consider the vaccination status of the foster family home when determining the appropriateness of a placement, which it said allows the agency to match children with foster families of similar vaccination status. The DCS policy manual separately states that routine health care services include immunizations according to the schedule set forth by the American Academy of Pediatrics, as recommended by the child’s primary care physician.
The conflict between the father and the foster caregiver later escalated further.
In one exchange, the foster caregiver criticized the father’s role in the family and suggested he should leave the country.
“If you can’t do your part then maybe
you need to go back to India even if you don’t want to.”
The father responded in writing by accusing the foster caregiver of discrimination.
“What you are saying and doing is a pure hate crime,” he wrote. “Why do you have to interfere with us?”
When asked what safeguards exist when foster caregivers communicate directly with parents, and whether DCS maintains policies addressing abusive, discriminatory, or racist language, the agency said it encourages foster parents to participate in “Co-Care,” which it described as a practice supporting communication between parents and foster families. But DCS also said foster parents are not required to maintain direct contact with parents as a condition of placement because there may be valid safety concerns. The agency added that Senate Bill 171, which it said took effect on March 5th, 2026, requires DCS to consider a foster caregiver’s willingness to interact with the family when making a placement decision, along with the expressed wishes of the parent and child when age appropriate. DCS also said it respects the rights of foster parents as outlined in the Foster Parent Bill of Rights, including rights to safety, support, and respect. The DCS policy manual separately states that the agency should make reasonable efforts to support and facilitate two-way communication between a child’s parent, guardian, or custodian and any resource parent who will care for the child.
Across the United States, hundreds of thousands of children live in foster care while their families work through court supervised cases. Foster caregivers, caseworkers, and medical providers form the network intended to protect children during temporary separations from their parents.
In this case, the records reviewed by Redress South Bend document an injury that doctors later described as consistent with a concussion, disputes over the child’s religion, disagreement about medical vaccinations, and escalating conflict during a case that court records show was moving toward reunification. DCS’s written response to Redress South Bend addressed broad policy questions about religion, emergency medical care, vaccinations, and communication between foster caregivers and biological parents.
Leaving the question unanswered: what protections exist for a child and family when the written rules say one thing, but the records in a particular case appear to show something else.
Logan Foster
Logan Foster is the founder and editor of Redress South Bend, an independent news outlet covering local government, courts, and public institutions in South Bend and St. Joseph County, Indiana. He reports from primary documents: public records requests, court filings, state audit reports, and campaign finance disclosures. His reporting has examined city and school district payments made without competitive bidding, school board spending, and the records of candidates in county races. Redress South Bend obtained the South Bend Police Department's ShotSpotter coverage map after the department initially denied public access. The outlet is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists and the Online News Association. Reach him at info@redresssouthbend.com
