test test test test test test test test test test test test >> thank you. i apologize that i had to go to the other hearing on net neutrality so i missed a lot of your statements. i wanted to ask commander white if i could, i know that when you walk too the hhs headquarters and, of course, we went there for a briefing after the zero tolerance policy was put into effect, there's a quote on the wall from former vice president hubert humphrey who the building is named after and says the moral test of a government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children, the twilight of life the elderly and the shadows of life the sick, needy and handicap. we're focusing on the first part, how the administration treated those who are in the dawn of life, the children. commander white, do you believe that this policy passed the moral test that hubert humphrey spoke of? >> i'm really not an expert on such things. i, however, have said previously and will say again, separating children from their parents poses significant risk of traumatic psychological injury to the child and separations for cause that are necessary to protect children have always been part of this program. i think the national discussion, including a discussion for legislators is specifically, what are the legitimate criteria for separation. >> and again, this kind of goes back to what i said in my opening statement which is that i understand that there may be occasions when it's justified, but if you have to weigh it and balance and say you're separating kids and all the terrible things that result from that, i think you have to be really careful not to separate kids whenever possible and that's, you know, why i mentioned when i went to the detention center in new jersey on father's day i just got the impression that oh, you know, there was no real criteria for deciding even today, you know, when we do this and it shouldn't just be assumed that somehow the parents are bad because they're taking the kids over the border and they should be separated. that's the concern i have. the commander in march 2017, then secretary of homeland security, john kelly, publicly stated that dhs was considering separating children from their parents at the border and at the time child advocates sounded the alarm on the negative effect separation would have. i understand when you testified before the senate judiciary committee you raised concerns about the policy. what were -- i know you said something about this, but could you get specific, what were the concerns you had and who did you raise them with if you could? >> the concerns which i expressed were two. first, that this would be inconsistent with our legal requirement to act in the best interest of the child and would expose children to unnecessary risk of harm. second, that it would exceed the capacity of the program issues of capacity are very important to orr because it constitutes our ability to provide a safe and appropriate environment to every child. not only would this likely exceed our capacity but particularly exceed our capacity that was specifically licensed for what we call tender age children which is to say children under the age of 12 and children under the age of 5 since those are separate licensed facilities and a facility appropriate for care cannot easily flex to provide care to a 4-year-old. >> maybe you were going to say who you raised these concerns with. that was part of my question. >> i raised these concerns within my own to my own leadership. >> specifically? >> that would be the director of orr scott lloyd, acting assistance secretary of acf steven wagner and the counselor to the secretary for human services maggie wynn. these were the superiors who i made recommendations to and identify the concerns to. >> do you know what those people did in response to the concerns you raised? >> we participated together in modeling and discussions. additionally it is important to note that secretary kelly, whom you just alluded, made a public announcement there would not be separation and that announcement was referenced in the subsequent communications to me when we revisited this later that there wasn't a separation policy. >> all right. thank you so much. >> thank you. i now recognize the ranking member dr. burchess for five minutes. >> i appreciate the recognition and the advancement in status. i'm not the ranking member of the full committee. however, let's talk just for a moment. the title of this hearing is examining the failures of the trump administration's inhumane family separation policy. the difficulty and commander white let me focus here for a moment, the difficulty because of the numbers of people and unaccompanied children that were coming across the border through not just the trump administration, it began in the obama administration and continued in the trump administration, that is a fair statement? >> it is absolutely a fair statement that one of the most fundamental challenges we face every day in the uac program is the number of minors who come in as unaccompanied and the fluctuations in the number of minors who come in. >> let's talk about that for a minute. the fluctuations are important. i have made at least nine trips to the not just the texas border but other places on the border, primarily the texas border, it's my home state, i made a trip to the northern triangle countries this august, tried to get a delegation to go. mr. pallone had a cruise or something and couldn't go with me. i thought it was important that we understand what is going on here. this is not the -- well, again, the fluctuations that you described, august of 2016 i was down in the lower rio grande valley sector and the numbers of people who were coming across in august of 2016 was high. in fact, when i went down to the border with border patrol they, in fact, encountered a group of people about five or six women, some small children, some teenage boys, that had just been left there by coyotes, hot sun, out in the brush, cotton clothing on, flip flops for shoes. no way equipped to handle a trip across the desert to try to -- or across the brush country to try to get to civilization. they were left there by the traffickers. i asked customs and border patrol it's a serious situation. do you encounter this often? all the time. sometimes we bring busses to the border and 40 or 50 people will get on the bus and go off to a processing center. it was a big deal. in may of 2017 i went back down to that same sector on the border and it was vacant. the facility the processing facility, no one there. what happened that changed this and they said the inauguration of president trump, the word went out he's going to build a wall and nobody came. well, secretary kelly at the time was homeland security secretary visited a week or so before i did and had made the statement publicly and reported in the papers that the numbers are down, but if congress does not fix the problems with the laws that are inconsistent we can expect this problem to reignite. congress must act. and secretary kelly was exactly correct. a year later, we are facing another influx. again, it's not the only time in our history we faced large numbers of people coming into our country where it's become a management problem. an on-line publication moments in diplomatic history, quoting a deputy secretary of state john bushnell in april of 1980, the mare mariel boat lift. you may have heard about it. it was a big problem, and the carter administration had to deal with it. they were, of course, some difficulties. cubans lined up and down the florida keys in miami, not relatives, not related to people that were there, none had visas, most had no documents. republicans started causing problems for president carter saying you couldn't control your borders. here's secretary bushnel describing this, i remember sitting in a windowless conference room of the national security council with secretary of state edmond muskie, chief of naval operations, director of the cia, head of the coast guard, ins and several other senior officials debate how long to stop the flow of cubans, national security advisors brew seven brzezinski chaired. there was a long discussion how the coast guard and navy ships might stop the cuban boats. we asked the admirals how can we do this, the boats could be rammed or shot. wow. that seems even harsher than a zero tolerance policy, shooting the boats at sea. again, you have a vast number of people coming into your country and you do have to -- you do have an obligation, the government has an obligation to control that flow. bill clinton, when he ran against george her burt walker bush just derided george herbert walker bush for his blockade of haitians coming by boat and bill clinton said during the campaign if i win this election the statute of liberty will again be open for business and we will not turn those haitians back at sea. what did president clinton have to do before he took office he had to go on voice of america, tell the haitians not to come by boat because so many were projected to die at sea on that perilous journey. bill clinton started a zero tolerance policy before he was inaugurated. i yield back my time. >> the chair recognizes the gentle lady from illinois. >> thank you very much, congresswoman degette for this hearing. i'm going to try to hold it together because this has been such a traumatic experience for so many americans, watching what has been happening. i've been to the border, i've been to shelters, both in mcallen, texas and in chicago where people are getting very good care. the children are getting good care. but it -- can anybody here on this panel challenge this, the united states does not know how many children have been separated from their parents? no one. does anyone know how many are still separated from their parents? no nobody knows. and now we know that those in orr custody, that there is no way to know how to divide out those children that have been separated, that is right, commander? >> ma'am, no. i want to be very clear, children in orr custody, children who have been in orr custody who were in orr custody on the 26th of june, we have laboriously worked to identify those -- >> i understand. >> challenges those who exited orr custody because hhs did not receive from dhs any list or any indication of the complete set of separated children. >> thank you. >> in partnership with them we worked hard to identify every one of the kids from those who were in care. >> thank you. >> yes, ma'am. >> i just feel like what's been happening is more than irresponsible and sloppy, that i really think that what we're talking about is state sponsored child abuse and i would go as far to say kidnapping of children. miss maxwell, i want to ask you, what, if any, criteria has been shared with hhs regarding how determinations are currently made to separate children from their family and what if any process exists for hhs or attorneys or for the families to dispute these? my experience when i went to mcallen was, a whole court room of people, these immigrants coming across, these refugees coming across were declared guilty of crossing the border illegally. so is that a criteria? they're criminals? how do we know? and miss larin, you mentioned that there was no real criteria of who is then unfit and who should be separated. >> yeah. to be clear there is no federal statute that dictates the circumstances under which families must be separated at the border. that is a discretion made by enforcement immigration enforcement agents. as it pertains to children newly separated we do note in our report that there is information coming about the cause of the separations, there there lacks a level of specificity to determine whether or not the separations currently happening meet the spirit of the preliminary injunction as well as allow orr to have the information necessary to care for the children. >> let me ask miss larin, do you want to comment on that? >> i'll address it for gao if that's okay, ma'am. we understand from dhs that under certain circumstances children could be separated from their parents at the border and those circumstances include things like if the parent rep is unfit or represents a danger to the child, if they have a criminal history or if they have -- >> criminal history? how is that defined? are these people criminals because they cross the border? >> according to what was laid out in the court order for that population to be eligible for reunification, the court determined that to be eligible for reunification, it would be determining fitness if the parent, a consideration of if the parent was involved in possible criminal violations, but not including improper entry. misdemeanor improper entry. >> okay. do we know how many children have been separated for -- from their parents for a reason that was given? do we have a number? >> so ma'am, gao actually has ongoing work right now for the house homeland security committee where we're looking at how the department of homeland security is addressing families that are encountered at the border and planning to report out on that work later this year. >> okay. i just want to say that my constituents, i was hearing from parents regardless of party, who were so and are so upset at this child separation. a number of them said this is not rocket science. what about a hospital bracelet put on a parent with a matching one for a child to identify them. it is so shocking that we do not know how many. i hope this hearing can get to some at least knowing what we need to know. i yield back. >> the gentle lady yields back. the gentleman from west virginia mr. mckinley now recognized. >> thank you, madam chairman. a few quick questions to understand, media and some folks here in congress continue to talk about the children are being put in cages. commander, i haven't heard anyone talk about that yet. i would like to hear how you react when you hear that orr is putting children in cages? how do you react to that? >> well, of course, that's false. i mean, this is actually -- there's so many things about this issue that are complex and this is not one. the images that have been in the media are actually images of border stations. but the easiest -- i -- i think that the best answer for this is, come and see. come and see an orr shelter. i know that many members of congress have toured them and we have that process. but orr shelters are licensed by the state in which they're housed to be a residential care setting for children. they are not detention facilities. >> okay. >> many states they have no locked doors to the outside because that's not permitted under state law. we do not put children in cages. in fact, that's why we do influx sheltering is because for their mission appropriate for their mission border stations are a detention or holding setting. we don't have those. >> thank you, commander. i would also try to get a grasp, i'm from west virginia, we're not seeing the influx and the problems some of the other folks are, but we follow it in the media. i'm trying to get an understanding for the american public to understand, like for the minors, the accompanied minors, what's the age -- what would you say the average age for an accompanied minor would be? >> so i'm -- >> just a range. >> right. >> maybe. >> unaccompanied alien children can be any age, although the greatest majority of them are teenagers. those minors who were separated, the demographic is younger, because after all they were traveling with parents. they have a different set of needs and a different demographic picture than true uacs. most are teenagers. sometimes we do get much younger children typically who were traveling with a like a teenaged brother or sister. >> if you could again just get back -- i would like to understand, i can compartmentalize it better if you give me an average age. if the average age is 8.5 or the average age for the unaccompanied minor might be 14. i just would like to know what that is. >> the greatest number for unaccompanied alien children is 16 and 17. >> whomever would like to answer, there are so many misrepresentations about -- you just heard it here that this is state sponsored -- i don't want to finish the sentence. i would like for you to just walk through with me, please, give me a day in the life day one when you first get a child in the -- let's just say one of the minors that they come into your presence, could you walk through what they begin with? i was told one of the first things that they do is vaccinate the children to make sure that they're healthy. i'm told that they have access to doctors, that they -- that there's a mental health individual that they can be counseled with. can you walk through what a day is like as compared to what others are talking about, put in cages? give me -- just in the remaining time, minute and a half. >> sure. >> every -- >> first day. >> every child who enters orr care, part of their first hours include a comprehensive psycho social assessment to determine their needs. they go through ime, initial medical evaluation, a complete medical work up and we begin their process of age appropriate vaccinations, which we do to cdc standards. this is part of the child's first day along with the process of know your rights and legal screening and their orientation to the program they are going to be in. >> mental health. mental health, they may have begun to have problems based on what life was like back in their village or community, then they went through the ordeal, the trauma of a lengthy march through mexico to come up. what kind of mental health treatment are they receiving? >> so every minor in orr care has a licensed clinician and we have a specified ratio of clinicians to children. children receive individual and group legality clinical services. some children are diagnosed with more significant behavioral needs and would receive higher acuity care or setting for those needs. i feel, i'm very proud of the work we do, for the health and safety of children in care. >> thank you very much. i yield back my time. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, dr. ruiz. >> let's be clear, we know o.r.r. did not do the separation of children. we know that cbp and i.c.e. separated children. let's be very clear it was cbp and i.c.e. that detained children in cages. let's be clear about that. this is an outrage. this is a stain in our conscience and every mother or father that love any of their children should feel the compassion and hurt these children and parents went through when this happened. i understand, by the look in your eyes you understand that. as health care professionals, you understand the experience of having to go through and witness that as well. and yet, since it was one of the most intentional, hurtful experiences in our nation's recent history that our federal government has done to any population, this committee held no hearings on the topic while it was ongoing. this committee had no legislation that we marked up except for this resolution of inquiry and it was not passed with favorable sentiment to be voted on on the floor. we were simply asking to have a hearing to get questions answered. simply asking for resolution of inquiry that congress is saying, we want more information that was denied by this committee in the last cycle. commander white, do you understand the effects of toxic stress on children? >> i have professional training that does indicate toxic stress is an accepted scientific reality that has consequences for children's behave i don't recall health and psychology health and the consequences are frequently lifelong. >> so, this problem is not over, even after they unify the child with the family, right? >> the consequences of separation for many children will be lifelong. >> march, 2017, the american academy of pediatrics published a policy statement opposing the separation of mothers and children at the border, stating, quote, federal authorities must ensure the emotional stress is not exasperated by the additional trauma of being separated from their siblings, parents or other relatives and caregivers. you mentioned a tender age, children under 5 or children under 12. in your opinion, were they retraumatized by our federal government when we separated them from their mothers? >> i previously testified before the senate -- >> yes or no. do you feel they were retraumatized by being separated from their parents? >> separation of parents is a trau matter event and has the potential for psychological consequences. >> let's be clear, is there a nullification of retraumatize or an additional trauma that adds additional stress to a child after they experience the difficulties they experienced in their home country going through the long trek. did we add additional retraumatizization? my understanding is yes. when you voiced your concern to your leadership when miss maxwell mentioned that the department of health and human services knew there was a surge of family separations and folks were aware and they were questioning, did you voice your concern and did you say these need to -- how are you -- how are you treated when you voiced your concern? >> i received a respectful hearing. i was advised there was no policy -- >> did you feel that was a way to tell you, don't bring it up any further? this was not official, so don't mention it anymore to anybody else? >> no. that's not how i took it. >> and, did you advise that hhs should take a little more proactive step to stop these separations? >> that is the recommendation i gave. >> did it occur? >> it did not occur. >> in the intake, you said that you -- that the o.r.r. did not distinguish which children were separated and which children were not separated, correct? >> that's correct. >> let me ask you a question, were you able -- was there anything preventing you from asking the question during intake? o.r.r., was this child separated from their parent? >> that is now part. >> you weren't told you can't ask that question and you failed, the department of o.r.r. failed to ask that question during the intake of the child. >> we routinely ask and have asked for years -- >> at this time, you said you were not able to determine if they were separated or not separated. a social worker, a case manager would simply ask, was this child separated to determine a full history and context to provide the adequate treatment for toxic stress. did that occur and were you proud that it did not occur? >> i did attempt to identify -- >> earlier -- >> we are going to have -- >> earlier, you said you didn't. >> i was specific. what we did not have was a single, comprehensive list. many children identified as separated, there is nothing in their initial assessment to indicate their separation even when asked the question. so that's not an exhaustive l t list. >> the gentleman's time expired. the gentle lady from indiana, miss brooks is recognized. >> thank you madam chairwoman and ranking member guthrie. thank you for holding this important hearing today. i would like to remind the committee that during an important debate over the passage during the energy and commerce committee debate on the pandemic hazardous preparedness act, we did accept an amendment to require orr and department of hhs to provide us weekly reports. so, this committee did, in clarification of my friend the gentleman, dr. ruiz, this committee did address that duction during the pandemic all hazardous debate. it was included and, in fact, has been voted on by the house and passed the house twice. we already got it out of the house, once again. in that bill, about pandemic all hazard preparedness, we addressed this issue in requiring the department to provide weekly updates and to require the department to deal with this issue. so, i wanted to clarify for the record that our committee did address this. we have passed it in the house, although people might not have realized it was a very important bill having to do with pandemic with vaccines and preparedness for public medical emergencies. i would like to share that i, too, have visited not only the border and visited the brownsville facility and saw, which overwhelmed me, the southwest key facility where i saw 1379, i'll never forget that number because it was on the board as i walked in. 1379 boys ages 11-17. i, like others, saw they were incredibly well cared for. i was overwhelmed at the numbers of children at that point and time. this was in july of '18. the vast number of unaccompanied children. some may have been separated and in the process of being reunited with their families. i think, until i saw that, i was really not -- had not the full understanding of the massive numbers our country has been dealing with since 2014. the massive numbers of children who were separated from their parents in their home countries, smugglers and coyotes who were paid to bring those children. these children have been experiencing toxic stress for a very, very long time, including these unaccompanied children as well as those separated. for the record, i, too, was opposed to the separation of families and children. i want to talk briefly about one of the facilities and commander white, there have been media reports about the variation of care. the tent ski city that we saw, it's my understanding that's since closed. is that correct? >> temporary influx facility, the tornio site has been closed. >> so, can you talk with us, i think it has to do with the fluctuations. this has to do with what i would call a crisis that we have been handling, but not handling incredibly well since 2014. we still have thousands of children, still, in december there were about -- oh, i have the numbers. 4,000 unaccompanied children that came each month in october, november and december. do you know what the numbers were in january? how many unaccompanied children do we have? >> i don't have with me monthly numbers, but we do provide them monthly. i can tell you, thus far, this fiscal year, we have received just under 14,000 referrals. last fiscal year, we received 49,100 children in care. over recent years, the fluctuation has been between 40,000 and 60,000 children into the care of orr. >> we are at 14,000 now? >> thus far, this fiscal year. >> thus far. do you have any way of predicting what is coming for the next three months? >> so, we have to use capacity modelling to anticipate how many beds we will need. the most honest answer, no one can predict how many kids will cross the river tomorrow. >> because of that challenge, my time is up, because of that challenge, i will be submitting questions in writing relative to the future planning since we have absolutely no idea how many thousands upon thousands of unaccompanied children in addition to and god forbid, any further separations, but the unaccompanied children our country has not dealt with. they continue by the thousands. they are children coming to our country with no adults. i yield back. >> the gentle lady from new hampshire, miss custer is now recognized. >> thank you. like my colleague, i will try to keep it together. i'm a mother. i have been an adoption attorney for 25 years. i'm very, very well versed in, to quote the commander, i want to thank you for your courage, your honesty and your compassion. the consequences of separation of children from their parents will be lifelong. i have been to mcallen, texas. i have been to brownsville. i want to be very clear to my colleague, i have seen the cages. i have walked through the cages. i have seen the children crying. i have been with the mothers who had no idea where their children were taken. we were all crying. it was a group of women, members of congress, mothers and grandmothers ourselves, weeping in the arms. the guards were weeping. i met two women breast-feeding their babies that were taken by the government of the united states of america. breast-feeding their babies. so, i understand that you did not make that happen. but, we are all citizens of the country that made that happen. with all due respect, to my colleague, miss brooks, who is a friend and a colleague, yes, they face trauma in their home country and we need to do more. yes, they arrive with trauma at our border and we need to do better and open our arms with compassion, but we have inflicted additional trauma on each and every one of those children. we need not forget until we get to the bottom of this. i appreciate all of your professionalism in helping us to do just that. now, what i want to focus on is the children who are separated in your jurisdiction, i have great respect for the care they are receiving. they are being placed into child placement agencies and they were sent, at that time, around this country while their parents, mothers and fathers were sent to detention facilities thousands of miles away. they had no contact. the women we spoke to couldn't make a phone call. then they were charged for the phone call. they had no money. i want to focus on the legality. my colleagues are doctors, i'm a lawyer. help me understand how those children's rights are being protected and promise me, please, that not a single child has had parental rights terminated against that parent's will on grounds of abandonment or neglect because the united states of america separated that parent. >> first of all, o.r.r. has no authority, this congress never provided authority to o.r.r. to terminate parental rights. that is not something we do. >> sorry to interrupt -- >> yes. >> can you promise me, there's no agency across this country where o.r.r. has placed a child that has somehow slipped into a state court, a county court and urged the termination of parental rights because this child was, quote, abandoned at the border? >> so, as it happens, our grantees are prohibited from attempting to intervene in custodial matters in court and indeed in previous years where there have been isolated cases where someone attempted that, we have fought against that. i want to be very clear. we do not allow that. i need to talk, i think this is also very important people understand this about what discharge to a sponsor means. i hear in the media, talk about discharge to sponsor like it's a crypto adoption. sponsors are members of the child's family. let me give the exact statistics for the year. it's very important. when we talk about children in o.r.r. care and discharged to sponsored before, let's talk about those children in the context of what that population looks like. so, in 2018, 86% of the children in our care were released to an individual sponsor and 42% of them went to parents, 47% of them went to close relatives. that means an aunt, uncle, grandparent or sibling and 11% went to a cousin or nonrelative, family friend, generally identified by the parent in home country. that's important. >> my time is up. i agree that's important and i would far rather have those children in a loving home with a parent, a grandparent, someone who will care for them than to have them separated and placed in an agency. i appreciate that. >> gentleman from virginia, mr. griffith is recognized for five minutes. >> i thank our chair very much. look forward to working with you over the next several years in that capacity. let me make it clear that the question earlier was, you know, could somebody slip into a state court as a former practicing attorney in that arena and with a spouse who is a juvenile and domestic district judge in the commonwealth of virginia, you can't guarantee somebody won't commit an improper act, but it would be a fraud on the court to indicate a child is abandoned when they came into the country with a parent. the bigger question for all of this is, all those thousands of children, how many did you say last fiscal year who were unaccompanied when they came to the border? >> the total number referred last year was, excuse me, i believe 47,000. i had it in front of me a moment ago. >> i believe you said the average had been between 40 and 60 so 47 is right on track, consistent with the average? >> if i take my glasses off, i will be able to give you the number. last year, fiscal '18 it was 49,000. over the last several years it has fluctuated between 40,000 and 60,000 children a year. >> when they come across unaccompanied, you all take charge of them, as we heard earlier, make sure they get some medical attention physical and mental health, is that correct? >> they are referred to us by another federal agency and only a federal agency can refer. we cannot lawfully take children. dhs refers them. then, we designate which of our facilities is right for that child and has a bed for the child. dhs brings the child to that facility. >> those coming unaccompanied in the first place, the 40-some thousand, you all then try to find a place for them, whether it's with family or with an agency, a placement agency, is that correct? >> so, we are required by tvpra and the homeland security act to place the child in the least restrictive setting. that means a -- almost invariably means a sponsor and we work with a family to identify that sponsor. children do not go out into state adoption systems. that does not happen. if we cannot find a family member, if we can't find a sponsor working with the family to meet the emotional and financial needs of the child or get through the vetting process, the child remains in o.r.r. care and can remain in o.r.r. care until their 18th birthday. >> it's also, the fact that there's lots of children who cross the border that you don't know how many that is because they inform are placed into any agency's hand at all and don't come to your referral and are just in the country, isn't that true? >> certainly. the majority of apprehended children are part of family units. that's what all the separated kids were. ordinarily, family units are managed by i.c.e. they don't come to o.r.r. of course, also some children enter the country without status and they're not apprehended. we don't have visibility on them, either. >> as a part of all this, of the 49,000 last year, roughly 2800 were people who came across with a parent or with somebody in the family and they were separated, of which i also was opposed. you all have placed all, i think you said, but six of those and determined they cannot be placed and putting them through the standard process. is that correct? yes or no? my time is running out on me. >> the 2816 are the potential children of mizel case members. >> a case where you have to deal with the children and get them back to their parents. i have to move this along, i am running out of time. you have six cases left. my understanding is five of those under that case, the aclu is playing a role and five of those have been delayed resolutions because you have been notified by the aclu that there's something going on they want to take a look at. is that not correct? >> of the six children who might be reunified, one has a parent in custody. i don't mean i.c.e. custody. >> i need to know. the other five, i would not say held up by aclu. we are awaiting indication from the aclu what the parent's final decision is about the child. >> what the parent's decision is? there's some question whether they want the child? as tragic as that is. >> whether the parents wish to have them reunified with them in home country or stay in orr care. there are five that we are waiting for that notification. >> that creates problems if the parent doesn't want them back. that answers itself. i yield back. >> miss castor? >> thank you chairwoman. i want to associate myself with remarks from democratic colleagues that expressed outrage over the trump administration's family separation. it was entirely frustrating that the republican majority refused to allow us to have an oversight hearing. i wanted the public to know what did happen. rather than have an oversight hearing, they marched us over to hhs. so folks understand, that is right next door. the hhs leadership could have come here, across the street, so that the public could understand and hear questions being asked in front of everyone. fortunately, we have rectified that today. commander white, we know the trump administration started this routine family separation well before it was announced, formally announced in may of 2018. you have testified here, today, that you expressed concern over family separations. did you -- how did you express, you said you had conversations. did you put it in e-mails or write memos to that effect? >> it's important to distinguish two points in time. first, as a potential policy option, that began in february 2017 through spring of 2017. >> did you write memos before, during that time? >> yes, i proposed memos and e-mails. >> after the policy was announced in 2018, did you write additional memos and e-mails expressing concern? >> no because i was not in orr at that time. the subsequent period of discussion about this was regarding our informal observation within orr that we were receiving a number of children that appeared to be separated. >> did anyone, after the policy was announced in may, 2018, did anyone within orr tell hhs leaders family separation should be stopped? >> i was not working in o.r.r. at the time. >> do you know of any? have you seen memos or e-mails, written documentation. >> i have not seen memos or e-mails. >> so, after -- >> the concerns i had about separation were shared by every career member of my team, so i'm confident they continued. >> after the separations began taking place, are you aware of anyone from hhs attempting to tell doj or dhs that this separation should be halted? >> i'm not aware of that, but it doesn't mean it didn't occur. >> you haven't seen any e-mails or memorandum from hhs to other agencies along those lines? >> no, but -- >> how about to the president? or the president's chief of staff? >> i would not know. >> if hhs leaders didn't know that separations were under consideration, they were willfully blind. if they did know and didn't speak up, they were complicit in the trauma inflicted on the children and, at the very least, when it became clear separations were taking place, as the top health officials in the country, secretary aczar and hhs leaders should have put their foot down and stood up for the children. there is little doubt that this administration failed that moral test. this administration failed. miss lauren, thank you for the work of the government accountability office here. o.r.r. officials told you they were not given advance notice of the attorney general's zero tolerance memo. it strikes me as inconceivable that the agencies most affected and would be responsible for separating children and caring for them were not given advance notice. based on your expertise of looking into the operations of numerous government agencies, wouldn't you expect all agencies responsible for carrying out the policy to be part of inner -- inter agency discussions? >> one of the key things we look at when assessing agency performance is whether they have appropriate internal controls. by that, i mean, do they have a structure in place to -- >> including impact on family separations on the health and well being of children? >> a key principle of internal controls is operating on the basis of reliable and accurate information, including information both internal and external to the agency. >> we still -- and we still don't know if secretary azar or secretary nielsen were given advance notice of the april 2018 memo. if they weren't, once they became aware of the chaos that ensued the trauma inflicted on the children, the burden on o.r.r., would it be reasonable for secretary azar to reach out to doj and dhs to at least raise concerns about the harm the policy was causing? >> they have reported on the importance of inner agency coordination. that is key to planning. the involvement of stake holders -- >> did you come across memos along the lines i asked commander white of anyone at hhs expressing concern to dhs, doj, the president of the president's chief of staff? >> we did not get any evidence that that consultation -- >> did you ask for it? >> we asked if there was any consultation and we were told there was none. >> gentle lady's time has expired. the chair now recognize mrs. duncan from south carolina. for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. thanks for allowing us to delve into the issue of children apprehended at the southern border when they cross illegally into this country. the gentlelady from illinois, miss schakowsky just asked commander white from hhs, do we know how many kids are currently separated from their parents at the southern border in this country? let me ask this. do we know how many children were brought into this country by coyotes and sold into the sex slave market to be violated primarily by men in towns like chicago or atlanta? the answer is, no, we don't. because we don't know how many people, children or otherwise, cross our southern border annually. we're investigating today the separation of kids when apprehended at the border and what we as a nation, when apprehending unaccompanied or accompanied children illegally entering this country, working to assess their situation, is that a family member they're, or is that a coyote, someone wanting to traffic that child? what is their physical condition. what is their health? a lot of them come with a lot of problems we need to assess. do they have munitiimmunizatioi are they bringing something that might affect the children where they're relocated. that's the appropriate thing to do in this nation to find out the health of these children before they are turned over to loved ones. that takes a little time. to do dna tests on who they were accompanied with and that child to see, is that a family member? to make sure we're not allowing that child to go with a human trafficker to be sold into sex slave market. super bowl weekend, 169 individuals were arrested in a sex sting operation. 18 victims were freed. i'm wearing this "x" because today, today is human slavery awareness day. 40 million people in this world are currently in the slave market, or currently enslaved. 70% of those are women. and one in four in the world are children. children. it's right that we're shining a light on this issue at the southern border with these children. it's right that our nation is trying to do right by these children. to make sure that they don't end up in the sex slave market or end up in the slave market working for someone in their household. to make sure that they are reunited with family members here or reunited with family members back in their country. because let me remind this committee that they have entered this nation illegally. right or wrong, whether they're set upon their families by honduras or other places to hopefully make a better life for their child. or whether they're accompanied with a parent coming across the border. right, wrong, indifferent, whatever the issue is, we as a nation need to make sure that we're doing right by the children. and so i want to urge this committee and this congress to not just focus on this issue of children at the border and what hhs and orr are trying to do, because i believe we're trying to do the right thing. and there are laws on the books about what we're supposed to do. but to also focus on the issue of what is a reality for many children that enter this country and enter the slave market, whether it's the sex trade or others, all over the globe. we have the power in this congress to do that. and look, i'm for a border wall, because according to a dhs special agent, we need to build a wall for the children. this is an article that is dated february -- excuse me, january the 29th i would ask to include in the record, madame chair. it's great that we're focused on this issue, madame chairman. it's important that we make sure that our nation is doing right by those that want to come into this country. and that we're doing right by american citizens where those that do come into this country are immunized and are healthy and are reunited with loved ones and all of that. but let's focus also on this "x" and the human trafficking that's going on all over the globe. and it is a big issue on our southern border that we felt as a committee and as a congress to address as part of this issue. and with that, i'll yield back. >> no objection, the gentlemen's fox news submission is entered into the record. the chair now recognizes the gentlemen from norm, mr. tonco, for five minutes. >> thank you, madame chair. later today we will hear about the chaotic attempts to reunify children with their parents from child welfare experts outside of this administration. we'll hear shocking stories of how children were ripped away from their parents and the effect that this trauma will have on the rest of their lives. before we have that dialogue, however, i think it's important to understand from this panel how we got to that place. so miss lairing, the very first line in your report states, and i quote, the agencies did not plan for the potential increase in the number of children separated from their parent or legal guardian as a result of the attorney's april 2018 zero tolerance memo. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> and further, miss herring, is it also true that cbp and i.c.e. and orr officials tell you that they did not take specific planning steps because they did not have advanced notice of the ag's memo and only became aware of it when it was announced publicly? >> that's correct. so then further, miss larin, did jao speak with anyone at the office about hhs about the awareness of the memo? >> we did not talk to the secretary. >> if not, as you're indicating, is it possible that they had some awareness of that situation? >> we're not aware of any awareness. >> commander white, last year, in front of the senate judiciary committee, you testified that while neither you nor anyone who reported to you had any advanced knowledge of the attorney general's memo that had been in discussions over the previous year about policies that could result in the separation of kids from their family unit, we also know from gao that orr continu d d planning for continued increase in separated children, but hhs leaders advised them not to engage in such planning. during this time, you were the deputy director of orr, with responsibility for the unaccompanied children's program. who specifically within hhs leadership told you not to plan for continued increases in separating children? >> i received that from scott lloyd and from maggie nguyen, who were respectively at that time, the director of orr and the secretary's counselor for human services. >> thank you. and commander white, given that you previously testified that you never met secretary azar prior to the implementation of the family separation policy, is it possible that discussions occurred amongst hhs leaders prior to implementation without your knowledge or awareness? >> i couldn't speculate on what occurred without any knowledge. >> but is it possible? i'm not asking you to indicate that it did happen. is it possible? >> of course it's possible. but i wouldn't be the person who ask, because i don't know. >> commander white, did you agree with the decision not to plan for continued increase inc? >> it was my hope that the reason that we were not planning it is that that meant that separation would not occur. i experienced relief at that notification, that separation would not occur. >> do you believe orr would have been better prepared to care for and reunify separated children had it been allowed to plan for continued increases? >> we would have been better prepared for the capacity issues, however, to be clear, we were able to successfully reunify thousands of children with their parents, because judge sabra created a pathway through his orders for us to do that. we could not have affected the reunification of children with their parents in i.c.e. custody absent his providing a way to do that. under our state steady authorities. >> but it took hundreds of hhs staff, did it not? >> to -- it absolutely did. >> well, thank you for your responses. this administration should never have had a family separation policy to begin, but they made it worse by not having notifying orr about it. the very agency that would be tasked with caring for these thousands of kids. i just find that totally unacceptable. and as a new yorker, we're proud of the fact that we border along the bay with the statute of liberty. and the inscription included therein. give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free and not including your children looking to be separated from their parents. i find this whole approach so deplorable. on behalf of our kids. and the trauma that will follow them for their lives. with that, i yield back. madame chair? >> gentlemen yields back. gentlemen from oklahoma, mr. mullen is now recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair. and thank you, everyone, for being here. obviously, this is a very emotion until topic that people have strong feelings about, which they should. i'm a four of five and two of my beautiful kids are adopted. and every child deserves a home and a loving parent. and there's just -- there's just -- there's just not enough homes out there welcoming to everybody. unfortunately, that's what we face. we do that currently right now in oklahoma. there's not enough foster parents out there. there's not enough parents that are willing to adopt that's out there. yet we have an influx of children coming across our southern border. the question is, what do we do with them? how do we do with them? and miss maxwell issued an issue brief which found in part that thousands of additional children may have been separated from their adult parents by dhs and referred to orr. in the context of this report, is it referring to children who may have been separated from a parent or legal guardian only? for any specific reason? >> the prospective we bring with this issue brief is a broader perspective that separations could have occurred for a myriad of reasons. >> but you said thousands more. you said there's possible thousands more. what did you come up with that information, where you said thousands more? >> sure. thank you for the opportunity to talk a little bit more about that. so the thousands estimate was provided to us by hhs officials that were running the program and tracking separated children. and it realities to a significant increase in the number of separated children that they noted -- >> but you said possible. how would we not know the exact number? i think commander white said that you know -- i mean, you keep track of every child. is that not correct, that's referred to you? >> we absolutely do. however, the question as to how many of the children received who had been appropriately discharged before the judge's order, how many of them were separated, no one in hh east coast -- hhs has a definitive list to work from. >> how long has this separation been going on? how long has separation from an adult or parent been going on the southern border. >> separation from parents and legal guardians is legally different from separation from anyone else. >> well, but we've got to determine if they're actually legally their parent, right? >> right. >> but separation -- >> how long has that separation been going on the southern border? >> some separations have always been part of the program. we have separations for cause. >> so this was going on during the obama administration, too? >> separations for cause are distinct from large-scale -- >> but we still do separation of cause. there's a large number that's coming into it. we know it's a $2.4 billion human trafficking industry now that the cartels are running. so there's always a cause for us to have concern about anybody coming across the border, when we don't know for sure that it's their parent. and we can't just take the adult's word for it. how long has the separation been going on, though? is that practice not going on underneath the obama administration, too? >> prior to what we saw in july of 2017, separations from parents occurred typically for one of four circumstances. the parent was medically unable -- >> it's been going on before, though. that's what i'm trying -- >> we've seen over the last few months, however, was not going on prior to july of 2017. >> but the separation for concern of the child has been going on through the obama administration, too? >> correct. and before. >> now, you talked about this cage, at a detention holding area. now, we've been talking about this cage. there's a picture floating all around the internet of this cage. that cage is from 2014. >> the images that i have seen in the media are mostly from the nogales processing center during the 2014. >> right, 2014. so that was under the obama administration, right? >> correct. >> yeah, correct. >> so my colleagues on the other side want to say that this is the trump separation and family separation, but the separation was going on prior to this. and all it is is about the safety of the children. now, if we can't agree on anything, let's not make a political point out of this and start pointing fingers at each other. it's about the children. it's about children. i know some of you guys have opened your homes up to kids, but how many of you have actually opened your homes up to kids? right now i have six living with me. three are biological! so you want to talk about opening your family and talk about the kids, then get off your butt and do it yourself! you want to really be compassionate about it. then open your house up! oh, wait, just make a political point. i'm okay with just sitting here. i'm okay with just saying we need to do something. well do more than just say something. now there is some colleagues of mine on both sides of the aisle have that be great, that have opened their houses up. but there's few. but everybody wants to make a political point. the fact of the matter is at the end of the day, it's about taking care of the kids. and if we can get away from the political rhetoric and just focus on the kids, then we might actually be able to get something done. but as long as we dig in and point fingers, we're going to be right here two years from now, too. i yield back. >> gentlemen yields bab. the chair now recognizes the gentlemen from california, mr. peters. >> thank you, madame chair. thank you, madame chairman and thank you to the witnesses. i found your testimony so far to be very forthright and helpful. i will just say that families coming to the united states seeking refuge and asylum expected to be met with american welcome. and i think in the stale thyle mr. mullin might have wanted, was this administration chose to go against decades that have kept families together and court rulings that establish protections for migrant children. when we talk about separating kids for cause, it's because it's for cause in those individual circumstances, where there's evidence that suggests that that would be the right thing for the child. it wasn't this wholesale separation that took place under the trump administration. i think that's what's new. and that's what concerns a lot of members of this committee. as a san diegan, i know the border is part of our identity and our culture. and san diego and tijuana are inextricably linked. the border we see as an opportunity, not as a threat. and ripping terrified children from their parent's arms is not the policy of neighbors. we must acknowledge the lasting trauma that these children may face for the rest of their lives. it's horrific to know that our government causes pain and we as a congress have a duty to provide support and resources to assist separated families. i do want to acknowledge that the work of the court system, as an institution that's stepped in and made a difference here, partly because it was the court in my home district, the southern district of california, it was judge saborrah, who i actually practiced law with a long time ago, and he's one of many federal judges. he happened to be a republican appointee who takes his job of providing justice very seriously in an impartial and nonpolitical way. commander white, in a recent court filing, you stated the statistics suggest that if a separated child who orr discharged before june 26th 2018 remains in the united states, then he or she is, quote, probably with their family. in considering what we know about the challenges hhs has faced in identifying separated children, what level of confidence do you have that these separated children were placed with their family? >> thank you, sir. so let me clarify this. while we do not know, because it was never provided to us on hhs, while we do not have a list of every kid that was referred to us as separated, we absolutely do know to whom we have discharged every child who's been in our care. so when we speak about those children who were separated and referred to us and appropriately discharged before judge saborrah's decision on the 26th of june, we can speak with certainty about what happens to children in that process. so the answer, and i alluded to the statistics earlier, during that year, 80% of children in our care went to an individual sponsor. 90% of the time that's to a parent, sister, brother, aunt, uncle or grandparent. and the remaining 10 to 11% of the time it's to a cousin or other distant relative or family friend. so while i don't know which of the kids were separated, because i haven't been given that list, i do know what happens to children who exit orr care. and indeed, if someone cared to give us that list, we could walk through it. but that is the answer to that question. that's why i said, probably they're with family members. because that is to whom we discharge the vast majority of children. >> in your recent court filing, you said you believed orr would face significant hurdles if they tried to collect children who were discharged before june 26th. and that you believed that attempting to reunify them would present grave child welfare concerns. can you believe why you think that would be a grave concern? >> yes, sir. i think it's helpful if you look at the whole paragraph in the declaration. here's what i said about grave child welfare concerns. and what i said was, is that in some instances, the sponsor, that family member might not wish to have the child or the child might not wish to come back into federal custody. so we could go through this legal process. and since in orr, there is no capacity to go and take children into custody, what would that actually look like? and i really want this understood. what that would actually look like is i.c.e. agents or other federal law enforcement going into an immigrant family's home to forcibly remove that child and put them back in federal custody. yes, i believe that has a very significant risk of re-traumatizing a child who's already been traumatized in many case by separation and i stand behind the truth of what i said nah declaration. that's not how it's appeared in the papers, but that's what i said. >> but you do agree that we should try to determine where the children went, who they're separated from, that we make sure know who their guardians are. >> i think we're eager to comply with whatever judge saborrah determines that we need to do. and i think it's very important that people know the full story. but i want to be clear. we will not have at our disposal the same tools to identify children in care. that we'll have the same capacity for children who are no longer in care. it's just a completely different ball game. >> thank you. i yield back. >> the chair now recognizes the gentlemen from massachusetts, who i'm delighted to say will serve as vice chair of the subcommittee for the 116th congress. mr. kennedy for five minutes. >> thank, madame chair. i want to thank our witnesses here for your testimony and to our service for our country. a couple points right off the bat. one, i think if i'm hearing everybody correctly, and commander white, you indicated that there was a policy put in place on a memo by the attorney general of the united states of individuals that would be and should be in your care and need to know about it. and when asked, it was denied that that policy existed. is that right? >> my questions about separation proceeded the policy announcement based on observations that we were seeing. above what we would expect to see in terms of the ordinary separations for cause. >> so, second point, my colleagues have pointed out how good a job a number of agencies are doing on the border and trying to address this and a number of other concerns, which they've gone to great lengths to explain that this is being well addressed and well taken care of, which i do hope that the lawyers from the white house are looking at that as they contemplate an emergency declaration for potential immigration moves, depending on what happens next week. third, commander, you had mentioned a number of folks raised concerns about what was taking place, but that that didn't change. do you have any idea why your concerns weren't heeded? >> i evaluated to my leadership, my immediate leadership, my concerns that separations were occurring and that if we saw larger scale separations, it would exceed our capacity and additionally that separating children from family units was inconsistent with the best interest -- >> understood, sir. i apologize to cut you off. you've been forthcoming, i just don't that have much time. you evaluated those concerns and were you ever told why they weren't going to do anything about it? >> i was told that family separation wasn't going to happen. and i have no reason to doubt the voracity of their statements. i think that's what the people who told me that also believed. >> i appreciate that. there is testimony that's coming on the second panel that indicates that children are still being separated from their parents at the border and while these reasons for separation are not often clear, it's evident that separations are occurring at evaluated levels compared to past years. miss abbott will testify to those words. miss maxwell, you testified that orr have continued to receive children that have been separated from a parent or guardian. do you know the nothose are sti at an evaluated level. >> they're about twice the level they were in the late 2016. it's still significantly less that be the peak we saw in the summer of 2017, but the average is a less than 1%. >> and do you have any concern that those separations are coming for anything other than good cause? >> so we strive to identify the reasons for separations. that is part of the information that we've added to the portal. but to answer your question, congressman, there is no specification in law about the permissible grounds for separating a child from a parent. and i would submit that if you want to see that, that's on y'all. >> i appreciate that, sir. moving from the children to the facilities. i visited a number of them as well. i want to ask specifically about some reports that have come to my attention that the trump administration is working to house detained children on land that was owned or is owned by the department of defense and that is not currently being used, because it is contaminated with toxic chemicals, including lead, arsenic, mercury, pfas and perchlorate. you informed the administration that seems to go out of its way to treat immigrants as less, that seems a new low. we know that children are vulnerable for toxic waste and that even low levels of exposure can result in permanent health damage, as if given the testimony that we've heard, these kids have not already gone through enough. so mr. white, can you detail for the committee any discussions that hhs or orr has had with dod regarding the use of the land that might contain toxic chemicals? >> thank, i actually got your letter yesterday and you allude to two military installations. let me be clear, one is a military installation we did use in 2016 to shelter 8,800 children. ft. bliss is one and a half times the landmass of the state of rhode island. we do not -- i want to be as clear as i can be about this. we do not set up temporary influx shelters on cite scythes that pose a temporary health risk to children. in fact, we have ruled out sites in the past specificallily on that basis that were otherwise suitable. we vet hundreds of potential sites that sister agencies identify. the sites that you identify in your letters are ones that had already been precluded by hhs. we had already ruled them out before we got to the environmental health assessment, because there were other things that made them unsuitable. >> i appreciate that feedback. a facility in homestead, florida, was not required to obtain state licenseture, because it's located on federally owned property. that begs the question tooz whether recent effort to identify more properties is an effort to circumvent some of those state licensing requirements. do you have any knowledge as to any effort to do so? >> i have worked on every single influx sheltering mission in the history of this program. and i'll tell you something, i would love it if they were state licensed. the life of every career person, of every orr official who works on that would get tons easier. but the reality it's not that we get around licensure, they're licensure exempt. we do not have enough funds to maintain a steady capacity that account for the real surges we use. so there are times we must use temporary influx facilities because the alternative is border stations. and we've had conversations today about what border stations -- although they're absolutely suitable for law enforcement, are not suitable for child welfare. i'm proud of the work we have done on influx standards and the way we maintain program standards under incredibly different time situations with fluctuations. >> the gentlemen's time has expired. >> thank you, madam chair. and thank you all for being here today, commander k, and from so of your responses. i have visited an orr facility down in san diego with several of my colleagues. so one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle asked, what's a day in the life -- you know, what is it like, a day in the life. and let me tell you, when i went to go visit to this facility and talking to some of my colleagues that have visited other facilities. what we saw were children, children who were very quiet. children who were not playing and happy or interactive like kids should be. and what we saw was the impact of trauma that was happening. kids that were crying for their parents. kids that wanted to be with their parent. and i heard an official say, oh, the kids have it really good here. they have a bed, they can play. and they said, one of them even said, they have it better than my own kids do at home. and i was shocked. well, your kids at home get to be with you. and to indicate and to just even say that a child has it well off here, when they're separated from their family, i think just shows just a complete ignorance of the trauma that is felt by these kids. and we have heard report after report, kids being reunited with their parents, feeling like they were abandoned by them, not recognizing them, not wanting toto go back to them i think is to critical. i have introduced a mental health bill make sugar we provide ongoing medical treatment for kids even after they have left these facilities, because i don't think they're getting that care and this trauma goes on for a very long time. now, i was -- one of my questions was going to be about where can a member of congress actually find the standard that's being used to say that a parent is unfit and should be separated from their child? but what i think i just heard for you say is, there is no place a member could look, because there is no standard. and that's upon us in congress to do. is that correct? >> so it is a question for dhs, the criteria that they use to effect separations for cause. but to be clear, there is nothing in law which either precludes arbitrary separation or defines the terms for separations, neither is there anything in law that gives us in the orr program the authority to say, that child is not separated after all. >> and equally speaking, there is no process for a parent to actually say, well, that's not true. or to appeal a finding that they should be separated from their child. is that correct? >> so there is no process. >> okay, thank. one of the other mind boggling parts of this whole aspect from this separation has been on how difficult it has been for the administration to reunite families and the lack of a tracking system. i think -- i read the january 17th, 2019, hhs, iog report and from my reading of it, the report is still not clear that orr, hhs, and dhs can track separated families across agencies, even today. is that true, miss maxwell? >> yes, both agencies have stated they've made improvements to their tracking systems. we do have ongoing concerns about the quality of the data being pin put into those systems. as i mentioned, current separations or information about them is being sent to orr, not always at the level of specificity, and even sometimes limited information as to the reason of the separation. for example, while most of them are separated and the indication is for criminal history, we did note that some separations were, the reason guiiven was immigratn offense only and some were given as other. so given that lack of transparency, we made a referral to the dhs iog to look into this. >> so miss larin, maybe you can also chime in here. what needs to happen so that we can make sure that we're -- these data systems have the proper information sharing and that vulnerabilities could be addressed. >> as i mentioned in my testimony, both agencies have made changes to their systems, pru prior to the court order. neither one had a way to consistently indicate whether a child had been separated. now each have a check box. but initially, it was not clear that data was consistently being shared between the agencies. so we have not assessed since then whether the systems are working to identify every child who's been separated. >> okay, and the commander, when my colleague from oklahoma was asking the question about how long separations have been going on, i think you tried to at least explain that they were not going on like this prior to the zero-tolerance policy. would that be accurate? >> there have always been separations for cause throughout the history of the program -- >> commander, i'm already over my time. there has been a change, hasn't there been? >> there has been a change. that's why we're talking. >> so so everyone knows, i sit on homeland security as well. secretary nielsen came in and said there was no separation policy. she's lied before, but of course she starts mincing words and when you really find out what's happening is, they started prosecuting parents and that resulted in the separation of children. so it's this administration's zero-tolerance policy. it's this administration that started this from happening, was trying to hide it and now congress is trying to make sure we provide that oversight and we'll continue to do so. inyield back. >> gentle lady yields back. gentlemen from florida, mr. soto is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, madame chairwoman. so as far as i could tell the timeline. we saw a draconian family separation order come down without prior planning, coordination, or advice from the white house leading to absolute chaos. and for that, i'm sympathetic of those of you who had to implement that, because we weren't given any advice on that. and we saw a population of separated children skyrocket. my colleague, mr. kennedy mentioned the homestead facility which i had the unfortunate honor of having to go to, after being blocked initially from being able to go. and there at the homestead facility, the second largest that we had. 1,179 teenagers were at this facility, made for 500 and that was the first clear point for me that there was no preparation for this, much to do that the white house didn't give anybody advanced notice and just threw it out there. the bottlenecking of these kids was caused by several policies like zero tolerance, but another one was the fingerprinting of entire adult members in the household, that was an hhs decision in the tornillo influx care facility and in other facilities. commander white, did hhs implement the extra vetting process in 2018 to include all members of the household in addition to parents or potential sponsors? >> yes or no -- >> i'm sorry, i couldn't actually hear you. i'm sorry. >> did hhs implement extra vetting processes in june 2018 to include all members of the household in addition to the parents or potential sponsors? >> we expanded our biometric background check in 2018 and subsequently, we had a change in operational policy to waive some of those requirements again. we have been iteratively changing our review process in response to oversight to congress since 2014. >> and commander, we'll get into some of those things. diz did hhs consider this new policy would affect the increase of the number of children under orr's care and whether you had the resources to meet those needs at the time when you implemented that additional fingerprinting? >> the two main variables that drive the number of kids in care at any time are the number referred each day on average and the number discharged each day on average. so among the variables we looked at was a continued discharge rate. >> and later hhs announced they would no longer require the requirements. without demonstrating benefit to children. and we saw hhs assistant secretary johnson state that adding anything to the protection or safety for these kids through the extra vetting was accomplished without those means. going into sort of our next question, within a month of extra vetting policy reversal, the last of the children held at the tornillo influx care facility were gone. did hhs conduct an analysis of this fingerprinting policy prior to or after its implementation? >> so, both. so the right way of understanding this is that we iteratively or constantly are looking at our release processes for safe and timely discharge. and i want to be very clear with you, congressman. safe discharge and timely discharge have s some friction between them. the safer you make a review process for a sponsor, the longer the average length of care. our motivations were to increase child sauft that particular operational change after we were able to see how it rolled out in practice, it burdened discharge rate more than it benefited safety and that is why assistant secretary johnson made the announcement that she did. we continue to strive and will continue to strooive to make changes as we need to find the optimum ratio between safety and timeliness in discharge. >> so given the fact it caused more of a delay than actually kept children safe and led to more mushrooming of the population, y'all determined ultimately it wasn't in the best interests of the child to do that? >> that's right. all of our decisions in the orr program must be guided by the best interests of the child, but they're also bounded by the appropriate resources that we receive. >> thank you. >> gentlemen yields back. i've extended the courtesy to have the ranking member for additional round of questioning. >> thank you very much. and commander white, it was mentioned that you had -- children at ft. bliss -- i understand ft. bliss is a massive place. i'm sure you didn't put them in the parts of ft. bliss that they don't belong, but you also said that was 2016. >> correct. >> can you verify that was 2016? >> we operated a temporary influx shelter in 2016 at the range complex on ft. bliss and we sheltered nearly 9,000 children there. and because of that, we were also able to safely evacuate children out of the path of a hurricane from florida and to prevent a backup into border stations. i'm proud of what we did at ft. bliss. i'm proud of what we did over two administrations in every one of our influx missions. >> and that was previous to president trump's administration. i just want to ask this question and then i'll finish up, because i know we have another panel coming. but just kind of putting where we are now, so as orr's accounting and tracking of children -- separated children changed since the zero-tolerance policy? are you receiving the proper information from dhs to properly have the information you need about children that are separated for cause and if not, what can kopg do -- or, let me finish. what can congress do to make your job more feseffective? >> so we have added essentially it's a box in the referral -- the electronic referral system that dhs personnel use, cbp personnel use to refer a child into orr care, for the referring agency to indicate if this child has been separated. and if so, the circumstances of the separation. right? so that is an improvement we made electronically. we additionally have added more robust appreciates in our own intakes process to identify and notify up if there are minors that the program that's providing care to the child believes are separated, so we can more comprehensively track them. in terms of what congress can do, it is reasonable to believe that if there was clear legislative guidance about when a child may be separated from a parent, that would ease the work of both departments. both our colleagues at dhs, who are sfrooifing honorably to execute their requirements and us. additionally, many problems would be prevented if orr shared with dhs the power to determine who is unaccompanied. as a reminder, weapon accept all the children who are referred to us. a lot of things might be different if that power were equally shared between the two agencies. that's what congress could do for us. that is only my opinion. >> appreciate that and i yield back. >> thank you, and mr. carnes from california has come in, so i'll recognize him for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mrs. chairwoman and thank you for giving us the legislative body to shed some light in full view of the american people and the world on how to get down to the bottom of what's been going on with the -- i personally consider it an atrocity that any country would wholesale take action, intended action of separating babies, children from their parents. i haven't heard of anybody in the psychological field that has said anything other than that is probably the worst thing that a person, that a society or any individual can do to a young brain. so to give that experience of that trauma. i have not heard any of them say anything other than that trauma lasts a lifetime. not some does it have a mental effect on that human being for a lifetime, it actually translates into negative physical effects, as well. so that having been said, it's alarming to me that earlier, i think it was you, commander white, was quoted as making a statement along the lines that perhaps you're not even going to be able to reunite all of the children in custody today with their appropriate parents. my point on that is, if that's in fact what you're willing to admit, i thank you for that admission. because until that moment, we were given stories from the administration and from various departments that everything's going to be okay at the end of the day. it's not that bad. all the children are going to be just fine. and nothing could be further from the truth. no offense. once a child has been traumatized like that, it's never going to be just fine after that fact. i just want to remind us that the ability of not being able to return every single child to their rightful families eventually and for us to do anything less than everything that we can do to make that right with that child and their family, anything less than that would be like we're treating them like sweaters left behind in a lost and found. and these are human beings. they might not be american human beings, but they're human beings. with that, i would like to ask some questions. commander white, with the reports of children crying themselves to sleep at the orr facilities, did hhs provide any advice or training to cbp on how to minimize trauma for these separated family members, particularly the children? >> so that's something we would have to get back to you on. i do not know if there is an inter-agency discussion. hhs is a big agency. i did not myself provide any technical assistance to an inner agency. but that's a question we need to get back to you on. >> if you could provide that to the committee, that would be very important for us to know the answer. and again, commander white, i'm not here to beat you up, i'm actually here to compliment you, because everything i've heard about your comments have been pretty darned forthright and just straightforward with trying to paint a truthful picture about what happened and what's been going on. i apologize, i'm having a hard time even asking some of these questions, because it is just so startling that in the greatest country in the world, we actually participated in this, in separating thousands upon thousands of children. but at what point in time was your department made aware that there was going to be an increase, a drastic increase, an influx of children that would have to end up in your custody? >> i'm not aware of any hhs -- i have no personal knowledge of any hhs person being advised of zero-tolerance policy prior to its public announcement. >> because my time is short, thank. did you personally inquire or did you discuss with any of your colleagues at your level, above or below, that if they were inquiring to ask for anybody else has heard, or at least -- maybe they were inquiring, but they weren't getting any answers. >> because i in many interagency meetings, it was clear to me that there were, that the possibility existed that separation was going to happen and indeed that preparation for that policy possibility was underway. as i've testified previously, i did evaluate those concerns to my own immediate leadership. >> but as far as you know, no direct answers were given based on the question i just asked earlier? again, to my knowledge, no one in hhs knew that zero-tolerance policy -- i have never heard an hhs person say to me, yes, i knew that zero-tolerance policy was going to happen. >> thank you for your frankness, commander white. thank you, madame chair. >> the chair now recognizes the gentlemen from maryland, mr. sarbanes, for five minutes. >> thank you, madame chair. thanks for the hearing, thanks to our panelists. miss larin, your inquiry in terms of the gao's review of all of this, was that confined to looking at what was happening in orr? or was it more -- was it broader than that? looking at the other agencies and how they touched this issue of the zero-tolerance policy? >> we looked at planning both by hhs and by dhs, or lack of planning. >> yeah. >> so i was fascinated when you gave your initial testimony, because you seemed to be describing a situation in which the official policy of the administration was that there would be no family separation, but the unofficial policy, going back to 2017, was that there would be family separation, which obviously puts the professionals who are trying to do their job well in an incredibly difficult position. they sit in meetings, having to interpret coded language, or winks and nods, as in, our official policy is not to separate families, but in effect, on the down low, this is what we're really up to. terribly disrespectful of people who are trying to do the right thing, as i believe, commander white, you've indicated you are trying to do it every step along the way. and having to tolerate the kind of atmospheric conditions that seem to be happening in these meetings and gatherings, where you're trying to pull information to allow you to do the right thing. so miss larin, i would just like you to expand a little bit on that disconnect. i've seen the trump administration issue, kind of shoot from the hip policy directives that get carried on cable television before people in the agencies that have to own those directives even know about it. through a combination of incompetence, sometimes, or other motivations. but this is an interesting case. because this is one where every -- the powers that be seem to know what they were up to. and they were saying, officially, we're not doing any of that stuff. there's no zero tolerance policy. there's no policy of separating families. but actually, that's what we're doing. describe that disconnect to me. because you touched on it in your initial comments and i think it's very telling, as to the difficult position that so many people just trying to do their job and trying to protect the interests of these families and children were placed in as a resul result. >> so i noted in my testimony that there was an increase in separated children, children who were separated from their parents between 2016 and 2017. and we were told that there were two different policies that potentially led to that increase. one of those was a memo by the attorney general that was issued in april 2017. so a year before the april 2018 memo, that prioritized enforcement of certain immigration-related offenses. and there was also an initiative that was specific to the el paso border patrol sector, which, again, increased referrals and prosecutions of immigration-related offenses, including of parents of minor children and that likely resulted in separations. so there were policies that were being implemented that could have led to that increase. >> what's interesting about is that it almost sounds like the administration was finding ways to test this out before they moved into a more official posture on it. one would have thought, based on some of the ripple effects that those more localized were target ed deployment of this policy would have demonstrated that they would have come back, realizing that that was a terrible direction in which to go. w but apparently the lesson they drew from it was that they should expand the policy more broadly with the disastrous and tragic impacts that it's had for these children. and i yield back >> the chairman yields back. i just have a couple of final questions for the panel. commander, i think you had said for the children separated before the april order that it would be very difficult for hhs to now figure out where those kids went, because most were released into custody or into their parents or whoever, is that right? >> the important time frame is not when they were separated, it's whether they had already been discharged from orr by the 26th of june. when we looked at the direction of the court, every single kild that was in care, there was no start date. the earliest separate was 2014. >> but the court order said you had to identify children after the time of the order. is that right? >> there was no start date from when they were separated. what mattered for the order was there they were in care on or after the 26th of june. >> so what you're saying today, and you painted this draconian picture of if i.c.e. went back into these homes and took these kids. i don't think that's what anyone is suggesting that's what we should do. but if we were going to identify what miss maxwell talked about, the potential thousands ofids who might have been separated, we don't know. it would probably take another court order to do that because of the interagency operations. is that what you're saying today? >> i'm saying to believe that we're compa capacitied. the best way to get that would be to pose this question to the department of homeland security. because hhs separated zero children. >> believe me, i understand that. but however -- and you don't really have to answer this, but hhs said they couldn't put -- they couldn't identify those children before and the court said to do it. so we're going to hear from our next panel about what they want to do, but this is what we're concerned about, is these thousands of kids that ig has identified, that may or may not be with family members now. so, you know, we'll have to explore this further. there's one other thing. you had mentioned to congresswoman castor, a memo that you wrote in 2017, is that right? >> i apologize, the castor memo? >> you had told miss castor that you had wrote a memo in 2017 to your supervisors? >> yes, i wrote multiple memos. >> this is really more a message for your department and not for you, but on january 18th, 2019, mr. pallone and i sent a letter to the secretary asking for a number of documents that would have been included in those documents. while we have received some documents in this committee, we did not receive that document or many other relevant documents. and so i'm asking you to please communicate to the department that they do need to comply with this document request. and i would ask unanimous consent to put our january 18th letter into the record without objections. so ordered. >> and i know hhs is going to fully honor your request. and they're working very hard on going through that number of documents. that will happen. >> and the last thing i'll say is we really do value the efforts you have made, but we intend to continue this investigation, because many of the questions the members have asked are questions you can't answer, because these conversations took part above you. and i also want to thank all of the other witnesses for participating in this hearing and for your thorough investigations. members will submit questions for the record. and i ask that the witnesses respond promptly to the questions. and with that, the subcommittee will dismiss panel 1. after the next -- after the next panel has been set, we'll invite them to the table. >> the chair will announce the because people have asked, we're expecting a series of votes between 1:30 and 2:00. so we're going to start with testimony from the second panel and then we'll break when we go for votes, so that if people need to use the restroom or grab a quick bite, they can do and we'll reconvene 15 minutes after the vote ends. i would like to now introduce our second panel. i don't know where mr. galernt is. mr. legalernt with the american civil liberties union will be joining us. miss jennifer podco, who's the senior director of policy and advocacy of kids in need of defense. dr. julie linton, who is the co-chair of immigrant house special interest group of the american academy of pediatrics. dr. christina munoz la pena, who is the terafir ma mental health director for the center of child health and resiliency, who's here on behalf of the american psychological society. dr. jack chonkof with pediatrics. and miss donna abbott, the vice president of refugee and immigration services. i'm sorry we don't have a name tag yet for you, but we are printing one off. this is the glitches when you have your first committee hearing of the year. i know all the witnesses are aware, we're holding an investigative hearing. and when doing so, we have the practice of taking testimony under oath. does anyone have any objections to testifying under oath? let the record reflect that the witnesses have responded "no." the chair advises you then that under the rules of the house and the rules of the committee, you are entitled to be accompanied by counsel. do you desire to be let the record reflect the witnesses have responded no. if you would then, please rise and raise your right hand so you may be sworn in. do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. please be seated. let the record reflect that the witnesses have responded affirmatively and you are now under oath and subject to the penalties set forth in title 18 section 101 of the criminal code. the chair will now recognize the witnesses for a five minute summary of their written statement. there's a microphone in front of you. it turns yellow when you have a minute left. and he red when your time has come to an end. you're now recognized for five minutes and thank you for being with us. >> thank you, chair, ranking member, and the rest of the members. i apologize i was late. i am the lead aclu lawyer in the family separation lawsuits. i'm going to talk a little bit interest that background, talk about the lawsuit and where we are and what i think needs to happen. i've been working at the aclu for more than 25 years doing civil rights work in the immigration area and i feel confident in saying that the family separation practice is the worst thing i have seen in my 25-plus years. no other administration has done anything like this family separation policy. i think the prior panel made it clear that it was very limited in the past, it was for cause, it was not this widespread systemic family separation and i think worst still, family separations are still occurring. as the prior panel mentioned. we filed our lawsuit in march of 2018. this is before zero tolerance policy and at that point we alleged based on talking to lots of people all over the country that there were hundreds of separations. by the time i stood up in court, in the beginning of may, the media had reported rough ly 700 separations. i think now it's clear that there may have been many more. this is before zero tolerance policy. and when the court ruled on june 26th, the government reported that there were 2,700 separations. those 2,700 are not obviously the whole story as this committee has talked about previously with the prior panel. the government's response now to the hhs report doesn't dispute that there may have been thousands more kids separated and released from orr before the june 26 date of the court's order. what i find remarkable is that hhs is saying that it may not be worthwhile and too hard to actually try and find where all these children are and where the parents are. it's remarkable that hhs is saying it may be in the child's best interest not to do so. and commander white mentioned it would not be great for i.c.e. to now be showing up at all these children's houses. i'd like to talk about this more and hopefully during the questions, but we see no reason why that would have to be how it would have to be done. the information could be provided to social workers and us just as it has in the past and we could find out what the family wants to do. to say in the united states it's not worth finding children, the government separated, seems to us to be an untenable position. you know, at a minimum i think we need to find out the full scope of the problem. i think that the government really needs to participate in process. i think one of the things the committee knows is that there were roughly 400 parents that we know of who were deported without their kids and at one point the government stood up in court and said if the aclu wants to find those parents, let them find them. ultimately the judge put his foot down and says no, the government has to help the aclu. i think going forward that's a lot of time and resources. we're happy to do it, but we certainly need the participation of hhs to help us and for the rest of the agencies. let me just sort of conclude by stating five points that i think are critical going forward. excuse me. first, as i said, we think the committee should ensure that hhs accounts for these thousands of kids talked about in the report to see how many there are, where they are, and what needs to happen. the second point is, we think it's critical going forward that there be proper procedures put in place and proper processes going forward so separations do not occur based solely on an a unilateral determination by an untrained cbp officer at the border. third, in the limited situation where they do occur, it's critical as the prior panel pointed out to have an integrated database that allows tracking quickly and the judge was shocked truthfully about how bad the tracking system was. he called the separations brutal and offensive, but on top of that, he said he was really startled by the lack of any kind of tracking system, and i don't think one is in place at this point. fourth, there were many parents deported without their children who were misled or coerced into giving up their own asylum rights. we believe those parents, if they have legitimate asylum claims and were coerced or misled with leaving without their children, ought to be given a fair shot to have an asylum committee. some of the parents got on the plane only to have the plane take off and now they're stuck in central america and their children are here. finally we believe strongly that funds should be allocated for the families that were separated to assist them with obtaining medical and other types of assistance. as was pointed out in the prior panel and i think is going to be strongly reinforced by the doctors on the panel, these children are suffering real trauma and harm and they need assistance. just conclude by saying, when i met with one of our plaintiffs and the mother who had a four and 10-year-old child taken from her for months, what she said when they came back, was the 4-year-old still asks her are they going to come and take me away again in the middle of the night. and i think that's what's going on with these children. any sense of stability has been shattered and without real medical assistance, i think it's going to be very difficult for them to recover. i will stop there. thank you. >> thank you. miss podkul. >> thank you chairwoman degette, ranking member, and members of the subcommittee. i'm here to represent kids in need of defense a national organization dedicated to promoting the rights of child migrants and ensuring that every child has access to legal representation. traditionally, kind has only represented children who arrive in the united states unaccompanied, meaning without a parent or legal guardian. however, last summer, during the family separation crisis, we expanded our services to serve the separated children and families. the majority of children that we serve come from el salvador, guatemala and honduras. these children have fled their countries out of a desperate need for protection, extreme violence and threats to their lives and safety leave them with no choice but to flee. children are telling us that they are embarking on what they know will be a dangerous journey. as one 11-year-old told me, if i stayed in my country i would die. if i took the journey, i might die. i had to take the chance. because of these levels of fear and desperation, any policies designed to deter future asylum seekers from asking for protection will be unsuccessful. you can't defer away a refugee crisis. unfortunately, what we saw this administration do last summer was an attempt at deterrent, but in the most cruel way imaginable. once the systemic separations began taking place, kind sent emergency teams of lawyers to serve these families. their stories were heartbreaking. there was an 8-year-old boy who was put on a plane over 2,000 miles away. the dhs officer told him he would see his father when he got there. that was not true. there was a 7-year-old who was highly traumatized by being separated from her father. and when the kind attorneys went to meet with her in the shelter, they could not even begin to discuss her legal case. she couldn't even answer questions she was sobbing during the meeting. a mother separated from all four of her children and when she was finally waiting the return of her youngest she was given the wrong baby. our attorneys heard several hundreds of these kinds of stories. we were serving younger children. than we had ever before. as attorneys we're obligated to represent a client's expressed wishes, yet some of these children couldn't even talk. while some of the children have legal claims that are distinct from their parents, many children's cases are dependent on their parent's claim, but because there was no system in place to track the separated children and their parents our attorneys didn't even know which children had to be separated let alone how to find the parents. we must demand accountability for what happened last summer, but we must also focus on the separations continuing to take place and address the systemic shortcomings that are still harming children. although the law allows dhs to separate a child from their parents, there are no standards for how that should be made. in order to reduce unnecessary traumas we need to have answers to these six questions, one, who's doing the screening, to evaluate the rare instance in which a child should be separated. two, what specialized training does that screener have to make a decision with such grave consequences. three, what standards are they using to make that decision. four, who reviews that decision. five, be how can the decision be challenged if there's a concern that the separation was not necessary. and six, what tracking systems are in place to ensure communication and future reunification in the event that a separation must occur. we need answers to these questions immediately. congress gave the care and custody of unaccompanied children to health and human services because of their expertise in child welfare issues. hhs should help dhs develop standards for screening and make sure that a trained child welfare professional is doing that screening to ensure that it only happens when it's absolutely necessary. when dhs sends a child to hhs, hhs must demand that dhs provide complete information about that child and hhs must also provide that information to the child's attorney or advocate. what happened to children under the family separation policy must never happen again. intentionally harming children is not who we are as a country. and we must act now to ensure that we are protecting any child that comes to us asking for help. thank you and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. dr. linton, you're recognized for five minutes. >> chairman, ranking member, and members of the energy and commerce committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak here today. i'm dr. julie linton, a practicing physician in south carolina where my clinical work is focused on the care of children and immigrant families. i'm the co-chair of the american academy of pediatrics, on behalf of the aap and our 67,000 members, thank you for holding today's hearing. the aap is nonpartisan and pro-children. pediatricians care about the health and well being of children, all children, no matter where they or their parent was born. as pediatricians we know that children do best when they're together with their families. after reading media reports in march of 2017 that the department of homeland security or dhs was considering a policy that would separate immigrant mothers from their children upon arriving at the u.s. border, we immediately spoke out against this proposed policy. we subsequently wrote to dhs six times to urge the agency to stop such a policy. the aap issued half a dozen statements about why family separation devastates the most basic human relationship we know. that of parent and child. the aap has repeatedly said that separating children from their parents contradicts everything we stand for as pediatricians, protecting and promoting children's health. today i will underscore the health effects of separation, both what we know from the scientific literature and what i know for caring for patients. prolonged exposure to highly stressful situations known as toxic stress, can disrupt a child's brain architecture and adversely impact short and long-term health. a critical role of a parent or known caregiver is to buffer this stress. separation from a parent robs children of that buffer. separated children can face immediate health problems including physical symptoms like headaches and abdominal pain, changes in bodily functions, eating, sleeping and toileting, behavioral problems like anger, and difficulty with learning and memory. children who have been separated may also experience feelings of mistrust, embarrassment, guilt, or shame. in the long term, children who have been separated may be susceptible to chronic conditions such as depression, post traumatic stress disorder, diabetes or heart disease. i have seen the impact of family separation with my own eyes. in june of 2018 i cared for an 8-year-old boy that i will never forget. this boy and his pregnant mother fled violence and direct threats in central america. realizing that the zero tolerance policy was at that time in effect, i specifically and gently asked the boy and his mother if they had been separated at the border. with my question, a silence arose. they both became tearful and their angst was palpable. the boy shook and his mother shuttered, whispering seven days. for seven days the boy and his pregnant mother did not know about the other's safety. this separation was shorter than many children harmed by the zero tolerance policy, but he still suffered the consequences. he could no longer sleep through the night. he had trouble being away from his mother for even short period of time. his mother reported he was a shelf his previous self. children are not little adults. to untrained eyes they can appear quite healthy even when their systems begin to shut down. this was the case for jacqueline and felipe while in the custody of customs and border protection. we urge our federal agency s to apply a child focused lens when considering policies that could have an impact on child health. the aap remains committed to working with federal agencies to offer our expertise as medical providers for children to protect and promote child well being. additionally children should not be placed in unlicensed facilities, whether run by hhs or dhs. the findings of the hhs office of inspector general about family separation are troubling. we urge all relevant federal agencies to address these findings. it is critical that all reunified children receive appropriate medical care in the community to help them recover from the traumatic experience of separation from their families. children and families who have faced trauma with support can begin to heal. as a pediatrician, i know that first and foremost we must treat all immigrant children and families seeking safe haven in the u.s. with dignity, compassion and respect. thank you. >> thank you, doctor. dr. muniz de la pena, recognized for five minutes. >> thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts before the subcommittee related to the adverse health impact of family separation at the border. i'm christina muniz de la pena, licensed psychologist and director of mental health services in new york city. i'm speaking today also on behalf of the american psychological association. or the apa. it's a program designed to serve and designed to accompany immigrant children since 2013. over the past six months, they've received increased requests of mental health services from foster care agencies and immigration attorneys, caring for these children, as well as from the parents themselves who had been reunited with their children and are still struggling with the aftermath. my thoughts are drawn both from case examples from my therapeutic work with these children and research findings. the traumatic impact of the separation of children in the border involves at least two different types of trauma. one is the acute trauma of the insensitive manner the separations were performed and the other is the trauma from this length of the separation. the level of impact of these depending on crucial factors such as the child's age and gender, the level of harshness of the separation, the length of the separation, the degree to which the child had communication with the parent during the separation and the degree to which the child was informed and predictability was offered during the separation. poll research tells us a separation from a parent may have high levels of anxiety and distress occur, which impair the developmental trajectories in otherwise healthy children. the following two examples illustrates some of the adverse circumstances and outcomes of parent/child separations. the youngest child in our program was a 2-year-old boy who had been separated from his mother while asleep and was kept away from her for two months. the mother had been told to leave the detention cell and when she asked to wake her son up to take him with her, the officers told her to not bother because she was going to be right back. after two months of helpless wait, the mother was reunited with her son in new york. she came to our program asking for help concerned about the then 3-year-old son anxiety of separation and persistence hyper vigilance. during the sessions the boy clung to his mother with fearful demeanor and had great difficulty relaxing and letting go any normal exploring behavior of a child his age. another 4-year-old boy i evaluated who appeared highly pleasant engaged and animated at first would turn quiet, stare off and become emotionally flat, following each question about his father and the separation. during these episodes the child appeared to struggle to return his attention to the pressing moment and re-engage in conversation and play. these are clear symptoms of the association from the trauma of being snatched from his father without any explanation or opportunity to say good-bye. research shows that longer parents and children are separated the greater this reported symptoms of an quite and depression. according to the presidential task force on immigration, sustained parental separation also predicts ongoing difficulty trusting adults and institutions as well as reduced educational attainment. attachment is the emotional bond that forms between infant and caregiver. in late terms, attachment love and protection from a parent is to a child's mental health what water, food, and oxygen are for physical health. it's the means by which helpless infants get their immediates met and it's the needed platform of safety and comfort to allow a child to explore, learn and develop. the mother of the child described early described feelings of anxiety and depression because we shuz terrified of connecting emotionally with her son, being detained, causing him a second trauma of separation. as a result she found herself keeping her emotional distance to protect her child from a second trauma of separation. therefore she was able to provide the safety necessary for her son to feel safe venturing to the world and develop. in some from my observations in well documented research findings, attachment must be protect and preserved. health care is critical to ensure that both adult and child survivors -- >> we are going to leave this hearing for a few moments to hear from senate judiciary committee chair lindsey graham. he is holding a news briefing to talk about the mueller investigation and we join it in progress. >> going forward, hopefully in a bipartisan fashion, we'll begin to unpack the other side of the story. with that i'll take questions. >> nor

Related Keywords

Miami , Florida , United States , New York , Texas , Rhode Island , Cuba , Illinois , California , Indiana , San Diego , Virginia , Togo , Haiti , West Virginia , Mexico , Oklahoma , South Carolina , Massachusetts , Tijuana , Baja California , Maryland , New Yorker , Americans , America , Cubans , Haitians , American , Cuban , Maggie Nguyen , Maggie Wynn , John Kelly , Scott Lloyd ,