Torts, Government Entity Defendant, Duty, Protect Foster Child From Abuse, 1, 1
There is a special relationship between a foster child and the public social services agency that places the child with foster parents. Consideration of the Rowland v. Christian factors does not lead to the conclusion that the agency should not owe the child a duty of care to investigate the child’s complaints about sexual abuse by the foster parent. Whatever the facts of this particular case, in general it is foreseeable that a failure to investigate such complaints will likely lead to continued abuse. Also, the agency in this case should not have been granted summary judgment on discretionary function immunity grounds. While the placement decision is a discretionary function, there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the agency (or its employee handling the matter) made a considered decision, consciously balancing risks and advantages, as is required to enjoy discretionary function immunity.