accountability

Maryland Admits Nearly 1,000 Foster Children Missing Since 2020 — Most Are Teenage Girls

In a letter released on October 22, 2025, Maryland’s Department of Human Services (DHS) confirmed what advocates had long suspected but could never prove: 990 children in state foster care have been reported missing between January 1, 2020, and August 17, 2025. The data, disclosed through an MPIA request filed by survivor-advocates Jennifer Guskin and Bailey Templeton, offers the first detailed look at how many children disappear while under Maryland’s supervision—and how quietly the system has been redefining what “missing” means. “Let that sink in—nearly 1,000 children under state supervision have gone missing in just five years,” Guskin said. “Most are teenage girls, and even toddlers are being labeled as… Read More »Maryland Admits Nearly 1,000 Foster Children Missing Since 2020 — Most Are Teenage Girls

The Moral Economy of Neglect: How Maryland’s “Compassionate Governance” Betrays Its Foster Children

This investigation is part of MDBayNews’ coverage of child-welfare oversight in Maryland. All claims are sourced to primary documents or peer-reviewed research and independently verified where possible. No public funds, government contracts, or advocacy-group sponsorships influenced this reporting. As of October 15, 2025 — New developments have deepened Maryland’s foster-care scandal. DHS has formally suspended Fenwick Behavioral Services—the contractor supervising Kanaiyah Ward at the time of her death—pending an internal review. A legislative workgroup tasked with recommending reforms missed its October 10 deadline, drawing bipartisan criticism. Meanwhile, “Kanaiyah’s Law” is gaining co-sponsors across party lines, with hearings expected later this fall even as the state continues to house children in… Read More »The Moral Economy of Neglect: How Maryland’s “Compassionate Governance” Betrays Its Foster Children

Shaka Cheka

Connecticut’s court system faces renewed scrutiny after reports surfaced of an internal “judicial intelligence” network operating beyond public oversight. Critics claim the system shields misconduct and suppresses constitutional rights under the guise of confidentiality. Judge Peter Brown’s recent protective order, sealing a 96-page report tied to a high-profile political commentator, has sparked outcry among legal observers and civil libertarians. They argue the order expands state secrecy at the expense of public accountability. The controversy underscores a broader concern: that Connecticut’s judiciary has evolved into a self-policing institution immune from the transparency it demands of others.