January 26, 2026

 

At its core, the child protection system is not just an apparatus for intervention in families’ lives—it is an economic engine, driven by financial incentives that prioritize profit over the well-being of children and parents. Each child removed from their family becomes not a case to be resolved, but a commodity to be exploited. The system functions on a continual inflow of state subsidies, each child generating revenue for the institutions that house them and the professionals who manage them. The result is a perverse economic cycle, one in which the interests of those within the system are directly tied to the number of children in care and the length of time they remain there.

The Profit Motive Behind Child Removal

For social workers, foster parents, and the organizations that manage care facilities, there is a direct financial incentive to keep children in state custody. Social workers—who are often paid based on case load and the success of their interventions—are driven to increase the number of children under their charge. The more children in care, the higher the compensation for those involved. This creates an environment where the welfare of children becomes secondary to the goal of maximizing financial resources.

Every child placed in foster care brings with it a flow of government subsidies—money that is allocated for their care, medical expenses, and educational needs. The longer a child remains in care, the more money flows into the system. These funds are often tied to bureaucratic performance measures that reward continued placement, even if it means unnecessarily extending the time a child spends away from their family. The idea of reuniting children with their families—a core principle of child protection—becomes a secondary concern when it conflicts with the financial incentives to keep children in institutional care.

The impact of this profit-driven motive is profound. Children who might otherwise be reunited with their families after a period of support and intervention are kept in care for months, years, or even longer. The system actively discourages reunification, creating barriers that make it difficult for families to regain custody. These barriers include complex legal processes, expensive court fees, and the systemic preference for fostering over family preservation, all of which make reunification not only difficult but financially less viable for many families.

The Web of Financial Exploitation

The child protection industry does not stop at government subsidies. It extends its reach into the private sector, creating a vast web of financial interests that profit from the custody of children. Foster homes, care facilities, and other child welfare services are often run by private companies or individuals, some of whom have direct financial stakes in keeping children in care for extended periods of time. These businesses—many of them run by social workers, former social workers, or those with close connections to the child protection system—profit from providing services to children who are taken from their families.

The financial exploitation of children extends beyond just care facilities. The system is rife with opportunities for fraud, with various players inflating costs, over-reporting services provided, or engaging in dubious billing practices to extract more money from state funds. In some cases, interest groups within the system perpetuate the lie of child protection, using it as a cover for a multi-billion-euro industry that profits from the suffering and distress of families. These groups maintain a façade of doing good, all while actively participating in the financial exploitation of vulnerable children.

Foster homes, social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, lawyers, and administrators all have financial incentives to keep the system running. Foster parents are often paid a daily rate for each child they care for, which means that the longer a child stays in care, the more money the foster family makes. In some cases, the care provided may be subpar, but the financial incentive to continue caring for the child remains strong. Social workers may receive bonuses or other forms of compensation based on how many children they place, how long those children remain in care, or how many cases they close. Meanwhile, private businesses that provide services to the system—such as counseling, psychiatric care, and housing—generate profit as well, ensuring that the system remains perpetually in need of services.

The Child Protection Industry: A Multi-Billion Euro Enterprise

This economic incentive structure makes the child protection system inherently exploitative. What is sold as a noble cause—protecting children from harm—turns out to be a multi-billion-euro industry that thrives on the very harm it purports to prevent. The figures are staggering. In some countries, the child protection system receives billions in state funding each year. This money is funneled through a vast network of private and public institutions, enriching those who control the system while leaving families and children in a state of perpetual trauma.

The vast amount of state funds allocated to child welfare programs creates an open invitation for corruption and fraud. The more children in care, the more funds are available for the people and organizations that manage the system. In many cases, these funds are not used to help children or improve care; they are simply siphoned off into the pockets of those profiting from the system’s continued existence. The fact that there is little to no oversight of these financial practices allows the corruption to flourish, unchecked and unaccountable.

Unmasking the Lies of Child Protection

At the heart of the financial exploitation of the child protection system is a lie—one that is perpetuated by interest groups, social workers, and the state itself. The lie is simple: child protection is about the welfare of children. The truth, however, is that child protection is about money. It is about maintaining a system that ensures the flow of state subsidies, the continued profitability of care services, and the power of those who control the system.

This economic reality is what drives much of the systemic dysfunction within the child protection system. Decisions are not made based on the needs of the children, but based on the financial incentives tied to those children’s care. Every decision made by social workers, care providers, and other actors in the system is shaped by the money that can be made from keeping children in care. As a result, the welfare of children becomes secondary to the profit motives of the system.

The ultimate victims of this financial exploitation are the children and families whose lives are destroyed by the system. The child protection system does not protect children—it exploits them. The children who are taken into care are used as pawns in a financial game, trapped in a cycle of dependency and manipulation, while those in control of the system line their pockets. Meanwhile, the true needs of the children—love, stability, and a sense of family—are ignored in favor of the bottom line.

A Call for Accountability and Reform

The financial incentives that fuel the child protection system must be exposed and dismantled. The current system, which prioritizes profit over welfare, cannot be allowed to continue. It is essential that families, advocates, and policymakers demand transparency, accountability, and reform. The welfare of children should not be commodified. Instead, families should be supported in keeping their children, and children should be returned to their families when it is in their best interest.

To end the cycle of exploitation, there must be a fundamental shift in how the child protection system operates. The financial structure that rewards the removal of children from their homes needs to be replaced with one that incentivizes family preservation and reunification. Only then can we begin to rebuild a system that genuinely serves the needs of children and families, rather than using them as tools for financial gain.

Leave a Reply