When child welfare agencies remove children from their homes, the conversation often focuses—rightly—on the trauma of separating children from their parents. We acknowledge the grief, confusion, and long-term emotional harm that can result when families are torn apart. What is far less discussed, however, is another devastating loss that too often goes unrecognized: the separation of siblings from one another.
For many children entering foster care, siblings are not just family—they are stability. They are the only constant in lives often marked by uncertainty, instability, and fear. When children are removed from their homes, siblings frequently become each other’s primary source of comfort, protection, and emotional regulation. In some cases, siblings have spent their entire lives relying on one another to survive environments shaped by trauma.
Yet, despite this reality, sibling separation remains common practice.
Child welfare systems frequently justify separating siblings due to placement availability, age differences, behavioral classifications, or administrative convenience. While these decisions may be framed as logistical necessities, the emotional cost to the children involved is rarely centered with the urgency it deserves. For a child already experiencing the trauma of removal, losing a sibling can compound feelings of abandonment, anxiety, and grief.
Research has consistently shown that children placed with their siblings experience better emotional outcomes, fewer behavioral disruptions, and greater placement stability. Siblings help maintain a sense of identity and continuity—something especially critical when everything else in a child’s world has been stripped away. Conversely, sibling separation has been linked to increased emotional distress, depression, attachment disorders, and long-term relational difficulties.
What makes this loss particularly painful is that siblings often serve as living witnesses to one another’s experiences. They share memories, language, culture, and family history. When separated, children may feel as though a piece of their own story has been erased. Younger children may not understand why their sibling is gone, while older siblings may carry guilt for being unable to protect or stay with them.
Despite these realities, sibling bonds are too often treated as secondary—optional rather than essential.
The lack of public discourse around sibling separation reflects a broader issue within child welfare: decisions are frequently made based on system capacity rather than child-centered needs. While laws and policies in many states claim to prioritize keeping siblings together, those promises often dissolve when they become inconvenient to implement.
If we are serious about trauma-informed care, we must expand the conversation. Protecting children means more than removing them from harm; it means preserving the relationships that help them heal. Sibling bonds are not luxuries. They are lifelines.
Children do not enter foster care as individuals—they enter as brothers and sisters, bonded by shared history and survival. When the system separates them, it creates a silent grief that follows them long after the case is closed.
Until we begin to recognize sibling separation as a profound trauma in its own right, we will continue to fail the very children we claim to protect.
Add comment
Comments