This Massachusetts bill would permanently protect benefits due to foster kids
BOSTON (SHNS) – Children's attorneys and disability advocates are trying to reignite their push to safeguard benefits that are owed to foster kids but were previously diverted to state coffers.
The Department of Children and Families last year ended the practice of depositing certain benefits — including Social Security and veterans benefits intended for foster children whose parents had died or became disabled — into the state's General Fund, Sen. Jo Comerford said.
The state used to take about 90% of the benefits each year, which Comerford said translated into nearly $5.5 million that was meant for roughly 600 foster kids. Advocates say the approach disproportionately harmed children of color and LGBTQ youth, who could have used the money to cover certain expenses while in foster care or to gain financial stability after aging out of the system.
'DCF, again, has taken the right steps, and I commend the Healey-Driscoll administration to fulfill its fiduciary responsibilities to manage state resources in the best interests of foster children,' Comerford said at a committee hearing on Tuesday. 'While this is incredibly meaningful for youth who are currently being served by the foster care system, again we must codify these DCF directives into state law to protect vulnerable children from the unpredictability of future administrations and budgets.'
Comerford and Rep. Tricia Farley-Bouvier refiled bills (S 105 / H 227) to ensure the state conserves benefits for foster children. Under the bill, DCF would be required to offer financial literacy training to children beginning at age 14, and provide updates on benefit accounts that the state is managing for foster children.
A redrafted proposal (H 4704) last session cleared the Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities in early June before dying in the House Ways and Means Committee.
Protecting Social Security benefits preserves foster children's 'humanity and dignity,' said Alexis Williams Torrey, co-director of strategic advocacy at the Children's Law Center of Massachusetts.
She said her clients in foster care have used benefits to buy 'modest items,' such as noise-canceling headphones and their preferred feminine hygiene products. Young adult clients also have more capacity to plan for their future, since those benefits can help them cover rent or a security deposit, she said.
'My clients understand that this money was always their money and don't want other young adults to feel the same insecurity that they have felt,' Williams Torrey said.
Rick Glassman, former director of advocacy at the Disability Law Center who retired last year, said the bill has 'essentially no opposition,' after lawmakers, state officials and advocates worked to refine it last session.
'This is fair because parents pay into the Social Security system knowing that [if] they pass away or they become disabled, their kids will have financial support. And SSI benefits are given because the federal government understands that even with Medicaid, there are additional expenses to being disabled and to becoming economically self-sufficient,' Glassman said.
Individuals exiting foster care are at heightened risk of negative outcomes, he said, including experiencing homelessness or unemployment.
'We're better off to conserve these benefits, not inflict unnecessary pain and trauma, and not pay increased costs for human services at the back end,' Glassman added.
DCF so far has opened more than 800 accounts to support the various benefits available to foster children, including survivor and disability benefits, said Linda Landry, senior attorney at the Disability Law Center.
The legislation is a 'moral' issue, said James Mackey, associate director of government relations and policy at youth empowerment nonprofit More Than Words.
'There's broad bipartisan support for this bill,' Mackey said. 'The youth we work with are watching, and they deserve to know that the commonwealth is willing to do what's right — not just what's routine. By passing these bills, you send a powerful message that foster children are not a burden.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court rules DOGE can access Social Security information
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday ruled the Department of Government Efficiency could access Social Security systems with sensitive information. The ruling blocked a lower Maryland court order that kept Doge from seeking certain Social Security information due to federal privacy laws. The data from the U.S. Social Security Administration includes Social Security numbers, medical information, citizenship records, school records, and tax returns for millions of Americans. Exclusive: Legal Institute Celebrates Scotus Decision, Declares 'Religious Liberty Is Alive And Well' "We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work," the court said in an unsigned order. The six conservative justices voted for the ruling and the three liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. Read On The Fox News App Doge Will Go On: Hill Pork Hawk Says Rooting Out Government Waste Will Continue After Elon Jackson said the ruling created "grave privacy risks" for millions of Americans by giving "unfettered data access to DOGE regardless — despite its failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards, and all before we know for sure whether federal law countenances such access." The ruling came soon after DOGE's former head, Elon Musk, left the government and a day after he and President Donald Trump traded personal attacks that were sparked by a disagreement over the president's "Big, Beautiful" bill. DOGE's path forward after Musk's exit isn't clear, but Trump and Musk have both previously said the newly-created agency's work would continue. The Trump administration has said DOGE needs access to Social Security information to continue its core task of rooting out government waste. Musk has previously called Social Security a "Ponzi scheme," and insisted on eliminating waste in the program. Maryland U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander previously ruled that DOGE's efforts with Social Security were a "fishing expedition" based on "little more than suspicion" of fraud. She did allow some access, however, to anonymous data for DOGE workers who had gone through background checks. An appeals court didn't immediately lift the block, with dissenting conservative judges saying there's no evidence that DOGE has done any "targeted snooping" or exposed personal information. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Original article source: Supreme Court rules DOGE can access Social Security information

an hour ago
Supreme Court allows DOGE team to access Social Security systems with data on millions of Americans
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court cleared the way Friday for the Department of Government Efficiency to access Social Security systems containing personal data on millions of Americans. The justices sided with the Trump administration in its first Supreme Court appeal involving DOGE, the team once led by billionaire Elon Musk. The high court halted an order from a judge in Maryland restricting the team's access to the Social Security Administration under federal privacy laws.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court grants DOGE access to social security data
A divided US Supreme Court on Friday granted President Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) access to the social security data of millions of Americans. The decision came after the Trump administration appealed to the top court to lift an April order by a district judge restricting DOGE access to Social Security Administration (SSA) records. "SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work," the top court said in a brief unsigned order. The three liberal justices on the Supreme Court dissented, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson saying the move poses "grave privacy risks for millions of Americans." "Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses, bank-account numbers, medical records -- all of that, and more, is in the mix," Jackson said. "The Government wants to give DOGE unfettered access to this personal, non-anonymized information right now -- before the courts have time to assess whether DOGE's access is lawful," she said. In her April ruling, District Judge Ellen Hollander banned DOGE staff from accessing data containing information that could personally identify Americans such as their social security numbers, medical history or bank records. Social security numbers are a key identifier for people in the United States, used to report earnings, establish eligibility for welfare and retirement benefits and other purposes. Hollander said the SSA can only give redacted or anonymized records to DOGE employees who have completed background checks and training on federal laws, regulations and privacy policies. The case before Hollander was brought by a group of unions which argued that the SSA had opened its data systems to unauthorized personnel from DOGE "with disregard for the privacy" of millions of Americans. DOGE, which has been tasked by Trump with slashing billions of dollars of goverment spending, was headed at the time by SpaceX and Tesla founder Elon Musk, who has since had a very public falling out with the president. Trump has been at loggerheads with the judiciary ever since he returned to the White House, venting his fury at court rulings at various levels that have frozen his executive orders on multiple issues. cl/dw