Before She Was a Candidate, She Was a Child Who Needed Protection

Community / Children & Justice — REAL POWER.TV

A campaign ad used Amy Acton’s estranged mother to question her childhood. TJ Dow asks what that tells every child who tells someone they are being hurt.

Editor’s note: TJ Dow wrote this column before the Nov. 3 election, which Amy Acton won.

The advertisement from Vivek Ramaswamy’s campaign featuring Amy Acton’s estranged mother raises a question that reaches beyond Ohio’s race for governor: What message are we sending to children who disclose abuse?

Acton, Ohio’s Democratic nominee for governor, has described growing up with abuse, neglect, and periods of homelessness. Her mother’s appearance in an advertisement questioning that history leaves out important context. According to reporting reviewing court documents, Acton’s stepfather was arrested and indicted on a charge of raping a 12-year-old girl in 1978. Acton and her brother say they were removed from their mother’s custody. The criminal case did not result in a conviction; records show that her stepfather failed to appear in court and became a fugitive.

That intervention matters. Removing children from an unsafe home is a profound step intended to protect them. We should also be careful about declaring that the entire system worked perfectly. Acton’s account describes repeated suffering before removal. Her story invites us to examine both the protection that eventually occurred and whether help could have arrived sooner.

The child who needed protection went on to build a substantial record of service. Acton earned a medical degree and a master’s degree in public health. She worked in pediatrics and preventive medicine, directed Project L.O.V.E., taught at Ohio State University, and served as director of the Ohio Department of Health under Republican Governor Mike DeWine. Her campaign biography also describes her development of a child-advocacy residency rotation and subsequent work on community health and access to parks.

Those accomplishments illustrate the possibilities that can remain ahead of a child whose early circumstances are painful. But a child should never have to become a doctor, public official, or candidate for governor to prove that protecting them was worthwhile.

Every child deserves safety because every child has value.

That principle should guide juvenile justice and children and family services. When a child comes to the attention of an agency or court, the response should include careful attention to safety, family circumstances, educational needs, and access to treatment. Adults must listen seriously, investigate fairly, and make decisions grounded in evidence.

For children experiencing abuse or neglect, protection must extend beyond an immediate placement. A safe home, consistent schooling, dependable relationships, and appropriate counseling should be part of the continuing commitment. Families should receive meaningful help when children can remain safely at home, and children must receive protection when they cannot.

For young people accused of wrongdoing, accountability should come with an effort to understand what brought them before the court. Understanding a young person’s circumstances can help shape a response that protects the community while giving that child a practical path forward.

The campaign controversy also deserves reflection. Candidates’ records and proposals warrant rigorous scrutiny. Using an estranged parent to challenge a survivor’s account risks telling other children that speaking about abuse may expose them to humiliation years later.

Amy Acton’s life cannot establish that every intervention succeeds. It does remind us why the work matters.

The child sitting in a caseworker’s office today has a future we cannot yet see. Our responsibility is to protect that future, support that child, and continue showing up long after the immediate crisis ends.