A Missing Foster Child Was Finally Found. Grave Questions About the Child Welfare System Remain.

Washington state authorities appear to have missed several warnings before the 5-year-old boy was allegedly kidnapped by his foster mom and taken to Vietnam.

Police accuse foster mother Amanda Dinges, left, and her mom Amber Lyn Dinges of kidnapping a five-year-old boy and taking him to Vietnam.Mount Vernon Police

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

On Friday, a harrowing three-week search for a missing foster child came to a close: A five-year-old boy was flown back to Mt. Vernon, Washington, after he was allegedly kidnapped by his foster mother in late November and taken to Vietnam. The foster mother, Amanda Dinges, had recently learned that the boy, who goes by ND in court documents, would likely move back in with his mother in the weeks to come.

The boy arrived in Seattle on Friday morning, accompanied by FBI agents and victims’ advocates, and has reunited with his mother. Law enforcement is now turning to the arrest and extradition of Amanda and her mother, Amber Dinges, who are believed to still be in Vietnam.

Despite the relief of the saga’s outcome, the alleged kidnapping has shed light on problems that are far more systemic: red flags that child protective services missed in the lead-up to the kidnapping; an unwavering faith in the foster parent; and a subdued initial response by police and media when it became clear the boy was missing.

The Washington Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) appears to have missed a series of warnings, leading to a ten-day gap between when ND was last seen at school and when the police were informed of his disappearance. The Mt. Vernon Police Department started looking for the boy on November 28th, but never put out an AMBER alert, saying there was no “danger of imminent death or serious bodily injury,” and “there have been no previous issues” with Dinges. The department didn’t publish photos of the Dingeses until a full week after they began their investigation, by which point, court records suggest, the Dingeses had already fled the country. With the exception of TV station King 5, local media was slow to cover the kidnapping; the Seattle Times has yet to write about the case. 

The response has drawn criticism from child welfare experts, who say that foster parents are often given the benefit of the doubt. “Suppose a birth mother was accused of kidnapping her child from a foster home,” wrote Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform. “Would it have taken a week before anyone noticed? Would there be no AMBER Alert?” It’s not hard to imagine: In 2019, an AMBER alert was issued after Seattle parents Nicholas and Crystal Antoine took off with their four children after learning that child protective services sought custody of the kids. Soon after, the family was found 250 miles away and the parents were detained.

ND was taken into state custody in February 2021 due to concerns about his mother’s substance use. “She’s someone who has always very, very much wanted to parent this boy,” Brittany Tri, the attorney representing the mother, told  Mother Jones. “But she was also someone who, at the start of the case, acknowledged openly that she was struggling.” The mother stopped using in December 2021, and, in the subsequent months, completed the treatment and parenting classes required to reunify with her son. She was thrilled about the prospect of his return home, which was expected in January 2023.

Dinges, however, wanted to adopt him, and had raised eyebrows for her possessiveness over the boy. One caseworker told police that Dinges was constantly obstructing her attempts to coordinate court-ordered visits. After a meeting in July, during which Dinges said that ND was already part of her family, Tri became so alarmed that she emailed ND’s caseworkers to express her concern that Dinges would interfere with ND’s reunification with his mother.

Dinges also had a teenager in her care, and, in November, after learning that ND would soon start overnight visits with his mother, Dinges told DCYF that she was moving and could no longer care for the teen. DCYF complied, removing the teenager. Asked what would happen to ND, Dinges lied, saying the boy was no longer in her care. This lie doesn’t appear to have prompted DCYF to check in on the boy. The following week, he didn’t show up for school or his first scheduled visit with his mother—who reported the no-show to authorities. By the time DCYF got her message, three days later, the Dingeses had disconnected their phones, and the apartment where they lived with ND had been abandoned.

“I realize DCYF isn’t going to check in every child every day,” Tri said. “But I do think there were enough red flags going on that there should have been communication.” DCYF didn’t respond to a request for comment, citing the active investigation.

“Time and again, we see the system ignore parents’ concerns—to the detriment of the children involved,” said Christine Gottlieb, the co-director of the family defense clinic at New York University School of Law. “The families enmeshed in the foster system have no clout.” Adding to the power differential is race and class: Parents involved in the CPS system are disproportionately Black and brown and disproportionately poor. Dinges is white, and ND and his mother are Mexican American.

On Friday, the Mt. Vernon authorities praised the collaboration between international agencies and information collected from more than 25 search warrants that led to ND’s return. Investigators had determined that the kidnapping was “an intentional, pre-planned event.” Amanda and Amber Dinges are facing charges for second-degree kidnapping.

Tri, meanwhile, checked in ND’s mother. “She said they are very tired, but very excited, and she is thrilled that she’s going to get to spend Christmas with him,” Tri said. “Beyond that, she was a little bit at a loss for words right now.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate