Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevenstwin
I think it's lot easier to explain that these were nice people who took care of you for a while vs. no one in your (birth) family wanted you.
THAT is the line I was responding to.
I don't know where you are getting some of your comments from, in your response to me..."try before you buy"?? What the heck is THAT all about? and I don't know what you think I meant by "reaping the benefits" but what I MEANT was a family unwilling to take a child with severe emotional and behavioural issues, and then coming forward and suddenly wanting to take the child once they have begun significant healing.
You are also painting birth families with a pretty broad brush - saying that of course they can't take care of a child with special needs, since they were dysfunctional in the first place. Just because the child's birth parents are dysfunctional does NOT mean that the rest of the family is as well.
My FS was 14 years old when he came to me. I had no intention of adopting and wasn't seeking another child. I wasn't even a foster parent. I very much hoped someone in his family WOULD step forward and take him; but they didn't, so I applied to take him. His grandparents and aunt all would have been suitable placements but did not want to take him because they were not willing to do the hard work of dealing with his emotional problems. I was, so I took him. BUT MY POINT was that IF a foster parent has taken a child and worked their butts off to help the child, it is particularly tragic to then lose that child to a birth relative who wasn't willing to do the work in the first place, but now wants the "healed" child. And I am NOT saying that is what happens all the time (no, Helen - I'm definitely not talking about you, or anyone else who has been trying to get a birth relative for some time and is willing to take on all the challenges) - but it DOES happen sometimes. There have been several cases on this board of birth relatives not interested in a child with "big problems" who suddenly become interested months or years later when the child is well into recovery. I guess what I'm trying to say is that in such cases it is that process of hard work and recovery that MAKES a family, and is what makes the foster parents the child's "real" parents. And no "blood link" is more important than THAT link. Which is why your characterization of foster parents as just "nice people that take care of a child for while" irks the heck out of me. The best interests of the child are in being with the person who has stuck by them, done the therapy and healing with them, and been there through all the hard stuff. NOT necessarily the person who shares the same DNA. There is an undertone in your post of thinking that foster parents all have some sort of "agenda", and are selfish if they want to adopt a child they've parented. This is getting rather off track, so I think we need to bring the focus back to the original poster. She is the ONLY healthy parent this child has experienced in his entire life - that makes her a heck of a lot more than "some nice person who took care of him for a while".
|
The original poster had little ones since birth. A relative has come forward. IMO, no, the foster parents do not have the same standing as the foster parents in court. Children have a right to stay in with their birth family whenever possible.
Often foster parents are not aware that a heartbroken relative has been struggling with social services for months and months, not even allowed to visit or communicate (in my case) with the child. It's a broken system and many times many hearts are broken, not just foster parents.
As I have said before, each child is unique, each family's case is different. For your 14 yr old, I am very glad for the child that you were there. Are you sure these people were just selfish and didn't want to do the work? Is it possible there was family opposition and infighting regarding taking this child which delayed the relatives coming forward? Regardless, at age 14, he needed you, he needed permanancy. You may have shared your final outcome on this site--I am sorry I don't recall it right now. Buttascotch is another fparent in that situation, and I am glad for her that the children are hers now forever. It was right for them, and wonderful for her.
There certainly was infighting and other problems in my family regarding our lil guy--he was five when taken into the system and 6 1/2 when we finally got him placed with us. We struggled from the beginning to help him, but between family accusing us of "stealing" lil guy and the ICPC--it was a nightmare. Then his foster family started with us--their attitude is why they have no contact with our son, and that was painful for them I am sure, perhaps is even still painful now, two years later.
Stevenstwin, the system is broken, that is something I think you and I can agree on. The foster parents come in and offer their hearts and home and too often are dismissed from a child's life. It's not right.
The issue of a child "bonding" is complicated--it needs to happen for a child to thrive. There is much research that shows children are successful when raised within their birth family, so the system tries to make that happen whenever possible. It's not always possible, as you well know. It is also every child's right to be raised by their birth family.
"try before you buy" is what I see on this site--people who want children so they go into foster-adopt. If it doesn't work out, they can give that child back to the system to try another family. Bio families do not have that option. When it DOES work out, of course the foster family "falls in love" with the child and wants to be able to fight to keep him/her. I thought the foster system was to help children and families in crisis--my eyes have been opened going through the process and reading on this site.
Bottom line--no matter how much foster parents do for the foster children, they are
foster children until TPR is granted and the adoption is final.