[mommy2fiveplus]

RobinKay

I am an adoptive parent of both a relative and another son that was first my foster-son. I seemed to fare a bit better than you in the animosity department. I think that I have the unique position to view this from both angles.

I am saddened that you feel I (and many other foster/adopt parents) choose this path to "try it before you buy it". I choose this path because I watched my parents foster for 20+ years and I fell in love with family and fostering. Believe it or not the foster-brothers that returned to bfamily are just as much my brothers as the ones my parents adopted and just as much my bio bro.

Your situation seemed to turn you against foster families, if you were not already suspicious of them. Your posts seem to indicate we are "child-snatchers" and determined to thwart the bfamily at every attempt to be a part of the child's life. That MAY have been YOUR story, it is not mine! I encourage my son's (the relative) former foster parents to be a part of his life just as I encourage my other son's (not-relative) family to be a part of his life, in a manner that is safe. He will always know his bfamily as much as is safe and I know other foster families that do as much for thier adopted children. Few bfamilies, maintain the connection the children had with the foster family, despite strong bonds being formed and in some cases (such as babies) entire lives being lived with foster families.

IMHO, I think that your situation and opinions are hampered by lack of experience and as such you are offending people such as myself and other foster parents with your inflammatory comments.

Many of your accusations (and that is what they are) against foster parents can be just as readily applied to bfamilies.

I am a proponent of relative adoption, I feel as if familial heritage can play a huge part in a child's self-image. If foster and bfamilies would work together more often, instead of pitting themselves against each other in battle for ownership of a child, a strong bond that is created during long-term foster care could coexist with extended family involvement. Foster-parents could raise the children that recognize them as Mom and Dad and the child could have strong connections to extended bfamily.

In cases where a suitable relative comes forward (and from experience that is no easy task, when you are fighting the rest of your family) within a short (say 6 mos or as soon as you know the child is in care) time, the foster parents should be informed and immediate vistation should be established.

I would NEVER agree that bonding or DNA would play any significant role one over the other. Every case is different and needs to be judged on its own merits and what is in the best interestof the child. Just becasue a responcible and suitable relative comes forward does not mean that relative placement is best for the child if they have spent 2 years with a foster family and are only 3 years old. Likewise, a 9 mos old (placed at birth) that has bonded with his or her foster family and the relative has been involved with the case since say 6 mos old, that infant should bond appropriately with a new caregiver (relative) if normal bonding was established the first time. In each case the family that ends up raising the kid should have strength to put aside any negative feelings toward the other so that they can allow the child to maintain a healthy relationship with a previous caregiver or extended family. Can You say you have done this? I can.

Until the squabbling between foster and bio families is put aside (and only the adults can do that) the child will never be put first.

Some of this may have offended you but I just wanted to make sure "you were hearing me", you do not however have to "agree with me".