Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kxl164
I disagree. It is not wrong. It is not wrong to change your mind, if you indeed did change your mind. It is not wrong to go into fostering with the hopes of adoption and not say anything at first, it is a hope, not a goal. If you say your will foster only and really want to adopt, so what, it doesn't hurt anyone and it most certainly doesn't hurt the child. It HELPS the child stay in a permanent home sooner. It is not circumventing the system, it is being a part of the system in hopes to build your family.
|
It is not wrong to change your mind. That is not what I said.
I said it is wrong to deliberately say "I am only interested in fostering"
with the intent to have a child placed with me sooner than if I say I only want to adopt. That is "playing the system", not changing your mind and putting a child's needs first. Maybe the OP did that, maybe not. Regardless, I see that could be a systemic problem and wanted to discuss it on this thread.
I have concerns about giving a helpless child into the care of anyone who is so focused on their own needs and desires for a family they are willing to use loopholes and risk the child's emotional health--they may
cause a child to be moved or make it harder for the child by not supporting the transition when social services says no, we have a pre-approved adoptive home. Again, I am not talking about someone changing their mind, I mean someone who
deliberately goes into the situation knowing foster only will get a child more quickly, and once they have a child, and the child bonds, their position is strong to keep the child.
I really should have made that more clear in my previous posts.
My posts, after the first one, was to discuss how this kind of situation came about. Why was there a situation where, due to paperwork, a child was going to be moved?
Was it because the foster parents said "only foster"
hoping to get a child sooner? And then later, say "don't move the baby because he/she is bonded"? Deliberately planning to do something like that is deceitful and wrong.
I questioned the situation, I questioned the system that would set up a family to be in this situation, would allow a "loophole" like this to exist. Who would want to give up a baby they cared for if it was available for adoption? I don't think anyone who has read this post would want to do that.
BTW, just want to say that we have gotten away from the original OP question--and I think everyone felt the child should stay in this loving home.