[kcurran]

Why should the tax payers have to fork over so much money to provide so many services to some of these people. It is crazy that our govt is giving 14 yo's the opportunity to parent using my money.

I saw that timeline listing out all the steps and how harrowing it can be. While they are going through these steps they can be working a job even if it is min. wage to help pull themselves together. They can do more than 1 step at a time. Imagine all the people who work and go to therapy and evaluations??? Why can't those that want to get their families back together do the same thing? There needs to be some motivation on their part not just sitting back and moaning about all the things they have to do to try and get their kids back.

I parent, take my a daughter to therapy because she was left w/ a 14 yo mother too long who messed her up so much had two children taken away at birth and they left her there, in a home where she was abused, neglected, and starved. This "family" had all the services and yet Mom still chose to spend the taxpayers money on drugs and alcohol instead of caring for her 3 year old. My dau knows how to treat a hangover! Isn't that great! Good thing so much money was spent on this waste of a mother- she should have been sterilized after her 3rd child before 18.

We also go to school functions, activities, are active in the church, place an emphasis on learning etc. Why can't someone who has lost their child and told to get their act together do 2 things at once? There is no reason except that they are not motivated.

Also, when has is become the responsibility of the taxpayers to continue to take care of these people. If you are going to be "adult" and "responsible" enough to bring a child into this world then you should take on the responsibilities of this child. It is not the taxpayers responsibilities. There are far too many brood mares who show no sense of responsibility and just moan about how their children were taken away. They don't care about the child at all - they care about the money they are getting for the children.

The real answer to the problem is that if you want to parent then you need to do so on your own without all the federal assistance but if you want to raise your children using the taxpayers money then by all means you should be scrutinized to the max. Adoptive families and foster families are. Far too much. If these same screening processes were in place for bio families we wouldn't have the amount of abuse that we do.

[HappyMomAnna]

The Safe Families Act of 1997 Does not specifically address the issues of wrongful removal--however they do establish means for the child to be returened---The fact of the matter and the law is such that a parent making any reasonable effort should be able to overcome the issues of wrongful removal! Unfortunate as it is (and remember it has happened to me) I would rather see a child removed from a situation that later proves to be an error then left to be abused or die. It boils down to a judgement call and no system will be perfect.

Clearly your information shows that your state and several others have been too aggressive in the removal of children from the parents--wrongful removal--while our state and many others are under fire for failure to protect children and the failure to remove children from situations that have actually led to their deaths.

There will never be a perfect system---the parties involved have to respond from their personal education and GUT. The best we as concerned citizens are able to do in monitor the situation and work for changes......The Safe Families Act of 1997 does offer more support and services to the biological families.

I am very sorry for the other children like myself who are forced to be taken away from their parents for a period of time in order to protect them.......however there are so many safety measures in place that ANY true wrongful removal would be seen with little to no effort and the parents involved in a wrongful removal have help and assistance every step of the way---if a parent cannot demonstarte that the removal was wrong within the 15 months---well, then I have a problem believeing the removal was wrong....

If my children were removed wrongfully I would do ANYTHING it took to get them returned.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The following is (part of) the info from the National Association of Social Workers RE: The Adoption and Safe Families Act 0f 1997
Please note the additional funds and efforts made for reunification.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Adoptions and Safe Families Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-89) was signed into law by President Clinton on November 19, 1997. The new law, which amends the 1980 Child Welfare Act (P.L. 96-272), clarifies that the health and safety of children served by child welfare agencies must be their paramount concern and aims to move children in foster care more quickly into permanent homes.

Among the new law’s provisions:
Shortens the time-frame for a child’s first permanency hearing;
offers states financial incentives for increasing the number of adoptions;
sets new requirements for states to petition for termination of parental rights;

reauthorizes the Family Preservation and Support Program.

NASW POSITION
The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) did not take an official position on the Adoptions and Safe Families Act, but strongly supported the reauthorization of the Family Preservation and Support Program, the expansion of medical insurance coverage for children with special needs, and development of state standards to ensure quality services.

NASW did endorse an earlier version of the legislation, the Safe Adoptions and Family Environments Act (S.A.F.E. Act; S. 511), sponsored by Senators John H. Chafee (R-RI) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-WV). Unlike the Adoptions and Safe Families Act, the S.A.F.E. Act included additional funding for:

Family reunification services;
training and retention of agency staff and cross-agency training; and residential substance abuse treatment programs for parents and their children.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS

TITLE I: REASONABLE EFFORTS AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR FOSTER CARE AND ADOPTION PLACEMENTS

Child Health and Safety. The new law clarifies that the child’s health and safety must be of paramount concern when making decisions about removal of a child from the home, reunification, and implementation of any aspect of the case plan for children in foster care.

"Reasonable Efforts" to Preserve and Reunify Families. States must continue to make reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify families. However, the reasonable effort requirement does not apply in all cases. The exceptions include cases in which a court has found that:

A child has been subjected to "aggravated circumstances" as defined in state law (including, but not necessarily limited to, abandonment, torture, chronic abuse, and sexual abuse);
a parent has killed or assaulted another of their children or has assaulted the child; or a parent’s rights to a sibling have been involuntarily terminated.
In cases when reasonable efforts to reunify are not required, states are required to hold a permanency hearing within 30 days and to make reasonable efforts to place the child for adoption, with a legal guardian, or other permanent placement.

Termination of Parental Rights (TPR). States are required to file a petition to terminate parental rights immediately and, concurrently to identify, recruit, process and approve a qualified adoptive family, in the case of:

a child who has been in foster care for 15 of the most recent 22 months;
a child who the court has determined to be an abandoned infant (as defined in state law); or
a court has determined that the parent assaulted the child or killed or assaulted another of their children.
In addition, states may file for termination of parental rights earlier than 15 months or for other reasons.

TITLE III: ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS AND REFORMS
Reauthorization and Expansion of the Family Preservation and Support Program. The Family Preservation and Support Program, renamed "Promoting Safe and Stable Families," is reauthorized through FY 2001 at the following levels: $275 million in FY 1999; $295 million in FY 2000; and $305 million in FY 2001 (increases of about $20 million each year over the current baseline). Also reauthorized are existing allocation provisions, including a one percent reserve for Indian tribes, and set-asides for court improvement grants and for evaluation, training, research, and technical assistance.

State plans are required to contain assurances that in administering and conducting programs, the safety of the children to be served will be of paramount concern. States are required to devote significant portions of their expenditures (after spending no more than 10 percent of their allotment for administrative costs) to each of the following four categories of services:

community-based family support services;
family preservation services;
time-limited family reunification services; and
adoption promotion and support services.
Time-limited family reunification services are defined as services and activities provided to children (and their parents) who have been removed from the home and placed in foster care, for up to 15 months, beginning on the date of their removal from the home. Such services and activities may include:

individual, group, and family counseling;
inpatient, outpatient, or residential substance abuse treatment;
mental health services;
assistance to address domestic violence;
temporary child care services and therapeutic services for families, including crisis nurseries; and
transportation.

Permanency Hearings. States are required to hold a first dispositional hearing, reanamed a "permanency" hearing, within 12 months (formerly 18 months) of the date the child is considered to have entered foster care. Entrance is defined as the earlier of the date of the first judicial finding of child abuse or neglect or 60 days after the child’s removal from the home.

The purpose of the hearing is to determine the child’s permanency plan, which would include the timetable for:

returning home;
being placed for adoption;
being placed with a relative;
being referred for legal guardianship; or
being placed in another planned, permanent living arrangement.

TITLE IV: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Coordination of Substance Abuse and Child Protection Services. The Secretary of HHS is required to submit a report to the Committees on Ways and Means and Finance on substance abuse services. The report must be based on information from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and the Administration for Children and Families and include:

the scope of the problem of substance abuse in families served by child welfare agencies;
the types of services provided to such families;
the outcomes resulting from the provision of such services; and
any recommendations for legislation to improve coordination in providing services to families.
Standby Guardianship. It is the sense of Congress that states should have laws and procedures permitting a parent who is chronically ill or near death to designate a standby guardian for their minor child, without surrendering their own parental rights. The standby guardian’s authority would take effect upon the parent’s death, mental incapacity or physical debilitation and consent.

Preservation of Reasonable Parenting. Nothing in this legislation is intended to disrupt the family unnecessarily or intrude inappropriately into family life or prohibit the use of reasonable methods of parental discipline or to prescribe a particular method of parenting.


NASW Contact: Cynthia Woodside, Government Relations Associate; National Association of Social Workers, 750 First Street, NE, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20002-4241; Telephone: (800) 638-8799, ext. 324; Fax: (202) 336-8311;


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Again I have no idea what you propose to do to reduce the wrongful removal issues----would you demand that the child needs to be bleeding--broken bones (one or two?) Would you require semen in the childs under pants---or a black eye? Or a kid being drunk or drugged when the caseworkers come in? What exactly would your require before a child is taken out of a situation?????? How many nights would you let a kid be alone before you took that child out of the home 2---3---10? Do you think verbal abuse is abuse? Do you think seeing a parent pass out drunk or high is OK?

KritsieMaureen------when would you leave a child---when would you decide a child needed to be safe? And don't you think any ligitimate wrongful removals would be cleared up rather quickly?

Yes, I am sure there are situations when they are not---but, last year we saw two parents kidnap the caseworker--committ murder all because they believed their children were wrongfully removed---WERE THEY?????

[HappyMomAnna]

How Does the Child Welfare System Work?
Year Published: 09/2003

What is the child welfare system?
The child welfare system is a group of services designed to promote the well-being of children by ensuring safety, achieving permanency, and strengthening families to successfully care for their children. Most families first become involved with the child welfare system due to a report of suspected child abuse or neglect (sometimes called "child maltreatment"). Child maltreatment is defined by Federal law1 as serious harm (neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and emotional abuse or neglect) caused to children by parents or primary caregivers, such as extended family members or babysitters. Child maltreatment can also include harm that a caregiver allows to happen (or does not prevent from happening) to a child. In general, child welfare agencies do not intervene in cases of harm to children caused by acquaintances or strangers. These cases are the responsibility of law enforcement.2

The child welfare system is not a single entity. Many organizations in each community work together to strengthen families and keep children safe. Public agencies (departments of social services, child and family services, etc.) often contract and collaborate with private child welfare agencies and community-based organizations to provide services to families, such as in-home ("family preservation") services, foster care, residential treatment, mental health care, substance abuse treatment, parenting skills classes, employment assistance, and financial or housing assistance.

Child welfare systems are complex, and their specific procedures vary widely by State. The purpose of this fact sheet is to give a brief overview of the purposes and functions of child welfare from a national perspective. Child welfare systems typically:

Receive and investigate reports of possible child abuse and neglect.
Provide services to families who need assistance in the protection and care of their children.
Arrange for children to live with foster families when they are not safe at home.
Arrange permanent adoptive homes or independent living services for children leaving foster care.
What happens when a report of possible abuse or neglect is made?
Any concerned person can report suspicions of child abuse or neglect. Most reports are made by "mandatory" reporters (persons who are required by State law to report suspicions of child abuse and neglect). In approximately 18 States, any person who suspects child abuse or neglect is required to report. Reports of possible child abuse and neglect are generally received by child protective services (CPS) workers and either "screened in" or "screened out."3 A report is screened in if there is sufficient information to suggest an investigation is warranted. A report may be screened out if there is not enough information on which to follow up or if the situation reported does not meet the State's legal definition of abuse or neglect.4 In these instances, the worker may refer the person reporting the incident to other community services or law enforcement for additional help.

In the year 2001, a total of 2.7 million referrals involving 5 million children were made to CPS agencies. Approximately 67 percent (1.8 million referrals) were screened in, and 33 percent (870,000 referrals) were screened out.5

When a report is "screened in," what happens next?
CPS workers (often called "investigators") respond within a particular time period (anywhere from a few hours to a few days) depending on the type of maltreatment alleged, the potential severity of the situation, and requirements under State law. They may speak with the parents and other people in contact with the child (such as doctors, teachers, or childcare providers). They also may speak with the child, alone or in the presence of caregivers, depending on the child's age and level of risk. Children who are believed to be in immediate danger may be moved to a shelter, foster care placement, or a relative's home during the investigation and while court proceedings are pending. An investigator's primary purpose is to determine if abuse or neglect has occurred and if there is a risk of it occurring again.

Some jurisdictions now employ an "alternative response" system. In these jurisdictions, when risk to the children involved is considered to be low, the CPS caseworker may focus on assessing family difficulties and offering needed services, rather than gathering evidence to confirm the occurrence of abuse or neglect.

At the end of an investigation, CPS workers typically make one of two findings—"unsubstantiated" ("unfounded") or "substantiated" ("founded"). (These terms vary from State to State.) Typically, a finding of "unsubstantiated" means there is insufficient evidence for the worker to conclude that a child was abused or neglected, or what happened does not meet the legal definition of child abuse or neglect. A finding of "substantiated" typically means an incident of child abuse or neglect (as defined by State law) is believed to have occurred. Some States have additional categories, such as "unable to determine," that suggest there was not enough evidence to either confirm or refute that abuse or neglect occurred.

The agency will initiate a court action if it determines that the authority of the juvenile court (through a child protection or "dependency" proceeding) is necessary to keep the child safe. To protect the child, the court can issue temporary orders placing the child in shelter care during investigation, ordering services, or ordering certain individuals to have no contact with the child. At an adjudicatory hearing, the court hears evidence and decides whether maltreatment occurred and whether the child should be under the continuing jurisdiction of the court. The court then enters a disposition, either at that hearing or a separate hearing, which may result in the court ordering a parent to comply with services necessary to ameliorate the abuse or neglect. Orders can also contain provisions regarding visitation between the parent and child, agency obligations to provide the parent with services, and services needed by the child.

In 2001, approximately 903,000 children were found to be victims of child abuse or neglect.6

What happens in substantiated cases?
If a child has been abused or neglected, the course of action depends on State policy, the severity of the maltreatment, the risk of continued or future maltreatment, the services available to address the family's needs, and whether the child was removed from the home and a court action to protect the child was initiated. The following general options are available:

No or low risk—The family's case may be closed with no services if the maltreatment was a one-time incident, there is no or low risk of future incidents, or the services the family needs will not be provided through the child welfare agency, but through other systems.

Low to moderate risk—Referrals may be made to community-based or voluntary in-home CPS services if the CPS worker believes the family would benefit from these services and the risk to the child would be lessened. This may happen even when no abuse or neglect is found, if the family needs and is willing to participate in services.

Moderate to high risk—The family may again be offered voluntary in-home CPS services to help ameliorate the risks. If these are refused, the agency may seek intervention by the juvenile dependency court. Once there is a judicial determination that abuse or neglect occurred, juvenile dependency court may require the family to cooperate with in-home CPS services if it is believed that the child can remain safely at home while the family addresses the issues contributing to the risk of future maltreatment. If the child has been seriously harmed or is considered to be at high risk of serious harm, the court may order the child's removal from the home or affirm the agency's prior removal of the child. The child may be placed with a relative or in foster care.

In 2001, approximately 275,000 children were removed from their homes as a result of a child abuse investigation or assessment.7

What happens to people who abuse children?
People who are found to have abused or neglected a child are generally offered voluntary help or required by a juvenile dependency court to participate in services that will help keep their children safe. In more severe cases or fatalities, police are called upon to investigate and may file charges in criminal court against the perpetrators of child maltreatment. (In many States certain types of abuse, such as sexual abuse and serious physical abuse, are routinely referred to law enforcement.)

Whether or not criminal charges are filed, the perpetrator's name may be placed on a State child maltreatment registry if abuse or neglect is confirmed. A registry is a central database that collects information about maltreated children and individuals who were found to have abused or neglected those children. These registries are usually confidential, and used for internal child protective purposes only. However, they may be used in background checks for certain professions, such as those working with children, so children will be protected from contact with individuals who may mistreat them.

What happens to children who enter foster care?
Most children in foster care are placed with relatives or foster families, but some may be placed in group homes. While a child is in foster care, he or she attends school and should receive medical care and other services as needed. The child's family also receives services to support their efforts to reduce the risk of future maltreatment and to help them, in most cases, be reunified with their child. Parents may visit their children on a predetermined basis. Visits also are arranged between siblings, if they cannot be placed together.

Every child in foster care should have a permanency plan that describes where the child will live after he or she leaves foster care. Families typically participate in developing a permanency plan for the child and a service plan for the family. These plans guide the agency's work. Except in unusual and extreme circumstances, every child's plan is first focused on reunification with parents. If the efforts toward reunification are not successful, the plan may be changed to another permanent arrangement, such as adoption or transfer of custody to a relative.8 Occasionally the plan involves a permanent placement with a foster family, usually for older children who have become strongly attached to the family or for whom a suitable adoptive home cannot be found. In addition to a permanency plan, older children should receive transitional or independent living services to assist them in being self-sufficient when they leave foster care between the ages of 18 and 21.

Federal law requires the court to hold a permanency hearing, which determines the permanent plan for the child, within 12 months after the child enters foster care and every 12 months thereafter. Many courts review each case more frequently to ensure that the agency is actively engaged in permanency planning for the child.

In fiscal year 2001, 57 percent of children leaving foster care were returned to their parents. The median length of stay in foster care was 12 months.9

Summary
The goal of child welfare is to promote the safety, permanency, and well-being of children and families. Even among children who enter foster care, most children will leave the child welfare system safely in the care of their birth family, a relative, or an adoptive home.

For more detailed information about child welfare, please refer to the resources listed below. For more information about the child welfare system in your State or local jurisdiction, contact your local public child welfare agency.

Other Resources
Badeau, S. & Gesiriech, S. (2003). A child's journey through the child welfare system. Washington, DC: The Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care. (http://pewfostercare.org/docs/index.php?DocID=24)

Goldman, J. & Salus, M. (2003). A coordinated response to child abuse and neglect: The foundation for practice (The User Manual Series). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

McCarthy, J., Marshall, A., Collins, J., Milon, J., Arganza, G., Deserly, K. (2003). Family guide to the child welfare system. Washington, DC: National Technical Assistance Center for Children's Mental Health at Georgetown University Center for Child and Human Development. (Available Fall 2003).

Rycus, J. & Hughes, R. (1998). Field guides to child welfare (Vol. I - IV). Washington, DC: CWLA Press.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. AFCARS report #8. (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...ons/afcars.htm)

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002). Child maltreatment 2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p.../cmreports.htm)

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003). Child welfare outcomes 2000: Annual report. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. (www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/publications/cwo.htm)

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2003). Definitions of child abuse and neglect. 2003 Child Abuse and Neglect State Statute Series: Statutes-at-a-Glance. National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information. (http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/general/l...sag/define.cfm)

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2003). Mandatory reporters of child abuse and neglect. 2003 Child Abuse and Neglect State Statute Series: Statutes-at-a-Glance. National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information (http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/general/l.../sag/manda.cfm).

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2003). Reporting procedures. 2003 Child Abuse and Neglect State Statute Series: Statutes-at-a-Glance. National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information (http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/general/l...utesglance.cfm).

The Child Welfare System Chart



Footnotes

1 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106 ). Each State has its own laws that define abuse and neglect for purposes of stating the reporting obligations of individuals and describing required State/local child protective services agency interventions. For State-by-State information about civil laws related to child abuse and neglect, visit the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information Web site at http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/general/legal/statutes. back
2 While some States authorize child protective services agencies to respond to all reports of alleged child maltreatment, other States authorize law enforcement to respond to certain types of maltreatment, such as sexual or physical abuse. back
3 See Mandatory Reporters of Child Abuse and Neglect and Reporting Procedures, available from the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information Statutes-at-a-Glance Series (http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/general/l...utesglance.cfm). back
4 See Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect, available from the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information Statutes-at-a-Glance Series (http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/general/l...utesglance.cfm). back
5 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003). Child maltreatment 2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. back
6 Child Maltreatment 2001. back
7 Child Maltreatment 2001. back
8 Under the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), while reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify families are still required, State agencies are required to seek termination of the parent-child relationship when a child has been in foster care for 15 of the most recent 22 months. This requirement does not apply (at the State's option) if a child is cared for by a relative, if the termination is not in the best interest of the child, or if the State has not provided adequate services for the family. back
9 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003). The AFCARS Report (Preliminary FY 2001 estimates as of March 2003). back

[HappyMomAnna]

The Research I found for 2001:

In fiscal year 2001, 57 percent of children leaving foster care were returned to their parents.

Your research:

If you'll check back to my original post on this thread, I specifically state that the statistics show 1/3 as the conservative estimate (30 or more percent is what you'll be looking for in the citations). I then applied that percentage to the approximate total number of children in foster care, listed in most references as around 500,000. My calculation, based on the information I found, is where the 165,000 estimate comes from.

If my math is correct and 57% of the children who enter to Foster Care are returned to their parents

and

your research shows that 30% were wrongfully removed what does that mean?

Does your research say how many of the 30% are returned--or are any eventually adopted? And if the 30% are coundted as returned to their parents out of the 57% of all the children who are, does that mean all of our services and assistance and funds are only successful for 27% of the families who use them?

[Sharon]

"I am very sorry for the other children like myself who are forced to be taken away from their parents for a period of time in order to protect them.......however there are so many safety measures in place that ANY true wrongful removal would be seen with little to no effort and the parents involved in a wrongful removal have help and assistance every step of the way---if a parent cannot demonstarte that the removal was wrong within the 15 months---well, then I have a problem believeing the removal was wrong...." ~ HappyMomAnna

I agree that the protection of children should be everybody's primary concern; however, family court requires, in effect, that the accused prove their innocence. They ask the (wrongfully or otherwise) accused to prove a negative proposition, which is in most cases impossible, which is why our criminal judicial system doesn't work that way.
You say: "if a parent cannot demonstarte that the removal was wrong within the 15 months---well, then I have a problem believeing the removal was wrong."
I assume that "demonstrating that the removal was wrong" is the same as proving your innocence (of whatever charges led to the removal), which is an impossibility in most situations. The basis of our justice system here in America is that the court must prove that the defendant is GUILTY, not that the defendant must prove they are innocent. How, exactly, does one go about doing that? I mean, seriously.
If a person is innocent, it will be very difficult for anyone to prove that they are guilty. BUT, it will be equally difficult for an innocent person to "prove" they are innocent. Innocence is not provable! Only guilt is provable, and only if the accused is actually guilty. The burden of proof should rest on the State (or on Social Services), not on the accused.
I do not like the disparity between adult court and family court. I think the rules should be the same in both courts. I think people's constitutional rights should be observed in any and all legal situations, not tossed out the window in the interest of "protecting the children". Part of protecting our children is making sure they grow up in a free democracy, not in a fascist society where social services is likely to kick in their doors at any moment, snatch THEIR children away, and require that they "prove their innocence" before they can have them back.
The same legal structure that applies to adult criminal court should also apply to family court. Everyone's civil rights need to be observed. THAT, in my opinion, is what is TRULY in the best interest of all children.
~ Sharon

[KellyStacy]

I cannot believe they would not take the children away if the mother or father was homeless.Those poor children.I can only imagine what they went through that is pitiful.I understand everybody is not rich or times get tough,but a child should never have to literally live on the streets.And if they do become homeless atleast give the children up or let them stay with a relative or friends.No child ask to be brought up that way.I am sure there are homeless people who truely love their children very much but the point of the matter being if you loved your child enough you would want the best for him/her.I remember a couple times as i was driving in my car seeing a little boy about 6 with his mother panhandling for money on the side of the road,to me that was pitiful enough.I came home crying and called the police I just did not feel that child was safe,he looked pitiful.I really do not understand social services not at all.I feel for the foster children and the children out there who so desperately need a loving family.I would love to give a child love stability and a wonderful life,and i am sure somewhere out there a child could use just that.Unfortunately some people decide to hold on to their children even knowing deep inside they have no intentions of taking proper care of them.I saw for myself the damage of foster care.I read the message boards where foster parents have serious issues with the children.These children at even age 2 have so much rage and anger and honestly they have every right to.I just wonder with all these children being hurt and seeing things they should not see the abuse,neglect,etc. how will these children once grown into an adult be in society.The way a child is brought up reflects heavily on the adulthood.It seems no one is out there to protect the innocent children and unfortunately for some its too late!

[vicrose]

I thik this all boils down to responsibility...responibility on the parent's part...and responibility on the state's part. If a parent for any reson cannot and will not take care of the beautiful children that they bring into this world..then by all means, the stateshould step in and take responsibility...as we saw lately..in the NJ case...neither the parents or the state took responsibility..it was the neighbor who stepped up and said...there's a problem here!!!! Granted, there are not enough social workers working at state or local agencies to possibly oversee the amount of children that are in foster care...so sometimes it is up to friends, family, and neighbors to step up sometimes and call the police..and have children that are being abused taken out of the home. And then....we hope, that the social workers and judges are smart enough to see through a false claim. My heart goes out to the many children that aren't taken away..and flounder in abusive homes for years. But, I can say with all honesty....if I knew that I wasn't a good parent..if I knew that I was becoming abusive with my children..I would get help...but not all people are like that...not everyone seeks help....and then the abuse just keeps going. Hugs, Brenda

[HappyMomAnna]

Sharon~~~

I also agree with you on many points. I am not here saying that our system is perfect or that there are never horrible stories of how our system has failed. And I am very interested in being part of and working hard for a change in the way thing happen.

The biggest problem I can see with getting the system changed is when someone--or one part of the system--or one law only focuses on a portion of the problem--or one statistic of the situation. There is a big picture and one change has a ripple effect.

I agree it is not right that when it comes down to a situation of wrongful removal parents are put into a situation of proving themselves. That would be horrible and as you point out that would in many cases be impossible.

The truth however is that parents forced to defend themselves are not only forced to defend the exact issue that may have lead to the removal--but, their whole lives are considered and if not it is their legal right to have their whole life considered. If a parent is able to adhere to the plan offered then in most cases they will get their children returned. In many cases at the initial hearing children wrongfully removed are returned.

It will be parents who fail drug tests--parents who will not get a job--parents who will not end a violent relationship and those who will not follow the requirements. If you are a good parent--if you want your child back this is the time in your life that you will do anything....... It may not be fair. And, from experience I can tell you it is not good for children who experience wrongful removal. But, how do we change this?

This issues has two diametrically opposed outcomes. The humans who are left to decide at the moment what to do with something that is a clear risk have to decide. As often as I hear the stories of wrongful removal, so to do I hear about the dead child--the forever damaged child and the hurt child. While we try to see the changes in wrongful removal we must not forget these children. If one child dies because a caseworker fails to remove a child at risk---well, that is the statistic I care about. And in this area I consider 1% to be horrifying and too much.

I think that in the past few years our government has made an effort to address the issues of wrongful removal. Many states now has CASA's, social workers are making efforts on every front to be sure that they are working with each parent to provide a child at risk with as safe a life as anyone can expect. There have been a lot of changes over the last 6-7 years. No, we have not fixed everything and yes we still need to work on it. But, we have to have balance and we need to continue to look for the ways to achieve that.

[HappyMomAnna]

Recently you requested personal assistance from our ACF on-line
questions and answers support center.
Below is a summary of your request and our response.


HappyMomAnna's Email for numbers.
Customer - 01/01/2004 01:32 PM
I am very active on an adoption web forum and recentally another user is posting that acording to her research she believes that 1/3 or 165,000 children currently in Foster Care can be considered as 'wrongful removals'

Do you have/know where I can find any info to provide any real numbers for cases of Wrongful Removal?


The answer I recieved

Subject
---------------------------------------------------------------
Foster Care and wrongful removal


Discussion Thread
---------------------------------------------------------------
Response - 01/21/2004 03:49 PM
Your recent e-mail regarding wrongful removals was forwarded to the Children’s Bureau for response.

While the Children’s Bureau’s statistical reports (http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/...ions/index.htm) track child maltreatment, adoption, and foster care data, they do not include statistics on wrongful removals. I am not aware of any national organization that tracks this data. Furthermore, I have searched the documents collection of the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information (http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov), a service of the Children’s Bureau, and I could not locate any current information on wrongful removals. We do not cite information without credible references that can be verified.

For your information….One of the Children’s Bureau’s primary, ongoing initiatives is the Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSR). The goals of the review are to ensure that States are meeting the Federal child welfare requirements; to determine what is really happening to children and families involved in the State child welfare system; and to help States achieve positive outcomes for children and families. For more information on this initiative, I encourage you to visit the Children’s Bureau Web site at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/cwrp/index.htm. Please note that many States have completed their CFSR and the final reports are available online.

You may want to share your concerns with your State’s Foster Care Manager. If you would like to take your concerns to this level, the Children’s Bureau Web site at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/...s/fostersp.htm provides a complete listing of contact information for all of the States’ Foster Care Managers.

I hope this information is helpful.

[Cricket8351]

Having worked for two different state Child Protective Services agencies for the past ten years, I can tell you that there are and continue to be a lot of changes.

I have worked as a Social Worker, Investigator, Permanency Planning/Treatment Worker, Foster Care/Adoptions Worker, Permanency Planning Supervisor, Licensing Worker and Foster Care Licensing Supervisor over the years. I have been called a Social Wrecker, Baby Snatcher, and numerous other names I cant even repeat.

There's good and bad in the "system" and areas that need definite improvement. I have made mistakes and also saved lives but I know in my heart that I always made the very best decisions I could with the information I had available at the time.

In the two state systems I have worked in, removing a child "just because" was never an option. A court hearing always followed the removal and that hearing was NEVER for the parent to prove their innocence or guilt. In one state, it is called a Show Cause hearing which simply put means the state has to SHOW CAUSE for the removal. It is called different things in different states...Probable Cause hearing...

If there was not sufficient evidence to warrant the removal then the child was returned immediately. It did happen. Times when the evidence was lacking, questionable, etc. Neglect and emotional abuse were at times seemingly impossible to prove in court.

Also, in neither State, being poor or homeless was not against the law and therefore NOT considered abuse/neglect. Dirty house complaints had to be extreme before we could even investigate.

Contrary to popular belief, spanking a child does not send the state out banging on your door. Maybe this has happened in the past but Child Welfare has changed so much even in the last ten years and yes, it has a long way to go. The system makes mistakes...it always will because it is made up of people...and people make mistakes.

There are horror stories. I too have read about them, heard about them, even had them in my unit. The system we have in place is too much of a band aid and not enough is focused on prevention.

I agree whole heartedly that there are not enough community supports and services in place. The problem is funding and no one wants to pay more taxes.

But having written a bazillion service plans, there should be timelines given in which the parent/client can reasonably complete the steps. The parent/client is also given an attorney if he/she cannot afford one to advocate if the service plan is not appropriate or feasible. As someone else stated, the services can run concurrently and do not have to be completed consecutively.

Sorry I got off on a tangent. I will stop now.

[Lindsie]

In regards to children's safety, I think it is preferable to be "better safe than sorry." If a child is at risk then why on earth should social services (or Department Of Community Services (DOCS) in Australia) have to wait until they are half dead before they can take them from their abusers. I mean sure, it would be terrible if someone said to you "that's it, we're taking your child until you dump your abusive boyfriend" but really, in most cases you should have come to that decision yourself after the first time they abused you or your children. If you haven't, then perhaps you are a crappy parent and don't deserve to raise that child. Whatever happened to putting children first! In most of the cases I've seen, all that the parents need to do is keep in touch with the child and clean their act up a tiny bit and DOCS hand them back their kid. As this is the case I would think it would be difficult to have very many children taken and kept without reason. If anything I feel sorry for DOCS as they work their butts off trying to keep the kids safe from the parents and then the court turns around and gives them back for further abuse.

[lonnad]

"Why should the tax payers have to fork over so much money to provide so many services to some of these people. It is crazy that our govt is giving 14 yo's the opportunity to parent using my money."

People who adopt get money from the government as well per month per child. No matter what your money will be spent, but as it is going, most of our money is being spent (BILLIONS) towards other countries, so it's ignorant to complaint about what little is done to actually help OUR society and OUR people.
You have NO clue how that 14 year old mother was raised herself and what she had to endure in her lifetime. She probably has had it just as rough as her own child. So give the kid a break. You can't expect every 14 year old woman out there to properly raise a child. I've seen mothers much much older raising kids and high off drugs daily... for them there are REALLY less excuses!


"The real answer to the problem is that if you want to parent then you need to do so on your own without all the federal assistance but if you want to raise your children using the taxpayers money then by all means you should be scrutinized to the max."

Then why should adoptive parents receive benefits and money from the government either if they choose to want to parent? Hypocritical if you ask me. If people need help, I say let them have it for a set amount of time or until they get on their feet. Surely money is better spent on our own people than towards people who don't even live in this country, don't you agree? Or do you have any sense left?
Not to mention that there are parents who are ready for children, but then the husband leaves the wife with a few children and she is left with nothing but bills and no support. What then? It happens every day.

[roxanna425]

Originally posted by debsdone
So that I can better understand this topic.........Could you give me a few examples of what situations would require a parent to have children in foster care? And what would qualify as "a little while"? What sort of help or "leg up" would a parent need in these situations? Perhaps if I understood that part of things, I could better understand what all this means! Debi

-inpatient stay at a psych facility (to regulate meds) and no bed in Childhaven.

-parent is arrested and there's no family to take the child.

and I agree with Cricket8351...there are no frivolous stays in foster care. no one WANTS their kid in the system. however assuming that everyone has an extended family is a mistake too. all this advocating that a child be yanked at the first sign of trouble is scary since once we go that way parents will be under a lot of scrutiny, good and bad parents and if your child falls and hurts themselves and you have to take them to a hospital with the fear of a full blown investigation and your child getting pulled out of your home awaiting an investigaion a lot of parents may think twice before taking their kids to the ER and that puts them in dager too. lets advocate a moderate approach and work towards safe homes and intact families whenever possible without endangering the child.

[roxanna425]

Originally posted by KellyStacy
My opinion on foster care is that it literally destroys a child emotionally.Foster care should only be used as a temporary alternative

I disagree and I have met many WONDERFUL foster parents and I insist that it's the FEAR of foster care that is a problem. I think that the situation has to be *so* bad for a child to GET into foster care that it's the home situation that harms them emotionally and that we have many talented and loving foster parents that are doing their dangdest to heal or at least provide a safe haven for children.

Foster care is never permanent. The Gov't does not have the time nor the money for fister care drift anymore. Children don't stay in foster care forever. 12-18 months continuous without the parent making any effort is the max, 2 years if they parent shoes effort GENRALLY. judges sometimes go outside those guidelines but not too often.

[lonnad]

"Good thing so much money was spent on this waste of a mother- she should have been sterilized after her 3rd child before 18."

Did you ever think about how negligent HER mother was. How you can have so much hate towards a child is unbelievable. No human life is a waste. I'm sorry you feel that way. But your attitude is what makes humans a "waste of humanity". You'd rather criple someone than help them. You wanted a child to adopt for YOURSELF and now you are hating on the mother who gave it to you. If it wasn't for her, you wouldn't have that child. You are the exact type of woman I would steer away from if I was considering to give up a child for adoption. I'd hate to think of how you will brainwash that child one day into having negative feelings towards their mother. I've seen it happen too many times. I hope you think of the child's feelings first before you badmouth her parents.