[Aminah]

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

I'm not sure that "stealing" is a very helpful word here. Children are not objects, and they aren't property. They can't be stolen, because they aren't property, and they can't be stolen from you, because you don't own them. So maybe it's better not to think about "stealing" and who has the rights to possess a child, and think more about the child as a person in a set of relationships.

Can I make a suggestion? Try thinking about it through W's eyes. You may think "he has one family, and that is it." But he's been part of another family, his foster family, for more than two years. How old is he? Two years must be a huge chunk of his life, and to a child, even a few months is like forever. To W, this other family *is* his family. He has attached to them. So losing them suddenly, and having to leave them forever with no ongoing contact, is basically exactly what it would be like to have your mother or father die. It's a huge event with lifelong consequences.

If this family has been good to W, and he loves them, I think you should make an ENORMOUS effort to continue contact. It's not for them. It's not for you. It's for W, who will suffer tremendous harm if he's wrenched out of the family he feels is his and never allowed to see them again. Yah, maybe they're not the nicest to you. I'd bet they think you're not very nice to them, either. But the adults have got to put their differences aside and work together to make the transition okay for W. He's the one who matters.

I think we are going to disagree in the fact that children in fact can be stolen and when you give birth to a child you in fact do have a great deal of rights, and children have rights to be with their biological families. I’m sorry if you took offense to the word steal, but I believe that “stealing” does take place in some cases where the biological family comes forward and the foster family and agency fight you for RU. I believe the difficulty usually comes with chldren under the age of 3 that are much easier to adopt.

I certainly haven’t said a child shouldn’t be thought of as a person in a set of relationships. When I referred to the word stealing, I referred to it in a sense that an agency and foster family is trying to permanently disconnect a set of relationships in a very unhealthy and unfair manner. Of course, I hope, these situations are very far and few between. However, my family and I have been through this twice, although this second time is much more severe than the first. I’m sorry if me making reference to the word stealing rubs you the wrong way. I’m certainly not speaking on behalf of all fp, or all agencies. I do not believe my current ff is trying to steal my nephew. I do believe the agency has tried for the second time. However, I have been in a previous situation where I do believe the foster family was trying to steal my nephew H.

I think you also misunderstood what I said when I said W has one family. W has been part of his foster family, this is true. However, I still believe he has one family which can and cannot include the foster family. My point was that I am not willing to DIVIDE W BETWEEN FAMILIES. WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER FOR HIS SAKE. That was the point I was making. I understand that the foster family loves W and I believe they have been excellent fp, which is why I was asking for suggestions on how to go about visitation. I was asking b/c in light of how I've been treated by them (and no they cannot say I haven't been nice to them) I believe it's important to continue the relationship. However, you really failed to give me any advice besides be defensive on behalf of foster families. I do not have a problem disagreeing with you but I do have a problem with the defensive nature of your post and ultimately the lack of advice you gave.

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by Aminah

I think we are going to disagree in the fact that children in fact can be stolen and when you give birth to a child you in fact do have a great deal of rights, and children have rights to be with their biological families.

Biological parents have rights, and the judicial process is designed to protect those. The child welfare process is incredibly time consuming and bureaucratic precisely because there has to be a high bar to overriding parental rights.

As I have said several times, child welfare systems should strongly prefer keeping children with their families of origin whenever possible. But after years in foster care, kids develop really significant attachments to their foster families. That's normal, natural, and an almost inevitable part of human development. When those attachments are disrupted, kids suffer psychologically. We know that--decades of study have proven it. It is important for kids' wellbeing not to rupture those attachments. That is why I think that time is everything. If biofamily shows up early in the case, fabulous. They should be the placement option of choice and the kids should be moved quickly. But once the kids have been in care for many months or even years, I do not think they should be moved unless absolutely necessary.

I’m sorry if you took offense to the word steal, but I believe that “stealing” does take place in some cases where the biological family comes forward and the foster family and agency fight you for RU.

When you say "steal," you imply somehow that a child is your property, and that it is your right of ownership that we should be concerned about. Me, I do not care very much about adults' feelings or concerns in these cases. I care about what is right and best for kids. So the question isn't, "Who does this child belong to," but "what is the best possible place for this kid to grow up." The agency may have had different ideas about what the best possible placement was for your nephew. Fine--that's what court is for. Everyone presents their recommendations, and the judge decides. This talk about "stealing" is silly.

However, you really failed to give me any advice besides be defensive on behalf of foster families. I do not have a problem disagreeing with you but I do have a problem with the defensive nature of your post and ultimately the lack of advice you gave.

To be perfectly honest, if anybody had asked my advice before they moved your nephew/son, I would have said that a kid who has been with the same foster family for two years should not be moved. If they had asked my advice on the day he had come into care, I would have said overwhelmingly that he should be with you. But after years in care, I would prioritize stability.

You said I didn't give you advice. That's not true--I just didn't give you advice you agreed with. I suggested that looking at things from the foster family's perspective might improve your relationship with thim, and help make a more supportive environment for W. You didn't like that advice. But hey, it's the Internet. The advice is free. If you don't like my advice, you're perfectly welcome to take somebody else's, or find a competent therapist whose advice you like and to pay for it.

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by Mama_K

Thanks for the chat today- It really made me think about all my options-

It really broadened my view, too! Hey, that's what these forums are all about. I hope you manage to create a loving, supportive family all around M, and that he grows up happy and healthy and adored.

[Aminah]

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

Actually, I'm very sorry to say it, but the research shows that on average, children do WORSE when they are returned to relatives than when they are adopted by foster parents. My guess is that this has more to do with class than with anything else----that foster parents, on average, are more well off than the relatives of kids taken into the system. One thing we know for sure is that the greatest predictor of how well kids do in school and in life afterwards is parents' income and education level. (Sucks, but there you have it). Relatives who don't set good boundaries with the birthparents may also cause kids to have worse outcomes. But the aggregate data show that kids do better when adopted by foster parents.

I'll try and dredge up that study from my files and post the reference for you. Of course, statistical averages can't predict what the right answer is in any individual case, so you're right on the money when you say that the CW and the GAL need to be investigating the situation with a great deal of care!

Boulderbabe, I'd be very interested in the research you have read regarding children being better off when adopted by ffamilies than when being returned to bfamilies. I have been doing a great deal of research since trying to get my nephew W out of foster care and from what I read, the premise for mandating agencies search for relatives for foster care placement and adoption was that children do better when placed with relatives.

"Data indicate that foster children living with relatives experience abuse or neglect at lower rates than children with unrelated foster families."

"Children placed with relatives generally have fewer moves while in foster care."

"Siblings are less likely to be separated when placed in relative foster care."

"Children in relative foster care maintain community connections."

"Relatives are frequently willing to adopt or become permanent guardians when reunification
is not possible."

There is an article you can read at: Kids Are Waiting | Publications | Reports

Title: Support Relatives in Providing Foster and Permanent Families for Children

From reading your post, I was getting the impression that your criteria for what it means to be "better off" may be different than the research that says children are better off in bfamilies. It sounded like your criteria was less emotional and more regarding college completion, current salary, etc. With all that said, there is a researcher at Columbia University that I was able to hear speak regarding the amount of emotional instability and "unhealthiness" in middle class, and upper middle class, in comparison to lower middle class, poor, and poverty. Surprisingly, the emotional stability and overall happiness decreased the more money a family had. Children in middle class and upper middle class have higher suicide attempt rates, and more experimentation with drugs and alcohol. One of the reasons this researcher gave for the drugs was due to access to money. I now teach in a middle class school district and can attest to the difference in suicide attempts and completion as compared to teaching in a school district with students that are poor or in poverty.

I'd be interested in your research.

[Aminah]

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

When you say "steal," you imply somehow that a child is your property, and that it is your right of ownership that we should be concerned about.

When I say steal, you assume that I am implying a child is property. No, I used steal to explain exactly how SOME children are separated forever from their bfamily in sneaky ways. You take issue with the word, that is fine. However, you could use some of your own advice and trying thinking of the word from the point of view that I was trying to use it, rather than your own point of view. I wrote the statement from my point of view, not with your negative undertone. When the best place for the child to grow up is with bfamily, the bfamily is ignored or shut out, I consider that stealing a child. Yes, a judge can make decisions, but a judge can make a decision on incomplete information, especially if the family that has come forward is not presented to the judge. If you like the word kidnap better, that's fine too.

Your point of view is very interesting in that you are very Pro-FFamily because you believe that is in the best interest of the child when a child has been in care months to possibly years. However, when I say that I am Pro-BFamily, you assume I'm not thinking of it as in the best interest of the child. I certainly am as it pertains to W. I have no problem with disagreeing with you on this.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

As I have said several times, child welfare systems should strongly prefer keeping children with their families of origin whenever possible. But after years in foster care, kids develop really significant attachments to their foster families. ... If biofamily shows up early in the case, fabulous. They should be the placement option of choice and the kids should be moved quickly. But once the kids have been in care for many months or even years, I do not think they should be moved unless absolutely necessary.

As all this relates to my nephew, I'm surprised by your response in regards to WHY you believe he should remain in care. From reading your previous posts, you seemed to go into more of what may be best for the child and looking into other details that could cause influence. I think issues of race, culture, religion, biological ties, and the fact that my family has been in the picture since the time my sister was still making RU efforts (very early in the process). There's more to what is in the best interest of a child than temporary stability. There are long-term effects to being adopted that can be compounded with identity issues due to race, religion, culture, etc.

In regards to advice, I guess "looking at the picture from the point of view of the ffamily" was advice. I guess I was looking for something that I could actually use in regards to planning visitation with them. I was hoping to get specific suggestions. I felt like your response was more of an attack than trying to help.

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by Aminah

Boulderbabe, I'd be very interested in the research you have read regarding children being better off when adopted by ffamilies than when being returned to bfamilies.

I'll try and find the study I read for you. The study I saw was not looking at income per se, but at the likelihood that adopted kids would finish college, avoid being arrested, avoid substance abuse, and have children after the age of 21. The authors didn't gauge emotional health per se, but used these outcome variables as a proxy.

You keep assuming that I'm against placement with relatives. I'm not---in fact, I'm in favor of it, if it is done in a TIMELY manner. What I'm opposed to is leaving kids in care for very long periods, and then jerking them out to go live with a relative that they don't know well and haven't had contact with.

I'm in favor of permanence and stability. With relatives, if possible and done early. If not, with fost/adopt families.

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by Aminah

When I say steal, you assume that I am implying a child is property. No, I used steal to explain exactly how SOME children are separated forever from their bfamily in sneaky ways. If you like the word kidnap better, that's fine too.

I don't like either the word "steal" or the word "kidnap" in the context of placement decisions. I think they are inflammatory and accusatory words that don't do much except get people very angry. They certainly don't help resolve situations in children's best interests, or reduce the conflict that can tear kids apart.

I'm at a loss to explain why you would continue using such hostile and hurtful words.

Your point of view is very interesting in that you are very Pro-FFamily because you believe that is in the best interest of the child when a child has been in care months to possibly years. However, when I say that I am Pro-BFamily, you assume I'm not thinking of it as in the best interest of the child. I certainly am as it pertains to W. I have no problem with disagreeing with you on this.

I don't know you, or know your nephew, so I can't say how anything pertains to your family. My argument is more general, and it is about policy. I'm talking about how child welfare systems should work in general. And my argument is that permanence and stability are of vital importance to children, and should be a high priority in child welfare decisions. Whether that stability should be found with foster families or with biorelatives depends on the families involved, and how soon placement can happen.

As all this relates to my nephew, I'm surprised by your response in regards to WHY you believe he should remain in care. From reading your previous posts, you seemed to go into more of what may be best for the child and looking into other details that could cause influence. I think issues of race, culture, religion, biological ties, and the fact that my family has been in the picture since the time my sister was still making RU efforts (very early in the process). There's more to what is in the best interest of a child than temporary stability. There are long-term effects to being adopted that can be compounded with identity issues due to race, religion, culture, etc.

Most of the research I have seen says that attachment issues trump race and culture issues. I'm an anthropologist, so I definitely understand how important issues of race and culture are. (I would also add class to that list). In the early days of a case, I think race, culture, religion and class should be strongly considered, and maintaining connections to birthfamily should be a VERY high priority.

But IMHO, those priorities should shift the longer a child has been in a stable out-of-home placement. At two months, connections to biological family are absolutely at the top of the list. But once a kid has been in the same foster home for a long time, I think the necessity of maintaining his attachments trumps other considerations.

This is why I think it is absolutely imperative for birth family to step forward as early as is humanly possible, within days of the child entering foster care.

In regards to advice, I guess "looking at the picture from the point of view of the ffamily" was advice. I guess I was looking for something that I could actually use in regards to planning visitation with them. I was hoping to get specific suggestions. I felt like your response was more of an attack than trying to help.

I'm not attacking you. I'm suggesting that you think about why they are doing what they are doing, and reach out to them in ways that are more likely to lead to a good relationship with them. I say this because I believe that conflict among the important people in a kid's life is bad for kids.

My specific suggestion is that to the greatest extent possible, you try and overlook small slights and reach out to these people from the shared love that you have for W. My other suggestion is that you avoid using words like "steal," "kidnap," and other words that insinuate that the foster parents are malicious or are criminals. That increases conflict rather than decreasing it.

Who was right or wrong about placement is irrelevant now. You have W, and you have to make a life for him that promotes his emotional well-being. Integrating his caring foster parents into his life can only help him. My suggestion would be that you try as best you can to leave your anger behind and forge a loving community around W.

You might begin by sending them a card telling them how well W is doing, and thanking them for all the care they gave him. You'd be surprised how much that might mean to them.

[Aminah]

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

You keep assuming that I'm against placement with relatives. I'm not---in fact, I'm in favor of it, if it is done in a TIMELY manner. What I'm opposed to is leaving kids in care for very long periods, and then jerking them out to go live with a relative that they don't know well and haven't had contact with.

I haven't assumed that you were against placement with relatives at all. I recognize that you support early placement with relatives. However, the system often prevents that very thing. I can attest to that on two occasions. The system is setup for foster parents, not relative placements. Therefore, there is often unnecessary delays with relative placements or even agencies that shutout relatives regarding placements. My family has dealt with that.

I do not agree with you that it is in the best interest to keep a child with a fost/adopt family b/c of certain timeframes when there is bfamily that has come forward in a timely fashion. The system often delays the process and adds to the delay. I can again attest to these delays. My family requested visitation with my nephew very early on and was denied. The CW told us that only the bp could visit. However, they approved visitation 1.5 years later (after I hired a lawyer).

I do believe that children prefer to be with bfamily in most cases. Furthermore, children typically are not jerked out of foster care placements to go live with relatives. There are series of visits that take place over many months to begin that transition starting at 2 hour visits, progressing to 4 hour visits, overnight visits, and then the transition into the home full-time. I don't call that jerking. Furthermore, if a healthy relationship is able to be maintained with the ffamily, then it becomes even better.

Please do not think that I refer to all foster care placements. I recognize that many bfamilies do not come forward. I recognize and am thankful to ffamilies, like the one my nephew W is with, that do an extraordinary job and are willing to care for many of these "at risk" children. I am speaking on behalf of the instances where the system is abused, and CW's have an agenda to adopt to ffamilies without properly pursuing bfamilies.

[Aminah]

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

I'm at a loss to explain why you would continue using such hostile and hurtful words.

You may not agree that there are cases that have been maliciously handled. Well, I'm involved with one that has. I have several caseworkers (b/c of interstate issues) and a lawyer, and the common consensus is that my CW in PA messed up (you can include the agency solicitor for this CW in that opinion).

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

Most of the research I have seen says that attachment issues trump race and culture issues.

I would like to see this research. Furthermore, it's not an issue of one trumping the other. It's a matter of how to address all of the issues. With that said, I can speak from experience from being jerked from one home to another that attachment does not trump race and culture. I'm not saying that race and culture trump attachment either.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

This is why I think it is absolutely imperative for birth family to step forward as early as is humanly possible, within days of the child entering foster care.

...And when the bfamily does step forward and the agency ignores them, and the process turns into months, then years, does the child still remain with the ffamily? My family has been through this twice. It isn't as simple as stepping forward early on in the process.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

You have W, and you have to make a life for him that promotes his emotional well-being.

I'm not sure if you read my first post, but I don't have W. I'm still going through the process. As I said before, it's a long and slow process. I anticipate that he'll be moved in the next three months.

If you can think of any other way to incorporate the ffoster family in W's life, I'd greatly appreciate it. That really was the premise of my second post. I certainly don't want to shut out the ffamily. I was hoping to get some experiences from other people on how best to incorporate them. Maybe I should ask the ffamily directly.

[Becki_in_IN]

Originally Posted by Aminah

I agree with not having sympathy for foster families that essentially want to steal your family from you. I am not in agreement with many people on this site that feel as if foster families have the same rights as biological families once they have been in the home for 6 months and beyond. There is a timeframe where I can concur with that belief but it's well beyond 2 years. That length of time does not give you the rights of familial relationships with someone for the next 70 - 80 years and essentially canceling their biological relationships. I do appreciate the kindness and sacrifice many foster families make.

I feel about 90% sorry for the ffamily that I am currently working with. I don't feel completely sorry because the family knew the foster family of my nephew that was previously in care. Therefore, the ffamily knew W had siblings and never inquired about them and also knew that my family came forward before and my nephew H was returned. The ffamily has also been uncooperative and rude to me on several ocassions. I said hello to the fd on two ocassions and he acted like I didn't exist. The fm slammed her car door in my face b/c her fs was saying hello to me. The fm has tried to get me to do 9am visits during the week when I'm driving 2.5 hours from NJ to come visit W in PA. She has a 20 minute drive. The fm even went as far as trying to get the CW to mandate this time. I tried compromising with her and said 10am but she wouldn't budge. However, the CW realized the foster mom's ridiculousness and mandated 10am. The foster mom also tried to not give a visit in a particular week since it had to be changed to earlier in the week. The foster mom assumed that I was doing something else inappropriate with my time and said aloud to the CW "Is she going shopping with her girlfriends?," referring to why I could not come down later in the week. When the caseworker told her that she would send an aide to pick up my nephew if she wouldn't bring him, the visit was then agreed upon. Nonetheless, I have documented all of these things with the CW. Recently, the fd has not been in the vehicle when dropping off W for our visits. The fm has been neutral and even has her generous moments. She offered to create a list of favorite foods of W's and gave us W's most recent pictures. I'm hoping we can stay along this nice route.

However, I need some advice. My nephew W turned two this Jul '08. He will probably we moved in Oct. '08 or Nov. '08. That's my prediction. I am not sure how to go about continued contact with the ffamily and possible visitations. I do not know much about their care for children but it appears that they are very good foster parents to all of their children. They have a very good relationship with W. My only concern with continued contact with the ffamily is how they have treated me and my family. I believe my nephew has 1 family and you're either part of that family or not. I don't want him divided.

Any suggestions on how to go about continued communication, contact, visitations, or just what to do next regarding the ffamily? Keep in mind that I live 2.5 hours from the ffamily.

Wouldn't it be nice if we had a crystal ball?

I have been on both sides of this issue. I never would have thought that my kids would even want any contact with foster families or biofamilies, but they do. We adopted them at 2. I'd encourage you to try to think long term. Do you think it would be important to him when he is older? No there is no way they could remember, but they still would like to know them. Because of that experience, we do see K's former foster family occasionally.

It's really atough call.

[Aminah]

Originally Posted by Becki_in_IN

I'd encourage you to try to think long term. Do you think it would be important to him when he is older? No there is no way they could remember, but they still would like to know them. Because of that experience, we do see K's former foster family occasionally.

I would like to pursue the option of continued contact, but I'm not sure what is best for my nephew W. One suggestion I received was to send the ffamily a postcard or letter updating them. Honestly, keeping contact with the ffamily isn't really about them. It's about my nephew. He's too young to understand a postcard or a letter. Pictures, yes he'll get that a little better.

My fear is that the way the ffamily has treated me could spill over into the relationship with my nephew W. I do not want him to feel torn between us. I think it's important for both parties to do simple things such as saying hello when you see each other.

These decisions are especially hard to make. However, I'm trying to look the other way and be positive towards them.

I'm open to physical visits, but is that a good idea? Phone calls? What boundaries are set? I read on another post where the afamily made the ffamily godparents. I like that idea. Others referred to them as aunts and uncles.

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by Aminah

I recognize that you support early placement with relatives. However, the system often prevents that very thing. I can attest to that on two occasions.

I do not know what the ICPC bureaucracy entails. I do know what homestudies entail, though, and I can attest that it doesn't take years. I can also attest to the fact that at least in some child welfare systems, relatives can begin supervised visitation early if they are considered a potential placement resource.

My son had his first relative visit a week after he came into care, at age 21 days. If his aunt had decided to become a placement resource, we would have continued visitation. His grandmother also requested visitation. This was denied because she had been TPR'd on three previous children of her own.

The system is setup for foster parents, not relative placements. Therefore, there is often unnecessary delays with relative placements or even agencies that shutout relatives regarding placements. My family has dealt with that.

You seem to imply that the system is somehow set up to further foster parents' interests. That is flat out not true, as many of us can tell you. Foster parents' needs or wants are generally completely disregarded---as they should be.

I do not agree with you that it is in the best interest to keep a child with a fost/adopt family b/c of certain timeframes when there is bfamily that has come forward in a timely fashion. The system often delays the process and adds to the delay. I can again attest to these delays. My family requested visitation with my nephew very early on and was denied. The CW told us that only the bp could visit. However, they approved visitation 1.5 years later (after I hired a lawyer).

I think we will have to disagree, then. I do not---and won't ever---agree that disrupting a child's placement after 1.5 years is a good idea. There is too much research to show that it is traumatic for children, and that multiple moves damage their ability to inhibit their impulses, make good decisions, and forge positive relationships. Moving kids around from place to place is bad, period, and should be avoided if at all possible.

I Furthermore, children typically are not jerked out of foster care placements to go live with relatives. There are series of visits that take place over many months to begin that transition starting at 2 hour visits, progressing to 4 hour visits, overnight visits, and then the transition into the home full-time.

In 13 placements, that has not been my experience. Transitions have happened in as little as one day. That's tragic for kids. The longest transition I've been involved in took place over a long weekend.

I recognize and am thankful to ffamilies, like the one my nephew W is with, that do an extraordinary job and are willing to care for many of these "at risk" children. I am speaking on behalf of the instances where the system is abused, and CW's have an agenda to adopt to ffamilies without properly pursuing bfamilies.

You don't sound very thankful, given that you've accused them of "stealing" and "kidnapping." But that aside, why do you think CWs have any agenda other than placing the child in the best possible placement?

[dakotabluebaby]

Wow this is a lively discusion and I almost feel like I am evesdropping when reading it. I think that your argument (from what I can tell) it the same kind of arguement my husband and I get into.

We call it Blue balls

I say wow this is a nice ball.
He says your missing the point its blue
I say yes...but its round.
He says it has a dark hue
I say But it bounces
He says what does that have to do with what I am
talking about?
I say.....ect continues

Thus blue balls. We are correct, but coming at the same object with such different perspective that we can not truely hear each other because we are making a point.

While this is not exactly what your doing (we've actually never agrued about the color of a ball) it might be good to think about.

[mommy2fiveplus]

Just want to tell everyone that recently there was a post about sensitive wording, where foster parents were using the words "come out of the woodwork" and relatives were offended, Anyone who uses the term "stealing" in reference to foster parents and foster children is equally offending foster parents. If relatives want foster parents to avoid using "come out of the woodwork" because it is offensive then I think they should tread lightly about foster parents "stealing" kids.

[Aminah]

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

I do not know what the ICPC bureaucracy entails. I do know what homestudies entail, though, and I can attest that it doesn't take years.

It took my grandmother from the day of referral to the day of approval 9 months! This was longer because it was an interstate referral. That doesn't include the time it took for the referring agency to then make their decision, which was another 5 months! As I said before, this is probably not typical of all cases. Doesn't mean I do not have a right to be angered at the inappropriate handling of this case.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

You seem to imply that the system is somehow set up to further foster parents' interests.

No, actually I don't. That's you again putting meaning to MY THOUGHTS! My comment was in reference to the process being one that is meant for foster parenting, not relative placements. Relative placements is something that has been given more attention by the agencies and gov't in recent years. However, the system is still somewhat antiquated. THAT IS WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO. Not the negative twist you put on my words.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

I think we will have to disagree, then. I do not---and won't ever---agree that disrupting a child's placement after 1.5 years is a good idea.

That's interesting that you say this considering, that is exactly what is done when a child is placed in foster care to begin with. Now, since a child has been with a ffamily for a year or more, those years count more than the years they have been with the bfamily. There's something disturbing to me about that. My comment here refers to foster care in a global sense, not a specific case.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

In 13 placements, that has not been my experience. Transitions have happened in as little as one day.

Guess what, that's not all placements. My grandparents have an approved home study, APPROVED!! My nephew still wasn't moved.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

You don't sound very thankful, given that you've accused them of "stealing" and "kidnapping."

Actually, I didn't. You should go back and reread what I wrote. My comment was in response to a post by RobinKay. It was not in regards to the ffamily I am currently dealing with. Again, another misinterpretation by you. However, you can apply your interpretation to the CW.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

But that aside, why do you think CWs have any agenda other than placing the child in the best possible placement?

Well, consider that CWs now have time restrictions that have been placed on them since the passing of the Adoption and Safe Families Act in 1997. There have been more reforms and pushes to find permanency for children quicker. Adoptions for children under the age of 3 are often more desirable for persons unable to have children of their own, Federal monies support agencies when more adoptions take place, and its easier for CWs to place a child with an approved foster family than search for relatives (which could prove unsuccessful) and take them through the process.

Quite honestly Boulderbabe, you keep telling me about what the ideal situation should be like, or what you've experienced... but none of that matters because it isn't what I've experienced. The way things should have been done are not the way they have been done. Unless you have some insight into how to help a family that is currently raising 7 out of 8 of a sibling group is having so much difficulty getting the 8th even after having a successful home study, you don't need to offer anymore of your criticisms to me.

I know that you and I would disagree or many issues, but it appears that you have some good information to offer. I can appreciate your point of view. However, you don't have the right to tell me how my situation should have been and make me feel as if I'm somehow at fault for an agency making delays. My situation is what is, and it certainly was mishandled from the onset.