[Urs-n-Bob]

Hi all. I am new to this forum and have been a foster parent for almost a year. Our first fostering experience began Nov 13, 2002. We took in 4 siblings: female-13 yrs, female-9 years, male-6 years, female-3 mos. The 9 and 6 year old were placed with a different foster family because they needed therapeutic care which we were not trained for. The baby who is now 15 mos and the now 14 year old are still with us. They have become a big part of our family and we are hoping to eventually adopt them both. The bio-mother is the same for all 4 kiddos but they all have different bio-dads. The baby's bio-dad is in prison and the other children have never had contact with their bio-dads. They had four supervised visits with the bio-mom from the time we got them until Dec. 16, 2002. There has been no contact whatsoever since then. The bio-mom is unwilling to make any efforts towards family reunification. She claims to want her children back but refuses to follow case plans or meet the state's expectations. We just received word today that the GAL (kids' attorney who has never even met the kids) is trying to set up a phone visitation between the bio-mother and 3 older children. The phone call would be supervised, on speaker phone, videotaped with counselors and would only last a couple of minutes. We are worried about what effect this will have on the kids as they have all made so much progress. We hate to see any setbacks to months of hard work, especially for just a few minutes. Our 14 year old has made great leaps. She is not even the same girl. She is happy and thriving. Our case workers and the counselors do not think the phone visit is in the best interests of the kiddos. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to handle this? Do we just say nothing or do we try to get it stopped? We are just so frustrated with the system. It seems like everything is done for the best interests of the parents instead of for the kids.

[monroeman]

When my son was my foster son, I did everything I could to advocate for his best intersts. I talked to the caseworker, her supervisor, the GAL, I wrote letters to the judge. If I thought something was not going right I didn't let go until it got changed. In your case you have the caseworker and counselor on your side.

I is ridiculous that the GAL is trying to set up this phone visitation without at least checking with the 14 year-old to see if it is desired. To ignore the concerns of the counselor and caseworker is inane. (Feel free to copy this and give it to the GAL) The GAL's only concern should be the child's best interest. He/she shouldn't care less about the mother because that not what the job is all about. (yes, I know that's a strong way to put it, but that's the way it is.) Talk to the GAL. If that doesn't work, find a supervisor and strongly express your concerns. You are the children's best advocate.

Unfortunately, the system does seem to hold the parental rights, rather than best interest of the child, as the standard until rights are terminated. But the GAL shouldn't be part of that.

No contact from the birthmom since December?!!! By her choice?!!! This joker should be pushing termination, not seemingly pointless three minute phone contacts.

[riley6]

I agree with the above post.

I would write a letter to the GAL, send a copy to the sw, the sw's supervisor, and the lawyer of DCFS. In the letter, I would write a summary of the children's case, complete with what their behaviors were when first in your care and how they are now. Include the 14 yo's grades, any activities she's involved with, friends that she has made, anything. Document how her behaviors were during and after visitation and how they are now. Use objective words, not : the child was anxious. Instead write: the child would pace, become non-stop chatty, pick at her nails, scream at the baby, etc.

I would end the letter by asking the GAL: When would be a good time for you to visit our home and meet your clients? Then list a couple dates that would be good for you: The children are available after school on Wed and Fridays.

Is the sw aware of the GAL's plan for phone visitation? Is the therapist? They should also be writing him letters or calling and advocating for the children. This GAL is WAY off base!

[jessica_e]

I don't know what state you are in, but I am an attorney in Texas and have been GAL on several cases. In Texas, the law REQUIRES a GAL to visit with thier client (the kids) if the kids are old enough to communicate. You might check into it where you are. If that is a requirment, I am sure the GAL would not want the judge to get a copy of a letter saying they have never met their client!

[DianeS]

Wow... that sounds like a LOT of hoopla for a "couple of minutes" phone conversation. Videotape, counselors... Is it possible that what the GAL is doing is getting some visual proof for the court of the children's reactions to their mother? Or perhaps of their mother's reactions, or things she says, or visual proof that she didn't call at the assigned time?

Where I live, videotapes of visitations are commonly submitted into evidence to support one side or the other's opinions about reunification. The bio parents' attorney submits warm-fuzzy videos of bio mom buying ice cream and giving hugs, and the prosecutors submit horrific videos of the children screaming and running away when bio dad walks into the room.

So, before I jumped to any conclusions, I'd simply ask the GAL what she hopes to accomplish with the whole set-up. Discuss your concerns about the childrens' potential behavior and emotions after the phone visit. (Of course, all this after you point out that he needs to come and TALK to the children himself.) He may truly be doing what's necessary. Even if people involved with the case understand that the children don't want mom and mom doesn't want them, you still have to convince a judge before rights will be terminated, and a picture IS worth a thousand words.

Good luck in whatever you decide!

[stepforone]

Jessica - I didn' t know that the GAL were required to visit with the kids here in TX. We have a 3 yo fd and she has never met her GAL (and he's supposed to be a great attorney for these kids!). Believe me, she's vocal and communicates quite well for her age. I asked the CW once and she said he didn't really need to meet with her, he got all his info from CASA and CW. Maybe it's different in each county?

[jessica_e]

Stepforone--

Let me first say that this is in no way meant to be legal advice.
(Sorry, but I have to cover myself!)

The requirments of a GAL are the same in every county in Texas. The statute that covers it is statewide. However, the staute does not require the GAL to visit the child if the child is under 4 years old. (Presumably a child under 4 is not able to communicate well enough for the visit to aid the GAL in their decision. I guess the statute was not written by moms-- or by dads who pay any attention to their toddlers!)

Also, these requirments do not apply to an attorney ad litem-- only to a GAL.. Sometimes the court appoints one attorney to serve as the GAL and attorney ad litem. If that is the case, then the attorney is suppose to meet with the child if he/she is at least 4. It sounds like CASA is invloved in your case. So, they are probably the GAL and the attorney in your case it the AAL and he would not be required to visit your child-- even if she were 4.

The statute is

Texas Family Code § 1007.002 POWERS AND DUTIES OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

Let me know if you have any other questions about it.

[Vince]

Urs-n-Bob, I would list my objections and questions in writing and send it to everyone involved. The GAL might be doing the right thing, but you are entitled to an explanation.

[Urs-n-Bob]

We truly appreciate all of the advice. Just wanted to give an update on the situation. We asked what the purpose was for the phone visit and were told that they were hoping that with all of the restrictions that the mother would flip out and not follow through with it. Where the kids have been in foster care for almost a year they say it is time to start looking into the permanancy issues. The phone call is supposed to take place tomorrow at 4 pm. Understandably, our fd is very nervous about the phone visit. Mainly because she is pretty certain that her mom won't be willing to abide by the rules. The GAL did finally come to meet the kids this evening. She will be with the kids for the phone visit and said that if the mother is inappropriate in any way or verbally abusive towards anyone at all the visit will be immediately terminated, or if any of the kids are uncomfortable they are to give her a thumbs down sign and it will be terminated. Our fd is very much aware of her mother's problems and hopefully this phone call will be a comfirmation to her of her mom's unwillingness to change.

[lambeausam]

I know this visit is going to be hard on all those involved. I am glad to see the protective measures, especially the non-verbal indicators (thumb signal). This will allow the kids to terminate their part of the visit without having to verbally tell their mother. I wish you all well!