[vesw01]

We just went to the yearly regional meeting and they are changing how foster care is going to proceed.

For all NEW cases, the foster parents are going to be REQUIRED to interact with the biofamily and work on reunification with them. That means working on visits with them, taking them to appts, even having them at your home (closer to when the kids are going to home). If you decide not to interact with the bio family then the children will be removed from your home.

[athikers]

Well, I'm glad I don't live in IL. Kids are not taken from parents for "small" reasons. I would NOT want to interact directly with a bio parent until I had a clear understanding of their situation and how they treat their children... and then I would want it to be MY choice about how much contact based on whether I thought it would be positive and safe for the kids. I would rather die a slow painful death then interact with the bioparents of my current kids... and for good reason.

[vesw01]

I also forgot to mention that we are no longer going to be foster parents we are going to be referred to as caregivers. They felt that the children have parents and we should not assume that role (what??). Oh yeah we should love the kids, but support reunification, always.......they are also going to make it harder for children to be free for adopting. They are putting a new model into place where there are three different kinds of kids coming into care:

reunification (20%) of the kids - they are going to be considered reunified within the year (adoption is not an option), parents who are motivated, they will not have to complete services, just make progress to get the kids back

concurrent planning (75%) - the tougher cases, where the parents have a "longer road to go." There should be a concurrent plan in place, but adoption should be the last thing on their mind.

expediated TPR (5%)- heinous crimes against the child that DCFS does not owe the parents time to progress and they will go straigh to court for termination

[stevenstwin]

Good luck finding foster parents. I won't do it to be forced into contact with someone I'm not comfortable with and insulted by the term caregiver. (by the way -they do the same thing in the UK "foster care providers" ) They're already short of good foster homes (or ANY foster homes for that matter!). What do they hope to accomplish by further alienating people?
And in a related gripe - I'm sick to death of the zilion chances for reunification. They gave my boy's bios 14 years!! (a couple changes of bio family in there, so that is why the clock kept getting reset). His siblings are SO lucky - TPRd by age 3 and...but he's paid the price for them.

[Boulderbabe]

If that happened in my state, I'd be out --- and I know a lot of other people would, too. Requiring us to have bfamily in our homes is NUTS.

[mrstkg1]

I'm an Illinois foster parent, and while I don't think I will completely quit fostering, there is still a need for emergency housing or for respite care, I think it will definitely change the way I would consider taking a placement. Up until now my concerns are about what is happening with the child, because I'm inviting them to be a part of our family life. Now I will need to know everything about the birthfamily to see if I want to invite them to be a part of our lives too. I can see it working out in rare cases, obviously not the bulk of cases that involve drug addiction or criminal behavior.

I think I will continue to foster, but my placements will be more rare (they are already pretty rare in our area) because I will have to be a lot pickier about who to take.

I also believe there will be a lot more placement disruptions. Also, in my experience, the more I have found out and know about the birthfamilies, the more fear I have about the kids going back.

My prediction is that there will be a lot of foster parents who will say, no thanks and there will be a huge recruitment effort to find people with these kind of political leanings. I don't want to start a big thing, but don't kid yourself, this is all political.

Then you will have a lot of inexperienced foster parents and the SW's are going to have even more work on their hands, then I think the pendulum will swing back the other way.

Our SW for our current placement said that they would even go so far as only place children in the neighborhoods where their birthfamily lives, so the family could be dropping by, picking them up for school, etc. That should be interesting.

Try not to be too worried, you are still in control of who you take in and I believe there are still ways that we can help. That's what I'm going to do until I find out different.

I just pray that we don't have something tragic happen to a foster family to have to prove what a stupid idea this is generally.

[Happy_Cat]

My DH and I were just in Chicago and he has a job opening available we were considering. We loved the city, but this is something else. I just can't fathom treating families who are willing to take in and help children with such disrespect. In my opinion it implies that what we contribute is not valued. We had already decided we probably would not take the position, but this is definately something else to consider.

[aunlanpo]

whew... we were looking to MOVE to IL...seriously... I guess you know where we are NOT moving now. Unbelievable. There is NO WAY I would foster if it meant I was forced to have people in my home that did whatever they did to lose their children. I don't want what ever that influence is around my children, me, my home. I don't want to worry about money that is laying around, what medicines are in my cabinet, where Grandma's ring is. I don't mean that I think all parents who lose their children steal or do drugs... but come on. The chances that they do are statistically higher.

Parents make a lot of selfless sacrifices... they give their own money, their own time, their own everything to help children and families. And I think that's out of love, and hope. If a child's parents get it together, the investment is worth it. If the child becomes a member of their own family, the investment is worth it. Where's the personal investment if you are just a "care giver?"

I agree with a pp, I think a lot more placements will disrupt, foster parents will be scared out or away, and kids will lose out in the end. I agree that bioparents are best for kids when they can get it together, but fact is, only 50% of them do. I don't think their lack of commitment or lack of selflessness, or whatever the lack is that got their kids taken can usually be helped by foster "carer givers" who are just people, not therapists, counselors, pastors...

I think IL should get busy building some group homes for children in need of parent figures. What a cryin' shame.

[BrandyHagz]

This was discussed over a year ago in our PRIDE classes - its been coming for a while...they are trying to model after another states program, I can't remember which one...

Personally, I think its a great idea - look at how little support foster parents get...imagine having to work a plan with that same lack of support...if I can be a support person for even one person and it helps them get their child back in the end, then I say the program is a success...

Sadly, I no longer live in Illinois...we can't even get a license here in Arizona, no one returns calls...the classes are closed at the last minute (when you find out about them at all).

[mrstkg1]

Oops, but I'm going to have to disagree. The whole system is there to provide support for the birthfamily. There are tremendous opportunities for the birth families that are willing to partake. Perhaps your background makes you uniquely qualified to help birth families, but mine sure doesn't.

[athikers]

It occurred to me last night after my previous post, that really, the foster parents are then being asked to do MUCH of the social workers job (supervise visits, provide transportation, provide mentoring, etc.) while getting even less respect than before and continuing to have very little "say" in what happens. I think its a recipe for disaster and I think it will result in more kids AND more foster families being hurt.

I, too, will have to disagree on the birth parents not having supports. Our birth parents are provided EVERY service needed to complete their case plan. They have transportation services, job seeking services, in home care services, mental health counseling, in home counseling... and more. That's a lot of support, I'll take care of the kids and let the professionals deal with the birth parents.

[vesw01]

Most of the foster parents that were there agreed - this was with the Northern DCFS Region Administrator. The were also going to try to extend the # of days that a child has to be placed with a family and moved before they can appeal. Currently if a child is in your home for 60 days or more, you can appeal, but now they are trying to make that 90 days to ensure they foster parents are willing to work with the family. Does that not mean the kids being moved for no reason-who pays the price then - the KIDS.

I and a few other foster parents spoke up when they asked us what we thought the challenges were to this theory....I said that foster parents are going to be dumped on MORE than we already are. I would have to adjust my week with my own kids to make a calendar with the birth parents-I really do not see how that is "fair" (yah yah, I know life is not fair).

I do not mind working with the birth parents when it works for me and as long as we are both comfortable. I am blessed to have a good relationship with the bio parents now, but if they stopped respecting my rules then I would drop them....and wait until things settled down.

Another foster parent yelled out "what has changed, all you are doing is saying the same program that we have heard for 14 years just with different words." They agreed....

I guess it is what it is. DCFS said they are not taking kids into care because they have no homes - not sure how they are going to get more foster parents when they mandate this.

[vesw01]

BTW Our family WILL not still be foster parents if we are placed with kids that have their birth family in the same neighborhood - so much for confidentiality.

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by BrandyHagz

Personally, I think its a great idea - look at how little support foster parents get...imagine having to work a plan with that same lack of support...if I can be a support person for even one person and it helps them get their child back in the end, then I say the program is a success...

This is all based on the Annie E. Casey Foundation's "Family to Family" program. I think it's a great idea---when you have motivated birthparents, who don't have uncontrolled mental illness, who don't have uncontrolled drug addictions, and who aren't prone to violent or disruptive behavior. But the fact is, there are A LOT of birthfamilies in the system who aren't like that. Nobody is opposed to this kind of interaction where it's appropriate. But mandating it across the board? That's insane. It's just flat out not safe.

If you want to have meth addicts and violent felons in your house, okay, but that's not what I want to do. And some of my fkids' parents have been serious addicts and/or violent criminals.

[jillned]

I am in Illinois too..............our FS has been with for almost 4 months and I have never met the BP's. I have offered to meet them, etc, but for whatever reason the CW'er keeps brushing it under the rug. I can only assume it's because she does not think RU will be happening, but I don't know.