[ConnieAnn]

I hired a Attorney two weeks ago to file a Petition to adopt our Foster Child who has been in our home 7 months. She has been TPRed since July 19, 2007 and had her goal changed to adoption. A partanal Aunt has now came into the picture and say's she want to adopted as of Aug 24,2007 and had the State Attorney put in for a ICPC on Sept 12, 2007 for her to be sent to the Aunt and now at this point My Husband and I are no longer consider the Placement for FD.
Well I hired the Attorney 2 weeks ago and she filed a motion in the court to not have FD removed and we have not set a date in court, here's were thing get crazy!!!

Today Sept 21,2007 SCC sends a Licensing Supervisor to my home and this is what she said!!
If I intervene with a Attorney they will pull my foster Licence and remove my FD immedately because of papers I have signed when I was in Mapp Class. Here is what they she's talking about.



At Risk Statement
4. I/We will take no action to adopt or obtain legal custody of the child/children without first obtaining written consent of the safe children Coalition

Bilateral service Agreement
V. To refrain from engaging in any legal action to acquire custody of the child without the Coalition's consent. Adoption by a child's foster parents is often the best choice for finding a permanent home for a child when reunification is not an option. In these situations foster parents and the coalition will work together to achieve this goal.


Well she showed me these two forms and out the door she went.
Has anyone out there dealt with The Safe Children Coalition and intervened with a Attorney and have signed these papers and they DID NOT take your foster child out of your home and if so please tell me how you did it. You can privately e-mail me if you feel you do not wanted the whole world to see. If your ok with it you can just post. Please help me if you know anything. My Attorney is even stumped on this one and she is going to have to do some research this weekend.


Thank you from the bottom of my heart!!!!

[foster_bub]

Ahhh the SCC. I too am on their poop list but for different reasons.

Contact April Putzulu at the SCC ASAP, and ask for a grievance staffing to be held immediately.

April Putzulu
Director of Client Relations
Safe Children Coalition of Pasco & Pinellas
(727) 456-0600 Ext. 2004


In the meantime send an email to Senator Rhonda Storms who chairs the committee for Children, Families and Elder Affairs and copy Nick Cox.
He's the regional director of DCF in the Bay area. Express your concerns on how removing a child from your home would be in their best interest when you're trying to adopt them.

storms.ronda.web@flsenate.gov

nick_cox@dcf.state.fl.us

Once you send them an email the SCC will back off because they'll have to report back to DCF on the outcome of the staffing.

I did this and it worked wonders!

Good luck and feel free to contact me if you need help!

Also keep in mind that something changed in Florida legislation (i think) back in July where blood relatives should not be considered if the child is bonded to the foster parents. They finally got it through their thick skulls that a child IS better off in a home where they are bonded to a care giver rather then yanking them out of a home just because it's a blood relative.

Contact these people ASAP.. continue to fight.. the SCC uses these scare tactics and it's disgusting. You've done nothing wrong at all.

Oh.. and by the way the paperwork that you signed at the SCC is an agreement between you and the SCC and won't hold water in court, at least it shouldn't. I just can't believe they'd threaten to remove the child if you deal with a lawyer.

I am also pretty sure that if a child has been in your home for over six months they would have to go to court and have a shelter hearing in order to have them removed. If they threaten again, and ask your lawyer this, that they better have a court order in hand saying the child is to be removed.

I've said it a million times.. the SCC never ceases to amaze me! 99% of the staff are incompetent who don't have the best interest of the child in mind.

The ONLY thing that should concern you is if the SCC dropped the ball during the duration of the case. Meaning they are supposed to try to contact family members all along. If that didn't happen and they noticed their error late in the case, that could be a BIG problem for you and your husband.

Send the emails and make the phone call to April Putzulu TODAY!

[chickieboom]

Note sure if this applies but I think there is also a law (Florida i think, but may be federal,) that says that if the child is in home for 6 months they may not be moved without a court order unless there is abuse.

Now, about the bilateral aggreement I have wondered about that myself. I'd imagine that it would hold up if as a contract that you violated. I know they were very insistent on having that in place during the Mapp classes and I know I had to sign at least 2 if not three of them. Ask your attorney.

If the paternal side aunt gains custody do you think the child will have continued adverse exposure to the biological parents? If so, maybe that is why you hired the attorney, to protect the interests of the child, rather than gain custody. It wouldn't win you any friends with the agency, but it might keep you in compliance. I don't know, just ideas.

[ConnieAnn]

Well I did some research today and went to Florida's DCF sight which is part of SCC and found this. It is a lot to read but I would like someones input into what they think about this and if you think they will do as they Said. Revoke my Foster Licenses

STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF
CF OPERATING PROCEDURE CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
NO. 175-58 TALLAHASSEE, November 1, 1998
Family Safety and Preservation
RELICENSING OF FAMILY FOSTER HOMES AND EMERGENCY SHELTER CARE HOMES
1. Purpose. This operating procedure applies to the department’s staff and does not enlarge, modify or
reduce the rights or obligations of the licensee. This operating procedure establishes relicensing
procedures for the department’s licensing staff to follow when relicensing family foster homes and family
emergency shelter homes. It provides directions for documenting enforcement procedures when
investigating complaints involving foster or shelter parents or when licensing violations are found during
the relicensing process. This operating procedure also provides a listing of the required documentation
that must be in the licensing file before denying or revoking a license.
2. Authority. Section 409.175, Florida Statutes (F.S.) and Chapter 65C-13, Florida Administrative Code
(F.A.C.).
3. General. Each district will develop process for managing relicensing activities to include
determination of renewal dates, identification of delays in meeting time frame, as well as start and
completion dates for each task to ensure timely completion.
4. Procedures. The following procedures must be initiated by licensing staff 90 days prior to relicensing
family foster homes and family emergency shelter homes.
a. Relicensing Process.
(1) Request a sanitation inspection of the home a minimum of 90 days prior to the
expiration of the license.
(2) Review and assess all exit interviews of children who left the home during the past
year. If necessary, conduct a staffing with foster care or the unit(s) responsible for completing the child
exit interviews.
(3) Send Foster Care Counselor’s Review of Foster Parent(s) Performance as listed in the
Bilateral Service Agreement to all counselors who have had children in the home and request that the
form be returned to the licensing unit within 14 working days.
(4) Secure Child Abuse Hotline and local law enforcement clearances, including a check
for current orders of protection, for all persons over the age of 12 who reside in the home.
(5) Ensure that a criminal records check on the foster parent(s) is completed no less
frequently than once every five years.
November 1, 1998 CFOP 175-58
2
(6) Complete the Relicensing Summary for Foster Home for Dependent Children, form
CF-FSP 5027.
(7) The foster or emergency shelter parent must complete Section B of the Relicensing
Summary form CF-FSP 5027.
(8) The foster or emergency shelter parent must sign an Application for a License, form
CF-FSP 5007.
(9) The licensing counselor must meet with the foster or shelter family to review the
Relicensing Summary for Foster Homes for Dependent Children and formulate recommendation for
relicensure.
(10) The substitute care parents must have completed eight hours of in-service training
annually. The number of hours of training and subjects of trainings must be documented in the case file of
the family.
(11) The local health department must inspect and approve the home.
(12) The substitute care parents must sign the Bilateral Service Agreement.
(13) At least two weeks prior to the date of relicensure, copies of all forms, including the
sanitation inspection and home study on the foster/emergency shelter family, must be submitted with a
request for the issuance or denial of a license to the staff designated by the District Administrator to
approve or deny licenses.
(14) The foster or emergency shelter parents must provide proof of income.
b. Possible Outcomes of the Relicensing Process.
(1) Renewal with no changes.
(2) Renewal with changes.
(3) Change to provisional license.
(4) Denial of license.
(5) Voluntary Closure of home.
5. Enforcement Procedures.
a. Provide written notification by certified mail to the licensee of the statutory and rule violations
that were found, citing the applicable rule and statute and providing a date by which the family must
correct the deficiencies through a corrective action plan.
November 1, 1998 CFOP 175-58
3
b. The notification must specify that failure to comply within the time frame specified could result
in the license being suspended, denied or revoked.
c. If the licensing violations found pose an immediate threat to the health, safety or welfare of the
children, the children must be removed. The licensing counselors must make a report to the hotline and
notify the appropriate district staff that the children need to be removed.
d. If the licensing violations do not pose an immediate threat to the health, safety or welfare of
the children, the department will require that a corrective action plan be developed to correct the
deficiencies. This plan must have the department’s approval.
e. A plan to correct the deficiencies/violations must be developed by the district in conjunction
with the foster/shelter parents. The plan must contain time frames which must be complied with as a
prerequisite to relicensure. This plan may require that a relative who has moved into the home has to be
screened by a certain date, as a responsibility of district licensing staff. The approved corrective action
plan must be put into writing in the form of a letter, return receipt requested, and sent to the foster/shelter
parents. The signed return receipt shall be placed and remain in the licensing file.
f. Failure of the family foster home or emergency shelter home to timely comply with the
corrective action plan shall result in denial of relicensure, a provisional license or revocation of the
license.
6. Documentation Requirements Prior to Revoking a License.
a. Before making a determination that a license will be denied, suspended or revoked, the
following actions/occurrences must be fully and completely documented in the licensing file.
(1) All reports made to the Abuse Hotline, as required by Chapter 415 F.S. and the
outcome of the investigation(s).
(2) List of all deficiencies or conditions, other than abuse or neglect of the children, which
compromise the safety or well-being of the children.
(3) The length of time and frequency of the noncompliance with the licensing
requirements or deficiencies in caring for children.
(4) The date of written notification to the licensee as to the deficiency and time given to
the licensee to correct the deficiency.
(5) The licensing staff’s efforts to help the licensee to come into compliance.
(6) Barriers, if any, which prohibit the licensee from correcting the deficiencies.
b. All abuse reports and records on the foster family must be kept in a separate confidential file
from the foster parents licensing file, which is a public record.
c. The decision to issue, deny, suspend or revoke the family’s license rests with the district
administrator or the person that the district administrator has appointed to deny or approve licenses.
November 1, 1998 CFOP 175-58
4
7. Coordination With District Legal Counsel and Other Appropriate District Staff. The documentation
described in paragraph 6 above must be shared with the district legal counsel and other appropriate staff
in order for the district administrator or his designee to make an informed decision whether to deny,
revoke or suspend the license. District legal counsel must respond to this request within 10 calendar
days. No notification of action is to be sent to the licensee without approval of both the district legal
counsel and the person designated to approve or deny licenses.
BY DIRECTION OF THE SECRETARY:

(Signed original copy on file)

SAMARA H. NAVARRO, D.B.A.

Deputy Secretary

[ConnieAnn]

Also chickiboom I think your refering to this new
Statute 39.812 that say's this:



4) The court shall retain jurisdiction over any child placed in the custody of the department until the child is adopted. After custody of a child for subsequent adoption has been given to the department, the court has jurisdiction for the purpose of reviewing the status of the child and the progress being made toward permanent adoptive placement. As part of this continuing jurisdiction, for good cause shown by the guardian ad litem for the child, the court may review the appropriateness of the adoptive placement of the child. When a licensed foster parent or court-ordered custodian has applied to adopt a child who has resided with the foster parent or custodian for at least 6 months and who has previously been permanently committed to the legal custody of the department and the department does not grant the application to adopt, the department may not, in the absence of a prior court order authorizing it to do so, remove the child from the foster home or custodian, except when:

(a) There is probable cause to believe that the child is at imminent risk of abuse or neglect;
(b) Thirty days have expired following written notice to the foster parent or custodian of the denial of the application to adopt, within which period no formal challenge of the department's decision has been filed; or
(c) The foster parent or custodian agrees to the child's removal. (5) The petition for adoption must be filed in the division of the circuit court which entered the judgment terminating parental rights, unless a motion for change of venue is granted pursuant to s. 47.122. A copy of the consent executed by the department as required under s. 63.062(7) must be attached to the petition, unless the court determines that such consent is being unreasonably withheld and provided that the petitioner has filed with the court a favorable preliminary adoptive home study performed by a licensed child-placing agency, a child-caring agency registered under s. 409.176, or a licensed professional or agency described in s. 61.20(2). The petition must be accompanied by a form provided by the department which details the social and medical history of the child and each parent and includes the social security number and date of birth for each parent, if such information is available or readily obtainable. The person seeking to adopt the child may not file a petition for adoption until the judgment terminating parental rights becomes final. An adoption proceeding under this subsection is governed by chapter 63, as limited under s. 63.037.


Yes I know about this but SCC said they have their own way of doing things, no questions asked! I really think, they think they are Attorneys!

[hkolln]

Originally Posted by chickieboom

If the paternal side aunt gains custody do you think the child will have continued adverse exposure to the biological parents? If so, maybe that is why you hired the attorney, to protect the interests of the child, rather than gain custody. It wouldn't win you any friends with the agency, but it might keep you in compliance. I don't know, just ideas.

This is not necessarily all true. Some relatives actually do protect the kids. But I do understand the concerns you may be having. Each case can be so different!

What do you know about the Aunt? Has she gotten any type of home study done? Has she known about this all along and just now comes forward?

And as far as hiring an attorney to protect the best interest of the child...I don't think they think of it as that is why it was done. I think they suspect it was done to keep the child where she is and not moved to a relative placement. If that is the case, then they see the attorney as an attorney for a custody battle. And that is how it was explained to us when we did finally get custody of our niece the end of June. They were angry we hired an attorney and angered that the foster parents did also.

I know in our case the Judge did say in court that he didn't want to preside over a custody battle when he found out that we both had attorneys (us and the foster parents whom had our niece). We had a hearing to move our niece from the current foster parents home (whom were also fighting to keep her there) to our home after we became licensed foster parents. I think it angered DHW because it put them in the spotlight and made them accountable for all their screwups in the case. But it sure did speed it up too!

But then again I have no knowledge of SCC or their practices. I am just relaying my experience which is probably not at all like yours

[ConnieAnn]

Helen,
Aunt does not have a homestudy done yet and she found out about FD in March of 2007, but came up with every reason in the book that she did not want FD. But SCC talk her into it after parents were TPRed on July 19, 2007 because when they went to court the Judge said that FD had to be in our home till Aug 21, 2007 till we had rights to adopt, so please look into relative placement until that date. Well they some how talk the Aunt into it, but after it became time for us to adopt, yet they say to us that they have to place her with Aunt because it is the law and no one EVER told the judge that 6 months had past before the Aunt made up her mind. Thats when we hired a Attorney. The problem here is something is really wrong with this Aunt, if it took her all this time to make up her mind. The best part is the our FD has been in foster care since birth and the grandparents which are the parents of this Aunt knew since then and I have a hard time believing that this Aunt never knew. She either wanted to wait to TPR or SCC has talk her into this without concern for our FD. This Aunt has already asked SCC if our FD could be placed with her brother or maybe her parents but niether of them are will to take her. There is something really wrong here and the best interest of the child is not being thought of. This Aunt doesn't know our FD and neither does anyone eles in her family.

Well I don't know how people feel regarding this but this is the what we have been dealing with!

[hkolln]

Originally Posted by ConnieAnn

Helen,
Aunt does not have a homestudy done yet and she found out about FD in March of 2007

She should have done something back in March 2007 then...and not wait so long. What's up with that? As soon as we found out about our niece being in foster care we immediately started the process to get her here.

Our niece didn't know us at all either. The last time we saw her was when she was 10 mos old and she was 7 when she went into FC, so she had no knowledge of who we were when we started this entire process. She was living with the previous FP's 11 mos when she was moved here to our home. Most of the time they do say relatives are first priority and in our case not knowing our niece was not held against us. But in your case that relative should have showed interest 6 months ago and not now that TPR has happened.

[foster_bub]

This just came right out of the Pinellas County FAPA newsletter.

New Law Affects Adoptions

Good News for Foster Parents who adopt the children already in their care! A

NEW State Law (2007-124)
that took effect this past July 1 virtually guarantees your eligibility for the Adoption Subsidy program! (The
law is NOT retro-active, so if you completed your adoption prior to July 1, 2007 you still have to qualify
under the old law). Parents will still be asked if they would adopt without the Subsidy -- but a simple NO is
all it takes to keep your child (forever) and maintain the payments from the State for their support.
The new law also eliminates the requirement that the State (SCC, DCF, etc.) seek to place the child with
extended family members before allowing you to adopt -- effectively putting the Foster Parents "first in
line"! (No more searches for grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc. that may be willing to take them!)
Both of these items were included because the State recognizes that a change in placement nearly
always has a detrimental affect on the child -- regardless of age. The message from Tallahassee is clear -
- when a Foster Child comes available for adoption, the State WANTS the Foster Family to adopt,
because it is in the best interests of the child!
This new law didn't just appear out of nowhere -- a concerted effort by Foster and Adoptive Family
Advocates across the State (including myself) alerted the legislature of the need, and BOTH chambers
(House & Senate) passed the measure unanimously this past Spring! If you are so inclined, writing a
note of thanks to your State Representative or Senator would go a long way towards helping to pave the
way for further improvements we're still fighting for in Tallahassee!
There are more aspects to the new laws that affect Foster Care & Adoptions -- keep your eyes out right
here for more information to come!

[itsjustmel]

I posted my story in another category on this site titled "crushed..." or something like that. We too feel bullied by CPS right now. We are fostering my niece and nephew because their b-parents will be in jail for the next 5-10 years. We WANT to adopt, but have been told we can't because we are relatives, and that CPS can not "legally terminate parental rights when there is a relative placement". We voiced our complaints, and mentioned that we wanted to get a lawyer. We were told that if we did not "go with the flow" that the kids would be removed and we would lose our foster certs. Basically they said shut-up, and don't disagree with us or else. I thought it was our RIGHT as US citizens to have legal counsel, but we are now being lead to believe otherwise. PLEASE let me know what you find out!!! Good luck!

[ConnieAnn]

My Attorney called SCC today to set up a staffing so we can get everyone involed to understand what we are doing and for Directions to tell us what they are doing. As my Attorney put it to them, we all can agree to disagree as long as we both understand what we are all doing. The person she spoke to at SCC in regards to my License being revoked and J being pulled out of our home, said that they will not and can not do this because once TPR has happened and the case has been changed to adoption, at that time I can hire a Attorney. The Bilateral Service Agreement's is not in effect after TPR and the terms regarding: "Refrain from engaging in any legal action" is void. Also I spoke to someone at the Agency this week and they told me that I am not going against SCC, that in fact I am going against Directions since that is who handles J's Case! OK. Well hopefully we will get somewhere at this staffing on Oct 12, 2007, but I don't have high hopes, because they were still trying to argue with my Attorney about things that make no sense to her, which I can't get into but she realized today they really don't understand Law at all and they indeed are playing somewhere between Private Investigator and Attorney with no clue or Degree in either. She really wondered if anyone there talks to the State Attorney before they say things.

[MomwithFive]

the State recognizes that a change in placement nearly
always has a detrimental affect on the child -- regardless of age>>

Do you think other states will adopt these laws?

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by itsjustmel

We WANT to adopt, but have been told we can't because we are relatives, and that CPS can not "legally terminate parental rights when there is a relative placement".

What?! That is utter and complete baloney. You need an attorney.