[spicedmama]

Originally Posted by xxsurroundedbyxy

I promise you were not targeted.....you became a member of a public forum and posted on a thread entitled Foster Parent Adoption vs. Relative Adoption. SO I responded to some of your opinions with my own.

Same rules, but you have to admit.....totally different perspective than most foster parents.

I probably got caught up in the postings and not the topic, . And it is a totally different perspective, I agree.

[vernellinnj]

Well, this post has taken on a life of its own. I disagree with what several have said but this is America and that's the beauty of it - you can say and think whatever you like and I get to agree or disagree, respectfully.

I am a FP who has "fallen in love" w/ my FC. I make no apologies for that. It's been over 2 years and this child's birth mother still continues to go through the process. The legal system, sadly (for FC and biomom), has dragged it's feet. CW, GAL, Independent psychiatrist (who did bonding eval with me and child and child and bio mom), and an independent citizen review board all recommend (fervently) adoption by me. I could not love the child more if I gave birth.

Nonetheless, I wait and pray that God's will is done. And, battle, internally, about hiring a lawyer to represent me . In the end, I trust that God's will will be done and that He will sustain the child and me.

[RobinKay]

Originally Posted by vernellinnj

Well, this post has taken on a life of its own. I disagree with what several have said but this is America and that's the beauty of it - you can say and think whatever you like and I get to agree or disagree, respectfully.

I am a FP who has "fallen in love" w/ my FC. I make no apologies for that. It's been over 2 years and this child's birth mother still continues to go through the process. The legal system, sadly (for FC and biomom), has dragged it's feet. CW, GAL, Independent psychiatrist (who did bonding eval with me and child and child and bio mom), and an independent citizen review board all recommend (fervently) adoption by me. I could not love the child more if I gave birth.

Nonetheless, I wait and pray that God's will is done. And, battle, internally, about hiring a lawyer to represent me . In the end, I trust that God's will will be done and that He will sustain the child and me.

This is the kind of situation that seems obvious to any reasonable person--of course the child should stay with you. Will be sending positive thoughts your way--

[vernellinnj]

Originally Posted by RobinKay

This is the kind of situation that seems obvious to any reasonable person--of course the child should stay with you. Will be sending positive thoughts your way--

Thank you!

[stevenstwin]

Just another random thought on the whole idea of what constitutes a "family" - something in another post made me think about this. When I had my FS and it was going towards adopion, I was "kinship placement". Now, I'm not related to him by blood at all, but I had a prior relationship with him as his teacher. The courts considered THAT to make me "kin" and gave me a place above bio relations he didn't know as well. His "dad" fought that in court becuse he was offended I could be callled "kin" when I was no blood of his (he wanted A. moved to a cousin), but the judge made it plain that I was "related" to the child, if not the parents.

[tvs4]

I think a lot of the issues could be cleared up or at least lessened if the court system was quicker and there were more resources for social services. Part of the reason foster parents get so emotionally attached to children who are in thier care is that the children are in their care for YEARS! how not to attach? how not to feel they are somehow now "yours"? There is no good reason (except money that it takes) for agencies/CWs/SWs not to track down children's families when children are first put into care. Then families could be given the choice to do the work and to have the child moved to their care. I know they say they are looking for family but honestly with the internet and open source information and a private detective you could find family members a heck of a lot sooner. Also, I think when parents have thier children taken into foster care there should be INTENSIVE services offered to the parents for 6 months. Give them access to every tool they need to succeed. I think at the end of 6 months you'd have a pretty good idea of which parents were going to succeed and which were going to - for whatever reason - not succeed. Those making progress continue to get services and RU is the plan. Those that don't take advantage of the services or make little progress have the kids go to family or non-family that looks like it is a good fit for the child. I think this would be much more fair to the kids and the parents. The parents would be given access to every service possible (job training, child development classes, parenting classes, psych help, drug treatment, etc) and the kids would hopefully get out of foster care faster or placed with family faster or placed in a permamant home faster. The problem, like so many other problems is money - but I think that it might not be as expensive as you think since you'd be offering more intensive services but for hopefully a shorter period of time and to a pool of people who are likely to excel once they have those services rather than throwing some sporatic services to the whole pool of people for years.

[RobinKay]

Originally Posted by tvs4

I think a lot of the issues could be cleared up or at least lessened if the court system was quicker and there were more resources for social services. Part of the reason foster parents get so emotionally attached to children who are in thier care is that the children are in their care for YEARS! how not to attach? how not to feel they are somehow now "yours"? There is no good reason (except money that it takes) for agencies/CWs/SWs not to track down children's families when children are first put into care. Then families could be given the choice to do the work and to have the child moved to their care. I know they say they are looking for family but honestly with the internet and open source information and a private detective you could find family members a heck of a lot sooner. Also, I think when parents have thier children taken into foster care there should be INTENSIVE services offered to the parents for 6 months. Give them access to every tool they need to succeed. I think at the end of 6 months you'd have a pretty good idea of which parents were going to succeed and which were going to - for whatever reason - not succeed. Those making progress continue to get services and RU is the plan. Those that don't take advantage of the services or make little progress have the kids go to family or non-family that looks like it is a good fit for the child. I think this would be much more fair to the kids and the parents. The parents would be given access to every service possible (job training, child development classes, parenting classes, psych help, drug treatment, etc) and the kids would hopefully get out of foster care faster or placed with family faster or placed in a permamant home faster. The problem, like so many other problems is money - but I think that it might not be as expensive as you think since you'd be offering more intensive services but for hopefully a shorter period of time and to a pool of people who are likely to excel once they have those services rather than throwing some sporatic services to the whole pool of people for years.

You are so right. In my situation, bmom was given a list of things to do and told go do it. That was it. This was a dysfunctional substance abuser who had struggled all her life with drugs and bipolar disorder--long history of petty crime and prostitution. And social services expected her to get herself together on her own. This story is repeated all over the United States.

Add to that the lazy social worker who was told about dh and I who live in Hawaii (kids in Florida) by our son's 15 yr. old bio sister the DAY they were taken into care. He dismissed us--never made any effort, not one call. We heard about the situation through the family grapevine, as the dysfunctional birthparents sure weren't going to call and tell us they lost their children.

We trusted the system, figured they'd call us if we were needed, and after six months we finally called them. The social worker was still resistant to even consider us, and I had to get in touch with my inner b**** to get him to start the process.

All the agony and broken hearts could have been avoided if our ICPC had been started right away. Then we would have been ready when it became obvious that bmom was never going to get it together enough to parent this child. BTW, bdad is my BIL and was in jail most of the time ason was in foster care.

Again, the idea of intensive services is the answer!!!! I would vote for a tax increase for that!

[spicedmama]

Originally Posted by RobinKay

You are so right. In my situation, bmom was given a list of things to do and told go do it. That was it. This was a dysfunctional substance abuser who had struggled all her life with drugs and bipolar disorder--long history of petty crime and prostitution. And social services expected her to get herself together on her own. This story is repeated all over the United States...,

Again, the idea of intensive services is the answer!!!! I would vote for a tax increase for that!

With a few tweaks here and there, that first paragraph is our little relatives birth mother.

[Hadley2]

To casey03: Sounds like a hard situation. I hope the best for the child, whatever that may be, and that if there is pain in the outcome for you or others, that there will be some kind of comfort in the end. The answer to your question is that it depends on the cw, the county/district practice, the court practice, state law, and local legal interpretations of that law. Of course, it also may depend somewhat on the relatives.

Over all that, there is a presumption in international, national, and state law that the child has an inherent right to be raised by family when possible and that the child's best interest lies in that right. Against that, there can be all kinds of different exceptions made for different reasons.

To everyone: No matter what happens, the child will suffer a loss.

The general argument is over whether one loss carries inherently more weight than the other. The law says it does. I am told by therapists and other such that research supports that presumption.

In specific cases, courts are supposed to determine which loss is greater or more harmful in the long term. In real life, ss agencies and courts sometimes do try to make reasoned judgments and sometimes simply fall back on formulas. More often, I would bet it is some combination of the two.

To everyone: No adult except the parents or guardians has "rights to" a child. Children are no longer property; even a parent's or guardian's "rights" are tied to and limited by the authority they must have to be able to fulfill their much weightier duty to provide for and protect the child.

So, legally, it is the other way around. Children have "rights to" certain adults, including extended family. I think it is fair to say that this one major point of Robin's has not been heard, addressed directly, or even disagreed with directly; just ignored.

The real argument is not over whether a child has a right to be raised by family--he/she absolutely does--it is over when the child's right to family and family integrity and the benefits the child derives from those rights do or don't outweigh the benefits of an undisrupted attachment to others.

That I think has to be a case-by-case judgment.

Robin's other main point is likewise getting lost in the emotional shuffle: I don't think she is saying fps should never adopt or that wanting to adopt is a bad thing in itself. She is saying that when that desire alone blinds the fps to the child's best interest--when it "gets in the way"--thereby derailing or trying to derail RU with parents or family, it is a problem.

I think she has several times acknowledged that it is human and understandable when this happens, but the fact that it sometimes does happen--and I think we can honestly say we've seen it on this board on the part of some posters and in the stories of others--is a problem.

On another topic, as for ICPCs, I would like to point out that domestic infant adoption ICPCs go through in DAYS. People are outraged, in fact, when they take more than 3-4 days. Even after a homestudy, when required, is completed, it still takes fc ICPCs MONTHS to complete. There is no good or reasonable explanation for that difference.

[RobinKay]

Originally Posted by Hadley2

To casey03: Sounds like a hard situation. I hope the best for the child, whatever that may be, and that if there is pain in the outcome for you or others, that there will be some kind of comfort in the end. The answer to your question is that it depends on the cw, the county/district practice, the court practice, state law, and local legal interpretations of that law. Of course, it also may depend somewhat on the relatives.

Over all that, there is a presumption in international, national, and state law that the child has an inherent right to be raised by family when possible and that the child's best interest lies in that right. Against that, there can be all kinds of different exceptions made for different reasons.

To everyone: No matter what happens, the child will suffer a loss.

The general argument is over whether one loss carries inherently more weight than the other. The law says it does. I am told by therapists and other such that research supports that presumption.

In specific cases, courts are supposed to determine which loss is greater or more harmful in the long term. In real life, ss agencies and courts sometimes do try to make reasoned judgments and sometimes simply fall back on formulas. More often, I would bet it is some combination of the two.

To everyone: No adult except the parents or guardians has "rights to" a child. Children are no longer property; even a parent's or guardian's "rights" are tied to and limited by the authority they must have to be able to fulfill their much weightier duty to provide for and protect the child.

So, legally, it is the other way around. Children have "rights to" certain adults, including extended family. I think it is fair to say that this one major point of Robin's has not been heard, addressed directly, or even disagreed with directly; just ignored.

The real argument is not over whether a child has a right to be raised by family--he/she absolutely does--it is over when the child's right to family and family integrity and the benefits the child derives from those rights do or don't outweigh the benefits of an undisrupted attachment to others.

That I think has to be a case-by-case judgment.

Robin's other main point is likewise getting lost in the emotional shuffle: I don't think she is saying fps should never adopt or that wanting to adopt is a bad thing in itself. She is saying that when that desire alone blinds the fps to the child's best interest--when it "gets in the way"--thereby derailing or trying to derail RU with parents or family, it is a problem.

I think she has several times acknowledged that it is human and understandable when this happens, but the fact that it sometimes does happen--and I think we can honestly say we've seen it on this board on the part of some posters and in the stories of others--is a problem.

On another topic, as for ICPCs, I would like to point out that domestic infant adoption ICPCs go through in DAYS. People are outraged, in fact, when they take more than 3-4 days. Even after a homestudy, when required, is completed, it still takes fc ICPCs MONTHS to complete. There is no good or reasonable explanation for that difference.

Thank you so much for your clear, concise summary of the many heartfelt posts. I have felt really awful for the past two days over the responses, and was in tears by the time I finished reading yours.

[spicedmama]

Originally Posted by Hadley2

...On another topic, as for ICPCs, I would like to point out that domestic infant adoption ICPCs go through in DAYS. People are outraged, in fact, when they take more than 3-4 days. Even after a homestudy, when required, is completed, it still takes fc ICPCs MONTHS to complete. There is no good or reasonable explanation for that difference.

In searching this site for information on others ICPC process, I noticed that adoption ICPC's are getting through in days too. I do wonder why Foster ICPC's take so much longer, especially when Foster is not "forever," and the State agreement is to monitor. Who handles legislature on the foster care system? Is it state or federal? And what groups are out there that helps/advocate with changing and/or overseeing legislature?

[RobinKay]

Originally Posted by spicedmama

In searching this site for information on others ICPC process, I noticed that adoption ICPC's are getting through in days too. I do wonder why Foster ICPC's take so much longer, especially when Foster is not "forever," and the State agreement is to monitor. Who handles legislature on the foster care system? Is it state or federal? And what groups are out there that helps/advocate with changing and/or overseeing legislature?

I am glad you asked this question. I have done some research on this. The federal law is very old, at least 50 years. Hawaii, for example, has not updated their legislation in 50 years.

Check this website about the new law and see if your state has introduced updated legislation. If not, contact your legislator and ask them to introduce it. I am hopeful Hawaii will change their law this fall--my state rep has already done the legwork with rewording the Hawaii's legislation at my request.


THE NEW ICPC


I also asked friends and relatives to contact their state reps--that was about 6 different states.

The group on this site can be a powerful voice.

[mommy2fiveplus]

A child has the RIGHT TO BE HAPPY. I am not sure which law states that "a child has the right to be raised by bio-extended family if a safe situation can be found" but I disagree. I think, "if a child will be most HAPPY raised by a safe bio extended family" than I suppose that would be appropriate. I agree with the areas that look at every given situaton independantly, because there are times when the child will be most HAPPY with the foster family and other times when the child will be most happy with the bio-family. I think RobinKay did a good job of supporting this with her comments on infants in foster care who only know the foster family.

If I had not known that my ason (the relative one) had gone into care OR if I had thought that he had a chance at RU(they were given the opprutunity but everybody pretty much knew it wasn't gonna happen) with bparents, I would not have stepped up to take him from the begining, relative foster care is a road for strong-willed, thick skinned and down right b****y people, I know I am one of them. I would have allowed the sytem to work and think that eventually his parents would get him back, when they failed to do so, there is no way I would have stepped in at TPR and adopted him, particularly if he had spent 2 1/2 years bonding to a set of foster parents (that is how long we fostered him before TPR). I would have hoped that they would see the vast importance of bio ties and allowed him access to his bio family (not us access to him, that is way less important). He was 13 mos when he entered the system, not an infant but not "an older child", most of the memories he had developed were bad, judging by the survival skills he had aquired and the emotions displayed at visits.

If the my ason not been in one home for a significant amount of time (say 1 year) than I probably would have stepped up because then the long-term best interest could be to be placed with family.

RobinKay: I agree with some of you comments but disagree with others. I too browse the Adoptee Boards, as I am constantly trying to attack the possible hurdles we may come across later with both of our adopted sons (one relative foster/adopt, one non-relative foster/adopt). It seems like the Adoptees who have problems later in life are those that are completely denied bio-ties not the ones that are lovingly raised by foster-families that embrace the bio history. I think that in many cases (not all) where the child has spent significant time (greater than 1 year) with a foster family and bonded as indicated by a therapist that they will be most happy permentaley with the foster family, rather than with a bio-extended that they have met only once in thier life, but only if the foster family can encourage the healthy bio-family to maintain a relationship with the child, this did not happen in your case and I am sorry for that. Also many foster families can encourage all they want and once the child is permantley with them, the bio families lose interest, this is the situation I am in now and I feel terrible for my young son who will know very little about his bio-family unless they change their tune.

Also don't like the idea that "It doesn't matter if the child has no memories of the extended family, THEY (meaning the adults) do have memories of the child, from birth". I think it does matter that a child doesn't have memories ofr his extened family, and if we put the memories of the extended family on the table during a permanency planning we are not addressing the needs of the child so much as the needs of the extended family.

To spiced mamma : I like xy, took your original post as a lecture for us "foster parents" as to how we should do our job, although I do not consider Fostering a job. And it is difficult to see all aspects of our "job" from the outside so I sorta felt like you were out of place as well, you are completely within your rights to post your opinions just please remember we take opinions within the context of the person giving the opinion. Anyway good luck with your journey, it sounds like your relatives have not had much stability in the system, hopefully someone can provide it soon.

xy: I loved your reply in the form of a nursing situation, I am a nurse and that has so happened to me so it felt very accurate to this situation for me.

I totally agree with the posters who think we need more intensive services for families. If I have to take one more child to a whole body bone scan only to find multiple healed fractures, I am going to cry. If we helped these families before these kinds of things happen, RU would be a more realistic goal and perhaps with increased support services children would not return to care after failed RU, more damaged and less salvagable each time.

[spicedmama]

Originally Posted by mommy2fiveplus

A child has the RIGHT TO BE HAPPY. I am not sure which law states that "a child has the right to be raised by bio-extended family if a safe situation can be found" but I disagree. I think, "if a child will be most HAPPY raised by a safe bio extended family" than I suppose that would be appropriate. I agree with the areas that look at every given situaton independantly, because there are times when the child will be most HAPPY with the foster family and other times when the child will be most happy with the bio-family. I think RobinKay did a good job of supporting this with her comments on infants in foster care who only know the foster family.

If I had not known that my ason (the relative one) had gone into care OR if I had thought that he had a chance at RU(they were given the opprutunity but everybody pretty much knew it wasn't gonna happen) with bparents, I would not have stepped up to take him from the begining, relative foster care is a road for strong-willed, thick skinned and down right b****y people, I know I am one of them. I would have allowed the sytem to work and think that eventually his parents would get him back, when they failed to do so, there is no way I would have stepped in at TPR and adopted him, particularly if he had spent 2 1/2 years bonding to a set of foster parents (that is how long we fostered him before TPR). I would have hoped that they would see the vast importance of bio ties and allowed him access to his bio family (not us access to him, that is way less important). He was 13 mos when he entered the system, not an infant but not "an older child", most of the memories he had developed were bad, judging by the survival skills he had aquired and the emotions displayed at visits.

If the my ason not been in one home for a significant amount of time (say 1 year) than I probably would have stepped up because then the long-term best interest could be to be placed with family.

RobinKay: I agree with some of you comments but disagree with others. I too browse the Adoptee Boards, as I am constantly trying to attack the possible hurdles we may come across later with both of our adopted sons (one relative foster/adopt, one non-relative foster/adopt). It seems like the Adoptees who have problems later in life are those that are completely denied bio-ties not the ones that are lovingly raised by foster-families that embrace the bio history. I think that in many cases (not all) where the child has spent significant time (greater than 1 year) with a foster family and bonded as indicated by a therapist that they will be most happy permentaley with the foster family, rather than with a bio-extended that they have met only once in thier life, but only if the foster family can encourage the healthy bio-family to maintain a relationship with the child, this did not happen in your case and I am sorry for that. Also many foster families can encourage all they want and once the child is permantley with them, the bio families lose interest, this is the situation I am in now and I feel terrible for my young son who will know very little about his bio-family unless they change their tune.

Also don't like the idea that "It doesn't matter if the child has no memories of the extended family, THEY (meaning the adults) do have memories of the child, from birth". I think it does matter that a child doesn't have memories ofr his extened family, and if we put the memories of the extended family on the table during a permanency planning we are not addressing the needs of the child so much as the needs of the extended family.

To spiced mamma : I like xy, took your original post as a lecture for us "foster parents" as to how we should do our job, although I do not consider Fostering a job. And it is difficult to see all aspects of our "job" from the outside so I sorta felt like you were out of place as well, you are completely within your rights to post your opinions just please remember we take opinions within the context of the person giving the opinion. Anyway good luck with your journey, it sounds like your relatives have not had much stability in the system, hopefully someone can provide it soon.

xy: I loved your reply in the form of a nursing situation, I am a nurse and that has so happened to me so it felt very accurate to this situation for me.

I totally agree with the posters who think we need more intensive services for families. If I have to take one more child to a whole body bone scan only to find multiple healed fractures, I am going to cry. If we helped these families before these kinds of things happen, RU would be a more realistic goal and perhaps with increased support services children would not return to care after failed RU, more damaged and less salvagable each time.

Thank you for your response and opinion of my past posts. I have apologized if anyone "felt" that I was lecturing, and have posted as much to that effect. With regards to your statement, "please remember we take opinions within the context of the person giving the opinion." I hope that I, too, am included in the "we" of this, as I am a member of this board as well. I try my best to be courteous and not to put others down for their opinion, life experience, and I am not a big fan of tit for tat. I love participating in boards where my opinion, (even if it does not agree with the concensus), can be expressed without retaliation. I do think, and I have said, that we are all passionate about these children. Thanks for including me in your post.

[spicedmama]

Originally Posted by RobinKay

I am glad you asked this question. I have done some research on this. The federal law is very old, at least 50 years. Hawaii, for example, has not updated their legislation in 50 years.

Check this website about the new law and see if your state has introduced updated legislation. If not, contact your legislator and ask them to introduce it. I am hopeful Hawaii will change their law this fall--my state rep has already done the legwork with rewording the Hawaii's legislation at my request.


THE NEW ICPC


I also asked friends and relatives to contact their state reps--that was about 6 different states.

The group on this site can be a powerful voice.

Robinkay- Thanks for the link. I will take a look at it and see what can be done from North Carolina.

Blessings!