[MommyAlysia]

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

Scraps is acting as an agent of the government, because she is a foster parent for a government agency. If the parents want their children to be practicing a certain religion, and she refuses to allow the children to practice that religion, she's basically acting as the government to prevent somebody from the free exercise of religion. That's a violation of the First Amendment---very serious business.

I absolutely agree refusing to allow them to practice their religion is a violation of the first amendment and should not be tolerated but you are *assuming* that she is refusing that. Who says the kids or her parents even care if they go to a Buddhist temple? I would think if their parents wanted their children to go they would make it known they were not happy about the current arrangements. With the oldest being 13, I would be surprised if her parents aren't aware of where they are going to church or temple. Obviously all this is an assumption on my part, but its a valid one. Not to say yours isn't but point being we don't know the whole story and I hate to see people passing judgment on someone who obviously has the best intentions when we do not know the whole story.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

With the implicit disapproval of Buddhism that Scraps is probably showing, and the implicit peer pressure to attend their evangelical church, it's hard to say what the kids do or don't want. But legally speaking, what the kids want doesn't matter. Their parents have the right to make decisions about their religious upbringing. Those rights are intact until the moment that parental rights are terminated. If the parents say the kids go to Buddhist temple, the state (here in the person of Scraps) must ensure they get to Buddhist temple.

Again, you don't know that she is showing disapproval of their religion, in fact she said she was nuetral in front of the children. Just because she expressed her feelings here it doesn't mean that she does in front of her kids. And, again, who says these kids parents say the kids must go to Buddhist temple? Just because someone belongs to a certain religion doesn't mean they actively follow every aspect of it.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

In general, foster parents have to be VERY careful to respect bparents' wishes about everything pertaining to religion. One reason we can't cut kids' hair is because both Native American kids and Sikh kids have religious reasons for not cutting hair, and those religious rights have been violated in the past by fparents who demanded the kids get haircuts. Now most agencies just ban haircuts without permission in order to make sure nobody's rights to practice religion are violated.

I 100% agree with this.

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

I think Scraps' agency has made a very bad decision to place Buddhist kids with her. If she is this negative about Buddhism or about Cambodian animism, she shoudn't be parenting kids of those faiths. The risk of her abrogating their free exercise of religion is too great.

Well, thats your opinion and your entitled to it, though I personally feel that its rude to attack her by sharing your opinion with the whole board when you don't *know* the whole situation.

I honestly am not trying to take sides, I don't know Scraps anymore than I know you. I actually agree with your line of thinking, if everything you are *assuming* is true then, I agree its not a good match and there could be serious issues but I just don't feel like what your assuming is true it seems as if you are twisting her words and making it something its not. She defended her OP.
I am not a foster parent yet, but the agency I will be going through told us we can take the children to church as long as the child doesn't object. We have the right to follow our religion as well, if the FK's need to practice a religion that goes against ours then we do not have to accept placement. I am pretty sure Scraps said she let them know upfront what she was comfortable with and she said she would not accept placements that required her to take the children to religious establishments that went against her religion. So, that leads me to assume her current placements parents do not require that their children must be taken to temple.

[Joy2566]

I do require my children to attend church with us. I made it very clear that taking the children to another church was not an option for us. Even if it were another church of the same faith, it would not work out for our family to take the children some other place. I also feel that it is an important part of our family to worship together, therefore to fragment the family for that would not be good for our family. Most of the kids that we have taken have not been any religion, but we have taken a Jehovah's Witness and Catholic children. None of my foster children have ever practiced their official religion. The birth parent of my Jehovah's Witness kid made it clear that it was her religion, not the child's and she didn't care where we took him. My "catholic" children did not even know they were catholic. That was only brought up by the birth father (after we had the kids for 2 years) when he didn't want them to be adopted by up because we were not Catholic. I only take older kids and they have to agree to attend church with us. It is their choice, but if they choose not to attend, they have to be moved to a family that can accomadate them. We establish this before placement, so it has not been a problem for us. My agency is aware of the situation, and don't have a problem with it.

As for the piercing thing, our agency rules state that NO piercings are allowed for foster children period. It doesn't matter if the birth parents want them or not.

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by MommyAlysia

We have the right to follow our religion as well, if the FK's need to practice a religion that goes against ours then we do not have to accept placement. I am pretty sure Scraps said she let them know upfront what she was comfortable with and she said she would not accept placements that required her to take the children to religious establishments that went against her religion. So, that leads me to assume her current placements parents do not require that their children must be taken to temple.

I understood that the parents *had* asked that the children be taken to a Buddhist temple. If I'm wrong, I hope Scraps will forgive me.

But there's a lot more here than just saying "well, if the kids don't throw a fit about going to an evangelical church, it's okay," or "if the parents don't demand that the child be taken to temple, it's okay." Parents and kids in the system are in very vulnerable positions. It is often hard for them to articulate their needs and wants because they are afraid of the social workers. If these kids were taken because their parents were practicing Cambodian religion, then they would be extra careful not to make religious demands. That doesn't mean that they don't want their kids in temple. It may just mean that they're intimidated and afraid to ask.

I think we owe it to kids to respect their religions and their cultures of origin. I would be LIVID if my child were taken to an evangelical church---those churches violate every principle I hold dear. Our foster children are not ours to make religious decisions for, and so I think we need to keep them practicing their parents' faiths until TPR.

[stevenstwin]

I think what distresses me in parts of this conversation is an attitude that keeps cropping up of "Other religions are AGAINST my religion." I don't understand why a foster parent who believes one thing can't also support a child who believes something different. Perhaps there would be more peace in the world if religious groups weren't so antagonistic in wanting to tell each other "I'm right and you're wrong." As long as the child's religious practices don't call for something outright physically harmful (such as the example of refusing medical treatment - comes up here from time to time with Jehovah's Witness children) I think it is nothing but arrogance to say "I don't believe that, so it must be bad for you."

Originally Posted by Boulderbabe

I understood that the parents *had* asked that the children be taken to a Buddhist temple. If I'm wrong, I hope Scraps will forgive me.

But there's a lot more here than just saying "well, if the kids don't throw a fit about going to an evangelical church, it's okay," or "if the parents don't demand that the child be taken to temple, it's okay." Parents and kids in the system are in very vulnerable positions. It is often hard for them to articulate their needs and wants because they are afraid of the social workers. If these kids were taken because their parents were practicing Cambodian religion, then they would be extra careful not to make religious demands. That doesn't mean that they don't want their kids in temple. It may just mean that they're intimidated and afraid to ask.

I think we owe it to kids to respect their religions and their cultures of origin. I would be LIVID if my child were taken to an evangelical church---those churches violate every principle I hold dear. Our foster children are not ours to make religious decisions for, and so I think we need to keep them practicing their parents' faiths until TPR.

[twinflana]

As a catholic I of course would support the baptism. Yes it does have to be done in the church and when I baptized my 2 adopted sons I only had to have one catholic godparent. None of us had to attend the classes since I had 4 bio children that had been baptized many years previously.

[stevenstwin]

Originally Posted by twinflana

As a catholic I of course would support the baptism. Yes it does have to be done in the church and when I baptized my 2 adopted sons I only had to have one catholic godparent. None of us had to attend the classes since I had 4 bio children that had been baptized many years previously.

Do the godparents have to be a couple, or can you choose from 2 totally different families?

[Withay]

excited2adoptsoon
Requests from Biomom

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My FD is almost 2 months old now and I've had her since birth. Biomom calls almost every day and has weekly visits. Not sure if RU will continue. Bio mom mentioned to me that she'd like my FD to get her ears pierced as soon as possible. She has another daughter adopted and that adoptive mom agreed to her request with her other daughter (it's open adoption). I FOR SURE will tell the social worker if she is persistent about this - as I don't want to do it for a long time. FD is just too young IMO. Second request is that she wants to plan a baptism. She is catholic and I am not, but I'm not against this at all. I'm just not sure if it's something I should consider or not. She has many other kids and they are all in foster or adoptive homes and they have all been baptised.

How do you guys feel on these two things? If we do adopt, I do plan on keeping it open assuming it goes ok. Again, I will definitely talk to the SW about these two things but wanted to see some fosterparent insight here first.

Thanks in advance.

The original poster asked two, and only two questions. Let's get back to answering those questions and leave the rest of the religion debate out of it.

[Scrapsathome]

Speaking to the issue of whether or not to help them get their daughter baptized or pierce their ears if it's a religious/cultural thing, I would say that foster parents (even as "agents of the government") have no requirement to do that.

The constitution says that government shall make no laws restricting the free exercise of religion, nor shall it create a government religion that we all have to follow. It doesn't say that the government shall help you practice your religion in any way. While custody of the children belongs to the state the parents have temporarily lost their right to direct their children's upbringing. Can you imagine if the bio parents were of a religion that requires you to pray X number of times a day and were able to get a judge or CW to demand that foster parents must ensure that the children pray that number of times? Or if they said the kids had to celebrate every one of their religion's holy days in their foster home? Where would you draw the line? What if there isn't a single foster family willing to devote an entire Saturday to focus on nothing but God like the 7th Day Adventists require every week? Where do you put the kids? Or if this were required of foster parents, wouldn't it also apply to public schools? Wouldn't teachers have to allow Muslim students to interrupt class for prayer and foot washing?

Finally, it seems to me that if bio parents were allowed to make demands about baptism or other religious/cultural things they could abuse this thoroughly. Bio parents who previously only attended church (or temple or whatever) twice a year at most could suddenly claim that their children needed to be in church multiple times a week. Or if they could remotely claim to be Jewish they could demand that the state and foster parents put their children in Hebrew school. This could go on and on. My older two (8 and 13) foster kids' parents fall into the "seasonal attendance" category when it came to their Buddhist faith. It wouldn't make any sense for me to be required to take them there when I'd actually be encouraging more involvement in their faith than their parents would.

So my point is that you shouldn't feel obligated to do either thing (piercing/baptism) just because the mom would like it. And, on a side note, I would not be letting the bio mom call me every day. That would be a major inconvenience and infringement on my time. I'd nip that in the bud immediately.

Jess

[RavenSong]

The issue of parents retaining the legal right before TPR to have their children baptized in the faith of their choice led me to research various state DHS policies on the Internet.

I was able to find Illinois' official guidelines on the subject.

Rights of Birth Parents

Parent/s retain some rights and responsibilities if their rights have not been legally terminated by the
court, even if their child/ren are in foster care. Parent/s have the right to:

• Support the child
• Reasonable visitation
• Consent to the child’s adoption
• Determine the child’s religious affiliation (including the right to allow baptism)
• Know information about the child
• Participate in making decisions about the child
• Correct conditions that led to the child’s placement in foster care and regain custody of their child

Permanency Through Teamwork, Section 3, Page 14, ©2002 Illinois Department of Children and Family Services

The link is http://www.state.il.us/DCFS/docs/fpChapter3.pdf for the PDF file.

I haven't looked at the other state sites yet...Illnois was just the first one I got back on Google.

[Scrapsathome]

They can definitely decide whether to allow baptism or not. We were informed that we can't allow any foster kids to be baptized without parental consent, even if the kids are teenagers. We did actually have a 9 year old girl ask us once last year if she could be baptized and we had to tell her no.

But that's different than the parent ordering the state or foster parents to have their child baptized. You have to get consent on anything appearance altering or life altering unless it's emergency medical care. When it comes to "determining" their child's religion, the bio parents also have the freedom to request that their child be moved to a home that shares their faith or has no particular religion. Like I've said, that's always an option. Or the kids could even request a move. That doesn't really apply to a baby the age that the OP currently has, though.

Jess

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by Scrapsathome

While custody of the children belongs to the state the parents have temporarily lost their right to direct their children's upbringing. Can you imagine if the bio parents were of a religion that requires you to pray X number of times a day and were able to get a judge or CW to demand that foster parents must ensure that the children pray that number of times? Or if they said the kids had to celebrate every one of their religion's holy days in their foster home? Where would you draw the line?

Jess, I think if you look at the law, you will be surprised. Children in foster care must be permitted to practice the religion their parents choose for them. So if that religion prays six times a day, the foster parents must make time and space for the child to pray six times a day. If there are nineteen holy days, the foster parents must make arrangements for a member of the child's faith to come and get them on each one of those nineteen holy days, and cannot prohibit the child from attending church on those days.

Legally, parents retain the right to decide what religion their children practice. That's not our decision to make as foster parents. If the bparents want to have the child baptized, that's what must happen.

[LollipopsAndGumdrops]

Originally Posted by Scrapsathome

Can you imagine if the bio parents were of a religion that requires you to pray X number of times a day and were able to get a judge or CW to demand that foster parents must ensure that the children pray that number of times? Or if they said the kids had to celebrate every one of their religion's holy days in their foster home? Where would you draw the line? What if there isn't a single foster family willing to devote an entire Saturday to focus on nothing but God like the 7th Day Adventists require every week? Where do you put the kids? Or if this were required of foster parents, wouldn't it also apply to public schools? Wouldn't teachers have to allow Muslim students to interrupt class for prayer and foot washing?

Public school teachers do in fact have to allow Muslim students to leave class in order to pray during the day and they further have to provide an appropriate place in the school for them to pray facing Mecca.

Likewise, if the parents (and the child if capable) request that they want the child in foster care to pray 6 times a day facing Mecca, the foster parent is required to accommodate the request and make appropriate arrangements. If the child was given the room to say the prayers and then chose not to, that would be the child's choice. The line would be drawn on if the state deemed the practice of the religious belief was detrimental to the child's safety and wellbeing. It would not be a decision made lightly and would probably involve a determination made by a judge. As baptism clearly wouldn't qualify as being detrimental, if the bio parent requests it as being a part of the child's religious practice and the child is too young to object, the foster parents are required to accommodate (make the child available in this case).

[bethy724]

It is very disturbing & saddens me that a foster child that just lost the only family they know (good or bad) may now loose their religion becasue some fp's refuse to accept the child as a whole. There is nothing wrong w/ not wanting to drop a child off at a different church than yours to allow them to practice their religion - just let your agency know & don't take a child of a different religion - just don't force (yes taking a child to YOUR church is forcing your religion on them) them to go to your church. What child that just lost their home & family is really going to say "no I don't want to go to your church" when you are a home that provides love, shelter, clothes & food to them? Religion is not the decision of the FP or the child it is that of the bio parent until TPR is granted.
FP's are not the judge & jury on what the parents did (or may not have done) We have a judicial system for that - believe me I wish I was judge & jury but it took a while to realize I was not. If a child needs to pray 6 times a day than you better have the opportunity for them to do so, if not say no to the placement. FP's hardly have the luxury to decide what works for their schedule; we take the children to visits when we know it tramatizes them - I guess because a court ordered it-religion you can sweep under the rug.

Maybe I'll learn something from a child of a different religion-I'm not all knowing or so short focused to not accept other religion - I'm comfortable w/ my relationship w/ God that I can learn & respect other religions while knowing that the one I was raised with & practice is the one for me.

Again America is a melting pot & very diverse & that's what makes us a great nation.

[onhazier]

Originally Posted by Emily222

We have had MANY adoptive parents tell us that they chose to go to another country to adopt because they just were not willing to deal with the system in the US.

I thought -- oh, how bad could it be? And then I read on here that you can't cut your foster child's hair without their Bio paren'ts permission? I almost fell out of my chair. How can the system ask you to be responsible for the well being of a child if they don't even trust you to know if/when the child needs a hair cut? And they do trust the parent who has, for whatever reason, lost their rights to parent?

As for all the cultural issues -- if these children are in the US foster system -- aren't they American? I would never mock or denigrate any tradition, ritual, or "way" that a child was raised with prior to coming to my home, but I also would not assume that everything said and done to the child was "Good" or "harmless" -- isn't there a REASON they're in foster care?

If a child showed interest in a culture I would definitely enjoy helping them explore and learn about it and maybe incorporate good things from it into our lives. But I certainly would not push something on them just because of their skin color.

No. Not all children in the US Foster Care system are American citizens. Any child at risk in the US can be taken into care. Think about how horrible it would be for you to call CPS about a child who is being abused and then learn that child won't get any help because he isn't a citizen.

In my area, it is common for the children in care to be citizens of other countries. The US has agreements with a number of countries which guide how international cases are handled. When a child is a citizen from a country without these agreements, their cases are MUCH more complex.

Like you, I was a bit surprised when I learned we had to have permission before cutting a fc's hair. Honestly, it is not a big deal at all. With our previous kiddos we were told the night they came that we absolutely were not allowed to cut their hair. It was a cultural issue. The parents were from another country and were raising the kids with many of their traditions despite being here in the US.

Some of the kids come into care at such a young age that they have no idea about their culture or traditions. As a result, they won't "show an interest" and we can be proactive with exposing them to their cultural heritage. Aside from sharing food, we can expose them to the music and art. If the child is little, the bedtime stories could be from their culture.

With our kiddos, we asked their mother to tell us which deity was the one their family worshiped. Once we knew that, we were able to find a statue and put it in their room. When they were reunited, the statue went with them. We didn't perform any prayers to the statue or even attempt to teach the children how to pray. However, we hoped that the statue would be a familiar image for the children. If nothing else, it assured their mother that we were really working to respect them. I know not everyone would take this step. Just tossing it out as a suggestion.

[Emily222]

Originally Posted by onhazier

Some of the kids come into care at such a young age that they have no idea about their culture or traditions. As a result, they won't "show an interest" and we can be proactive with exposing them to their cultural heritage. Aside from sharing food, we can expose them to the music and art. If the child is little, the bedtime stories could be from their culture.

Thank you for the explanation. I really have not understood exactly what people are talking about doing when they say "support their culture" -- aside from some specific religion --

I guess I live in a very diverse area in that there are people of many races but everyone seems to have the same "culture." Everyone eats all kinds of foods, listens to all kinds of music, etc. People have family traditions but they don't seem to be tied to their ethnicity. No one is focused on race/country of origin that I have noticed.

It still seems this could cut both ways to me -- people are worried about the foster child feeling bad because he or she is being denied "their culture" -- but how would they feel being dropped off at a "different" church from the rest of the family? Some might like it but others might really feel isolated/excluded by it. It seems that pursuing "their" culture could HURT their self esteem just as much as it could "help" it depending on the child. I guess it's best if you can find a placement with a family that is the same religion.

I can see incorporating food for the whole family. Not even necessarily cultural, but favorite foods the child is attached to. (Music -- only if I liked it, and if they tried selling me that something vulgar or crass was from "their" culture I would not be buying that!)

Again, thanks for the further explanation.