[sunnyandi13]

I am absolutely heartbroken right now. I feel like I’ve been beat down and kicked in the gut. We had our staffing yesterday for S & N, wherein we expressed our reservations about N’s safety and the ability for S to heal while they’re together. We were trying to explore what temporary options we had for getting S out of the home for a bit to allow things to calm, her to get intensive help – all with the idea of her rejoining our family eventually with consideration of adopting them both. Our whole goal (and hope) was to get S immediate help and keep N in our home where he is progressing so well. This is what we were told…

S’s behaviors aren’t severe enough or have a long enough pattern for her to be in RTC. (What?! Two violent episodes in three months with a pattern over three years isn’t enough?!?) Policy says that a minimum of two “therapeutic” placements be tried before RTC is even considered. (Which means that S would have to go through two more families before they’d even consider hospitalizing / RTC for her, even temporarily!)

The siblings are not to be separated for any reason. “In the past, the Department has made some mistakes separating siblings too quickly. In this case, we need to try another placement, preferably therapeutic, before we will even consider separating them.” Since TPR is just around the corner (late July and certain to be granted), they want them in a pre-adoptive home as soon as possible.

If we cannot accept S for adoption with N by the trial date, they will begin recruiting other families to take both children together. Only if S has another violent episode, will they consider placing her in the hospital for 10 days, during which time they will transition her and N to a therapeutic home. In other words –it’s all or nothing – take them both, or you can’t have either one.

When I asked them point blank about N’s safety and our concerns over being charged for neglect / abuse if she injures him the next time we were told “Let’s not borrow trouble or worry about what might have happened to other families in similar circumstances, we need to focus on these two children. If you have that much concern over your ability to control S and keep N safe, then we need to remove the children immediately and place them in a therapeutic home – if you can’t handle them as a “basic” foster home.”

HOW IS THIS SUPPOSED TO HELP US RIGHT NOW?!?!?!?!?! Her new therapist (the one I initially had such reservations over) has turned out to be our biggest advocate in getting S help. He’s even exploring the possibility of getting S into a crisis stabilization unit for 1 – 2 weeks to get the psych eval done now and explore what, if any, medications might assist with S’s sleep difficulties and mood swings where she can be observed for affects. This would also give me and DH a much needed break to step back and really examine our feelings about adoption for these two. At this point, we’ve agreed to keep them in the home for now while trying the intensive therapy 2x a week and starting in-home services 2x a week. However, once TPR is granted and the case is moved to an adoption worker and not case worker, we will be forced to make a decision.

Just how is it in N’s best interest to be uprooted from our home, where he is starting to attach and is making real progress, and dropped into another home with his abuser?!?!

How are we supposed to make an informed decision about adoption in a little more than five weeks, when we waited for six months for therapy and still don't have even a diagnosis?! Five weeks is barely enough time to get her psych eval done (scheduled for 6/27), much less trying any medication (appointment 7/3). And right now my DH's and my own heart and psyche are so wounded and emotionally exhausted… I’ve cried, I’ve prayed, we keep putting one foot in front of the other and hoping against hope. Our world is falling apart and this is the help we get!

[zebramom]

This is ridiculous. What happened to the best interest of the child? If the kids can not heal together, and one is victimized by the other, how are the kids best interest being served?

Wish I had some magic answers for you. This should not be happening.

[momraine]

Sounds to me like they are trying to cover thier butts. I bet that social worker got in trouble for separating siblings once. I have not adopted through the stystem, so my opinion is probably not worth much, but sounds to me like they may be bluffing. The way they are threatening you is sick.

[Indy]

Keep a good kid with a bad one....to get them adopted. Keep a young one with the older one to get them adopted. If they separate S and N, S will not get adopted. "Best interests for the children" is only used when it fits what DFC wants. It is never about the child, never has been.

Sorry to sound cynical, but this is the way many DFCs operate.

[kay]

I'm so sorry. I was sitting here fuming, trying to figure out something you could do. I'd suggest the press and publicity, but you can't do that due to the kids' privacy. Elected officials? Who's higher up on the food chain in the agency? Hugs and sympathy!

[aMarylandfamily]

... knowing that many of us gave you the advice to ask for help ... to have her removed - temporarily to start ... to get the professional services she requires (now ... not after two more placements!!!!!!!!!!).

Our hearts are with you ... those words "lets not borrow trouble" are now haunting me ... be careful no matter which way you proceed now ... you will become the "example" for things that are not true nor accurate in order to present these kids as a great sibling group who have weathered many situations including that of a family who decided they only wanted one of them after one became difficult to manage (been here and done this too!) to other families. Watch your back!

Prayers and hugs!

[sunnyandi13]

The children's caseworker, our home/resource worker and S's therapist were ALL in agreement that S needed immediate help. The therapist did say, though, that this healing process was going to be an extremely long one. He feels like we're beyond trying to restore her childhood and instead need to focus on getting her healthy enough that when she's 18 - 20 years old that she'll be able to lead a somewhat normal and productive life - talking about years of trauma to overcome and years of therapy to do so. But, when it came time for the "supervisors" to sign off on placing S in therapeutic care until we could get her diagnosed and medicated, the "talking heads" were the ones quoting policy and spouting off about forced disruption. We were the only ones sitting at that table that have known these kids for longer than 90 days. Their caseworker is brand new (had her about a month now) and we've experienced a revolving door with our own home workers.

We did appeal it yesterday, all the way up to the assistant administrator of the agency -with the same BS about policy!?! We were at the agency for over four hours meeting with one after the other. In fact, it was the assistant administrator himself who made the snide comment of "if you can't handle them as a 'basic' home". (Okay, and exactly how many kids have you adopted? Seems that's "beside the point"!) Short of a state-level ombudsman, I don't know where else to turn? My only hope is that the in-home therapist will see what we've seen - as I was told this in-home person and the current therapist could fight to have the final word in separation recommendation. But it sounds like policy is going to trump it all this time.

I do love S and had honestly thought if I could see some glimmer of hope and have support systems in place for the future, that we could go ahead and adopt them. Now, we're just holding our breath and trying to parent them both as best we can. All our family and friends are telling us to walk (no, actually, run) away from this situation - but my guilt is huge in being yet another person who's abandoned them!!! And this time, it's not even completely my choice anymore. I'm afraid that even if we did commit to both children, that by the time we get to the adoption, we'll have made such PITA's of ourselves that they'll move them from us anyway, just so they don't have to "deal with us" anymore...

[AmyAnne]

On your behalf I am angry. You DID your job...to advocate for the children's best interest. They did not do theirs. UGH

[lucyjoy]

I've been in your position and it's not pleasant. I did keep the kiddos and one did eventually land in RTC's.

Since the therapist sees S as a real threat, he needs to send a report stating what her needs are. Does he see N as well? If so, he needs to make a written recommendation as to his thoughts on splitting or not splitting sibs. Therapists statements tend to go farther then foster parents.

In my case, it was the judge who refused to allow the twins to be split. If it is just the SW, it's not a done deal. Is there a casa worker or a GAL who could intervene on the children's behalf?

Keep a log of S's behaviors and your conversations with the SW and therapists and anyone else involved.

Do you live in an area with an adoption support group? I know we have a group here we can call when stupid stuff is going on. They know the laws and they can often point parents to whom they need to call to get things moving in the correct direction.

Sorry you are dealing with this. It's not a fair choice for anyone to have to make.

[Lorraine123]

Im so sorry Sunny. I have not had experience with this, so I have nothing to add, but I wanted to let you know that I feel your pain. The very people that should be helping the children are the ones who hurt them. What a messed up system.

[po]

We have been where you are. We had a 10 yr. boy, 11 yr. girl and 13 yr. girl. The older was much larger than the younger two. before we got them she had knocked teeth out of kids and broken ones ankle. She did not want to be adopted, the younger two did. We had them for 16 months and she insisted she did not want to be adopted. We said we would adopt the younger two and be her legal guardian, but since she did not want to be adopted, we would not force her. She was violent with the other two, was self abusing by slashing her hands. Her doctor warned us and did not want to see us keep her. On Christmas she had told us it was the best Christmas ever. That night she slashed her hands and had been laying on the 4wheeler. I know now that she was huffing gas. Dr. wanted her admitted, but the agency would not allow it. They also would not allow me to get her evaluated. They did move them to another home. I know how you feel and have no words of advice since it sounds like you are dealing with the same type of agency we had. The best interest of the children is not being served.

[Barksum]

(((hugs))) and prayers. Do the children have a GAL or a CASA? The ombudsman may or may not be helpful.

Sadly you have put your finger exactly on the problem; policy trumps common sense. Decisions need not be in the 'best interest of the child' (hate that phrase) and they need not meet what is vital for the child to do well and thrive or even be safe, as long as the cw's and supervisors follow policy to the letter. Most people on this board have horror stories of the people within the child welfare system actively and consistantly choosing to throw children away. Literally.

Will be praying that you and your family are able to make the best decisions in this situation.

[tybeemarie]

This is outrageous. I would first contact the child's guardian ad litem, and the CASA. Then I'd hire my own lawyer, and give them what for.

Here are your rights under Kentucky law (I looked up your personal profile and saw Kentucky):

620.360 Rights and responsibilities of foster parents -- Training of person
investigating abuse or neglect in foster homes -- Nonliability of cabinet.
(1) Persons who provide foster care services to children who have been committed to
the custody of the state shall be considered a primary partner and member of a
professional team caring for foster children. Foster parents who contract directly
with the cabinet shall have the following rights:
(a) To be treated with respect, consideration, and dignity;
(b) To fully understand the role of the cabinet and the role of other members of
the child's professional team;
(c) To receive information and training about foster parents' rights,
responsibilities, and access to local and statewide support groups, including
but not limited to the Kentucky Foster/Adoptive Care Association, the
Kentucky Foster and Adoptive Parent Network, and Adoption Support of
Kentucky;
(d) To receive information and training to improve skills in the daily care and in
meeting the special needs of foster children;
(e) To receive timely and adequate financial reimbursement for knowledgeable
and quality care of a child in foster care within budgetary limitations;
(f) To maintain the foster family's own routines and values while respecting the
rights and confidentiality of each foster child placed in their home;
(g) To receive a period of respite from providing foster care, pursuant to cabinet
policies;
(h) To receive, upon an open records request, a copy of all information contained
in the cabinet's records about the family's foster home and the foster care
services provided by the family consistent with KRS 605.160;
(i) To access cabinet support and assistance as necessary twenty-four (24) hours
per day, seven (7) days per week;
(j) To receive, prior to a child being placed in the foster home pursuant to KRS
605.090, information relating to the child's behavior, family background, or
health history that may jeopardize the health or safety of any member of the
foster family's household, including other foster children, and similar
information that may affect the manner in which foster care services are
provided, consistent with KRS 605.160. In an emergency situation, the cabinet
shall provide information as soon as it is available;
(k) To refuse placement of a child within the foster home and to request, with
reasonable notice to the cabinet, the removal of a child from the foster home
without fear of reprisal;
(l) To communicate, with an appropriate release of information consistent with
KRS 605.160, with other professionals who work directly with the foster
child, including but not limited to teachers, therapists, and health care
practitioners and to notify the cabinet within twenty-four (24) hours of the
communication;
Page 1 of 2
(m) To assist the cabinet in the development of the child's plan of care;
(n) To receive an explanatory notice from the cabinet, consistent with KRS
620.130 and when it is in the best interest of the child, when a foster child's
case plan has changed and, except in an immediate response to a child
protective services investigation involving the foster home, an explanatory
notice of termination or change in placement affecting the foster home within
fourteen (14) days of the change or termination in placement;
(o) To have priority consideration for placement if a child who has previously
been placed in the foster home reenters foster care, consistent with KRS
605.130 and 620.130 and to the extent it is in the best interest of the child;
(p) To have priority consideration for adoption if a foster child who has been
placed in the foster home for a period of at least twelve (12) consecutive
months becomes eligible for adoption consistent with KRS 605.130 and
620.130 and to the extent it is in the best interest of the child; and
(q) To maintain contact with the foster child after the child leaves the foster
home, unless the child, a biological parent, the cabinet when the cabinet
retains custody of the child, or other foster or adoptive parent refuses such
contact.
(2) The responsibilities of foster parents that contract directly with the cabinet shall
include but not be limited to the following:
(a) To maintain an orderly and clean home;
(b) To ensure that the child has adequate resources for personal hygiene and
clothing;
(c) To provide recreational and spiritual opportunities for the child, in accordance
with cabinet policies;
(d) To attend all school and case planning meetings involving a foster child
placed in their home whenever possible, subject to KRS 620.130 and the
confidentiality requirements of 42 U.S.C. sec. 671;
(e) To abide by cabinet policies relating to discipline of a foster child; and
(f) To support the involvement of a foster child's biological family whenever
possible and in accordance with cabinet policies.
(3) The cabinet shall provide specific training on investigations of alleged child abuse
or neglect in a foster home to a person appointed by the Kentucky Foster/Adoptive
Care Association. The training shall include the rights of a foster parent during an
investigation. Training shall be consistent with 42 U.S.C. sec. 5106(a).
(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed to establish monetary liability of or cause
of action against the cabinet.
Effective: July 12, 2006
History: Created 2006 Ky. Acts ch. 45, sec. 1, effective July 12, 2006.
Page 2 of 2

Here is the part of the statute that addresses CASA's. These are volunteers. They can be good, they can also be uninformed and disastrously judgmental. They are folks who care about kids, though. Anyway, the statute:

620.525 Duties of CASA volunteers.
(1) CASA volunteers who have a conflict of interest in a case shall not be appointed to
the case.
(2) The CASA volunteer shall:
(a) Attend all court hearings except that the CASA volunteer may be excused by
the court or the program director if emergency circumstances arise;
(b) Submit a written report and recommendation to the judge for consideration in
determining the best interest of the child at the dispositional hearing,
dispositional review hearings, other hearings as requested by the court, and at
least one (1) report every six (6) months for as long as the case is assigned to a
CASA volunteer;
(c) Monitor the case by visiting the child as often as necessary to observe whether
the child's essential needs are being met and whether court orders are actually
being carried out;
(d) Participate in any treatment planning conferences and reviews involving the
child to assess whether reasonable efforts are being made to provide services
to the child and family and determine the appropriateness and progress of the
child's permanent plan;
(e) Advocate a prompt, thorough review of the case if the child's circumstances
warrant the attention of the court;
(f) Interview parties involved in the case, including interviewing and observing
the child;
(g) Maintain complete written records about the case;
(h) Report any incidents of child or adult abuse or neglect to the appropriate
authorities and to the program director;
(i) Remain actively involved in the case until dismissed from the case by the
program director or judge with competent jurisdiction, or when an adoption
proceeding is finalized;
(j) Return all case-related materials including, but not limited to, written notes,
court reports, and agency documents, to the program director upon the request
of the program director; and
(k) Work with the cabinet representatives to advocate the best interest of the
child.
Effective: July 15, 1996
History: Amended 1996 Ky. Acts ch. 245, sec. 7, effective July 15, 1996. -- Created
1990 Ky. Acts ch. 264, sec. 6, effective July 13, 1990.
Page 1 of 1

Interestingly, your state also has a citizen review board for child welfare. Don't know if it's legitimate in your state, or just a political arm of the Department. I'd talk to your state's foster parent association and find out. Here's the statute on the citizen review board:

620.190 Citizen foster care review boards -- Local citizen foster care review boards.
(1) There shall be established within each judicial district a citizen foster care review
board to be appointed by the Chief District Judge or family court judge. The Chief
District Judge or family court judge may authorize the creation of additional local
citizen foster care review boards as needed.
(2) Each local citizen foster care review board shall consist of not less than three (3)
members and shall be appointed according to the following guidelines:
(a) All members shall have an interest in foster care or child welfare;
(b) At least two (2) members of each local citizen foster care review board shall,
as far as practicable, be chosen from among the following professions: law,
medicine, psychology, social work, and education;
(c) Each local citizen foster care review board shall, as far as practicable, include
a foster parent;
(d) All members of each local citizen foster care review board shall, as far as
practicable, be representative of the socioeconomic, racial, and ethnic
composition of the area served;
(e) Employees of the cabinet shall be prohibited from serving on the local citizen
foster care review board;
(f) All appointed board members shall serve a term of three (3) years, except that
if a vacancy occurs, a successor shall be appointed to serve the unexpired
term. The term of each member shall expire on August 1 of the appropriate
year. Members may be reappointed and shall continue to serve until a
successor is appointed; and
(g) All members shall be certified prior to appointment by the state citizen foster
care review board or its designee. For the purposes of this section, "certified"
means acknowledgment of completion of initial training approved by the state
citizen foster care review board.
(3) Local citizen foster care review board members may be removed for
nonparticipation, failure to meet training requirements, or other cause as determined
by the state citizen foster care review board in compliance with its constitution and
bylaws.
(4) Each local citizen foster care review board shall annually elect a chairman and vice
chairman to serve in the absence of the chairman.
(5) Each local citizen foster care review board shall meet, at a place designated by the
Chief District Judge or family court judge, as often as is deemed necessary to carry
out the duties of the board. The local citizen foster care review board shall meet no
less than four (4) times annually.
Effective: July 15, 1998
History: Amended 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 278, sec. 3, effective July 15, 1998. -- Amended
1996 Ky. Acts ch. 301, sec. 3, effective July 15, 1996. -- Amended 1992 Ky. Acts
ch. 412, sec. 6, effective July 14, 1992. -- Amended 1988 Ky. Acts ch. 350, sec. 56,
effective April 10, 1988. -- Created 1986 Ky. Acts ch. 423, sec. 80, effective July 1,
1987

Here's the info on your state's foster parent association: The National Voice of Foster Parents.

You are going to have to take action to save this boy's life. He will never get a family if he is stuck with his very disturbed sister. If they get you to take both, he still doesn't have the childhood he deserves, because he will be waiting for his sister to attack all the time. This is so wrong.

These people are vile--"let's not go courting trouble!" What a thing to say!

Another motivator--the care that the sister would need is very expensive, and they want to keep things at the basic foster care rate, which means basic services, in all likelihood. Basic ain't gonna cut it. It is so upsetting and wrong.

I would talk to the foster parent association, find out who the bull dog lawyer is for foster parents, and hire her.

I am sorry you are facing this impossible situation. As if things aren't crazy enough!

[ajjhmf]

We went through a similar situation with our son's older brother. I can tell you what happened with us and you can see if any of it will help you.

D had been in our home for six weeks when we realized somethng was seriously wrong. We went through 3 psychological assessments in addition to our weekly attachment therapy. During the time he was here, D spent a weeked in a crisis room at a local RTC and 10 days in the psych ward of the hospital. Every assessment we had done said D was not going to heal as long as he lived in the same home as his primary victim, J. What ended up happening was this...

We had a meeting at a local RTC with our CW, therapist and the psych you did D's final assessment. The recommendation was to remove D from the home and place him the RTC for a period of 18-24 months while doing family therapy with us, individual therapy with D and J and continue working with our attachment therapist for the eventuallity of D coming home. The county decided to remove D instead. We did not want to disrupt on D and it honestly never even came up in this meeting.

I think the cost of this placed a lot into the removal, but also we had all these experts saying neither boy could truely get better in each others presence.

After the dust had settled and J's adoption was finalized, I spoke at length with our CW about the county's decision. She said that we held on far longer than they ever expected once things got bad. That time though allowed them to get a true picture of D's issues and have the professional opinions needed to find the best palcement for him. Although they really didn't like having to separate the boys, it probably was the best decision for both of them. The key was though that we had 4 professionals all saying the same thing.

I wish I had some good advice for you. Lucy and Tybee have some great insight for you. You may need to stick in there for a while and start documenting, working with an attachment tehrapist and getting experts backing you on separating the kids before the county puts the kids ahead of policy.

Hang in there and put stuff immediately into place to keep the kids safe.

Blessings,
Jenny

[Lylac]

I have nothing to add, just wanted to give ya HUGZ!