Foster parents are needed. and there is an article from Cleveland today that shows why. There are way too many children going back to biological parents before they should. This article talks about a number of different cases.
Unfortunately, while it is Departments of Children Services around the country that are lamenting the lack of foster parents available, they are the very ones who don't listen to what foster parents have to say.
The main reason for this article is the murder of a child returned to the biological parent AFTER the foster parents adamently opposed the reunion of this family. They felt the mother was not yet in a position to care for children.
Case Workers: You can't have it both ways!
If you want foster parents, you have to believe in what you are told. In most cases you are overworked and the foster parents have a much better idea of what is happening with the children then you do. I know you don't like to admit this, but admitting you have a problem is the first step to resolving your issues.
So.........(S)s bio-parents are back in town. They have not made any attempt to contact DHHS or their children and apparently don't care to find out how they are doing, but the court still has not decided on the appeal of the TPR. Put that together with the attached article, and you can understand why I will remain worried until I hear that the appeal has been denied. At this point, any other outcome is unacceptable.
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/02/county_officials_defend_decisi.html
*
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I remain divided about how much foster parents' opinions should be deferred to. I agree that foster parents often have important information, but on the other hand, foster parents aren't exactly disinterested parties.
ReplyDeleteI know you didn't start fostering with the intention to adopt, but many foster parents are recruited based on the lure of adoptable kiddos. I've read a number of blogs of parents who have turned to foster-adoption due to infertility, and many of them are anything but neutral about what's best for "their" baby. I've read the idea expressed time and again that they're more worthy of the child because they're older/ more educated/ wealthier/ have been waiting longer, etc. I've read a foster mother rail that the child shouldn't be adopted by relatives unless and until the relatives learn English. I've read a foster mother write--early in the case--"pray that the bio mom doesn't come to visits"--i.e., so the foster mother would get to keep the baby.
So I guess what I'm saying is that I agree that foster parents shouldn't be ignored, especially since they see firsthand how the kid is affected by visits, etc. On the other hand, even the best foster parents will be affected by the possibility of their child leaving and may act irrationally due to grief and desperation. And some have some really mixed--and sometimes inappropriate--motives to begin with. So I'd like to see the system do a better job monitoring the children themselves, rather than just being more likely to defer to the foster parents.
Foster parents are the eyes and ears for the county when it comes to the children's behaviour. Does the system defer to us solely? Of course not. They understand there could be a bias..
ReplyDeleteWe totally agree with our county that reunification is best for the child if IT'S SAFE. That means bio parents, family, etc. Language barriers are easily broken (I, personally, spoke "Spanglish" every summer with my cousins from Mexico and we got along just fine).
I do wish more foster parents would be trained on seeing all sides of the picture. During one of our mandatory training sessions we did a mock case and were in tears when the mom relinquished. The agony and loss truly hit home and has helped us with compassion for our families.
In Cloudmaster's case, bio parents have proven time and again they are not fit (including outbursts in court) and he has a right to be worried. Hugs to you, my friend.
PS... r., I know you cannot hear "tone" in comments. I hope that didn't sound like an attack.. it truly wasn't one. I agree with much of what you said but had to throw my 2cents in. :)
ReplyDeleteMelissa,
ReplyDeleteNo worries. I hope everyone understands that mine wasn't meant to sound attacking either.
Rebecca