What Is Wrong With Being A Single Parent ?

I believe in a two parent home but it doesn’t always work out that way. In my mom’s group, we have several mom’s who are single parenting their children and every one of them is awesome. Some became mothers without a partner because they wanted to parent and gave up hope on marriage. Many two parent homes become single parent homes when one of the parents dies, as happened to two of the families in my mom’s group.

So, the reality is that many kids grow up in single parent households. Every parent starts out with zero parenting experience and babies do not come with a how to manual. Today, I read about a 6 month old baby with a loving relative.

In the situation I am reading about, there is no empathy being expressed for either the deceased mom or her brother. The brother has lost his sister. The child has lost his mother. His nephew is probably one of the few things this young man has left of his sister.

Actually, this is a very sad story but unfortunately not a totally rare problem. Thus warned, here goes, sigh –

The baby’s original, biological, genetic mom was heavily on drugs during pregnancy. She told the social worker she had no family. Therefore, the baby was taken into foster care at birth. Then, the baby’s mom committed suicide and left a list of relatives. Hence the complication now.

The foster parents have grown attached to the 6 month old boy. He does have some challenges (both mentally and physically). The foster parents really really do love this boy. To their own perspectives, he is their son. He honestly knows no other parents and he’s apparently very happy with them.

Both foster parents have an adequate education. The foster dad works and makes a great income. The foster mom stays home with the baby and devotedly transports him to physical therapy 2 times a week, etc etc.

Now the baby’s uncle wants to raise this baby. He’s 29, single and has a steady occupation and therefore has the financial means to raise baby. However, he has no previous experience with children. It really isn’t his fault that he didn’t know about this baby until recently. He never knew his sister was pregnant because she was estranged from her family at the time. To date, he has not made an effort to see or have contact with the baby.

The foster parents really want to adopt this baby. It will crush them, if this baby is uprooted and turned over to someone who is effectively a stranger the baby doesn’t know. The baby is in a loving two parent home that meets his needs. Is it the right thing to send him into a single parent home ? It could be a struggle for this young man to meet the boy’s physical and mental need for expert therapies.

As a young man, the uncle doesn’t have the life experience to understand the trauma he will cause, if he takes the baby away from his foster parents. He doesn’t understand what he doesn’t know about parenting.

What do you think is the right outcome in this very complicated situation ? Generally, I’m in favor of genetically related family – always. I’m in favor of reform that prevents people from fostering simply in order to adopt a baby. This is a complicated case with no easy answers. I am glad I don’t have to be the one to judge.

The Goal Is Reunification

Think Foster Care is your avenue to an infant adoption ? Better revise that thinking because the goal of foster care is the reunification of the original family members. Here’s what one hopeful adoptive mother (using foster care to achieve her goal) wrote –

“Just out of curiosity how many of you have had baby placements and have either adopted or planned to adopt them? We have lost hope that we will ever get a baby, plus our region has pretty much said there are no babies that get adopted here. Can you also post what region you’re from, I’m try to see if maybe certain regions have better luck”.

Sure, it can be hard on the foster family to say goodbye to a child they loved.

Children are removed when the situation they are in is one that is unsafe. Each foster care case begins with the goal of reunification. Parents are given goals to meet in a timely manner to be reunited with their children. Most children are able to return home to their families. There are instances in which the parent has their parental rights terminated, and then the child is placed for adoption. Reunification is the goal and must be pursued when possible and safe for the child.

There is no guaranteed time frame for how long a child will remain in foster care. Some cases are short-term cases and can result in reunification after a few weeks, while other cases can go on for years. When the time frame turns to years, the case plan may become one of reunification with the concurrent plan of adoption. In that situation, the state is acknowledging that the case plan is taking a significant amount of time and that the parents may not be able to complete all the tasks. At that time, the child is considered at legal risk and may be placed into a pre-adoptive foster home. A pre-adoptive foster home is one in which the foster family has expressed interest in pursuing adoption, and is home studied and ready to do so. While each case is different, a general rule of thumb is that if a child has spent 15 months in foster care, it is time to reassess and decide how to proceed, and if adoption ought to be added as a potential goal.

While parents are working on the reunification of a child, they will also (as safety allows) participate in visits with their child during this time. Visitation may be supervised or unsupervised, depending on the reason for the removal of the child from the home. In more extreme cases, where a child’s safety is in question, there may be a court order that prevents visits until the court can be assured that visits will be safe for the child. In these cases, parents may need to complete certain steps before being allowed contact with their children. The most important thing is to be sure the child is safe.

Because being removed from their parents is a traumatic event, social workers are required to try to find a kinship placement for children. Kinship placement is any home where the caregiver has a relationship with the child and is not a stranger. Typically, kinship care refers to placing the child with a relative. However, teachers, family friends, and others who the child may be familiar with can be considered. A child will be more comfortable if they are familiar with their caregiver, and far less stressed. Kinship care is not always possible, however, and that is why there is a need for licensed foster homes.

So, going back to the beginning, it appears that another woman was sympathetic and wrote – “We ALL know that some of the kids we have will reunify and we all should know that reunification is not a reality for some babies and kids and they will need adoptive families. If anything most babies shouldn’t be reunited. Obviously MANY families here are praying that they can adopt! I feel like some of you are going out of your way to squash their dreams! They know what the journey can hold! We should be building them up and encouraging them. NOT every case ends in reunification. Actually the national statistic of reunification is only 49% percent there’s a ton of children needing homes! Our county has a lot of drug babies and junkie parents because of the opioid crises. Many foster parents can adopt a baby.”

So there is that.

She goes on to suggest – “We were upfront and told the caseworker we only wanted cases that had a chance of moving from Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) to adoption. Both of my babies are miracles and our first placement. We went into foster care TO ADOPT. There’s nothing wrong with adopting. Reunification shouldn’t be the goal. The goal should be about whatever is in the child’s best interests. Stop ruining people’s dreams of adopting. Many babies cannot go home. I have another baby right now who is heading towards TPR. Reunification isn’t an option. No need to remind us that reunification is the goal. We ALL know that.”

Maybe, but clearly – reunification is NOT the goal for some foster parents – adopting a baby is their goal.

Licensed

First it was the Gotcha Day announcements and parties related to adoptions. Now the promotions have moved into the field of foster care.

Starry eyed. When someone thinks getting a foster care license is such a difficult accomplishment that it needs to be celebrated publicly as this huge deal, that’s a red flag. Truth is, it’s easy to become a foster parent.

The stork with the baby and the baby bottle images hint at a broader agenda and that is – to participate in what is known as foster to adopt – which is often an easier path to adopting an infant or young toddler than traditional adoption. And the “no cravings” remark must be alluding to pregnancy and the well-known strange cravings for certain foods a pregnant woman experiences.

And it seems to be a thing also to have a “foster shower” and an Amazon wish list when announcing that one intends to foster children.

As a reality check, when becoming licensed to foster children, as the graphic indicates in its unique manner, you have to define age groups and number of kids. You have to have beds and maybe change some rooms around for the age requirements. You can’t get licensed for specific ages without having space and furniture (beds) for that age group. If you wanted to be open to all ages, you have to have a crib (and basic baby supplies), toddler bed and twin bed minimum.

One foster parent did say however, “when older siblings of little ones we were fostering came into care we were able to take them with minimal fuss, no additional training required.” Which is a good thing.

People approaching foster care like the announcement suggests often claim they have worked through the loss of being infertile completely. Once they are finally “called” to foster with the expectation they will adopt a newborn, they need baby announcements with storks, do gender reveals and big baby showers, seek attention and have professional photo shoots in hospital beds and wheelchairs. Doing it all – so it appears to be the same circumstance as someone who has given birth. It’s delusional and not the same.

And finally, I can’t help but ask – didn’t their “training” mention to them that the objective of fostering is family reunification ? This expression is actually celebrating the worst tragedy and trauma this family of origin is likely to see. Comparing it in any fashion to birth, pregnancy, a stork dropping a baby at your door is tone deaf and gross. Given that these kids needs are provided for through a government stipend, I also cannot imagine asking anyone for gifts.

Misperceptions

I don’t know where these people get ideas like this. Here’s today’s story –

“So when I talked to the foster care recruiter she basically said I can’t license you for the age group you want (0-3). You will have to do 0-18. I don’t want to do older kids because I’m only 25 and all my kids are 7 and under. She said we would only be allowed 1 child because we are going to have another baby soon. We would have 5 biological children (though one is stepchild, who is only with us weekends). Our state limits the number of children in a fostering home to 6 total. OK, I’ll be honest, I was really hoping to adopt a little girl since all of our children are boys. Well the foster care recruiter basically dashed my hopes. Based on the rules, it looks like we won’t be able to foster kids until we’re old and our kids are grown. This makes me sad. We have the room in both our hearts and our home for lots of foster children but because of the limit on how many kids we can have in our house, we are just stuck with the kids we already have. I am brokenhearted because I really wanted to be a ‘girl mom’. Even thought I know the goal of foster care is family reunification, what I really want is to foster to adopt.”

This is a real person.

One woman suggested – “become a Big Sister or volunteer with the Girl Scouts with that ‘room in your heart’.”

Another woman shared this – “I was raised in a church where people were expected to have big families… The first thing it does is make the oldest kids grow up way too fast. They usually end up half raising the youngest ones. The other thing it does is divide up the parent’s attention waaaaay too much. My friends from huge families often felt like their parents didn’t know them well. So yeah, I’m glad they are limiting this person and not allowing them to pack some really young kids in there.”

Another woman noted – “If this woman could have her way, her boys would grow up to resent the little girl, because they would know that they’re second best to the girl their mother so desperately wanted. Nothing entitles a person to take another mother’s baby and that should certainly be true when a couple already has five wonderful children of their own. How selfish and ungrateful can one person be ?!?”

One woman admitted – “My grandmother had two sons and then adopted a daughter. She favored all her granddaughters over her grandsons too, which really impacted my cousins who lived near her. The daughters of her daughter were the most prized.”

One replied directly to the woman who’s story leads this blog with this – “Do IVF and a designer baby. Sounds like you’re super fertile anyway, so maybe easier than you think. Talk to a fertility specialist.” And then added this reality check, “It’s gonna break your heart more if it isn’t forever when you have that infant in your arms and then the baby is returned to her rightful family . . . because honestly, reunification is the goal, as it should be, as long as it is safe for the child to be returned.”

And this, “I taught classes for prospective adopters and for a long time the #1 reason for picking China was the virtual guarantee if a girl, a ‘china doll’ (usually named Lily or the like. ) It is so incredibly harmful to a child to be adopted for their gender. It puts that child in a gender straight jacket. Same for sex selection sperm treatments and sex selection IVF etc. But especially for adoptees. This kind of perspective is heartbreaking.”

Charging Parents For Foster Care

I remember when I divorced my first husband, the issue of child support came up in court. I had heard horror stories about unending conflict in child support issues. I wanted none of it. My ex had already told me he would never pay child support. I believed him. His attitude was if I wanted his support for our child I had to stay married to him. In a weird turn of events, after leaving my daughter temporarily with her paternal grandmother for care while I tested myself to see if I was even able to drive an 18-wheel truck cross-country, my daughter ended up being raised by her dad. Eventually, he re-married and she grew up in a yours, mine and ours family when they had a child together and she had already brought a child with her to the marriage. I didn’t want to interfere in what I considered a good situation for my daughter – mindful of the old biblical story and the baby the kind almost cut in half to satisfy two women both claiming the child as their own. Only recently, after over 40 years of believing this fantasy, my daughter told me it wasn’t such a good situation growing up there. My heart still grieves to know that.

This is a bit of a digression but not really because today I have learned that when children are taken by the state and placed in foster care, the original parents become liable for child support to cover the costs of their children being placed into foster care. It seems that everything this government does is stacked against families and intent on keeping people enslaved to poverty regardless of how hard they try to improve their lives. Even though I lost much in not raising my daughter, I do not regret forgoing the constant conflict of fighting for child support. I don’t know what the best answer is as regards responsibility – I suppose better human beings but sometimes the deck really is stacked against people in general. It is so sad.

Most families in the child protective services system also interact with the child support enforcement system. A potentially important effect of child support enforcement on the duration of out-of-home foster care placement. Requiring parents to pay support to offset the costs of foster care results in delays of a child’s reunification with a parent or other permanent placement. While this is a short-sighted and unintended effect, longer stays in foster care are expensive for taxpayers. Without a doubt, extended placements in foster care has consequences on a child’s well-being. When the policies and the fundamental objectives of public systems are viewed in limited perspective and inconsistently coordinated we all suffer.

The child protective services (CPS) system can be seen as a safety net of last resort. While removing children from their parents’ care is an extreme intervention, recent estimates suggest that in the US 6% of all children and 12% of black children will have experienced out-of-home care by the time they reach the age of 18. Most children and families with CPS involvement also interact with other social service systems that can have very different goals and models of administration and financing. This lack of coordination often leads to substantial, though unintended, negative consequences for both for the families involved and the taxpayers who pay for these services.

The scope of the child support enforcement system is generally limited to establishing and enforcing nonresident parents’ financial obligations to their children. In contrast, the CPS system is responsible for assuring child safety, permanency and well-being, so its scope and responsibilities extend well beyond financial resources. The scarcity of studies regarding CPS-child support interactions may reflect important differences in their policies and the goals of these programs or a limited recognition of the potential importance of their interaction, but research in this area has been hampered by the limited availability of relevant survey data and the technical challenges associated with the analysis of administrative data from separately managed systems.

Requiring parents to pay support results in a longer foster care spell and it definitely decreases the economic resources a separated parent needs to achieve the conditions CPS sets forth for reunification. This would indicate that this policy is fiscally counterproductive. And the reality is that there are low levels of collection and additional costs in seeking to enforce these child support payments.

Most children enter foster care due to neglect, rather than abuse, with low income an important risk factor for parents losing custody of their children. Safely and quickly reunifying families is an important priority and it will reduce both disruption to children and the public costs of foster care. I know personally how difficult it can be to be a single mother. When I rejected child support as a very young woman, I was overly confident about my ability to provide for my self and my child.

The truth is children living in single-parent families are over-represented in the CPS system. Child support can play a particularly critical role in the income packages of low-income single-parent families. Some evidence suggests that increased child support may reduce the risk of child welfare involvement. Historically, the government has often retained child support payments from low-income families receiving cash assistance to offset welfare costs, but in recent years policies have changed to allow more child support to be passed through to resident parents receiving assistance—making welfare and child support complements, rather than substitutes.

The change in policy to prioritize economic support to families over cost-recovery for government has not been extended to children in foster care. Federal guidance and state policies generally call for child support orders to offset government costs, rather than directly benefit children, when children are placed out of home. Federal policy calls for child support previously directed from nonresident to resident parents to be redirected to the state, and, for those that do not have orders, new orders are established for both pre-placement resident and nonresident parents to cover the costs of foster care incurred by the state.

Defunding Foster Parents

If a biological parent can’t financially support their children, they are taken away. Yet the state funds foster parents to keep other people’s children. If you want to raise these children, you should be able to afford to do that first.

Case in point – a woman has NINE foster children and says that without funding from the state, she would only be able to care for THREE. Needless to say that having 9 foster kids in one home would constitute that home as being a “group” home. Different standards should apply plus a lot more monitoring.

The requirements for providing foster care do vary by state. I read that in Texas, you’re classified a group home if you house more than six kids. You are also required to have someone awake overnight on staff.

Defunding foster parents would cut down on abuse and neglect perpetrated by foster parents. However, given the current reality foster parents should not be allowed to have so many children in one home – unless they’re a sibling group. Three or four should be the maximum.

The state really should be funding parents instead of removing children in some cases. There are definitely cases where the children may need to be removed to allow the parent to get treatment/therapy/better parenting skills, etc but sometimes a parent just needs some utilities paid or other financial assistance, until they get back on their feet.

For more perspective, here is one former foster youth’s experience – group homes do have a bad reputation. I do strongly believe that with on site treatment, reputable staff and good funding it is possible to create group homes with less risk of abuse. I’ve been in 36 foster homes, in which 33 were abusive or neglectful. I’ve been in 3 group homes that were amazing. All that said, I do believe the state should be funding parents before any stranger, if it will keep a family together.

Clueless

“Hey guys.I’m a single woman who’s plan was to start applying to adopt/foster in my state. Sad story was that my social worker said that I wasn’t allowed to receive any government help like 0. I have to have a job which that’s mandatory at least with this agency. And I’m not complaining about having a job either or I’m still planing on working at some point the thing that caught me off guard was her response to government aid must be 0. Yes all the way from food stamps to government funded apartments that’s a huge No, causing disqualification to apply. I spoke with my therapist and since I have bipolar 1 she told me that it would be best to postpone the plan of adoption/foster care all together for now, my therapist even said that she does not want me to feel sad if at the end foster/adoption care is not an option for me even if I truly wanted to make a difference, since the agency is strict on keeping government out of the picture.
Any thoughts?
Advice?
Does this sound fair or unfair ?”

It’s hard to know where to start . . .

Not surprisingly, came this satirical response –

Um. Totally unfair. You should totally be jobless and on government assistance because you’ll get PLENTY of money to live on saving these kids from their parents on government assistance. If you take like 8 kids at a time you’ll make serious bank, and BONUS if you take some older kids with the younger kids you never have to do anything because the older kids can do all the cooking and cleaning and diaper changes! Yay! Also, f**k this bitch.

More to the point, came this one –

Someone sounds like they need to get their own life in order before, erm, “helping” (themselves to someone else’s children)…

And even more to the point –

Yes, it is very reasonable. FYI, they may also want to talk about your being bipolar, review your meds and/or want to talk to your therapist or get a statement from them that they recommended you would do well with foster care. Here’s the thing: all of the kids in foster care are going through big time trauma. They need someone who is financially and emotionally stable to help them through it.

In a lot of cases, poverty and mental illness have a lot to do with why the kids came into care. It’s kinda hypocritical to take them out of that just to place them right back into it. For example, the case plan might say that the parents have to get a job to get the kids back. So in the meantime, they stay with you, but you don’t have a job?

It’s great that you want to help, but what do you mean by foster/adopt? If you’re getting into foster care to adopt, just don’t, you won’t have the right mindset and it will not be good for you or the kids. What do you mean by your agency keeping government out of the picture? Foster Care =government, so I’m not really understanding that.

And finally –

She should talk to all these birth families who lose their biological children for bipolar disorder and because they were seeking mental health help and were in poverty or disabled. This post makes me angry because it seems so out of touch with reality.

Foster kids are not a prop or little adventure to embark on. You can’t just (or SHOULDN’T just) be a foster parent because you randomly decide you “love kids” and “it’s your calling.”

You can’t just decide you’re gonna be a foster parent when nothing in your life is in order to do so.

Mental health, unemployment, needing to rely on the system….. these are some of the causes for kids to be removed from their biological parents. Our society would be better off extending the services and finances to the natural families so that they can keep their own children.

Aging Out

This is inevitable and it happens to every child who is in foster care until they are 18. Today’s story of a girl aging out goes this way –

My son’s girlfriend is living with us. She is just aging out of foster care and I would like some help finding supports to put in place. Her mother is deceased and her father is incarcerated (I hate to give too much info but I don’t know if that changes her eligibility). She needs health insurance and is trying to go to college. They are planning to move cross country in a few weeks so I am trying to help her as quickly as possible. Any info on where I can turn for help for her is appreciated. She is a sweet kid.

Sharing some answers that may help someone else with similar circumstances.

For the health insurance, simply aging out of foster care could make her eligible for Medicaid. This does vary by state.

One recommendation was actually to enlist in the Army – this can be full time, reserves, or National Guard. They offer many college incentives plus a good bonus, stable income, and health care. Many (including the person suggesting this) that joined the military found it was a great opportunity for them.

It was mentioned that she may qualify for SSI due to the death of her mom. Depending on why she went into foster care she may qualify for VOCA (is that The Victims of Crime Act ? – the state may have filed an application or she may not even know that it’s available to her).

This does NOT seem generally known but someone said – If she is under 21 most states offer foster care until 21. It’s not nearly as invasive as it is for kids under 18. She can get a monthly stipend to put towards housing, Medicaid, and other help as long as she meets the requirements – typically in school or working at least part time.

There is a Preparation for Adult Living program that is part of Child Protective Services agencies that exists to help teens aging out of foster care. So contacting the coordinator of that program to inquire about benefits could be helpful.

There is The Free Application for Federal Student Aid which may give special consideration to youth aging out of foster care. There may be other scholarships available – this organization may be able to help Foster Care to Success. A student like her should qualify for a full Pell grant. Depending on the state, she might be eligible for reduced or free state college because she was in foster care.

Finally, one more link. iFoster has programs to assist Transition Age Foster Youth.

The Injustice of Disability

This is one of those issues that one rarely sees discussed. Here’s the story –

The natural mom of an adult son who suffers with MS reconnected with him 2 years ago. She had him when she was 14 and her parents adopted him out.

His wife recently died and they have an 18 month old. He fell down with the child in his arms and she needed stitches. Hospital called Child Protective Services and they removed the child saying her son is not fit to parent the child due to his disability.

Both his adoptive parents have passed away. Natural mom is a nurse in New York. Her biological son is in a different county in New York. She has tried to help him by calling and email but receives no response from the caseworker or the supervisor. She assumes it may be because she is not recognized as his family member.

This child is currently in foster care. The mother was asking what else she could do, to try and get custody of her grandchild? Her son supports her effort. He is heartbroken his child is now living with strangers.

The most obvious first step for this mother is to obtain the services of a lawyer and file an emergency petition for custody. The father will need to name her as the legal guardian of his child. This is admittedly expensive but it is usually the fastest way to address a situation like this.

And it almost goes without saying because it is so very obvious that the man didn’t abuse or neglect his child. He has a disability. The state should have helped him find resources to care for his child rather than taking his child away.

Bottom line – the son should be able to tell the caseworker that he wants his baby with his mother. As long as she can pass a background check, that should be where baby goes, regardless of legal relation. The placement hierarchy is usually in this order – grandparents, then siblings, then extended relatives, then anyone else that knows the baby as requested by the child’s parents with random foster parents – a last resort.

Is Foster Care Professional Employment ?

These days it seems anything goes. Even a stay at home mom of 25 years managed to get a job running a movie theater with a staff of 15 people. She made her case by outlining her experience in scheduling and budgeting experiences related to running a household.

With foster care, the “payment or stipend” goes to the child’s expenses and so is not actual compensation for doing specific work. It has been mentioned that if this a job that you would have to be bonded for, then yes you would list that experience of being a foster care parent on a resume.

If you are applying for a job where foster care experience is relevant, such as working with a youth program or something like that, it should definitely be listed but not as employment experience. It may need to be disclosed as a potential conflict with some positions, for example – work in behavioral health for an agency that also does child welfare work.

And it is interesting that advertisements seeking foster parents are always listed in the “jobs” section of the classifieds. Listing time spent fostering would make logical sense to explain a gap in work history. If you didn’t work for x number of years because you needed to be at home with foster children.

One foster parent shared – I might list foster parenting under community service/volunteer experience, depending upon the job I was applying for. I never have listed it in our 25+ years as a foster family. I feel that people are prone to look at me as a “savior” then, and I don’t feel comfortable with all that goes with that.

Another mom said – I did list foster parent and stay at home mom. I was applying for a teaching job after 10+ years of no employment, and I listed it as experience rather than employment. I definitely wouldn’t put it on a resume, if I was applying for a job that didn’t involve work with children.

A Human Resources Director noted – I would find it odd to see foster parenting on a job resume. Unless the job that they are applying for is in the foster field – like a volunteer, a house mom for a group home. Resumes are to get you the interview, not the job. Any gap of employment should be explained in a cover letter and not the resume. She also noted that HR professionals are not looking at gaps in employment as a big negative at this time. After the financial crisis, a lot of people lost jobs and it was hard to find other jobs and/or a good fit.

In fact, this professional admits there are employers out there that will not consider a person for a position because of familial obligations. She suggests the applicant remove any mention of foster care, stay-at-home, etc. Instead say something like “I was away from the workforce for x amount of time because of a personal obligation/matter. That obligation/matter has been addressed and is no longer a factor nor will it impact me in this position.