Foster Experience Truth

Totally short on time yet again but this is not the first time I have seen this kind of experience shared by a person who spent time in foster care.

I really need to get something off my chest tonight. I’m trauma dumping in a weird way. This trauma still bothers me to this day and I just can’t fully get past it… maybe because I don’t fully understand. I’m going to share some information that may be “foggish”, but I’m about about to be extremely vulnerable.

I had ONE amazing foster home out of the 50+ (yes you read that right) that I was in over the course of 6 years (because no one wanted pre teens and teens where I lived, so there was a ton of short term placements), and ironically this was also my last foster home. For many it doesn’t matter, but I was the only white child up in her home. You’d think it’d be odd (this was the south in the 90s), but God yall this woman her husband, and her kids never treated me any differently, provided me the same opportunities they did their own biological kids, and did more for me in my time with her than anyone ever did. She fostered dozens of teens, mamas and babies, and everything in between… She was our champion in dark times and our biggest cheerleader in the good.

Y’all. When I finally ended up at this woman’s home with her, her husband, and her children – I was completely broken. I had been abandoned as a preteen by my family. I was abused in foster homes both physically, mentally, emotionally, and sexually before her. I was “lost” by the system numerous times over disappearing for weeks and no one knew I was gone. I was sexually trafficked across several states while running away. I had just made front page news in Arkansas defending myself related to a 48 year old man at 16 years old, for what he and his friends (including a 911 dispatcher) did to me. The news back then published my full name, where I was from, that I was a runaway foster child from the city and state I ran from… and even more details. I was a vulnerable, broken, desperate and scared CHILD.

Looking back… I have to ask why NO ONE other than her cared enough to protect me before her. If it wasn’t for her and her husband sitting me down and talking with me days at a time (in the living room with chocolate and popcorn)… I’m not sure I’d even be alive anymore. Yes. I ultimately ran from her home too (because I had found out I was pregnant from the Texas rape and my caseworker had already warned me if I got pregnant they would force me to have an abortion and tie my tubes)… I have been given so many WHYS… but they could never answer my questions, no matter how hard they tried. Sadly, they said the system had failed me numerous times over. I know that one good home closed down not long after I left. So, maybe someone can answer these, so they’ll stop haunting me at night. The biggest one being why powerful men and women were able to successfully get away with this.

Why was my mother not criminally charged for taking me to Div of Family and Children’s Services with a duffle bag and dropping me off on the 3rd floor saying she didn’t know how to raise a teen?

Why did a foster home allow a 17 year old boy to room with a 13 year old girl in bunkbeds and when I started complaining of pain, ignored it telling me I needed to go on birth control instead of whining.

Why did a foster home allow her older foster girls to “take care of” younger foster kids including beating them (I started having seizures following one of those girls bashing my head into a wall because I told the school counselor she was hitting me and the foster mom told her to “take care of it” for her).

Why did a foster home get away with keeping a locked fridge with food/snacks for the family only, and locked cabinets with the same rules. Foster children were only allowed to eat at meals. Otherwise food was off limits.

Why was a foster dad allowed to stay in the room with me during a pap smear, even after I told the doctor I wasn’t ok with that?

Why did a foster home with a psychologist mom and a police officer dad allow and encourage me to date their 35 year old firefighter neighbor.

Why did a caseworker encourage me to run somewhere “fun”, for her to come and retrieve me from, and rewarded me with a mini shopping spree, when I called her from a pay phone in Vegas after my plane landed.

Why was a foster home allowed to have locks reversed on all the foster children’s bedrooms, essentially locking us in our rooms at night?

Why didn’t a foster home didn’t get in trouble for failing to report me as a runaway for nearly 2 months?

Why did foster homes do “round circles” where the teens were to hold “accountability meetings” and name calling, targeting weaknesses, etc – why was this encouraged ? I was called a sl*t, wh*re, my sexual activities shared with the other girls, my rapes talked about with them… and they were able to dissect them and tell me how it was all my fault – and the same done to others. Nothing was confidential.

Why did a foster mom have kids eat in shifts and if you didn’t get to the table in time before dinner was gone, you got nothing to eat (her table sat 6, she fostered six kids and had three of her own).

Why did my guardian ad litem tell me more than once that no one cared about me and when I ended up dead, it wouldn’t surprise anyone.

Why was a retired police officer and Texas state prison worker comfortable taking me, 15 years old at the time, into BDSM parties and sharing me with their friends. No one questioned my age, and the host of said party was a DHS caseworker in Texas.

Why did the police in Texas, when I called after being raped, tell me I deserved what happened to me, playing in a grown up’s world and placed me in juvenile detention, until my caseworker came and got me three weeks later.

Why when what happened in Arkansas made the news, the foster home encouraged me to speak with the media and their lawyers, and in turn these people were comfortable and allowed them to post all of my identifying information, allowed me to defend myself against a 48 year old man and his friends who abused me and used me for their gain.

Why did the judge call me an upcoming prostitute and a whore for older men “off the record” after court ended one day and tell me she could throw ME in jail because I was sexually active (sexually trafficked) with married men and adultery was illegal in our state.

Why after I ran from this lovely woman’s home and came out pregnant… the ER called from a different state (underage minor and all that) and my caseworker refused to return calls? Instead she faxed documentation that I was emancipated and not their problem.

Why did the state, after my baby was born, feel comfortable threatening me saying emancipation wasn’t a real thing and telling me I could go to jail, keeping my daughter, and me never seeing her again, etc because I was a rape victim, until I signed private adoption papers… and the day after it was cleared, they suddenly recognized and admitted the emancipation was valid and never contacted me again….

I’m hoping that someone can help me… because therapy sure as heck isn’t cutting it.

Truth No Longer Matters ?

When there is no agreed criterion to distinguish science from pseudoscience or just plain ordinary BS, it is post-empirical science, where truth no longer matters and it IS potentially very dangerous.

Case in point – Diane Baird – who labeled her method for assessing families the “Kempe Protocol” after the renowned University of Colorado institute where she worked for decades. From a ProPublica expose – LINK>An Expert Admits Her Evaluations Are Unscientific.

From that story – Diane Baird had spent four decades evaluating the relationships of poor families with their children. But last May, in a downtown Denver conference room, with lawyers surrounding her and a court reporter transcribing, she was the one under the microscope. Baird is a social worker and professional expert witness. She has routinely advocated in juvenile court cases across Colorado that foster children be adopted by or remain in the custody of their foster parents rather than being reunified with their typically lower-income birth parents or other family members.

Was Baird’s method for evaluating these foster and birth families empirically tested? No, Baird answered: Her method is unpublished and unstandardized, and has remained “pretty much unchanged” since the 1980s. It doesn’t have those “standard validity and reliability things,” she admitted. “It’s not a scientific instrument.” Who hired and was paying her in the case that she was being deposed about? The foster parents, she answered. They wanted to adopt, she said, and had heard about her from other foster parents.

Had she considered or was she even aware of the cultural background of the birth family and child whom she was recommending permanently separating? (The case involved a baby girl of multiracial heritage.) Baird answered that babies have “never possessed” a cultural identity, and therefore are “not losing anything,” at their age, by being adopted. Although when such children grow up, she acknowledged, they might say to their now-adoptive parents, “Oh, I didn’t know we were related to the, you know, Pima tribe in northern California, or whatever the circumstances are.” (Actually, the Pima tribe is located in the Phoenix metropolitan area.)

A fundamental goal of foster care, under federal law, is for it to be temporary: to reunify children with their birth parents if it is safe to do so or, second best, to place them with other kin. Extensive social science research has found that kids who grow up with their own families experience less long-term separation trauma, fewer mental health and behavioral problems as adolescents and more of an ultimate sense of belonging to their culture of origin.

But a ProPublica investigation co-published with The New Yorker in October revealed that there is a growing national trend of foster parents undermining the foster system’s premise by “intervening” in family court cases as a way to adopt children. As intervenors, they can file motions and call witnesses to argue that they’ve become too attached to a child for the child to be reunited with their birth family, even if officials have identified a biological family member who is suitable for a safe placement.

A key element of the intervenor strategy, ProPublica found, is hiring an attachment expert like Baird to argue that rupturing the child’s current attachment with his or her foster parents could cause lifelong psychological damage — even though Baird admitted in her deposition that attachment is a nearly inevitable aspect of the foster care model. (Transitions of children back to their birth families are not just possible, they happen every day in the child welfare system.)

In the Huerfano County case, Baird filed a report saying that the baby girl’s life with her foster parents was “predictable, safe, and filled with love”; that removing her from them and placing her with her biological grandma — with whom the girl had been having regular, joyful visits — would “derail her healthy development and create lifelong risk”; and that her “healthy development and mental health will be best protected if her current caregiving environment does not change.”

Baird, in an interview with ProPublica, admitted that “I do sometimes use the same verbiage in one report as I did in others.” But, she added in an email, “My consistency is not a boiler-plate approach, but rather reflects developmental science which applies to all children.” She emphasized, “In all cases I advocate for what I am convinced is the child’s best interest.”

Baird also noted that in many cases she is hired by county officials, rather than directly by foster parents, although ProPublica’s interviews and review of records show that this typically happens when officials are in agreement with the foster parents that they should get continuing or permanent custody. Baird, despite not being a child psychologist, achieves credibility with these officials — and with judges — in part via the impressive label that she uses for her methodology: the Kempe Protocol.

Founded in the 1970s, the Kempe Center is best known for getting laws passed across the country requiring “mandated reporters” like teachers and police officers to call in any suspicion of child abuse or neglect to a state hotline — after which kids were to be removed from their families, into foster care, if there was evidence of maltreatment. “No organization,” said Marty Guggenheim, the founder of the nation’s indigent family defense movement, “played a more direct role in shaping the modern system of surveillance, over-reporting, and under-emphasizing of the harms associated with state intervention.”

In recent years, Kempe has taken a more critical look at its past, accepting some institutional responsibility for what it has called the “myth of benevolence”: the idea that certain kids should be redistributed from their families to (often better-off) foster and adoptive parents. The center recently released a statement saying that it had participated in ignoring poverty by placing sole responsibility for poor children’s health and well-being on their families’ alleged maltreatment of them. The statement acknowledged the center’s “complicity” in its “generation-spanning impacts.”

Some of Kempe’s staff have called Baird’s method a “bogus Kempe protocol” and “junk science” used “to rip apart families.” She is “leveraging the Kempe name to bolster her opinion.” Drawing from the foster parents’ version of events, Baird routinely reports to the county or testifies in court that visits with the birth family have been detrimental to the child, and, accordingly, she recommends that the foster parents keep the child indefinitely or permanently, on the basis of attachment theory. She has called just this amount of evaluation “the Kempe Protocol” in several cases we reviewed.

Sadly, there appears to be no clear recourse for all of the birth families who’ve lost their children in the past because of Baird’s work.

Shame On You Missouri

Whose Money Is It ?

From an article in the Missouri Independent, LINK>Legislation aims to stop Missouri from seizing federal benefits owed to foster kids. Turns out Missouri’s child welfare agency took at least $6.1 million in foster kids’ benefits last year to reimburse itself for the cost of providing care. Of course they did !! Missouri’s practice of taking millions of dollars in Social Security benefits owed to foster kids to defray the cost of providing care could come to an end under legislation debated last week in a House committee. The state took at least $6.1 million in foster kids’ benefits last year — generally Social Security benefits for those with disabilities or whose parents have died — to reimburse itself for agency costs.

It’s a decades-long practice that has come under increased scrutiny across the country over the last few years. Several states, including Arizona, New Mexico and Oregon, have stopped the practice. Fifteen states and cities have, according to NPR, “taken steps to preserve the money of foster youth.” Nationally, state leaders have raised concerns they wouldn’t be able to fill in the budget gap left by abolishing the practice. California’s governor last year vetoed a bill that would’ve halted the practice, saying it would have cost too much.

If the legislation actually passes (a big IF in this state), the division could use the funds for the child’s “unmet needs” beyond what the division is obligated to pay, such as housing as the child prepares to age out of foster care. The state would also be required to ensure the account in which the child’s benefits are deposited is set up in a way that doesn’t interfere with federal asset limits.

“This money is important for their future,” Rep Hannah Kelly of Mountain Grove said. She has been a foster parent in the past. The hearing was in a House Children and Families committee. “We have a responsibility to make sure that it is safeguarded for their future.”

The state withheld $8.1 million in foster kids’ benefits in 2018, $7.9 million in 2020 and $7.1 million in 2022, according to data shared at the House Children and Families committee. State agencies are allowed to be designated as the payee for kids in their custody, though nationally it’s been documented that kids aren’t always informed the state is receiving their benefits. The main federal benefits at issue are through Social Security: Supplemental Security Income for those with disabilities and survivor’s benefits for those who have a parent who has died. Kelly’s bill also includes benefits issued by the Railroad Retirement Board and Veterans Administration.

Around 10% of foster kids are entitled to Social Security benefits for survivors or those with severe disabilities, national reports have estimated. That would mean somewhere around 1,200 kids are eligible yearly in Missouri. The result of the practice is that kids who are orphaned or have disabilities are responsible for paying toward the cost of their care in state custody, while foster kids who are ineligible for those benefits pay nothing. “No child really wants to be in foster care,” said Rep Raychel Proudie of St. Louis, “…to make them pay for it is just absolutely egregious. We don’t usually make children pay for their care under any other circumstance.”

The state uses the money to pay for routine foster care costs, though agency staff did not provide details when asked by lawmakers about those specific expenditures. In other states, it’s used to help offset the money states pay foster parents and group homes, for instance, for costs like housing and food. The bill would prohibit that practice, so the agency would only be able to use the money to pay for things outside the bounds of their obligations, such as tuition, transportation, technology or housing.

A foster father, Jason White, testified at the House hearing that his foster child, now 20, “has exactly zero dollars to his name,” which he said would not be true if the state had put his federal benefits money into an account. The state is supposed to provide a quarterly accounting of how it is using a child’s money but White said in practice that hasn’t happened. He has no record of where his foster child’s benefits went.

Madison Eacret, lobbyist for the nonprofit social service organization FosterAdopt Connect, said the annual social security disability benefit per child is around $10,000: equivalent to “two years of books and supplies for college, 10 months of rent for a one bedroom, nine to 12 months of child care for a young child, or four years of SNAP benefits. Currently the vast majority of foster youth beneficiaries including those in Missouri never see a dollar of this money, and they don’t even know that someone has applied for their benefits.”

Mary Chant, CEO of Missouri Coalition for Children, said the money could help foster youth who age out of the system and can become homeless. “This funding would make a considerable difference in helping youth better position themselves for independence. This money belongs with the child.”

How To Identify

Today’s thoughtful question from someone thinking about becoming a foster parent – How would you have wanted your Foster Parents to introduce you?

Example: If someone at a park/social situation asks me questions like “oh are these your kids?” Or “How many kids do you have?” What is the best way to respond? Do I say yes these are my kids? Do I say that two are and one is my foster child? How do I even handle that situation appropriately? I can’t imagine that outting a child all the time as a “foster child” is a good idea… I don’t want them to feel othered… but I also do not want to pretend like I’m their mother because I am not… idk it’s tricky and idk how to handle it in the safest and most considerate way.

The concern – once my Foster Child is old enough to be asked how they want me to refer to them, I will ask them but I likely will be fostering young kids/babies or kids that have unique medical needs … some who may be too young/unable to be asked this question.

Some responses – In California, it is illegal to tell people your foster child is a foster child. (Another noted – It is also illegal in Washington state to tell people they are foster children. It is suggested that if you are thinking about becoming a foster parent you should check the laws in your region.) In my opinion, you shouldn’t be giving out personal info about kids to people at the park. Absolutely allow older children to identify themselves however they are comfortable but with babies and young children just say they are your kids. I always do, whether they are mine, relatives, friends, neighbors or foster. Are they all your kids? Yes. Do I care if some random person wonders why I have 3 two-year-olds? No. If people question me further, I either start asking them a bunch of personal questions or simply say that life is full of mystery.

Another suggested – “yes, they are with me” as a helpful phrase.

Another said what this blogger thinks – People are way too nosy and not entitled to answers to these questions. She used this example – my daughter and stepdaughter are the same age and when they were little, people would ask if they were twins and I would just say “nope.” And then they would look at me funny and I just left them wondering. (blogger’s note – in fact, my 13 mo younger sister and I were the same size until she got much bigger. We were often dressed alike and so we were often mistaken for twins.) Someone else offered her a humorous reply – all I can picture is you getting irritated after being asked this one too many times in a day and saying “no, I found this one at the playground and she’s followed us ever since.”

Credible About Foster Care

I’ve read a book about a woman’s experiences in foster care and in my all things adoption group I’ve seen many stories about really horrific foster care placements – of course, not all foster parents are that bad – but sadly, some are. They don’t have the love of a genetic, biological parent. LINK>Antwone Fisher suffered twelve years of abuse in his foster care home placement.

Born to a teenage mother in prison only a couple of months after his father was shot to death at a mistress’ apartment, the movie Antwone Fisher with Derek Luke and Denzel Washington depicts the horrific childhood he survived while in foster care. In the movie, homeless and on the street in Cleveland, he reconnects with a childhood friend and witnesses the shooting of that friend in a robbery attempt. At the age of 14, the real Antwone Fisher spent time in a penal institution for teenaged boys in western Pennsylvania, leaving at the age of 17.

Antwone entered the United States Navy, where he served his country for eleven years; nine years at sea, two ashore, four deployments and one forward deployment duty, stationed aboard the USS St. Louis LKA 116. Denzel Washington is the naval psychiatrist in the movie who assists him in the emotional journey to confront his painful past. Ultimately with his psychiatrist’s prodding, he finally finds his first family and experiences the kind of fraught reception that some experience when confronting their first mother for answers about their abandonment. There is also a wonderful reunion with the extended family of Antwone’s deceased father.

He wrote a poem –

Who will cry for the little boy?
Lost and all alone.
Who will cry for the little boy?
Abandoned without his own?

Who will cry for the little boy?
He cried himself to sleep.
Who will cry for the little boy?
He never had for keeps.

Who will cry for the little boy?
He walked the burning sand
Who will cry for the little boy?
The boy inside the man.

Who will cry for the little boy?
Who knows well hurt and pain
Who will cry for the little boy?
He died again and again.

Who will cry for the little boy?
A good boy he tried to be
Who will cry for the little boy?
Who cries inside of me

After his discharge from the navy, Antwone took a job with Sony Pictures Studios, working as a Security Officer for eight months, before he began writing the screenplay for his own story. On April 23, 2013. Antwone testified before the Senate Finance Committee for a hearing titled: The Antwone Fisher Story as a Case Study for Child Welfare.

Antwone has worked in Hollywood as a screenwriter for more than thirty years with an impressive fifteen film writing projects, script doctoring or script consultant assignments with the major studios. Antwone’s present screenwriting project is with Columbia Pictures. He is the screenwriter of his own story for the movie my family watched last night. I highly recommend it.

Terminology Issues

Read today that at least one state is reconsidering how to refer to participants in the foster care system. One idea under consideration was to change “foster parent” to “resource parent/carer”.

Overall, the consensus was to no longer use “parent”, “mother” or “father” in foster care situations. This story by one adoptee was illustrative – I spent just two nights in foster care. I was very small but I remember the social worker calling the woman my foster mother. It just added to the terror of the situation. She was not and would never be my mother, or even act in a motherly role. For me, she was an emergency caretaker. A resource person/carer seems appropriate to me. Even foster caregiver is better.

A former foster caregiver notes – It’s none of my business, to decide whether their mom is “better” or “safe”. I’m taking care of the kid, until they go back to family. I don’t really consider that being a “parent”.

One woman, formerly in foster care as a youth, notes – This feels ick to me. It’s dehumanizing and impersonal. I’m really getting tired of people inventing more and more terms that claim to be inclusive and/or whatever and just end up being dehumanizing. What the hell is a resource giver? It doesn’t sound like a person and sure as hell doesn’t sound remotely healthy. We are people, all of us. We all need to be treated as human beings. And using dehumanizing terms is not only not ok but is abusive. ALL abuse starts with this type of language. Not ok. She was asked – “how you feel about temporary guardian?” but has not answered.

Another adoptee wrote – I think the best term would be something without the word parent altogether. I’m not sure what would be wrong with referring to someone as a carer or a resource person. Adding parent, mom and/or dad seems to feed the many hungry adoptive parents in the idea that it is somehow their child. Someone posted about seeing someone talking about the loss of their baby but then, realized they didn’t lose their baby, they lost a foster child who was reunified with family as it should be. I don’t feel like anyone needs more reasons to see themselves as a parent, when they’re not, nor do I think this view should be taken as a slam against anyone. It’s factual, they are a carer, they are a resource person, they are NOT the child’s parent.

One offered this age appropriate explanation from lived experience – When the girls came to live with me, we tried really hard to find age appropriate ways to explain what was going on when they asked questions; cognitively they were at pre-k level but were in grade school; they were familiar with having guest teachers, while their teachers were out sick – so we explained that like when teachers are sick and they get a guest teacher, their teacher always comes back. We were guest parents until mommy and daddy are better and safe to go back home to. That like parents, we will take care of them and do everything parents are supposed to do with them, until mommy and daddy are able to do those things again, but that it wasn’t permanent and that we weren’t their actual parents now. That made sense to them and made it easier for them to understand what our role was in their lives.

Another who spent time in foster care writes – The foster carers (FCs), not my parents then but the people I lived with and who were responsible for my day-to-day “care”, were my legal guardians. I called them by their given names & called my mother Mommy.

Another foster caregiver writes – I always liked the differentiation of being a “community resource” foster home vs kinship foster. It highlights the perspective that I was meant to be a (temporary) resource for the community, which obviously includes my foster children’s parents! Foster carer or foster caregiver makes sense to me as a gender neutral, nonparental title for this role.

Together California

Christian Bale at the site of his new foster care village

The new village in Palmdale California plans to build 12 foster homes, as well as two studio flats to help children transition into independent living, and a 7,000 sq ft community center. The aim of keeping siblings in the foster care system together, and ideally under the same roof. The completion date is sometime in 2025.

From an article in LINK>The Guardian – which notes that after the birth of his daughter in 2005, after being ‘stunned and mad’ to learn how many children were in care in California. He is quoted saying – “Imagine the absolute pain and the trauma of losing your parents or being torn from your parents, and then losing your brothers and sisters on top of that. That’s no way to treat kids. And so, we will be the hub for that. I hope that this village will be the first of many, and I hope that people, Californians and Angelenos, know to come join us in opening our eyes to what’s happening right under our noses. These are our children, and we must help our children.” He adds that growing up, “We were always having other people coming and living in our house who didn’t have homes, etc. That’s just the guy that he was.” (ie his father, David Bale)

He notes that “I had the very unrealistic idea that within one year I’d have created a miniature Sound of Music with kids singing on hills in an endlessly joyful environment. But I discovered no, it takes an awful long time and really well-motivated people. It’s complicated and tough to help kids. It should be a hell of a lot easier than it was but I didn’t flinch for one second.”

In the face of the foster care crisis, Christian Bale is proving that every action counts, no matter how small. His mission to build homes and keep families together echoes far beyond the borders of Antelope Valley. It serves as a reminder that we all have a role to play in shaping a more compassionate world.

What is CHINS?

Seems like there is something new for me to learn every day. I had not heard of CHINS before. It stands for Children in Need of Services.

I went looking trying to understand a post I read – someone was trying to help 2 kids (ages 4 & 6) who have been in placement with a foster family since Summer 2021. Their Mom has made progress on quite a few things and understood their plan to be reunification. The Mom reached out to a cousin when children were placed, so that cousin could become a Kinship placement. The Mom was told ICPC (Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children) would be explored because the cousin lived in a different state. To my knowledge, Dept of Social Services never followed through. The foster parents petitioned the court to change the judge (who has previously not recommended Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) multiple times because of mom’s progress). The result was that the judge has been changed to a CHINS judge.

I wondered what a CHINS judge is and why that would matter. I found this pdf LINK>What is a CHINS? It is from the Children’s Law Center of Massachusetts. Once the CHINS petition is issued, it is up to the judge, not the parent or the school, to decide when to dismiss the CHINS. It really does not seem relevant to the circumstances of this case but maybe there is some kind of bias against a judge who hears these cases ? Regardless, the judge must consider the best interests of the child. That means the judge could disallow the parent and remand custody to the foster parents. At least this is my understanding of CHINS.

Someone who knows a bit about the state in question suggested – I would also contact the Ombudsman, send emails to the caseworker, supervisor, etc and cc her attorney asking what happened to looking into a relative placement. The sliver of hope, should TPR be granted, is that CPS is still obliged to consider kin first, before allowing foster parents to adopt. You’re just going to really have to push. They likely didn’t move the kids to a different state because mom was doing good and making progress and they wanted them close for visitation. But, if TPR is granted, they may think differently. However, someone else corrected that mistaken impression – unfortunately when TPR is granted, that state no longer considers any biological relationships.

The original commenter added – There is a public defender for Mom, however she has only been able to see them a few times, none yet this year. Cousin has contacted the Ombudsman and I did advise her to contact them again and include the supervisors who initially stated (and I found out there is documentation) ICPC would be explored. Also this good news – it’s been continued until next week and the cousin is petitioning for guardianship. She and the Mom have been in contact with a resource also.

I will add only – it is a wonder that any poor person lacking abundant resources ever gets through the legal tangles !!

13 Years !!!

It actually doesn’t come as a surprise to any of us who are well informed about foster care in these United States. Even so, it is still possible to surprise me never-the-less. NPR described today that LINK>Texas could face fines over dysfunctional foster care system. Texas has been in litigation over its foster care system for nearly 13 years. A federal court is now weighing whether to impose hefty fines over the system’s inability to make progress.

Not only Texas but America’s foster system is in crisis. Sadly, Texas’ network is among the most troubled. NPRs story includes details of self-harm by one foster care youth – “I always get judged for my arms.” NPR notes – The 18-year-old’s left arm is covered in scar tissue from hundreds of self-inflicted cuts.

She explains – “people didn’t want to keep me. Or I feel like people didn’t want anything to do with me because I look like I’m insane. But in all reality, we’re not insane. We just are looking for somebody to love us.” NPR notes – Since she was 14, she spent her time being shuttled between treatment centers and psychiatric hospitals, often changing doctors and medications each time, never finding stability. So now, more than a dozen placements and 230 different medications later, she says the state’s child welfare system is a lie.

Children without placement hotels exist because Texas doesn’t have enough places for children, the ones with high mental health needs. Federal court monitors call these placements dangerous, noting in its reports times when kids got assaulted, ran away or were sex trafficked. And for more than three years, what was supposed to be a temporary placement for kids has often lasted for weeks or months. The state says it has cut the numbers of children without placement in half, but it’s still more than 100 kids a month. It’s cost $250 million over three years.

Texas has been aggressively refusing and opposing reform. It is a big system with lots of problems, but the state’s leadership is just not willing to work cooperatively to get it fixed or to find solutions. Federal District Judge Janis Jack calls the bureaucracy that produced these ongoing failures horrible. One in four caseworkers leave within a year of being hired. One person asks – “if state leaders can spend billions erecting barriers on Texas’ southern border, why can’t they fix this?”

NPR notes – Texas is not the only state to deal with legal fights over foster care. Alabama, Mississippi and Kansas have all dealt with federal oversight. Many still are. One former foster care youth says Child Protective Services (in Texas) was so bad that she would have rather stayed with her abusive family.

Who’s Responsibility Is It ?

Today’s story – I’m a foster parent (blogger’s note – not my own). Currently two of my foster kids are pre-adoptive. There has been some frustration from the family towards me for not reaching out more to schedule plans. I don’t disagree- I’m not doing enough.

One response – Any situation in which someone is raising someone else’s children… THAT person is the one responsible for making plans and arranging meet ups and phone calls…. simple. You hold the power here. They are in a position where you can just disappear from their lives… they are at your mercy. You need to reach out. Every time. .. until you can make it COMFORTABLY known and fully understood by them that they are allowed to reach out to make plans and ask to see the kids…. even then, it’s still kinda your responsibility. They are at your mercy. Forever. So… you gotta keep it as a recurring calendar reminder or something. Reach out. Always. Once a week, same day, different day… whatever… you figure out. It’s on you.

Another suggested – Sit in your uncomfortableness with their assertiveness. It is not aggressiveness, its assertiveness. They have feelings and maybe they need you to be an ally for reuniting this family together. Ask them how you can help unite them more and leave your feelings out of it. Stop making it about you! Its not! It IS for them. Its their family. Its personal for them. Instead of standing in their way, grant them as much access as they want.

Another plainly states it – You hold all the power in this relationship. Of course they are upset that you aren’t maintaining the relationship. They probably don’t feel comfortable reaching out to make plans because they know you can cut them out anytime.

Going deeper, another person suggests – go back to the family for a little clarification on them wanting to take the kids but not being able to – does that possibly mean not being allowed to by Child Protective Services ? Check in with the family to see if your placement was somehow interfering with them being placed with family who might not be the state’s first choice because they might require welfare or food stamps or something more than you require in order to care for them. In that case, the state might have selected you because it benefits the state financially and that would be a real good reason for the family to be cranky. Just be sure that there is no stone left unturned for those kids possibly being able to be raised by their own family. It’s sad that adoption is so permanent because whatever obstacles they face in taking them in today might be resolved a few years down the line, but the kids lose that chance to go back to family once an adoption happens. If they remain fostered, that option would remain on the table.

An adoptee who has also functioned as a foster parent moderates by saying, I honestly feel like I can see both sides of this. They’re probably hurt they haven’t seen the kids as much as they would like but there’s a time and place to say things and in front of the children is not it (and that was part of the original post that the frustration was expressed in front of the kids). But I also know how crazy things can get with several kids, events, holidays etc and time goes by so quick that you didn’t even realize you forgot to reach out til it’s too late. I think the door goes both ways and they could’ve reach out kindly to you as well and let you know they’d like to include the children in their schedule. It doesn’t really make sense they’re too afraid to ask for time because they’re afraid you’ll cut them out but they’re not afraid to be rude to you (because that could also cut them off). I think there’s probably just a lot of raw feelings there and sometimes people say and do things when they’re upset without thinking it through. I’d explain things have been chaotic but you’d prefer that they approach you privately next time to not give the kids the wrong idea of everyone’s relationship or have little ears in adult conversations. Also let them know, that you’re more than willing to include the kids in their plans, if they reach out and let you know when, so they can be there for holidays/birthdays/events (and maybe that’ll help keep the bond from upset when you’re really busy and forget to reach out).