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.”

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.

Keeping Them Together

My husband heard this story on NPR and knowing it would be of interest to me, told me about it. I grew up in a different kind of Texas than we usually think about the state in these modern times. I am grateful to have something good to say exists in that state today.

LINK>Casa Mia is a refuge for mothers with opioid use disorders and their infants in San Antonio Texas. Through a partnership between the School of Nursing at the University of Texas and Crosspoint Inc (a local nonprofit organization), mothers and their young children are offered housing while the mothers are enrolled in a recovery program and receive support services.

Casa Mia is located on a quiet street in a predominantly historic neighborhood near downtown San Antonio. It is a two-story house filled with laughter, baby bottles, diapers and toys. It includes a garden in the back. Gardening is proven to be therapeutic and helps with recovery, and nutrition is important to recovery as well. “A lot of our ladies have grown up with food insecurity,” says Dr. Cleveland. “People who are in recovery from a substance use disorder often have cravings, and it is important to discuss nutrition for mom and for baby.” There are clean beds for the women to sleep on at night. It is a far cry from the streets where these women formerly resided. Back in 2019, they were able to help 32 women and 26 children.

Dr Lisa Cleveland co-founded Casa Mia after witnessing the traumatic separations of mothers, who were diagnosed with opioid disorders, and their newborns shortly after birth. She partnered with Crosspoint Inc who had previously used the building as a women’s recovery support home. Crosspoint is a local nonprofit organization that provides transitional and behavioral health services to San Antonio’s most marginalized and vulnerable citizens.

“Casa Mia follows a social recovery-housing model. The focus is on teaching moms to live their lives without substances. We show them that they can have a great life without them,” Dr. Cleveland says. They provide a comprehensive wellness program for the mothers and also teach them life skills, while offering them a safe place to live with their children, while they recover.

While nationally there are numerous transitional or recovery homes for women, only 3 percent of that housing offers beds for their young children. As a neonatal nurse for 28 years and a mother, Dr Cleveland understands the mental and physical need for a child and mother to be together from birth. The maternal bond is important for each of them. “We need to help women become moms in a supportive environment before we put them out into the world,” she says.

Local and county statistics further solidified her resolve to take action. One-third of all Texas infants diagnosed with opioid withdrawal are born in Bexar County, the highest rate in the state. This equates to 300 to 400 babies each year; more than Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston combined. Casa Mia is a one-of-a-kind program designed to turn the tide.

“The statistics just really floored me,” says Dr Cleveland, “and I thought why is no one talking about this, especially since it has a really large impact on our community. With those numbers, it stands to reason that Bexar County really needs to set the standard for the state, and we are now. Bexar County truly is the leader in best practices and best care for these families.”

Traditionally, pregnant mothers who are diagnosed with substance use disorder have only two options after they give birth: either have a family member take care of their infant while they go to a treatment center or Child Protective Services places the infant in foster care. “Even if the infant is placed with a family member, the mother and baby are still separated. This separation is very traumatic for the mother and very traumatic for the baby. It is traumatic for the staff at the hospital as well. It just doesn’t make sense to me,” Dr Cleveland says. “Why are we taking these babies away from mothers who need help? Why are we not helping the mothers instead?”

Funded by the Texas Department of State Health Services, the Baptist Health Foundation and the Sisters of the Holy Spirit, Casa Mia is staffed 24 hours a day and can house up to 20 mothers and their young children at a time. Each woman must continue her recovery or treatment plan and follow the rules of the house. The first phase is fairly restrictive. Residents are not allowed to stay overnight elsewhere and must be in the house by a set curfew. They must let the staff know where they are going when they leave, even for treatment; they have to call when they get where they are going from the landline phone at their location, not a cell phone; and they have to call when they are on their way back to the house. As they progress through their recovery, the restrictions are relaxed until they eventually get ready to exit the program. There is no set timeframe for a resident to stay or exit the program.

“I think recovery is very individual,” Dr Cleveland says. “One of the things that makes our program unique is that if someone relapses, they do not get thrown out of the house. We know that recovery is a process and sometimes people relapse and that is part of the learning process. I have heard of women who have relapsed after leaving the program and then get right back on track. To me, that is a huge success.”

At Casa Mia, women may arrive expecting a child, having just given birth, or hoping to be reunited with their child. One case study is Becky who arrived at Casa Mia one January, six-months pregnant with her seventh child. After using drugs for six years, now at the age of 33, is thankful the judge sent her to Casa Mia. As a result of her drug use, she had lost custody of three of her children to their father and has joint custody of three others with a different father. She has been in recovery for more than a year and is finally excited about her future. While living at Casa Mia, Becky continues her recovery program, works a steady job (which she has had for almost two years) and takes classes to complete her GED. She plans to become a real estate agent.

“Now that my baby is born, I haven’t left her side, not even once. I am very happy because I think the Lord gave me another chance. He showed me these young women and how they take care of their children and that planted seeds in my head. Now that I have my little girl, he has given me another chance to be a mom again, and I’m very thankful for that.” She adds, “I love the staff at Casa Mia. They want what’s best for us, and they really try to help you. Having your children with you is the best thing, and I just see how everything works together.”

Crosspoint brings its expertise in recovery housing and support, the School of Nursing provides its expertise in women and children’s health as well as nutrition and childhood development. Classes for the mothers range from child nutrition and parenting to yoga and infant care.

Thankfully A Happy Ending

Story thanks to NPR – it can still happen that a child is abducted.

Police at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport say they’ve found the family of an infant girl who turned up with a woman at one of the airport’s light rail stations.

Authorities said the girl, believed to be about 10 months old, was found about 9 p.m. Sunday with a woman at the airport. Police said they believe the pair arrived via a Blue Line light rail train. Police described the woman as “a person in crisis” but did not offer any further details.

“Investigators do not believe that the woman is a relative or guardian of the child,” said a crime alert from the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

The woman apparently did not offer any information, either about the child’s family or identity. Police said they didn’t have any reports of missing or abducted children that matched the girl’s description.

But a Tuesday night alert from airport police and the BCA, which included pictures of the child wrapped in a blanket and held by an unidentified adult, apparently helped. Authorities reported early Wednesday the girl had been identified, and her mother located safe.

“Thanks to all who shared the alert and provided info that helped investigators identify the child and locate her relatives,” the BCA reported.

Family Separations

My husband told me about this story several days ago. Of course, I do care. It is abominable what the US border policies have done in separating children from their natural parents. You can read the transcript at this LINK> NPR Investigation reveals how government bureaucracy failed to stop family separations with Ari Shapiro talking to The Atlantic immigration reporter Caitlin Dickerson. The Atlantic also has the story, though I am not a subscriber and have used up all of my “free” article allowance. You can access that at this LINK> The Secret History of Family Separation or under this headline – “We Need To Take Away Children: The Secret History Of The U.S. Government’s Family Separation Policy.”

The Trump administration was known for immigration policies that were chaotic and extreme, yet even by that standard, family separation was in its own category. Kids as young as infants were removed from their parents at the border, more than 5,500 children total. Hundreds are still not reunited. Caitlin Dickerson chronicled those policies in real time, first for The New York Times and now for The Atlantic. And her latest cover story for The Atlantic is an exhaustive investigation into how the family separation policy came about.

Caitlin Dickerson says, “The Trump administration . . . was very focused on trying to curtail immigration, both illegal immigration, as well as asylum seeking. The reason this exhaustive an account was necessary was because it’s the most extreme implementation of consequences. And some families, hundreds of them, still have not been reunited today.” She goes on to say, “. . . hawks, like Stephen Miller, were going to push for these really aggressive policies. But it’s actually the bureaucrats, the career experts who went along with zero tolerance and family separations who are really important. They told me they were very concerned about separating families, but they stayed quiet. And when I asked why, they said, well, it wasn’t strategic to speak up in these meetings or, you know, I couldn’t alienate myself before Stephen Miller, given how much power he had in the administration. They figured someone else would intervene, and because of that, this policy was put into place.”

Dickerson goes on to say that Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen wishes she had not signed the memo authorizing family separations. She didn’t have good information when she made this decision. Career immigration officials said we have systems and processes in place to ensure it’s going to be implemented smoothly. And that wasn’t true. Based on their advice, she made that decision.

Sadly, there is still the desire by some former Trump administration officials to see this policy implemented again in the future. The separation trauma is immensely destructive for the kids who were in the very early stages of development and this is going to be a lifelong story for them.

I did some research and found two other articles – LINK> PolitiFact noted in February 2021 that the Biden administration had rescinded the Trump-era policy that led to systematic family separations and that he had established a task force to reunite families that were separated under the Trump administration.

However, a LINK> Vera.org piece noted – Children Are Still Being Separated from Their Families at the Border. This one is dated June 23, 2022 written by Erica Bryant. She makes the point that – “A better system would place Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) officials at the border to immediately evaluate family relationships. This should be done in trauma-informed and developmentally appropriate settings, rather than in jail-like holding centers. Medical and mental health services that children might need should also be available on site. If ORR confirms the family relationship and rules out risks of trafficking and other immediate dangers to the child, children should be released with their relatives immediately.”

Did You Know ?

Did you know that among the many hurdles that parents face when their children are removed (often due to poverty mainly) and placed in foster care, that these struggling parents are also hand a bill for the costs of that foster care of their children ? This has been the way that it has been handled but that may change over the coming weeks and months.

According to Aysha Schomburg, the associate commissioner of the Children’s Bureau which is the agency that provides federal funding to state and county child welfare agencies, their “default position” now is that states should stop charging the child’s parents and “find innovative ways to support families.” She adds, “When a state child support agency takes what little funds a parent has when a child enters foster care, it makes it harder for that parent to pay for gas or bus fare or to get to work; harder to get or keep stable housing. That’s not what we want.”

Impoverished families keep getting those bills until they’re paid off completely. Some parents still get billed for years — even 20 years or more — after being reunited with their kids. So this is a financial burden that can stick with families for years — and decades.

Examples of how big these bills can be . . . a Minnesota mother’s tax refunds were garnished after her three children were placed in foster care. That bill was over $19,000 after her children spent 20 months in foster care. One couple in Washington state had the horrendous experience of having their son taken from them due to the husband being charged with assaulting their 4 year old son. Eventually, all charges were dismissed but it took 13 months to get their son came back home. The state sent the couple a bill of $8,000 for the boy’s foster care and garnished their paychecks.

The policy changes will only apply to parents coming into the system now in some states. In reality, some states will be more generous and other states will not. A 1984 federal law requires state and county child welfare agencies to, when “appropriate,” collect the money and return part of it to the US Treasury to reimburse the federal government, which pays for a large percentage of foster care.

There is more where the content for today’s blog was sourced – “The federal government will allow states to stop charging families for foster care” by Joseph Shapiro posted at NPR’s website.

Ukrainian Twins

Straight off – I am NOT a fan of surrogacy. There was a mom in my mom’s group who used a surrogate because she was actively undergoing treatment for cancer. I remember the two of us sharing that we were using reproductive assistance for our husbands. She did pass away about the time her boy/girl twins turned 2 years old. After years of trying, my brother-in-law and sister-in-law finally were successful in bringing a son into their lives.

My problem with surrogacy has arisen out of my gaining knowledge about the trauma of separating any baby from the mom in who’s womb the baby gestated. This is detailed in the book The Primal Wound by Nancy Verrier. Even though my own family has depended upon medical technology to create our sons, I am at least grateful that in our own ignorance, we did one thing right – my sons both grew in my womb and nursed at my breast. I have been able to do something with them that I wasn’t even able to do for my biological, genetic daughter – be in the boy’s lives throughout their childhood.

The Russian war against Ukraine is heartbreaking and difficult to be a witness of. So, a feel good story coming out of that country is welcome. NPR did a follow-up to this story that had more than it’s share of bumps along the way. The genetic, biological father of these twins Alex Spektor was born in Ukraine, when it was part of the Soviet Union, and his family came to the US as Jewish refugees. From experience, I do believe that boys benefit from the genetic, biological mirror of being raised by their father.

The mother was a surrogate; and therefore, was never intended to parent these babies. His twins were born prematurely to the surrogate mother in Kyiv just as Russia began its war on Ukraine. In a dramatic mission called “Operation Gemini,” the babies and the surrogate were rescued from Ukraine in March. They dodged Russian artillery fire, drove through a snowstorm, and finally arrived at a Polish hospital where Alex met his boys for the first time.

For 2 months, the family was stuck in bureaucratic limbo in Poland. Alex’s wife, Irma had flown to Poland in early March, after the twins had been evacuated. She had stayed in Chicago to get the family’s legal paperwork in order. She arrived late at night and the next morning went straight to the hospital where her twins were. Alex and Irma have spent those 2 months fighting to take their twins home to Chicago.

The hospital said they needed to prove the twin’s paternity in order to discharge the kids. The American embassy said in order for them to get passports for the boys, the parents needed to bring their twins to Warsaw. Eventually officials needed to see the birth certificates and they were still in Ukraine. So, Alex crossed from the Polish city of Rzeszow back over the border to retrieve the documents from the Ukrainian city of Lviv.

Finally, the couple and their twins were able to fly home to Chicago. Alex now says his experience with his twins has made him feel closer to the place of his birth. Because of these experiences, friends of the couple in Chicago have created an organization known as the Ukraine TrustChain. They provide medical supplies, baby formula, food and other essentials to people in the war.

Youth Villages

My husband called my attention to an article at NPR.org – “18 can mean an abrupt exit from foster care. For some, it’s no longer a solo journey.” I already knew somewhat about aging out of foster care and the effects of that.

What attracted my attention was this – Helping young people see that they can have a stable future is the goal of the LifeSet program. Developed in 1999 by the Memphis nonprofit Youth Villages, it is being used today in 18 states and Washington, DC. I appreciate this from their Mission and Values statements – “When at all possible, children belong with their families. We help families provide the support and structure that all children need.”

Also this – We develop innovative programs that serve children and families facing the most challenging circumstances. Our entrepreneurial spirit leads us to test the limits of existing services and create new opportunities. We provide care and treatment for children in an open, safe environment. We ensure that young people are physically and emotionally safe. We help children and families develop skills to live successfully by focusing on areas that have a long-term impact on the family.

LifeSet puts transition-age youth in the driver’s seat of their lives with a trained specialist by their side to help them identify and achieve goals. It is is an individualized, evidence-informed community-based program that is highly intensive. LifeSet specialists meet with participants face to face at least once each week. They text, email and call young people regularly throughout the week, when needed. Specialists stabilize even the toughest situations and help young people build healthy relationships, obtain safe housing, education and employment. LifeSet is one of the nation’s first — and now one of the largest — evidence-informed programs helping young people who age out of foster care. More than 20,000 young people have helped through LifeSet across the country since the program began in 1999.

Being Infertile While Black

I actually learned about the book in my image while reading another woman’s story of the disappointments and heartbreak of going through failure after failure after failure in assisted reproduction cycles. The essay’s author mentions Emily Bernard’s book Black is the Body, in which she describes her own reproductive struggles, and how she felt like a failure for not being able to conceive. No matter how much she tried, she could not conceive (she ended up adopting). And though my blog today is not about that book, so often, one thing leads to another and there I find adoption. Infertility is a common thread that very often leads to adoption. In my all things adoption group they often counsel women to confront their grief related to infertility before adopting. An adopted child will never be the child you could not conceive naturally and not coming to grips with that will bring a problematic relationship with your adopted child who regardless may never feel like they were good enough to meet your expectations even if you did not go through infertility first.

You can read Edna Bonhomme‘s entire essay in The Guardian about her experience of infertility in search of Black Motherhood. “For women from Black, working-class families like mine, to have children – countering the forces that tried to destroy us – can be a powerful political act.” That perspective really made sense to me but was one I would have never considered, if I had not read Edna’s essay. I will share some other excerpts I jotted down.

“Infertility damages mental health in many ways, and the clinical depression and anxiety disorders that occur after failed IVF attempts can have long term negative consequences. Some people offered unwanted counsel: ‘Why don’t you adopt?’ I had to accept that some people will never get pregnant, no matter how hard they try. (As a writer) It is more challenging to tell a story about fertility treatment that ends in childlessness.”

“One friend and confidante, who struggled for nearly 10 years to conceive, told me how she had been ready to adopt right before she became pregnant. I have to rationalize that my body, like all bodies, is complex, and there is no simple answer for why I cannot get pregnant. In the closing lines of a story such as this, one might assume the denouement brings a child: it doesn’t. Unfortunately, it ends here.”

I had expected this essay to end in an adoption but another thing I often read in my all things adoption group is not everyone has to have children. It would appear that is where Edna ended up – in an acceptance of nature as it is for her Black body.

Adding More Misery To The Suffering

Daisy Hohman’s 3 children spent 20 months in foster care.
When she was reunited with her children,
she received a bill of nearly $20,000 for her children’s foster care.

An NPR investigation found that it’s common in every state for parents to get a bill for the cost of foster care. Case in point –

Just before Christmas in 2017, Daisy Hohman, desperate for a place to live, moved into the trailer of a friend who had an extra room to rent. After Hohman separated from her husband, she and her three kids had moved from place to place, staying with family and friends.

Two weeks after living at this new address, police raided the trailer. They found drugs and drug paraphernalia, according to court records. Others were the target. Hohman was at work at the time. No drugs were found on her, and police did not charge her.

Even so, child protective services in Wright County MN placed her two daughters, then 15 and 10, and a son, 9 in foster care. County officials argued she had left the children in an unsafe place. After 20 months in foster care, her three children were able to come back home. Then, Hohman got a bill from Wright County to reimburse it for some of the cost of that foster care. She owed: $19,530.07

Two federal laws contradict each other: One recent law directs child-welfare agencies to prioritize reuniting families. The other law, almost 40 years old, tells states to charge parents for the cost of child care, which makes it harder for families to reunite.

The NPR investigation also found that: The fees are charged almost exclusively to the poorest families; when parents get billed, children spend added time in foster care and the extra debt follows families for years, making it hard for them to climb out of poverty and the government raises little money, or even loses money, when it tries to collect.

Foster care is meant to be a temporary arrangement for children, provided by state and county child welfare agencies when families are in crisis or when parents are thought to be unable to care for their children. It’s long been recognized that the best thing for most children in foster care is to be reunited with their family. While in foster care, children live with foster families, with relatives or in group settings. More than half will eventually return home. There were 407,493 children in foster care on the day the federal government counted in 2020 to get a snapshot of the population, according to a report from the Administration on Children, Youth and Families.

In 2018, Congress reformed funding for child welfare when it passed the Family First Preservation Services Act. That law tells state child welfare agencies to make it their focus to preserve families and help struggling parents get their lives back on track so that they can be safely reunited with their children. But a 1984 federal law still stands, as do additional state laws, that call for making many parents pay for some of the cost of foster care. Among the costs the federal funding pays for: shelter, food and clothing; case planning; and the training of foster parents.

Of parents who get billed for foster care: A disproportionate number are people of color. Many are homeless. Many have mental health or substance abuse problems. And almost all are poor — really poor. 80% of the families in a data analysis had incomes less than $10,000 annually. Try living off $10,000 a year. You’re in deep poverty, if you’re living off that kind of money.

Hohman followed the case plan set out by county caseworkers in 2018 and completed the steps required to get her children back. She went to family therapy sessions and submitted to random drug testing. She saved up enough money to rent an apartment in order to provide the children with safe and suitable housing. The $19,530 bill was just a few thousand dollars less than Hohman’s entire paycheck in 2019, for her seasonal work at a landscaping company. The debt went on her credit report, which made it hard to find an apartment big enough for her family or to buy a dependable car to get to work. When Hohman filed her income tax, instead of getting the large refund she expected it was garnished.

To charge poor families for the cost of foster care sets them up for failure. Mothers, often single, work overtime or take on a second job to pay off the debt forcing them to leave the kids alone and unattended. While it might not seem like that much to have to pay fifty or a hundred or two hundred dollars a month in foster care child support, if you are a very low-income, low-earnings mom, that can be the difference in being able to save money for first and last month’s rent on a decent apartment or not. The mom is at risk of losing her child again because of poverty. That doesn’t make sense from a child well-being, family well-being standpoint, or from a taxpayer standpoint.

Even a small bill delayed reunification by almost seven months. That extra time in foster care matters. It increases the cost to taxpayers since daily foster care is expensive. And it inflates the bill to parents. It matters because the clock ticking for the parents. They are given a set amount of time to prove they should be allowed to get their child(ren) back. Once a child spends 15 out of 22 months in foster care, it is federal law that the child-welfare agency must begin procedures to terminate a parent’s rights to the child with a goal of placing the child for adoption in order to find them a permanent home.

Today’s child welfare system also struggles with conflicting incentives. Laws meant to hold parents accountable can end up keeping families apart. When parents don’t pay, states garnish wages, take tax refunds and stimulus checks and report parents to credit bureaus. In the overwhelming majority of the people in the child welfare program, a significant contributor to the reason they’re in that situation is poverty. Abuse is an issue in only 16% of cases when kids go to foster care. Mostly, the issue is the parent’s neglect. Maybe there’s no food in the refrigerator or the parent is homeless or addicted. These are issues of poverty.

States don’t actually have to go after this money. There’s some leeway in the 1984 federal law. It says parents should be charged to reimburse some of the cost of foster care – when it’s appropriate but it does not define the term appropriate.