HTT: Educate me on foster care

Dr.Loretta

I know there are at least a few people here who are doing foster/adopt (I don't think there are any doing foster only). I hear every so often about a child who is placed in a hellhole of a foster home and it's almost worse than being out on the street. While obviously this is not an issue with the people on this board, how does this happen? Is it a symptom of an overworked foster care system? Are there people manipulating the system to foster, and are able to snow the SWs they deal with (now mildly linking it to the "reasons to adopt" debate)?

jacksjerseygirl

I know really, right? Because I know that the people on this board going through the process to become foster parents are not going through a cake walk and are being scrutinized just as much.

Yet you hear about these sad stories about children being abused, neglected or worse in foster care. And, maybe it is a separate issue of kids being shuffled from foster home to foster home instead of being in a steady home.

Growing up, a middle to late aged couple was a foster family in my town - those kids were horribly treated. I know SW were called in many times to review but the kids were never removed.

It just makes you wonder sometimes.

come*on*baby

I know in our case we're in Texas - probably one of THE most overworked CPS systems in the nation. There are a LOT of people that do it simply for the money. You get a specified amount to be a foster parent, but it's not income, its to use for the children that come into your home. You get a dollar amount per day that they are in your house. I've heard of quite a few people who do it just for that reason, which is ridiculous. BUT there are some that obviously do it for the right reason. Our current placements are in our home because of their previous foster home, in which they were only there for a total of 5 days. I can't begin to tell you what she did to our middle child. A has some delays, but without the speech delays, she's a typical child. She tantrums for her age and she very dramatic. Hello, she's a toddler! The former FP did a few things to her that the oldest witnessed and thus led to them pulling all 3 girls and started an investigation. She definitely would have been better off with her BM. I do know that she's no longer a FP and has been "black balled/listed" and can't foster ever again, at least in the state of Texas.

I've heard TONS of stories and I was in a happy haze thinking they were all crazy, mainly because we were among other FP that are very caring and love the children. Then I witnessed it myself and I was so sad and infuriated by it all.  I think some actually do manipulate the system and are able to snow the CWs, mainly because the CW already have a TON on their caseload as it is.

MayDayGirl

I'm doing foster care only!

 

And I Have no idea.. honestly.

Temp206787500007404

Personally, we are only eligible to foster-only in our state for at least another year due to marriage requirements.  We went to the orientation and pre-class and I was seriously horrified at some of the other applicants (snap judgments here initially, but hang with me as my snap judgments were verified later in the session by some comments made in front of the entire group by these applicants).

There were a number of elderly folks -- who could barely walk without assistance.  All five of them had canes or walkers.

There were a number of single women -- I would guess mid-20's -- constantly on their cellphones texting the entire orientation session.  Several even had phone conversations.  I only know that they are legally single, because your spouse is required to attend with you.

And three couples -- all similar in age to us.

The old folks all wanted to "save older children, since no one wants them...and we can teach them so many things!"  Perhaps that's true, but all I could see was five elderly people who can't walk unassisted looking for some teenager to do their laundry and mow their lawn for free.  "Oh, and how much money do we get again?"

The single ladies -- when they stopped popping their gum and texting (okay, they weren't ALL popping their gum, but most of them were) and actually paid attention were only interested in how soon they start getting paid, who can watch the kids as far as daycare ("well, if my mom comes over and watches them, will the state pay her instead of the pre-selected daycare?"), how many kids they can "stick" (yes, one of them used the word stick!) in one room together, how many boys and girls can be in one room together, and why do they have to pay for the kids clothes?  Money, money, money.

And finally the three couples -- all of us ended up being turned away for the foster/adopt program b/c we haven't been married for three full years.  Not one of us had a question about how much money we get, how many children we can stack on top of one another (one of the ladies had a two bedroom apartment -- she slept on the sofa and one bedroom was the "girls dormitory" and one was the "boys dormitory"), etc.

I'm not saying that we're better than those people, but it seemed that you had three couples who genuinely wanted to foster/adopt.  Who were genuinely interested in working with the state to make sure children were either reunited with their parents or were adopted by parent's who could responsibly and safely provide for them.  And were turned away.  But the state accepted (many of the folks in our session were repeaters who's licenses had expired) and trained a room full of folks who's best interest was not that of the child's -- and they didn't blink one eye at the questions.  I think there is definetly a breakdown in the system, and I think there are foster parents who know how to take advantage of the system and do.

We had no interest in having any part of that.  We were very disappointed in the way things were handled and the bureaucracy for an obviously flawed system.  Once we investigated the adoption program, we discovered that you can't even request to foster/adopt a caucasian or biracial child under the age of 3.  Only AA.  Basically, the SW told us that they will adopt out AA infants, but CC and BR children stay in the system until they're three years of age because they had too many people requesting CC or BR children.  This is obviously my state, and I have no idea if any other states have similar laws, but I find it seriously flawed that state laws that are put in place to give children homes, would practice such reverse discrimination as to keep a child who was partially CC in "the system" until it is 3 years of age just because it is partially CC.  It makes me ill.

We were sure when we read the "rules" that we were misunderstanding.  But the SW was very clear with us.  For these reasons we felt unable to join the foster or foster/adopt program in our state.  Come*on*baby is a friend of mine IRL and I so admire the work she and her husband do and was so encouraged by her to look into it and we really felt led -- but until we live in a state that more closely scrutinizes applicants and doesn't have rules that penalize babies of ANY ethnicity, we will follow through with plans to adopt privately and will look into fostering later in life. 

Sorry this is so rambly and disjointed and turned into a vent! 

 

lilmufish

Well, being new to the whole foster-care to adoption scene as a "hopefully" future foster care parent / adoptive parent, I can only imagine it's like that because social workers are over worked and burnt out. Coming from the professional side of things, as a counselor, I see that they're bogged down with paperwork and red tape - and not enough time to deal with all the expectations and demand.

jacksjerseygirl

MrsB2007:

but I find it seriously flawed that state laws that are put in place to give children homes, would practice such reverse discrimination as to keep a child who was partially CC in "the system" until it is 3 years of age just because it is partially CC.  It makes me ill.

until we live in a state that more closely scrutinizes applicants and doesn't have rules that penalize babies of ANY ethnicity, we will follow through with plans to adopt privately and will look into fostering later in life. 

Thank you for sharing your experience, I couldn't imagine the horror of that situation. It is really just sickening.

But I think that we can't expect much better from agencies or state systems with regard to race and discrimination if society and adoptive parents promote the discrimination and imbalance by the high value and desire placed on white babies and the devaluing and lack of desire for black babies.

I know where you are coming from, but I get just of an ill feeling in my stomach when I see so many 'immediate situations' posted on agency web sites and facilitator web sites of all of the birth mothers who will deliver a child of color who have no one who wants her baby. I can't imagine how she must feel knowing that it will be hard to find even one or two profiles perhaps to show her, and even more so she knows that her baby is half the price on national average for domestic adoptions. So even though I know that it isn't kind or PC of me (and sometimes some people do not have the right mentality to raise child of a different race) I lose sympathy for parents who make the choice to wait in line for years for a child who will look as close to them as possible by way of skin color (this isn't meant to be snarky).

So when I hear words like 'only AA' are available or 'adopt out AA' - I also get an ill feeling in my stomach. Word choices do matter, all around.

My long winded response boils down to this: the issue of value and devaluing based on race starts with those who are on the "requesting/receiving" end of adoption. There would not be this imbalance if everyone who wanted to adopt so that they could become parents would do that color blind. From there it becomes a societal issue, too big of a topic lol

Temp206787500007404

Jacks -- you're totally right.  But we aren't restricted by our lawyer to only a CC baby, only BR, or only AA.  We are open to any and all situations as long as the birthmother is given the proper resources to make an informed decision, and we feel much more comfortable with that than with the state agency.  In addition, the only DA agency in our area has a restriction around gay marriage, so we refuse to work with them as well.

But I don't think forcing a CC family to adopt an AA baby is the answer though (not that you said anyone should be forced, I just feel that's what the "rule" currently in place does), especially if they don't have the family support to welcome a baby of another race or the community resources to raise that baby with a knowledge of it's heritage, culture, history, etc.  We can only try to take small steps and educate the people around us.

Temp206787500007404

Ha -- basically my last paragraph just re-worded what you had already said!  It's been months and I still get myself all worked up about those meetings.

jacksjerseygirl

I'm not saying that you personally are only open to a certain race of child, but on the whole that is the case in adoptio, which is why there is such an imbalance of the number of children available for adoption by race. Adopt today an AA newborn, wait two years and you an adopt a CC baby. There is just really something wrong with that in my opinion that stretches beyond people having the 'right' community or resources.

What I'm saying is that it is an adoption system issue in which we can't expect the state or agencies themselves to change their positions on the adoption fees or processes/rules unless those who are making the demands/requests change.

What you saw at the state system is a result of too many people coming to them wanting only newborn/infant CC babies when they have a system overfilling with AA children/babies. Their frame of thought is that if they restrict the adoption of the 'few' CC babies they have, then they can talk those people into adopting an AA baby (wrong, I know, but I think it is just as wrong as the subsidies offered by the govt for AA newborn adoptions too). Good intentions, wrong outcome. One results in reverse discrimination and the other results in further devaluing and people adopting AA children merely because they are discount babies.

Unfortunately, even those in the adoption community who beleive that they are educated and sensitive to the issues surrounding adoption are the very ones who end up using word choices or phrasing that places further devaluation on AA babies, like saying "only AA babies are available" - as if they are bottom of the barrel.

 

jacksjerseygirl

MrsB2007:

I still get myself all worked up about those meetings.

I would too. Good lord. I would just imagine wanting to stand up and go off on a soap box. lol It really is sad.

Temp206787500007404

I pretty much bolted my husband to his seat...he was ready to tell them all how he really felt.  And obviously when I told come*on*baby about it when we got home, she was pretty appalled as well and as she stated, she lives in a state where the foster system is sorely lacking.    Sad all the way around.

Temp206787500007404

Fred -- that policy makes 200% more sense than my state's policy!