Scribbles and Scrambles ~ Foster Care Any Solutions?

Christa asked a good question. Where are the statistics to prove that reunification (the goal of foster care is to return the child or children to their biological family especially parents) works?

I found the following pdf full of governmental wording and red tape type of speak. 
https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/family_reunification.pdf The bottom line I take away from it is that states that are able to fund programs and extra staff have a higher rate of success with reunification. The retraining of parents, showing them how to take care of their children is a main focus requiring hours a week for months and it seems to work well. Especially when there are caseworkers who have been given limited cases which frees them up to invest into these families. 

Not only is the government concerned with returning children to their home, they also want to see the children remain at home. High levels of parental training seemed to help this outcome. 

But what do we do with the average/usual situation? My grandchildrens' biological mother was very vocal about her opinion that counseling was a joke. A waste of time. This belief was repeated multiple times over the months the children were being phased back into her life before the judge had had enough. I cannot in good conscience believe that the overwhelmed parent who just needs some guidance and help from very well trained and available staff is the rule rather than the exception. My brush with humanity has led me to believe that most folks sink to the bottom of the tide pool because the swimming and going against the flow are just way too much work. I am flabbergasted that so many parents lose their children when they have already lost one, or been warned. If you can't pull yourself together enough to keep the state from removing the child in the first place, after ample warning, why should we assume that you can overcome and suck up and stand up and do the right thing forever in order to get your child back? And then lets add drugs or alcohol or both to the mix. How can we assume that reunification is the usual and best outcome for ALL of these families in crisis? 

I know I'm coming from a cynical place. I have seen children get sucker punched. I've seen the look of resignation when a child is disappointed and is compelled to make an excuse for the parent who broke their heart. Again. I have seen parents choose their favorite sedative over the children they carried for nine months, right underneath their heart. If a stranger can love a child better and more (because addiction is horrible, but there come choices to step away or no one ever would) than a biological parent, then can't we come up with an alternative to reunification always and forever? 

Scribbles and Scrambles ~ The Foster Care Problem Continued....

It's been a few days since I brought up foster care. And the issues.

Today I'd like to go back to the stories briefly mentioned a few weeks ago. The two moms who each lost multiple children and finally got their stuff together with the very last chance and the very last child. They kicked their drug habits and succeeded. One is even an advocate for biological parents after she obtained her Master's Degree.

Not having a Master's Degree, or the desire to obtain it, can I just say that I don't believe a Master's Degree makes one a successful human being? Nor does a Master's Degree make a person a good parent, or a decent person. A Master's shows you have accomplished higher learning and conquered the task. It doesn't measure your character or your abilities other than the ability to follow the stated rules, memorize and pass tests. In my field I was trained to "know" many, many, many aspects of my job and I can honestly say 5% of my education is something I still use to this day. The rest has become dormant. I might be able to recall tidbits. But tidbits that are obsolete don't really matter. I, instead, have broadened my education by learning other aspects of the medical field by hands on experience. The medical terminology I need is either in my brain because of repetition and use. I have ICD-9 codes memorized because I used them. ICD-10's are slowly replacing the ICD-9's because of the need for change.

Why am I going on about this? Because I don't know that 2 women out of thousands over the same time frame are a real good return for the state's investment of time and money. Two women are cited as examples why the reunification of biological families is best. But it can't be best in every case, every scenario. Those two overcomers clearly had something inside of them that changed. I believe change is possible. My husband lived as an active alcoholic for years. I understand the crazy that comes with substance abuse, I had a front row seat on that roller coaster. And he chose alcohol over his wife and children more often than I care to remember. Substance addiction is a horrible thing. Something that many can't overcome and it grabs people by the throat and demands them to do the worst just to get another fix.

And that's one of the problems with the reunification at all costs mindset. I think we could all agree that group home scenarios are probably not the best end result. I don't want the state to sever rights so we have group homes not meeting the needs of thousands and thousands of children. But I also think there has to be a better solution than rubber stamping bio is best on every single case. Biological parents are not best if they are creating a toxic emotional world for a child. Especially if there are others who have stepped in and said they'd be willing to take these children and raise them and love them. Too often the loving home environment is put on the chopping block because the biological parent isn't actively trying to injure their child at the moment so rights are returned to the biological parent. Two years later that child might just be back in foster care, more broken, bleeding internally from the heart and the soul over neglect and worse, but that possibility is conjecture. And conjecture isn't something that is presented to the judges. Impressions, reports, facts. Those all go into the machine. But legally fortune telling or stories or even likelihood can't play a huge part in the decisions made by judges. And how can the judges in a reunification state consider anything but the facts and how they line up with the state goal of reunification? They can't. Our judges hands are tied by the law that has been written.

I would be interested in hearing what the "lost" children have to say about the biological mothers mentioned above. And I'd like to hear from the child who was returned to her. I'm pretty sure they would have some interesting facts or impressions to bring to the discussion.

Scribbles and Scrambles ~ Like Riding a Bike

So. Things I learned about myself whilst I had the brood last week. 



Thought:  "Parenting" little children is like riding a bike. You don't forget. 

Truth: Ha. So not true. Actually, last time I was on a bike I crashed and hurt myself. A week of young children left a few bumps and bruises, too. 


Thought: I can survive on less than four hours of sleep at night.

Truth: If you like being a zombie, sure. Slow motion growling sound side effect. 


Thought: Four dogs is as easy as two, and how involved can kids be, they all wipe themselves? 

Truth: Two skid-marked underpants found in odd places, one in a dog's mouth. Nuff said!


Thought: When things are real quiet sit back and relax, they are probably reading nicely. 

Truth: Definitely NOT the above statement. Not at all. 

Scribbles and Scrambles ~ A Pause to Reflect...

The red faces are not devils, FYI, they are ladybugs.

I just finished a stint on the frontline.

"Really, Kelly? You don't strike me as Special OPS material. But, hey, you do you."

My mission was challenging. Tested my endurance, my abilities, every skill set I thought I had developed over my lifetime, and even my sanity.

You see. I had the grands and their two big dogs for nearly a month, errrr no it was less than a week. But. Just sayin.

In that week's time there were two incidents of random vomiting.

Not one single night where someone or something didn't wake me up.

There was a finger biting incident when all were supposed to be sleeping.

I had to apologize for yelling "Shut UP!" over the cacophony of fighting voices in the back seat. Not once but twice. The sage advice from the 9 year old was to just simply say "Be Quiet" next time.

I have never washed more laundry or dishes in my life.  Nor have I ever had to referee more squabbles, more skirmishes, more incidents ever. I said things like. "Stop licking your brother right now." "Do NOT wipe that on me. Go wash your hands!" "What about this sounded like a good idea at the time?" "Really. Did we just go there?!?" "Go to sleep NOW! Sweet dreams, Pumpkin!"

Okay. I did raise three children so I'm pretty sure I've said all those things and more and done more laundry, and dishes. But give me a break. Like I said, I've just returned from the front lines. And honestly, I'm missing the chaos just a little bit this morning. Sigh. Those kids.

Scribbles and Scrambles ~ Something Needs to Change - Part 6

On Memorial Day I did some more foster care research. Sadly, I found an article about exploding foster care numbers and the lack of families stepping up to take in kids. The little county in North Carolina had about 6 kids a month enter foster care but two months back to back the number jumped to 24. The current number of foster care families would have to take 10 foster kids each to meet the demand.

One of the biggest reasons for the jump in number of children into the system was surprising to me. Many of the families had military connections as in a parent in the military. Deployment puts extra stress on families and some of that is manifesting in foster care placements.

Families facing a difficult scenario while a soldier risks his or her life now have to be concerned about family breakdowns serious enough to end with a child in foster care?

There are people on each side of the reunification vs termination issue that have compelling stories. One mom, a mother of 10, lost nine of her children, then kicked drugs, received number 10 back and went on to get her Master's degree and entered the fray saying that termination happens too quickly. In the case of a military family struggling during deployment, how could the deployed man or woman even attempt to regain his or her child within the 15 month Federal mandate? In my personal situation how can the outcome of reunification possibly be best?

I have more questions, more concerns than answers.

to be continued....

Scribbles and Scrambles ~ Something Has to Change - How?

One of the biggest issues I've encountered with trouble in foster care is burn out. Several of my friends and family members have been foster care parents, or temporary family homes for foster children. Both in Iowa and Nebraska. In cases where those folks have stepped away from the system it's because they have witnessed the case of a child or children being returned to a very broken family scenario and they've lost heart.

Foster parents are expected to love a child like it is their own but remember it is not. What a wonderfully impossible goal. But that goal exists because reunification is the best alternative and the legal best outcome in Iowa. So helplessly, a foster parent watches a child return to a home where they will likely be fed, clothed, cleaned and nurtured in a way that is not going to lead to a successful outcome.

Some children are resilient and can overcome great odds and grow up to be super achievers if given a few breaks. Others will end up in defeat sinking into the road cut for them by nature and it turns out nurture. We have reached a point in the foster care system where many of todays parents of children going into or residing long term in foster care have been foster care children themselves.  Multiple generations of children in foster care might mean that the system is broken or breaking.

Not every foster care child has a safe family that is willing to adopt them. Which means that if termination happens, they become wards of the state or "legal orphans" as stated in an article I read. In this scenario is a broken, possibly dangerous family a better outcome than a facility?

Federal foster care laws state that termination must happen if a child spends 15 of the previous 22 months in foster care. Each state interprets that statement its own way.

What to do? Is there a solution that can lead to a better outcome?

to be continued

Scribbles and Scrambles ~ Change Foster Care, How?

Foster care goals, laws and interpretation of those laws vary state to state. Information I'm researching tells a convoluted story. One article stated that some states are up to 25 times more efficient in the severing of parental rights. But then went on to tell a story of an eleventh hour decision to give a mother of several one more chance. And she took it and turned everything around.

Therein lies the problem.

How many chances do we give? What things should be on the nevermore list? What portion or percentage of a child's life is okay for experimentation? Because putting children into emotionally charged, emotionally dangerous or troubling situations is experimentation isn't it?

West Virginia and Oklahoma have high parental rights terminations but they also have some of the highest rates of drug overdose deaths. And Oklahoma has high women incarcerations as well.  Both states also have some financial woes that may effect the funds available to help those families.

Here is what I see on this side of foster care in my world, finances in action. The foster care parents receive a daily stipend per child that covers room and board and basics. Bigger ticket items like child care (state registered), some clothing (a small yearly allowance) and certain other items like after school activities are reimbursable. As a tax payer, I'm okay with this. I also see the value in the involvement of social workers. After all, someone needs to manage a system to keep folks from taking advantage of it, because unfortunately, that's pretty people like. Using. Taking care of number one. Grasping the American dream at all costs i.e. making an easy buck.

Even with the watchdogs there are abuses. Foster care parents haven't always done foster care for the benefit of the child, instead they look at it as a money maker. Tragic. This is why rules and regulations have been put into place to monitor foster parents. And they do. Monitor. Very thoroughly, based on my small awareness of how the system runs. The foster care parents are pretty regulated. Those that care really follow the rules, those that don't work around them. Life. Yep. The quality rise to the top, the bottom dwellers sink to the bottom.

All this regulation costs loads of money. Salaries of the gatekeepers, the rule makers, the regulation drafters. Those add up. Each foster family has involvement with a few agencies. And three or more social workers. The foster parents have a staff foster care advocate. The children have a foster care manager and a transport/interactive social worker. Others are involved with different scenarios as well. Then there is counseling. Each child is offered counseling. This is not always taken advantage of, but it's available.

I can understand why quick termination is beneficial to states with tight budgets. But is that the best deciding factor?

to be continued....