Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

When We Remove Kids From Their Homes...


gbear

Recommended Posts

http://thelifewelllived.net/2014/08/20/promises-promises/

 

When society removes a kids from their family, are we as a society making promises to the kids and their parents we will try to do better?

 

I ask because I am watching the state of MD head down a path which I fear will not serve foster/adoptive parents or the children well.

 

MD averaged 5,724 kids in foster care in any one month.  Only an average of 4,044 of them were in one of the 1,596 foster homes.  The number of homes decreased by 46 over the past three months.  So the ability to foster kids is being stretched, but unfortunately this doesn't capture the breadth of the problems.  While foster parents are the most likely to adopt the foster children (57-59% of adoptions of fostered kids by foster parents historically), the state has recently made it much harder for foster parents to be able to afford to adopt children in their care.

 

When we approached the MD foster care ombudsman, he told us MD law trumps  federal law because it is just the state interpreting the federal law.  When we pointed out the federal law specifically states things contrary to the state guidelines now, he reiterated that it is MD's job to interpret the Federal law as they see fit.  Of course, he disagrees with some of the excluded expenses that MD's Department of Human Resources requires doctors' notes authorizing even under the MD guidelines, and he recognizes the emotional blackmail angle of it all.  

 

The irony is two other social workers have asked us if we would adopt 2 other kids for whom we provided respite care during the time we have disputed their new process for adoption stipends for medically fragile children.  If we are having trouble affording to care for 3 medically fragile adopted children, I don't think we are up for numbers 4 and 5.  The irony is J and I still talked about pursuing the offer.  This goes back to the point I tried to write in the peace about foster parents historically being the most likely to adopt children in their care.  If you make it harder to care for these kids financially when adopted, they will not be adopted which is the most expensive outcome for the state and the worst for the kids.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we approached the MD foster care ombudsman, he told us MD law trumps  federal law because it is just the state interpreting the federal law.  When we pointed out the federal law specifically states things contrary to the state guidelines now, he reiterated that it is MD's job to interpret the Federal law as they see fit.

 

I must have missed that day in law school when they taught that States are final authority on interpretation of federal law.  It would be one thing if Federal law delegates certain discretion to states, but if the ombudsman really said what the article says, either the ombudsman is being incredibly inartful, to the point of being misleading, or just talking out of his behind.  One would think that if MD law was really contrary to a Federal statute then someone would have challenged it by now, but then again there is always that period before the first challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Federal Child Welfare Policy Manual as forwarded to me by Josh Kroll: (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/cwpm/programs/cb/laws_policies/laws/cwpm/policy_dsp.jsp?citID=54)

 

Title IV-E adoption assistance is not based upon a standard schedule of itemized needs and countable income. Instead, the amount of the adoption assistance payment is determined through the discussion and negotiation process between the adoptive parents and a representative of the State agency based upon the needs of the child and the circumstances of the family. The payment that is agreed upon should combine with the parents' resources to cover the ordinary and special needs of the child projected over an extended period of time and should cover anticipated needs, e.g., child care. Anticipation and discussion of these needs are part of the negotiation of the amount of the adoption assistance payment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

From the MD DHR handbook as forwarded to us in rejection of all the expenses we submitted (even though the Fed specifically states we do not have to do so):

"The amount of the subsidy is based on the family’s out-of-pocket expenses related only to the special needs of the child.(My insert: Believe it or not, the bolding is theirs not mine.)

 

The following provides details of the application process as the family works with the Department of Social Services to prepare their request for the Department of Human Resources:

 

  1. The family will submit a letter that includes the amount of monthly financial assistance they are requesting.  The letter should include a description of the child’s special needs as well as what it is like to parent this child, including a typical day in the life of the child, as well as the rewards and challenges of parenting this particular child.  The family will need to itemize their out-of-pocket expenses that are incurred in relation to meeting the child’s special needs and provide documentation/receipts for these expenses.  Expenses that are covered by medical assistance (MA), and expenses typically incurred by all families as the cost of raising a child (i.e., clothing, food, daycare, summer camp, housing) are not included.

 

Examples of out-of-pocket expenses include, but are not limited to:*

 

Respite care

Nursing care not covered by MA

Tutoring not covered by a school program

Specialized day care

Cost of running electrical equipment (ventilator, respirator, feeding machine)

Medical supplies not covered by MA

Lost wages (due to medical appointments for child) if parent does not get paid by employer

Parking costs

Diapers for older children, if not covered by MA

Baby wipes

Changing pads

Modifications to make home handicapped- accessible

 

            *Please note that all out-of-pocket expenses must be supported by a letter of necessity from the appropriate medical or educational professional involved with the child.

(That last line was used to reject such expenses as prune juice for her chronic constipation.  I can not wait to go to a doctor and say I need a letter to be reimbursed for the $7 a month worth of prune juice.  It's OK because we also need a separate letter for each ipad ap to help her because she has extremely limited sight and another letter for...  What doctor do they think will write all these?)

 

Given these hurdles, is it a surprise fostering rates are declining?  It certainly is not because there are less children needing homes.  The stats in the article come from either the MD Departmetn of Human Resources blogs or from Josh Kroll with the North American Council on Adoptable Children.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's almost as if Maryland is (well actually, not almost, they are) disincentivizing adoption of children in foster care.  I get that adoption is much more of a permanent arrangement compared to foster care, which from a legal perspective can be both good and bad.  State loses a lot of the supervisory powers they may have had over a foster parent once the child is adopted.   But I don't think there can be serious debate that a stable, loving adoptive home is superior and preferable to foster care.  I'm sure from a mental aspect alone, it would mean a lot to a child to be adopted as opposed to being in foster care.  I would support a thorough background check of the adoptive parent and a conditional adoption period where monetary assistance from the government is involved, but it makes little sense to me that the system is designed to provide financial incentive for people to stay a foster parent as opposed to adopting those children.  God bless you and your family.  I'm sure in the end money is not driving the decision one way or the other, but I agree that it stinks that MD is essentially throwing up road blocks when you are trying to be more giving then you already are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am not well informed enough to have much to say on the matter.... other than it really floors me sometimes how awesome some people are at sharing their blessings with others.   and that you keep up the good work in spite of the obstacles cast in front of you

 

kudos !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MD system seems odd to me, not that I have any experience with any other state.

 

My mom is in her late 60's and has a 5 year old and a 3 year old.

 

Now, my mom's in pretty good shape for her late 60's, but that's a lot of work.  In her case, she has grown children in the area with young kids of their own so there's a lot of help (a sister or brother of mine actually pick them up from day care most days as my mom still works full time), and the kids are treated as part of the larger family.

 

The odd thing is that the state doesn't take the kids.

 

This is a situation where one women has 6 kids from 5 dad's and 2 of the kids are twins.

 

My parents had the oldest kid in the family when she was in middle school.  She's now over 18 (so 5+ years ago), and they weren't her first foster home.  The oldest ended up going to live with her father in AZ, but in no other case has the father shown any interest in taking the kids so they are all in foster care.

 

They had the 5 year old as a baby until about 2.  He went back to his mom for about 9 months.  Then they took the kids again and my parents took the now 5 year old and the youngest who is now 3 (my Dad was a live at the time).

 

My mom is ready be done, but she' doesn't want to force them to go to a different foster home.  Realistically, the youngest has only known my mom as a parent.

 

The birth mother has had 3 oppurtunites in the past 1 1/2 to take the kids back and each time has failed to do something that she was told she had to do to get them back (e.g. she didn't register the 5 year old for kindergarten).

 

And they still haven't started the process to take the kids.  There is another date sometime this fall for the mother to show she is ready.

 

I think everybody pretty much admits as the kids get older, it is harder to place them in adoption.  This women's kids have now been in foster care for something approaching a decade.  

 

Is it really so hard to say that we're going to take this 3 year old (she's a cute funny happy little girl) and find a family for her?

 

To take into the totality of the situation (i.e. close to a decade with kids in and out of the foster care system for the kids from this mother) and act based on that?

 

I once heard a piece on NPR about how the Native Americans were claiming that one of the Dakotas was taking their kids into foster system for federal money.  I believe the story was the federal government gives the state so much money for each kid in foster care and for that state, it was a significant income.

 

The Native Americans admitted to being poor and living in poverty, but that didn't amount to neglect that kids should be taken.

 

(Admittedly, the state didn't really say anything in or about the piece so it was a one sided piece.)

 

I've always wondered how much federal money drove foster care systems in every state.

 

Especially when you hear stories like this.


i am not well informed enough to have much to say on the matter.... other than it really floors me sometimes how awesome some people are at sharing their blessings with others.   and that you keep up the good work in spite of the obstacles cast in front of you

 

kudos !

 

I think my wife and I would take foster kids except we've seen the way my mom is treated by the system.

 

At first, it is can you take these kids for a month or so, and then it is well can you keep them a little longer again and again, until it turns into years, or you say no even though there is no family for them to go to, which only forces them into another home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter, add to this the fact that there are not enough homes to be shuffling them between.

 

As to how much the state pays versus the Feds, the ombudsman said the Fed pays 50% of the stipend for the medically fragile children.  So, at least MD is not making money on them being in foster care.  On one hand it's good that is not their motivation to disincentive adoption, but on the other hand at least there would be some perverse logic to it.  As it is, I just do not understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

When we approached the MD foster care ombudsman, he told us MD law trumps  federal law because it is just the state interpreting the federal law.  When we pointed out the federal law specifically states things contrary to the state guidelines now, he reiterated that it is MD's job to interpret the Federal law as they see fit.     

 

 

He is wrong.  Federal law is supreme (assuming that the federal rule is clearly stated in the law itself).

 

However, he is right to the extent that MD's interpretation will stand until a court tells them to knock it off and get with the program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really know how things work in terms of the feds funding states, but here's a story on the Native Americans:

 

http://www.npr.org/2011/10/25/141672992/native-foster-care-lost-children-shattered-families

 

"State officials say they have to do what's in the best interest of the child, but the state does have a financial incentive to remove the children. The state receives thousands of dollars from the federal government for every child it takes from a family, and in some cases the state gets even more money if the child is Native American. The result is that South Dakota is now removing children at a rate higher than the vast majority of other states in the country."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Texas has three tiers.

 

Foster

Foster to adopt

Adoption

 

To a large degree, it depends on the status of the child as to where you end up. The big fear with adoption by foster parents is that you can set that in motion before the parental rights are terminated. Sometimes you have foster parents ready to adopt and the parents regain custody. And that causes a huge mess.

 

Does Maryland break it down that way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...