How long is reasonable amount of time for reunification of foster children?

Looney Tunes

Actually, I agree with BOTZ.

But, there are two components to this:

1) Kids are in the system because the Family Court is a ******* joke. Bio-parents that have abused their children are given TOO many chances to get themselves together. And it is usually at the child's expense. Most laws state that if the bio-parent's don't get it together within 15 months, TPR can occur.
But, "any movement" could be something simple... like one part of their case plan.

2) The bigger problem and why kids are bouncing around is because NO ONE WANTS older kids. Everyone wants to adopt babies. No-body wants to adopt kids older than 5...."they are damaged goods," "they have problems," "they need therapy for life," etc etc
I was 7 and was never adopted...I had a brother who was 5 and never adopted. TOO OLD. Instead we bounced around from foster home to group home to foster home for many years.

It has more to do with those wanting to adopt than the issues about reunification. 50-60% of children are re-unified with their bio-parents. About 10% go into Kinship care. The remaining...some are adopted (the young ones) and the rest bounce around.

NO offense to anyone...but even here at Y/A...most people that adopted out of foster care adopted babies or those younger than 2-3.

Older kids are screwed. So the question becomes: Trauma from bouncing around in foster care or trauma from bio-parents...which is worse???

Randy B

I think there should be a cut off at some point, thinking there could be more harm in multiple placements then there is good in them. Just where that is though I'm not sure. Each case can be so different.

As I noted earlier, in some countries (Ireland) they have a system where foster care does not result in adoption. If a child is placed into foster care, they either return to their parents if that can be arranged or they stay in foster care till 18. There is no adoption from foster care and that can be really hard on the kids (according to our social worker who worked in Ireland up til 6 months ago). I'm all for the rights of the bio family but if it can't be arranged......

Mom to Foster Children

Our son was taken right before his 2nd birthday - sent back home right before his 4th birthday and pulled again 7 months later only to stay in foster care till a termination of parental rights was filed in Sept of 2007 and wasn't completed till January 2009 only to have mom relinquish on the last day. As I do / did fight for reunification - when it was apparent that it wasn't going to happen the light of wanting to help the parents get their **** together and mentor them was a waste of our time as we realized that they weren't listening to us nor anyone else for that matter. Our son didn't move in with us till he was 4 years old - after he was pulled from Mom again and has been with us ever since - we are adopting next month. He has had 6 different homes (we were the last placement) in his short life and for a long time - thought it was normal for everyone to have a case worker and see parents twice a week for two hours. I believe after the initial 16 out of 22 months - if there is not a HUGE change in behavior or whatever the issue is for the child to be removed - then steps must be taken to start thinking about terminating rights.

monkeykitty83

I agree with you that parents can't have unlimited time to get it together. Children can't just wait in cold storage while the parents try to fix things; they grow up, and need nurture and consistency. It isn't good for the kids to be left in limbo.

However, I don't think it's necessarily just a question of the amount of time, because different problems take different amounts of time to fix, and the family can still be whole if the steps are taken.

Instead, I think it needs to be a matter of whether or not the parents are putting forth sincere effort. They don't need lots of time to decide whether or not to be bothered. Caring for their children is not optional, and if they aren't going to do it, someone else needs to. I don't think they need to be given long stretches of time to sort out whether they want to be parents or not. The children can't just wait for that. The children are too important for that.

I think that social workers should focus not on reuniting families, but on helping families reunite. Minor wording difference, but the ultimate responsibility lies with the family to make the decision, while the social worker is there to provide help and resources. The social worker can't force the family unit to be functional. That's something the parents have to commit to following through with, even if there are setbacks. If they ask for help to keep their children, they should be given that help. If they need time to get it together through sincere effort, they should get time-- but it's not time to just screw around, it's time for focused improvement of their situation.

The time given to them should be time to follow their case plan, not to decide whether or not to bother with their case plan. If they want their family back together, they need to work toward it consistently from the start. I don't think it's a matter of setting an arbitrary time limit, but of insisting the family make the effort, and if they don't, terminating their rights instead of leaving the children in foster limbo.

opedial

I have seen as a previous foster mom, the back and forth of children in and out of hte system. Their needs to be a time limit absolutely. If the parents have taken their classes and cleaned up or whatever the case was, they should be given mentorship and time to reunite. If they blatantly refufse, then two years is up ajnd let's find some permancy for the children.

â™¥â™¥Mum To Superkidsâ™¥â™¥

I think each case needs to be considered on an individual basis. I think they need to take into account the children's ages, their needs, the stability of the foster placement, the efforts and achievements of the natural family, the bonding to the natural and foster parents, etc.

I don't think children should spend years in care, with multiple families, while the natural parents are making no progress. I think in that situation there needs to be permanent planning for the children with safeguards put in place to ensure contact with the natural family (where appropriate). However, in some situations people may have issues to resolve that you just can't put a time-frame on. What if a mother needs 2 years of counselling instead of 1 to recover enough to parent her child? Should she lose all rights while she is making progress?

In my opinion, the whole system needs to move away from the 'one size fits all approach' and start to REALLY look at the needs of the child.

mom of many

having talked with our caseworker and a private attorney on this subject before (we are foster parents) In the USA, the national average is if a child is in foster care for 15 months and the bio parents have not yet or are not on the road to get them back then they become eligible for adoption. At 12 months the judge gives them written warning that if they continue on the path of not doing what they need to do for reunification that their rights would be severed and an adoption could take place.

BOTZ

They are not "languishing for years" because "we want to keep children with their mothers".

They ARE languishing in care because (very sadly) children over the age of 4 are considered "undesirably old" for adoption from foster care. The adoptions of older children from foster care are not happening very often because ADOPTING PARENTS DON'T WANT THEM...not because "we" (whoever "we" are) are trying to keep them with their parent(s).

BABIES who come into foster care usually have no trouble at all being adopted. It varies by state, but my state allows for 15 months of case work before a parent's rights can be terminated. That rule also allows for extension by a judge and for 'early termination' if the situation is horrendous.

God bless the child who comes into care at the age of 3 or 4. THAT is the child who really fits the 'profile' you set up in your question. THAT is the child who "could have been" adopted from care if they were available right away but whose chances decrease because of time allowed for parents to "get it together".

Just for the record, I'm for family preservation (reunification). I worked in DCFS/CPS for several years and the parent who wanted nothing to do with his/her child and "couldn't care less" what happened was the VERY RARE parent, indeed. I'm speaking from my own experience here. The disinterested, uncaring parent was the MAJOR EXCEPTION among the parents/families that I worked with.

I think you would be hard-pressed to find a BABY in foster care who would go on to "age out". I think you would be hard-pressed to find a child UNDER age 3 in foster care who would go on to "age out". I don't know how it is everywhere -- I'm talking about the US. And, I'm talking about all healthy infants, of any race. Babies and very young children with serious medical conditions are harder to place but, in my experience, they still found placements (including adoptive placements) sooner/faster than older healthy kids.

Annabelle

Its supposed to be 18 months. Thats the law not my opinion. The problem as someone stated already is that once parental rights have been terminated finding a willing/ appropriate adoptive home for an older child is quite difficult.

kelynn1985

No, it's not fair for the children to be put in & out various foster homes just to give the parents time to straighten up. My parents got a foster baby when he was just 9 weeks old & had already been in 11 different homes. (that is 2 previous foster homes & 7 homes that his mother just left him at) He was the sweetest child! We loved him to death. jMy parents lost temp. custody of him in April. The courts were sending him to a rehabilitation center with his mother. His mother had already had 3 children that were living in different foster homes & the state decides to give one back to her! What a mess! I think these parents should be fixed so they can't have any children until they show responsibility!

Independ"ant"

Im not in agreement with lump summing every case. We are talking about human beings and each case is unique.

I think looking at the behaviors or abuses going on with adoption may help prevent more kids from languishing in foster care....like a natural mother being prohibited from seeing her child until the child turns 18.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: