If you got paid well to take in a child that needed a home, would you?

Looney Tunes

Look, two issues here.

1) Foster parents already get paid to care for children. But the payment is horrible. In the US, we spend more money on animals in shelters than we do on foster children. The average payment for a child in foster care is $10-$20 per day. Foster parents who are "good" and well trained in parenting abused and neglected children deserve more money. No doubt about it.

2) BUT BUT BUT, the system already has too many crappy foster parents. And those crappy foster parents should not get another dime and should NOT be allowed to be foster parents. Some people still do it for the money. If you take in 4 kids, you are talking about $800-$1200 a month. Some people use that as their income. WRONG! And this is the problem.

So, it is a conflicting issue. Good parents deserve more $$, bad parents need to be stopped from being foster parents.

Also, giving more money should impose more requirements for training and education for the foster parents. Training in and about child development, trauma theory, parenting technique for traumatized children, etc.

The idea of improving the pay without increasing the standards of foster parents, is a nightmare. Think of all the "bad" parents that will come to foster......Ugh.

Hello

As long as the mental and financial burden wouldn't affect my family, I would do so in a heartbeat. As the old saying goes,saving a life is like saving the world.

Carters Mommy

That's called foster care. I wouldn't do it for the money because they don't pay that well. I'd take the child in my home because that is what the child needs.

cruzgirlz3

No, but a lot of people would and they wouldn't necessarily be good parents at all. Taking care of kids for profit is not a good thing.

I'm already taking care of two who need a home and I don't get a cent. It isn't about the money. At least, it shouldn't be.

celexa

Yes, defiantly. It's hard to find money to raise our own children so having that extra income would help a lot. There might be more foster parents out there if they got the money for all their expenses.

cassie

i would no matter what the pay

Gershom

I think that if the state is going to be paying people to take in surrendered children, they should also be paying all of the mothers and fathers who are surrendering due to poverty who could otherwise parent if they had more $$.

I'll open my home to children in the future regardless of if I get paid or not. But adoption is out of the question.

Sophie

I would no matter what the pay.

Sheba

no!!

Crater

AKA, foster care? No.

Judah

Maybe in a couple of years. I'm not responsible enough to be a parent now, so money really isn't the only objection (though, believe me, it is one).

I'd never do it just for the money, it wouldn't be fair for the kid, and I'd resent him or her for being in my life if (s)he was just a paycheck to me. The money would only be a factor if it made the difference between "capable of paying for kid expenses" and "not capable of paying for kid expenses."

allchildrenareangels

HAVE YOU BEEN ASKED TO TAKE CARE OF A CHILD OR ARE YOU JUST CONSIDERING DOING FOSTER CARE. EMAIL ME I WOULD LOVE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THIS SUBJECT.

LOVE,
MICHELLE

kywyldefyre

No. Not for money. I would take any child in that needed a home free of charge. As I have done in the past.

C Wood

I'm sure some people would, but you cannot buy love.
cw

Alyssa's mommy

No. My daughter isn't old enough for me to have time for her and a foster child. Unless the foster child was one of my nieces or nephews I would have to say no, not yet. It wouldn't be fair to the foster child.

Cam

No. Taking care of a child in return for money isn't right.

Gabby_Gabby_Purrsalot

no, but I'd accept subsidy payments to more effectively raise a child. If you're properly parenting your foster children, you spend about twice as much as the stipend they give you on the child.

boo6509

Paid well? First of all, if you are doing it for the money, you are doing it for the WRONG reason. A child (a homeless child, any child for that matter) needs a stable, nuturing home environment, someone loving and caring that has a genuine interest and WANTS him/her there, NOT because if "how well you are getting paid for it"

curious

IT shouldn't be about the money!!!
Money can't make you love a child, it has to come from within.
No, I wouldn't do it.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: