Is taking in foster children easier than all other forms of adoption?

RPMR

Depends on what u consider easier... THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE FOSTER SYSTEM IS REUNIFICATION WITH THE BIOLOGICAL FAMILY. Foster parents care for the children while the parents r getting their lives together. The parents still have visitation rights. If after a certain amount of time (determined by a judge) they fail to comply with what the judge says the child becomes adoptable. As u may notice it takes a while for all that to happen (12 to 18 months), so if u want to adopt through the foster system u might want to consider an older child (school age). But if u are a straight foster parent, u have to be aiming towards reunification. If u are a foster to adopt then it's different! They will place the child with u close to the time of parental rights termination. Close not done, so there is still the legal risk that the bio parents will get them back. If u are straight adopt there is no legal risk whatsoever. The rights have been terminated. But that doesn't mean that u can't adopt being a foster parent. Because before they move the child to a foster to adopt home or a straight adopt the foster parents always have 1st choice to adopt! And yes fostering is the faster way of getting a child placed with you, but that doesn't mean that u are going to be able to adopt that child. Hope u get it! And hope I was able to help. May God bless u!

Randy B

They are two different processes.

Taking in foster children requires that you be trained and licenced in your area and that process can be as long and as detailed or as short and simple as your jurisdiction requires. Also, you can have children with you for as short a time as overnight or as long as time as years till they reach 18. In some cases, you get very short notice that they need you to take in a child and at the same time you can get very short notice that they are removing a child from your foster care (to replace them elsewhere or to return them to their families). The stress and emotions that go with all of that can be too much to deal with for some people. You have to know that things are always temporary (some is more temp then others) and that it can hurt when the children leave.

Adoption, on the other hand, is intended to be a permanent placement of a child in your home. In some ways, the screening processes are the same as for foster care and while the time lines may be longer the placement is permanent.

mr. domestic

We were approved as Adoptive parents and waited for two year with no calls.
We switched to Foster care and got a call one week after we were official.
We got a 7 week old little girl and she's now 21 months and we are adopting her.
Our case, anyone will tell you, is very rare.
Most foster parents have children come and go before being able to adopt one. Your heart is torn up every time a child moves on. even if it wasn't a good placement for you and the child then you feel horrible that maybe you should have tried harder.
If you choose foster care though, don't give up because there are lot's of children out there that need a temporary family and a forever family.
(we have taken in other children of all ages as well as our little angel and we have cried many tears as they have all gone home)

Zuko

Okay... here's my honest answer. I'm not very big on terms like 'easier' or 'harder' because it always depends on what specific aspect of the adoption you're talking about.

In both cases, you are still required to have a home study to make sure that your home is a healthy environment for the potential child. I'm not sure of the specifics and whether or not one is more intense than the other, so someone more knowledgeable will have to fill in that particular blank.

I believe it's shorter to get placed with a foster child. There are far more older kids available than brand-spankin'-new infants because infants are in high demand where older children can come with baggage from emotional, psychological, physical abuse and neglect and abandonment. So in the respect of actually getting PLACED with a child, it would be easier to have a foster child placed with you than an infant, and it would be a shorter wait period.

As far as actually parenting, it would be much easier to raise an infant. That's why everybody wants one. Infants don't come with names or much history post-birth. (I'm a firm believer that a new born DOES have 9 months of history pre-birth but this is a controversial idea and I don't want to get too far away from your question with debate.)

Older children who can remember abuse, abandonment, neglect, or that have been bounced around the system for awhile tend to be harder to parent. Their needs are harder to meet right off the bat. (Though this is not true in ALL cases, it's true in quite a few, and it's something to take into consideration.) If you do foster a child, the most important thing you can do IS NOT GIVE UP ON THEM. They are in just as much (if not more) need of a good home than any infant and every time someone gives up on them it just reaffirms any abandonment issues they may have.

Another issue that a lot of PAP's have with fostering children instead of straight up adopting infants is that foster children are not always available for adoption. Sometimes they're just fostered until their biological family works out their own issues and the child is allowed to return to them. Sometimes the parents refuse to relinquish their rights. Some people don't want to deal with this.

I've already decided that I would like to be a foster parent, but not necessarily to adopt. I would wait until my biological children were older, of course, so that any other child that comes into my home would have all of my attention instead of just half of it. And I would WANT to foster the older ones who are in danger of aging out of the system. Why not? Very few other people want to and if I have the space, the time, and the financial resources to do so, I don't see why not. If I had the means to provide a home and counseling for older children, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

And I wouldn't have any problem being a temporary foster mom either. Providing a good home for a child until he or she can be reunited with her family just seems to me like a good thing to do. Like a *human* thing to do.

Alright, I know I went off on a bit of a tangent here... but like I said, this question can get complicated. It's easier and quicker to get placed with a foster child, however it's typically easier to raise an infant.

luna

in the uk we dont say orphans any more.all children in care are caled looked after children or foster children.
im a foster parent. you can be as picky as you want within reason.if you only want boys/girls then thats fine. if you only want a certain age thats fine. if you only want to do respite thats fine or you can do short term or long term. however it does take less time than adoption but still around 6 mths to a year depending on your area and the team assigned to you.i advise you not to say that you only want to foster so you can adopt one of them,it does not go down well. i would just go for it and then if you click with a spacific child and the child is going up for adoption,you can then put yourself forward.however you may still be refused as they maybe looking for particular needs or racial requirements for that child. the main aim for fostering is to get them back to family.this may be a long process and extremely ehart breaking.you build up a relationship with a child and a bond,you make them feel secure and safe for them then to return home or move on somewhere else. these children often have visits with family each week,and also older ones can have insecurities or behaviour issues.you really have to make sure its the right decision. what if you get given a drug/alcohol dependant baby.i personally have not had that yet but they are hard work. what if you had a child with serious injuries? how would you feel.you have to be unjudgemental.i had a baby with broken bones at weeks old.its very hard to not to feel angry at the parent,but you should not judge too easily.you have to remain impartial for the childs sake which is easier said than done.

as for what children are more likely to come into your care is up to you.you decide to some extent.like i said dont go into it to say im only going to have children that are going up for adoption.they will know your game from the start.it's called dodging the list and is closely watched. you can decide to go for adoption of a child in your care if thats the plan for that child.but you may care for a good few kids b4 you you find the child for you. you can say that you are waiting on a list for adoption and while we are waiting we thought we would foster to get more experience.

look into your local council for infromation,someone will call you back and come to visit you for a chat. always remember you are as important as a social worker.they could not do their job without you. social workers get a bad name sometimes but there are a lot of very good ones.we are all part of a team.

can i just say that lots of infants also come into care for diefferent reasons as much as the older ones.it comes in waves-sometimes lots of older ones and sometimes just babies. and as i said usually you opt for a certain age group. ie 0-5 or 0- 10 or 0-16 or 8- 12,you can be as random as you like.they will always call you to take in a child not on your requirement list but then itss just up to you how much experience you want and love you have to give. infants can come with lots of baggage too. not like older ones but they might have mental health parents,disabilities due to poor pregnancy ie drugs,smoking. but they are easier in my eyes to mold,at the end of the year you look at a baby and say to your self well your parents made you but i nurtured you into the person/character you are today,it's such a wonderful feeling.

mom of many

adoption is totally different than foster parenting. Although most states has the same qualifications and training. for both.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: