JUSTICE FOR ANYBODY?
To the unfamiliar eye, the courthouse seems to be simply a lackluster building with no memorable features. Nestled in between a variety of blank buildings it is quite forgettable and easily evade attention. However, once the daily bustle of activity begins it impresses upon observer the seriousness of the business conducted within its walls. In some cases the court does bring bearings of cheer and good fortune. Within the hallways of the second door are courtrooms that hear adoption matters in which children await placement with a “forever family” who vows to treasure and love them for the rest of their lives. Families come in all smiles and laughter as they are formally united under the presence of a judge. But that is just about the limit of such warm and cuddly feelings. The entire first floor addresses matters of a far more serious and grave matters. Within the courtrooms on the first floor, dependency hearings are held. Dependency hearings address the matters of supposed child abuse and neglect in which parents are stripped of their custodial rights and must adhere to certain procedures in an attempt to regain custody. The courtrooms themselves appear to be a paradox of the situation. Beside the judge are shelves lined with stuffed toys and board games that appear to mock the parents’ grief with cavalier venues. Children’s drawings line the walls along with colorful brochures designed to educate children about the court process. Yet despite the mild interior filled with playful children’s drawings redolent of lost childhoods tensions run high in the court courtyard. Attorneys meet and confer with their clients minutes before their hearings. If sitting quietly, one can glean moments of the conversations. Parents and attorneys exchange their concerns and confusion through desperate whispers. Words concerning rehab, alleged neglect and abuse, and detained children slip through the constant babble. It is a sorrowful sight to behold. As the parents fears and tensions escalate escaping in various forms of crying or gasping voices, their counsel reminds them that their deportment is paramount. "The court hears, sees, and judges all. Do not give DCF any further reason to pull custody and rights" It is also quite a sad place as there are parents who truly have had their children removed due to ongoing criminal activity or substance abuse. Some parents had case files filled with numerous rap-sheets that made the court file hilariously fat. They continued violating the conditions of their parole and returned for more court dates and added an even fatter case file. But there is laughter to be had in this courtroom.. It may appear stereotypically comical on the outside but the reality is far from it. Putting a face to the case numbers Having been specially invited, my personal journey into the mire of the system begins with the first hearing of many; the detention hearing. This hearing scheduled addresses the matter of whether the DCF detained their children lawfully. For new parents facing detention hearings, each parent receives a copy of a court document called the petition. This document outlines in detail the allegations that the parents face and the reasons for why DCF believes the children are in danger. These allegations are often severe in nature and the document itself ranges from 20-40 pages. For any parent especially new ones, this time can be extremely alienating and aggravating as emotions are their freshest and rawest. Within the cavernous first floor, Rachel E meets her court appointed counsel. Her counsel, an older woman calls out names locates her and hands her a copy of the 45 page detention report and petition filed by DCF. Her eyes widen in shock as she scans the allegations. Within its voluminous sheaves of documentation, reports from family and friends detail false allegations of supposed abuse and mental illness. Reports trickle in about delusions and how the child should be moved out of state to maintain distance from the mother lest the child be “tortured” and “shaken to death”. The mother tearfully hands the report back to counsel as she began to prepare Rachel E for the upcoming hearing. She reminds that the mother that the nature of the first hearing is to determine whether the child is in immediate danger of "at risk of physical and emotional harm, damage, danger and death" if they remain in the mother’s custody. As her counsel departs to attend another hearing the mother collapses and confides her sentiments. “It’s as if you are treated as a criminal… a child molester or murder and no one is willing to believe you. They just read the paperwork and make a prima facie assumption about your entire life. How is that fair at all? I would… could never do such things to anyone let alone a child. Why would they say such things about me?” Soon the mother’s case is called and she shuffles in with her court appointed counsel in tow. As she enters the bailiff directs her past the bar to a chair at the defendant’s table. Amoung the table are quite a number of other people whom she fails to recognize. To the far left sit DCF case workers and their counsel, county counsel. In the middle sits minor’s counsel. Adjacent to her is the minor’s guardian ad litem. Behind them the minor’s CASA worker; a special worker designated to help the child navigate the court process. Finally, at the left end of the table sits the mother and her counsel. A few moments pass before the judge enters the courtroom and calls order. As the judge begins the proceedings, he stares intently at the computer monitor throughout the entire hearing. Not once did he afford the mother a glance. Rachel E's hearing was brief. 7 minutes brief. Rachel E’s child was ordered to be detained out of her care and placed in a nondisclosed foster care home and Rachel E ordered back to court in a month for her jurisdiction and disposition hearing. The judge added that the mother have supervised visitation for two times at week clocking in at two hours each. This future hearing would be a formal reading of the charges against her and her one and only chance to contest the validity of the facts in the petition. Regardless of how serious the nature of withholding custody was, Rachel E’s hearing was brief and intended that way as her hearing was one of dozens that day in the courtroom. The few dependency court-appointed attorneys spent the entire day in and out of the courtroom as they met with a steady stream of desperate and scared parents. As of this abrupt hearing, the clock began ticking as Rachel E would have to comply within her year long deadline to comply with her court ordered case plan … or have her parental rights forever terminated. A few weeks transpired before Rachel E attended her first family team meeting. These meetings designed in an effort to help bridge the gap between social workers and parents would address the issues that preventing Rachel E from “safely parenting and providing for her children”. Children family team meetings would attempt to neutrally discuss and plan the mother’s plan of action to ameliorate her underlying issues. However, as she would soon discover, it would be a harrowing and emotionally draining meeting that would Rachel E Rachel E woke up in that day filled with a sense of dread as she was unaware of what awaited her during that meeting. Around her lay an assortment of pictures of her newborn daughter. Some of her swaddled, nursing, and a few of Rachel E holding her. These pictures evoke sadness and an empty hollowness that could not be contained. Following the detention hearing, the San Diego County Department of Child Welfare Services had scheduled Rachel E's first family planning meeting in which a team of members whom she had never met would discuss her case plan and what requirements she would need to have in plan before regaining custody of her daughter.  Case plans are plans set forth by the child welfare agency that spell out the specific supports and programs the parent needs to partake in order to remain in compliance with the court and the agency. Within the brightly lit restroom of the child welfare office, Rachel E clad her narrow body in a professional outfit aimed to impress the impassive case workers. In part she hoped to disguise her despair and depression that threatened to settle and make home within her thoughts. Once she was beckoned into the large intimidating conference room, she was greeted by the sight of six foreign members. Each one was supposedly present on behalf of her and her child. There were mental health professionals for her and her child, caseworkers, and other members vested in her daughter's welfare. The goal: reunification?? As the meeting began to take off, various issues were brought up and discussed as points of concern. Amoung one of the most frequently cited was the her mental health concerns Written in the report were concerns of the mother's delusions driving her to believes all sorts of untruths such as believing that breastfeeding was a fabricated experience or that hidden rage would lead her to shake the child to death. All of these damming statements built up as a well of tears behind her eyes. As the mother fought back tears and defended such outrageous statements, she was only met with hostile defensive statements citing that the experts knew far better than her. The latest evaluation performed by a competent medical doctor cited that her mental illness was a moot point and symptoms were minimal. Never mind the fact that her last mental health episode was over three years ago. "I was told that it's ok and there is no shame in having a severe mental illness and that I just needed to accept that fact and that I needed meds. It would be ok if that was true but when it simply is not and when they say it in such a rude and degrading manner... then I begin to feel overwhelmed." the mother recalled tearfully after the meeting. Add insult to injury, Rachel E added to me in confidence that she felt extra vulnerable having recently birthed her firstborn. "When you are a new mother the emotions run high. Like you feel very tender and exposed. Each feeling is amplified and I dunno [sic] like I needed a lot of love during this time. I really wanted my own mother there to comfort me and remind me that I was an ok person. And when you have all of these people who don't know me or my story, it makes it far more miserable. Most new mothers get to bask in the warm soft feelings of loving and bonding with their newborn. And here I am separated and shamed. How am I supposed to react". Soon after the detention hearing or so Rachel E begins to attend her visit in a month and a half since the child was taken. Each visit proceeds in the same fashion. She arrives and waits for her child to arrive by a transporter. Once they arrive, she takes her child into a nondescript room with a few toys and chairs and begins to care for the child. She changes her daughters diaper tenderly whispering how much she misses her and how much love she holds for her. Once her diaper has been changed, she swaddles her child within several soft blankets and walks around the room in circles in an attempt to sooth the child. Sometimes her daughter wails and little comforts her. Other times the baby falls asleep on her chest oblivious to the unusual circumstances and basks in her mother's warmth. It feels entirely unnatural. "Who ever envisioned motherhood as this? Being able to love your child 2 hours a week?" Every single move she makes is carefully documented and sent to the courts for later inspection. Whether she was attentive to her child's needs, whether the baby was calm or upset, or whether she brought the correct supplies. Either way, at the end of the hour, she must willingly hand her child back to the worker to be taken away to her alternative care giver. "It hurt a lot the first few times. I found it difficult to hand my only child away into the arms of strangers and know that I could not see until 7 days from then. What mother wouldn't struggle with that?" With each time it became a little easier but the hurt never eased. Several visits and weeks later, Rachel E. arrives at the courthouse on an early Tuesday morning to challenging the allegations surround her and her daughter. She imagined that this hearing would be the beacon of shining light in which the truth would be at least revealed.. The entire hearing took under 10 minutes.... As Rachel E sat that in shock after the hearing she sorrowfully recounted how her counsel had failed yet again to properly defend her. There was no cross examination or even witness testimony. No one had asked her what she believed to be true. All that had occurred was a simple exchange of words in which the judge adjudged that she continued to be a danger to her child based on the false allegations. Allegations that no one had attempted to dispel. Her voice was another of the many silenced by the system. She walks out shell shocked and worn out. Her eyes dulled from the tedium of fighting for basic dignity and respect. She sighs softly and states, "Well I am in it for the long run." As Rachel faces the next six months of preparing to ready herself to complete the various tasks outlined for return of her child, she mentally readies herself for months of impartial treatment from those in charge of her child. Years or more face her and her child. Even though Rachel E's case does not represent every single DCF case, it does represent an overwhelming number of cases, The overworked, underrepresented, and reviled parents who struggle to reshape their parents after such a rude intrusion on their lives. Here's the harsh unspoken truth that rings true for many of these families: What the county DCF has done to her, her child, and her family unit is far more damaging than any purported mental illness. part ii to come soon...
0 Comments
 I would like to take a break from discussing LPS conservatorship hearing for one set of posts. This month has been a bad case of dead courtrooms. My client is pending trial and we are in the process of seeing if discovery was processed and waiting on his reevaluation for LPS conservatorship. We also have not received notice of trial but that is a matter I will have to look into at a later date. I would like to address a entirely different kind of court far away from mental health court. I choose LPS conservatorship because it is a relatively obscure area of the law. Another area of the law that is very difficult to find competent lawyers in is juvenile dependency court. Several of my clients have been tied up in this area of law for several reasons ranging from mental illness to substance abuse thus necessitating the involvement of this court. In short, juvenile dependency court serves the children of parents who have demonstrated a inability to provide for their children or have harmed them. This court is quite different from normal family law proceedings or criminal court. With this court, the evidence rules and local rules of court are quite different making it difficult for families new to the system to understand how it works. There is a lot of research one must do to begin to understand how to navigate the laws and understand what happens in each proceeding. A basic outline of the proceedings  Detention Hearing It is supposed to happen within 72 hours of the child being detained. This hearing is similar to arraignment in which the parents are read or given a formal presentation of the reasons of why their children were removed. If no cause is found for removal, the children are returned to the parent and the case is closed out or lightly monitored. If there is reason for the children to be removed, the next hearing that will be to see if the allegations in the petition are true. Jurisdiction/ Disposition Hearing During this hearing the court will making a finding on the petition. It will either make a true finding on the petition and order services and visitation for the parents or making a true finding on the petition but leave the children in the care of the parents while they have an ongoing family maintenance service plan. 6 Month Review Hearing After 6 months of working with CWS, the parents will be ordered back to court 6 months after the J and D hearing to ensure that they are on track with their case plan and visitation is going well. IF they have accomplished all of their requirements on their case plan, the children may be reunified and the parent may enter a probationary period. If the parents have made significant progress but are not quite ready, the court may order them to return for a one year review hearing and a permanency hearing to take place then. If the parents have not completed their services at all, the court can order that CWS no longer provide services to the family and can set a date for a permanency hearing and a selection and implementation hearing. 12 Month Review/Permanency Hearing During this hearing the court will move to choosing a permanent place for the children to stay. The court likes to see that the children have a stable home, financial, and family to grow up with. This is called permanency. The court likes to see that children have a permanency plan by one year into services. If the parents have done all they need to by the date of permanency planning, then the parents are considered part of the permanency plan and reunification has occurred. If the parents have not completed their plan, then the court moves to terminate their rights in what is known as a .26 hearing or selection and implementation hearing. Selection and implementation hearing (.26 hearing) This hearing occurs if the parents fail to reunify and the court need to find an alternative for the children. In this hearing, the parents' legal rights are terminated and the court seeks one of several alternatives for the child. The child may go into foster care long term, be placed with a relative, or be adopted by their current foster care. At this point nothing the parents can do can restore their rights once the judge orders their rights be terminated. Now that the legal basics are out of the way, I would like to address several issues having been with clients who are on the side of working a case plan to get their children back, and the foster parents looking to adopt their foster children. In an ideal world the foster parents would support the parents reunifying if they are really working their plan and striving to improve their lives for the children. I know that often the children are better off with a foster parent. However, I speak to address the issue of when parents do work very hard to reunify and there are still roadblocks and disrespect. The first issue I take is the court process itself. For those who are not accustomed to court it can be daunting and demeaning. It takes an degree of ease or experience with court to not be overwhelmed. Even for those seasoned with the legal world, it can be overwhelming when it is ones own child at stake. One of my clients had an old case where she was completely overwhelmed and saddened by what she read in the detention report. There were some allegations that were not true but hurtful to read none the less. Since first impressions mattered, her tears and being overwhelmed does not bode well in front of a judge. Especially ones that do not smile or look at the parents. Dependency cases need to be and should be handled with a degree of grace. When dealing with families, the cold environment of the courthouse does not foster a sense of comfort or trust, thus making new parents nervous and scared. The next issue I take to is the actual jurisdiction and deposition hearing. The law mandates that it should be a time for the evidence in the report to be weighed and determined to be true. Since the standard of proof for dependency hearings is very low compared to LPS, many of the allegations in the petition are found to be true. The public defenders do little to contest the allegations and even if you set a trial date, it will be a bench trial with little effort to determine if the allegations are true or not. I also do not enjoy how hearsay rules in court are different and looser than with criminal proceedings. There is a lot of paperwork for this court. A lot of paperwork makes the parent and their child feel like their case is just a number to the judge. Especially to judges who do not smile or look at the parent or their child. When reading through the large amounts of paperwork, the parent is often overwhelmed by the allegations and legal wording if they are not legally savvy. The large amount of paperwork does reduce the parent and the kid to just another name on the calendar call. Large case load. Not anyone's fault in particular but this does lead to ineffective bench trials and poor investigation into allegations. Both case workers and public defenders find themselves overwhelmed by the large number of cases they have to move in one day. With better organization and more people on the job, the cases and trials would be properly managed leading to fewer false allegations in the J and D report.  Now onto the more emotional aspect of court
If a new mother has her child removed from her care right after birth for reasons that are not drug/ abuse related it can be really hard on her as she may find herself treated as a child molester or abuser when in fact she was unprepared. She may have no history of abuse or harm, but during the investigation, she may face some investigators who question her motives. The time periods between court dates and the decisions made also affect new parents in regards to their emotions. "I felt like I was a kid again; everything was making me cry, and I needed a lot of love. I be feeling like, Do babies know who’s they mom? I feel like babies love whoever is giving them the milk, and I want to give the milk the whole time. I want her to know me.” “I feel better now, but sometimes I just feel so vulnerable, like I’m not ready for the world yet. It’s weird.”- Cardi on W Mag So many women find themselves facing a flood of new emotions after child birth in which they really do need emotional support and love. There are hundreds of research papers citing how women and newborns need long hours together to bond and create a strong relationship. It benefits both mother and child to do skin to skin and breast feed. When this chance is taken away from both it negatively affects the child and mother.. I know a few mothers who found themselves broken over the forced separation and limited time with their newborns. They cited how the visceral pain and incompleteness without their children. Having been given only two hours a week with their newborn as their case took off was really detrimental to their emotion state of mind. Bear in mind that these women also have to keep face for court hearings and meetings with their case managers. It is no easy task and does take a degree of emotional strength to hold together for that long. There are also times when case workers will accuse the parents of certain things but not do the work to follow up on whether those allegations are true or not. In this case they can upset a parent who believes that what they are doing is the right thing. The parent may become upset at such accusations knowing that they can physically prove it wrong even though the case worker will not do the work to investigate further. Another point of conflict is with the foster parents. As with anything there are good and bad foster parents. Ones who care about the child and help the parents reunify and ones who are controlling and undermine any efforts to reunify. In regards to the ones who do not do their job, I would like to address a couple of issues. The ones who act like the child is theirs and wishes against reunification. If the parent is committed and actively working their case plan, then they deserve to be given a solid chance to reunify with their children. There are foster parents who I have overheard and read online in blogs who wish against reunification. These foster parents will demonize the birth parents and make statements such as "I hope that the parents fail their plan" or "I wish TPR (termination of parental rights occurs sooner so he/she can be all mine). "I find the use of 'gotcha' to describe the act of adoption both astonishing and offensive. Aside from being parent-centered ('C'mere, little orphan, I gotcha now!') it smacks of acquiring a possession, not welcoming a new person into your life." -https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-insensitivity-of-adoption-day-celebrations_b_7207100 A common saying in the adoption community is “Gotcha Day”. This phrase refers to when the parent's rights are terminated at the .26 hearing and the child is available for adoption. This tends to come across to the other party as really insensitive as it connotes a .possessiveness. As in the child is "rightfully" the foster parent's child. That they deserve the child more than anyone else. In some cases yes the child is safer and better off with them. But in some cases the parent was not able to fully support the child and had their rights terminated. But this phrase gives the guise that the parent does not deserve their child in any sense. As if the foster parent snatched the child away from the birth parents. Like the child is a prize to be competed for and won. Don't forget this is a child; a new life not some award. Remember that for each gain, there is a loss on the birth parent's side. And often a enormous loss that will never be forgotten or healed. Foster parents: Try to not make things difficult for the birth parents if they are trying hard. Try and work with schedules and planning. Don't lie on reports to the case worker. Do your part. That is all I have on the subject matter for now. Until then... I would like to take a break from discussing LPS conservatorship hearing for one set of posts. This month has been a bad case of dead courtrooms. My client is pending trial and we are in the process of seeing if discovery was processed and waiting on his reevaluation for LPS conservatorship. We also have not received notice of trial but that is a matter I will have to look into at a later date. I would like to address a entirely different kind of court far away from mental health court. I choose LPS conservatorship because it is a relatively obscure area of the law. Another area of the law that is very difficult to find competent lawyers in is juvenile dependency court. Several of my clients have been tied up in this area of law for several reasons ranging from mental illness to substance abuse thus necessitating the involvement of this court. In short, juvenile dependency court serves the children of parents who have demonstrated a inability to provide for their children or have harmed them. This court is quite different from normal family law proceedings or criminal court. With this court, the evidence rules and local rules of court are quite different making it difficult for families new to the system to understand how it works. There is a lot of research one must do to begin to understand how to navigate the laws and understand what happens in each proceeding. A basic outline of the proceedings  Detention Hearing It is supposed to happen within 72 hours of the child being detained. This hearing is similar to arraignment in which the parents are read or given a formal presentation of the reasons of why their children were removed. If no cause is found for removal, the children are returned to the parent and the case is closed out or lightly monitored. If there is reason for the children to be removed, the next hearing that will be to see if the allegations in the petition are true. Jurisdiction/ Disposition Hearing During this hearing the court will making a finding on the petition. It will either make a true finding on the petition and order services and visitation for the parents or making a true finding on the petition but leave the children in the care of the parents while they have an ongoing family maintenance service plan. 6 Month Review Hearing After 6 months of working with CWS, the parents will be ordered back to court 6 months after the J and D hearing to ensure that they are on track with their case plan and visitation is going well. IF they have accomplished all of their requirements on their case plan, the children may be reunified and the parent may enter a probationary period. If the parents have made significant progress but are not quite ready, the court may order them to return for a one year review hearing and a permanency hearing to take place then. If the parents have not completed their services at all, the court can order that CWS no longer provide services to the family and can set a date for a permanency hearing and a selection and implementation hearing. 12 Month Review/Permanency Hearing During this hearing the court will move to choosing a permanent place for the children to stay. The court likes to see that the children have a stable home, financial, and family to grow up with. This is called permanency. The court likes to see that children have a permanency plan by one year into services. If the parents have done all they need to by the date of permanency planning, then the parents are considered part of the permanency plan and reunification has occurred. If the parents have not completed their plan, then the court moves to terminate their rights in what is known as a .26 hearing or selection and implementation hearing. Selection and implementation hearing This hearing occurs if the parents fail to reunify and the court need to find an alternative for the children. In this hearing, the parents' legal rights are terminated and the court seeks one of several alternatives for the child. The child may go into foster care long term, be placed with a relative, or be adopted by their current foster care. Now that the legal basics are out of the way, I would like to address several issues having been with clients who are on the side of working a case plan to get their children back, and the foster parents looking to adopt their foster children. In an ideal world the foster parents would support the parents reunifying if they are really working their plan and striving to improve their lives for the children. I know that often the children are better off with a foster parent. However, I speak to address the issue of when parents do work very hard to reunify and there are still roadblocks and disrespect. The first issue I take is the court process itself. For those who are not accustomed to court it can be daunting and demeaning. It takes an degree of ease or experience with court to not be overwhelmed. Even for those seasoned with the legal world, it can be overwhelming when it is ones own child at stake. One of my clients had an old case where she was completely overwhelmed and saddened by what she read in the detention report. There were some allegations that were not true but hurtful to read none the less. Since first impressions mattered, her tears and being overwhelmed does not bode well in front of a judge. Especially ones that do not smile or look at the parents. Dependency cases need to be and should be handled with a degree of grace. When dealing with families, the cold environment of the courthouse does not foster a sense of comfort or trust, thus making new parents nervous and scared. The next issue I take to is the actual jurisdiction and deposition hearing. The law mandates that it should be a time for the evidence in the report to be weighed and determined to be true. Since the standard of proof for dependency hearings is very low compared to LPS, many of the allegations in the petition are found to be true. The public defenders do little to contest the allegations and even if you set a trial date, it will be a bench trial with little effort to determine if the allegations are true or not. I also do not enjoy how hearsay rules in court are different and looser than with criminal proceedings. So much paperwork. There are just year long files that bigger than the one for the guy who was LPS conserved for 28 years.  Now onto the more emotional aspect of court
If a new mother has her child removed from her care right after birth for reasons that are not drug/ abuse related it can be really hard on her as she may find herself treated as a child molester or abuser when in fact she was unprepared. She may have no history of abuse or harm, but during the investigation, she may face some investigators who question her motives. The time periods between court dates and the decisions made also affect new parents in regards to their emotions. "I felt like I was a kid again; everything was making me cry, and I needed a lot of love. I be feeling like, Do babies know who’s they mom? I feel like babies love whoever is giving them the milk, and I want to give the milk the whole time. I want her to know me.” “I feel better now, but sometimes I just feel so vulnerable, like I’m not ready for the world yet. It’s weird.”- Cardi on W Mag So many women find themselves facing a flood of new emotions after child birth in which they really do need emotional support and love. There are hundreds of research papers citing how women and newborns need long hours together to bond and create a strong relationship. It benefits both mother and child to do skin to skin and breast feed. When this chance is taken away from both it negatively affects the child and mother.. I know a few mothers who found themselves broken over the forced separation and limited time with their newborns. They cited how the visceral pain and incompleteness without their children. Having been given only two hours a week with their newborn as their case took off was really detrimental to their emotion state of mind. Bear in mind that these women also have to keep face for court hearings and meetings with their case managers. It is no easy task and does take a degree of emotional strength to hold together for that long. It also feels very unnatural for the parents. Being allowed to visit and see their child for only two hours a time each week makes the parents feel like the child may no longer be their own. When they read the court reports or hearing about their child's development but know that they are not party to such moments can really breed a sense of isolation and that they are the stranger in their child's life. The parent can feel really excluded and develop some degree of depression as a result. But again they cannot voice such feelings as they are being watched by their case worker. There are also times when case workers will accuse the parents of certain things but not do the work to follow up on whether those allegations are true or not. In this case they can upset a parent who believes that what they are doing is the right thing. The parent may become upset at such accusations knowing that they can physically prove it wrong even though the case worker will not do the work to investigate further. The parent may be told to their face that they are "delusional or hallucinating" and "not to make things worse for themselves by lying" which again makes the parent feel really demoralized as they know in most other instances they would have some support network advocating for their abilities as a parent. Another point of conflict is with the foster parents. As with anything there are good and bad foster parents. Ones who care about the child and help the parents reunify and ones who are controlling and undermine any efforts to reunify. In regards to the ones who do not do their job, I would like to address a couple of issues. The ones who act like the child is theirs and wishes against reunification. If the parent is committed and actively working their case plan, then they deserve to be given a solid chance to reunify with their children. There are foster parents who I have overheard and read online in blogs who wish against reunification. These foster parents will demonize the birth parents and make statements such as "I hope that the parents fail their plan" or "I wish TPR (termination of parental rights occurs sooner so he/she can be all mine). "I find the use of 'gotcha' to describe the act of adoption both astonishing and offensive. Aside from being parent-centered ('C'mere, little orphan, I gotcha now!') it smacks of acquiring a possession, not welcoming a new person into your life." -https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-insensitivity-of-adoption-day-celebrations_b_7207100 A common saying in the adoption community is “Gotcha Day”. This phrase refers to when the parent's rights are terminated at the .26 hearing and the child is available for adoption. This tends to come across to the other party as really insensitive as it connotes a .possessiveness. As in the child is "rightfully" the foster parent's child. That they deserve the child more than anyone else. In some cases yes the child is safer and better off with them. But in some cases the parent was not able to fully support the child and had their rights terminated. But this phrase gives the guise that the parent does not deserve their child in any sense. As if the foster parent snatched the child away from the birth parents. Like the child is a prize to be competed for and won. Don't forget this is a child; a new life not some award. Remember that for each gain, there is a loss on the birth parent's side. And often a enormous loss that will never be forgotten or healed. Foster parents: Try to not make things difficult for the birth parents if they are trying hard. Try and work with schedules and planning. Don't lie on reports to the case worker. Do your part. That is all I have on the subject matter for now. Until then... |
