SaraLee
New Member
As a former social worker, and mom to a child adopted from the foster care system, I have some education on the inner workings of foster care. First, the article states the child was "abandoned" at 2 years of age. That does not mean the birth parent's whereabouts are unknown. Abandonment is a term used to describe when a parent leaves a child for an extended time with or without supervision. This boy may or may not have been in foster care then entire time. MANY kids come back into care after they have been reunified with their birth parents. The foster parents may have had him in their home for years or only a few weeks. Like Burghguy said, our two year old was in 11 homes since he was two months old! The fact that the judge is the one signing the paperwork leads me to believe that the birth parents rights have been terminated (despite your child being IN foster care, you retain your rights as the parent to make these decisions until the judge denies it and you lose those rights). Also, there are a lot of reasons a child who is available to adopt is still in foster care -- there are about 600,000 children waiting right now and I'll let you guess how many willing families there are to take these kiddos (let alone a 17 year old).
As far as the judge goes, she made a decision that many of us do not agree with. That happens everyday. I'm not saying what she did was right. But she has anywhere from 15-40 cases brought before her everyday. I GUARANTEE that she has made other less than stellar decisions. That is one of the inherent flaws of the system. If we leave these decisions up to the workers, you'd have just as many (if not more) bad decisions being made. There are a LOT of sh*tty workers out there who don't care about the kids at all.
Perhaps if the foster parents, worker, and the child in question are all in agreement, THEN the judge's decision could be overruled. Kind of like a veto power.
This is a sticky situation. Especially when it involves a kid. I personally can't decide what I would have done. I believe that it's not the decision the judge made that is outrageous, but her reasoning for the decision and the wording she used.
Sorry for the rambling...I don't type fast enough!
As far as the judge goes, she made a decision that many of us do not agree with. That happens everyday. I'm not saying what she did was right. But she has anywhere from 15-40 cases brought before her everyday. I GUARANTEE that she has made other less than stellar decisions. That is one of the inherent flaws of the system. If we leave these decisions up to the workers, you'd have just as many (if not more) bad decisions being made. There are a LOT of sh*tty workers out there who don't care about the kids at all.
Perhaps if the foster parents, worker, and the child in question are all in agreement, THEN the judge's decision could be overruled. Kind of like a veto power.
This is a sticky situation. Especially when it involves a kid. I personally can't decide what I would have done. I believe that it's not the decision the judge made that is outrageous, but her reasoning for the decision and the wording she used.
Sorry for the rambling...I don't type fast enough!
