For many thousands of America's foster children, prospects for a permanent home and stronger support will be brighter under a new law that bridged Washington's partisan divide and is touted as the most significant child-welfare reform in decades.
Its title is a mouthful — the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act. And it has raised some questions: Will budget-strapped states embrace some of the options it offers? Why didn't it include initiatives to help curtail child neglect in the first place?
Nonetheless, the bill — signed with little fanfare last week by President Bush — is widely viewed throughout the child-welfare community as a remarkable achievement by a Congress often incapacitated by partisanship.
"This is a historic moment for foster children and families," said James Brown, president of the Child Welfare League of America, calling it the most significant foster-care legislation since 1980.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081013/ap_on_re_us/foster_care;_ylt=AthFcOB...
""Once again, America's child welfare establishment has refused to put its money where its mouth is," Wexler said. "In this big new bill they're all cheering about, there is not one new idea, not one new word, and not one new penny for keeping families together.""
Foster care is the new growth industry. People will see this as a easy way to add to the family income. Of course it is not easy money as these children have many issues. But when foster parents don't want the children anymore they just call the caseworker to remove the child.
This recent push for foster and adoptive parents in Toledo has even had friends of mine wanting to cash in. When I ask why do you want to become a foster parent, the next words out of their mouths is, "I need the money."
I'm seeing this directly. The family involved is still led by good people, but there's a direct financial interest. The county pays a LOT of money along with each child so placed. The money is simply too much, which is again why I vote NO on all these silly social-program levies.
On top of everything else, once a child or children are moved on from one family, the foster family has grown so dependent upon the money that they are tossed into immediate crisis until another child or children are placed with them. Twila, you can certainly see this nightmare being built. It will grow slowly but inexorably.
I am not the only one who sees this. Because of the money involved the incentive to place children in foster care and then adoption bypassing the bioligical family makes this new law rife with future violations of the family. Much like when AFDC began, it in a way broke up families.
I am not the only one who sees this. Because of the money involved the incentive to place children in foster care and then adoption bypassing the bioligical family makes this new law rife with future violations of the family. Much like when AFDC began, it in a way broke up families.
You know, whenever my wife and I took a break from fostering, our disposable income went up, not down. Anyone who thinks there is money to be made in fostering is not only a selfish clod, but a fool. There are all sorts of hidden costs to bringing a child into your home that the measly per diem the county pays rarely lets foster parents break even.
Each child uses additional electricity and water, uses up more personal care products, eats/wastes all kinds of food, and requires that foster parents purchase the right amount of beds, mattresses, dressers, and everything else needed for the additional people in the home. $12-$20 a day (the per diem for children in the various general foster care categories) hardly adds up to "profit," though if you watch your money closely, you should be able to keep from going too far in the red.
I know that I will never convince purnhrt of this, as she is convinced that people are getting rich from being foster parents, but the fact remains that any prospective foster parents will still have to work their same hours and jobs after starting with placements. More often than not, foster parents break even or lose money by taking in children from broken homes.
That being said: why the hell shouldn't foster parents get paid for their hard work, instead of an inadequate per diem and quarterly clothing vouchers for $100 or $200? They have to deal with troubled kids who have a ton of psychological problems, and it's a 24-hour a day job. In addition, LCCSA never pays for things like wear-and-tear on your property from angry kids who smash windows, punch holes in walls, or steal your cash and possessions (all of which I experienced). They also do not pay you for driving to the Juvenile Justice Center in the middle of the night to collect a runaway, or pay you to sit in a pediatrician's office for two hours for a checkup, or pay you for all those trips to see teachers, principals, school counselors, or special services personnel.
Now, the satisfaction of knowing that we in some small ways helped over 40 children is what keeps us going, but anyone who thinks foster care is some sort of easy money scam is seriously deluded.
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
I have friends who fostered 2 toddlers for several years, until the children were adopted by a family. (Going back to their biological family wasn't an option - the mom was not capable of caring for them, and there was no extended family b/c the mom was a product of the foster care system. Though it shouldn't matter, I will note here that the bio mom and children are white, since some people feel that the foster care system unfairly targets black families.)
Anyhow, I recall that my friends stated that they can't afford to take any more foster children. The money from foster care didn't even come close to their actual expenses for the children.
It amazes me when I hear about people who "make money" from foster care. I'm not saying that I don't believe it happens...I just wonder what the heck those families are doing for the kids, if they are able to make a "profit" from the foster money????? Are they not feeding/providing (clothes, personal care items, etc.) for the kids?
I have a good friend in another state who occasionally fosters teenagers, and when she takes in a child, we (myself and our friend) often end up sending money/used clothing/gift cards because these children come in with nothing but the clothes on their backs. The money that my friend gets from her state certainly isn't enough to cover helping provide this child with clothing, food, etc.
Again, I don't doubt that there are some people who skimp on stuff for the kids, so that they can pocket the money. I just wonder how the heck they do it? Raising a child is expensive!
not being paid good money, especailly in these hard economic times.
Then let me dispel the notion that being a foster parent is not a good way to make a living, while you are “giving back”. In the state of Ohio, the per diem for a child 0 to 18 years old is $9.00 minimum to $118.00 maximum for one child. This means a family who takes in two children, will be paid for each child. When you have a child with what they call “Difficulty of care” the per diem shoots up to $85.00 per day for special needs (probably a teenager, a black boy or a sibling group of three or more), for Exceptional needs, which could be a child with extensive medical problems (such as a child with Downs), the per diem is $200.00 per day per child. For a child with Intensive needs (a child who is a sex offender or starts fires.) The per diem is also $200.00. For an emergency Foster care “parent” the per diem is a maximum of $365.
There is also an annual clothing allotment of $1500.00, graduation expenses of $1500.00 and a $2500.00 one time allotment for each child’s personal expenses.
In Lucas County the rates are as follows:
Minimum one normal child $15.00 per day. ($450.00 per month)
Maximum one normal child $118.00 per day.($3540.00 per month)
The minimum is generally for a normal baby and the $118.00 is generally for a normal teenager.
For special needs (same criteria as above) $52.00 per day.($1560. Per month)
For Exceptional (same criteria as above) $52.00 per day.
For Intensive (same criteria as above) $52.00 per day
There is an annual clothing allotment of $1000.00, a $500.00 graduation allotment and a personal allotment of $1000.00.
Do the math. This is a lucrative business and foster parents are no way in a “woe is me” position. If they don’t like or can’t deal with the foster child they have they can have that child removed and get another one. When this happens to a child four or five times, the normal child becomes a child with special needs and then commands a higher per diem.
This money is not taxable and the foster parents can claim the child on their taxes!
When you first cited $450/month for a normal child, that sounded like a lot of money to me.
Then I calculated my most basic household expenses (utilities, mortgage/property taxes, and groceries) and realized that all those things together cost me slightly over $450 per month per person in my household already.
(My household figure does not count things like family outings, health insurance, books, clothing, etc. Since the gov't provides separate allotments for those, I wanted to compare apples to apples.)
$450 a month isn't really all that much, when you factor in everything that its supposed to include.
*I used the normal child figure, since I presume that's what my friends were getting for the children they cared for. Also, if we actually became foster parents, that's the only type of child we could handle right now. Given that I'm already caring for my own children and also provide frequent respite care for a disabled relative, on top of working full time.
the foster care system unfairly targets, black and poor white families. There is no "some people" think about it. It is a fact. Do you think children are removed from their homes in Ottawa Hills? I think not!
Yes, the foster care system does prey on foster care families whose family was in foster care! It is a disgrace the way children are treated in America, the greatest country on earth!
Also provided to foster parents are mattresses, beds and dressers, if needed. Call 419-213.3200, ask for the Placement department and ask what the fringe benefits are for becoming a foster "parent."
Oh, LCCS has a levy on the ballot for November, to get more money to destroy more families.
1. Families in dire financial need who take in the children of family members sometimes get extra help from LCCSA, because the agency always prefers to place children with the extended family rather than complete strangers. However, regular agency foster parents DO NOT get a bunch of free stuff from the county. They receive a per diem for the child's expenses, quarterly vouchers for the child's clothing after a clothing inventory is completed, and mileage for driving children to scheduled, approved appointments. By attending state-mandated training sessions (20 to 40 hours per year) foster parents get paid $10 an hour. That is the entire "compensation" paid out to lcensed foster parents. Doubt me? Call the number and educate yourself.
2. Abuse and neglect of children happens in every demographic category. However, people in poverty often lack the resources to keep their families together during family crises, and children from poor families wind up in the system more frequently than wealthier children in abusive or neglectful situations. We have fostered children from Sylvania, Perrysburg, and a number of small towns in the area in addition to Toledo. We have fostered white, black, and Hispanic children, though the agency prefers placements within the same ethnic and cultural background.
3. Children have been removed from homes in Ottawa Hills, purnhrt, just like they have been in every other local community. Believe it or not, there are abusive parents in Ottawa Hills, and even (GASP) impoverished people in the Village. Do your homework and stop making ignorant assumptions.
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
Historymike, you're having a profound disconnect -- and I suspect moral incapacity -- on this issue.
The issue is that a foster family taking on 1-3 children is raking in about $600 per child, PER MONTH. Taking a pair of siblings turns into an extra $1200/mo income. Shit, HM! I don't even MAKE $2000/mo in income!
$600 per child covers a LOT of expenses, which was the point. I'm personally witnessing a foster family (with their own children already) making these sorts of calculations, and it's not about the expenses of added children. No, it's about the added expenses of taking on new cars.
HM, you can't sit there and tell me that $600/mo extra income PER CHILD isn't a signifcant and selfish factor with making the decision. Yuppies may find those amounts not significant, but to the REAL working class, adding $600/mo can make a clear difference between foreclosure and staying put. You might want to check up on the foreclosure stats for Lucas County.
I can't explain how ANY sane family can LOSE money on these sorts of numbers. Again, we're probably bumping into the Yuppie Factor, where money is spent in huge amounts for things either unnecessary, or overpriced ... and both are related to the yuppie ego. If you blow through cash for yuppie shit, then $600/mo doesn't look like much for you. For all too many people whose egos need deflating, $600/mo is "just a car payment". For people like me (i.e. one of the SANE people), $600/mo should buy me a suitable car in TWO MONTHS, not just continue paying into an ego-related consumption system.
Really, HM, I have to DEMAND that you post the suitable sanitized expenses of this so-called family that you claim LOST money from being a foster family. With $600/mo coming in PER CHILD, where on earth did that money go? Did they open the windows in the winter and pump the furnace to 72 degrees? Private school for the children? Was yet another SUV financed and insured and detailed at a highly-rated body shop?
People who understand the value of a dollar can't tell me that $600/mo doesn't more than take care of the expenses of a child. You also can't play the "health care" angle, since the county automatically takes care of those expenses. WHERE DID THE MONEY GO!?!?
generally receive no money much less more money to care for a relative's child. They call that a free home. I have a relative's child and have had her for 12 years and have received not one dime from LCCS, not that I would take any money from them.
LCCS does not prefer to place children with relatives, they would rather place a child with strangers and pay them a bunch of money. Nor does LCCS prefer placing children within the same ethnic group. You see black people with white children, white people with black children and hispanic children with whoever. Check out places where people take children. I guess this is LCCS's attempt to make America or at least Toledo color blind. What it does is damage children and destroy families.
HM, of course the Village has the same problems other people do but when it comes to removing children from homes, you can bet it ain't from Ottawa Hills' homes.
Check the stats on their (LCCSB) website.
In 2007, we had an average daily caseload of 1,895 children. Almost all (98 percent) of these children were living in a family environment:
* 733 (39 percent) were living in their own homes;
* 540 (28 percent) were living with a relative or other kinship caregiver;
* 570 (31 percent) were in foster care or a similar placement.
http://www.co.lucas.oh.us/LCCS/community.asp
Unless you're stating that the LCCS numbers in the "Report to the Community" are falsified or somehow misrepresented, it appears that 67% of the children served by LCCS either remained in their own home or in the care of a relative/kinship caregiver.
1. I'm not going to post my financial information for the world to see. You as an advocate of individual liberty can certainly understand my decision.
2. I drive used clunkers, like my 1995 Hyundai I bought for $700 last year, or the $800 1994 Saturn I bought this year. Our "tricked out SUV" is a 10-year-old Suburban we use for when we have to drive our still-large family around. I have not bought a new car since... well, since 1993, before we started fostering. After that point we were no longer able to buy new vehicles.
3. Do the math, GuestZero, and really look at the expenses involved with an additional child in your home. Follow one of your own children around and look at utility consumption, food consumption, personal care products, and wear and tear on your property. Off the top of my head, we have replaced at least three windows, one expensive kitchen faucet, one bedroom door, two stolen bikes, and a couple of mirrors from foster-related "incidents" (our birth children, of course, have also accumulated their share of ancillary expenses). But then look at birthdays, Christmas, and other special days - how much do you spend on a child? Could you spend this on your birth children, and then buy nothing for a child in your home in foster care? Maybe some folks could be this cold-hearted, but not us. Every child in our home at Christmas-time was treated the same as our birth children. Then think about back-to-school time, extracuricular activities, and just those moments when you have a wide-eyed kid looking up at you and wanting some goofy toy in the store. Sure, you could be a tightwad, but then you think about the crappy life the kid had had so far, and you grumble and buy the toy.. So yes: a calculating, money-grubbing, profit-minded foster parent could eke out $100-$200 a month, but the foster parents I know do not operate that way.
4. When purnhrt cites the high-end rates ($40 and up) these are for medical needs children or children with severe psychological disorders. Folks with hearts big enough (and the intensive medical and behavioral training) to take in these children get paid more, but this is because they often have to quit jobs to handle a child with terminal illnesses, serious medical conditons that require 24-hour care, or children whose behavior is so extreme that there are no schools equipped to deal with them. In these extreme cases the county is actually paying for the equivalent of a full-time medical assistant, and these rates are not "normal." Frankly, this is a hell of a lot cheaper to the county than an inpatient institution, and only a handful of foster parents complete the necessary training and certification process to become licensed medical caregivers to medical needs children.
5. On the other side of the financial equation: think about what it is you do to make money, and how much more productive you can be without the work involved with additional children in your home. For me, as a writer and college instructor, the chaos of a busy home means less time I can work: less free time for writing, less time to take second or third (or in my case, seven) part-time jobs. Even if you spent NONE of that $450-$600 on the child, this still does not add up to the money you could make even working part-time 10-15 hours a week at 7-Eleven, let alone pursuing activities that are more lucrative. As a foster parent, you can bet that each child in your home will require incrementally more and more of your time, and your ablity to maximize your earning potential is severely inhibited. Those trips to drop your kids off at a football game, a friend's house, or to the mall? Yep, every foster child wants those things, too. Then there are the countless meetings with the child's caseworker, the foster home caseworker, CASAs (assuming you have a good one), doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, school personnel, and - if you are especially lucky - police, lawyers, and justice system personnel. Foster parents are "paid" for none of this beyond mileage (assuming you are diligent to keep track of your mileage reimbursement, which I am sad to say we sometimes slacked on). Oh, and how about driving around for hours looking for a runaway? We have had teens bolt more times than I can count in the past ten years, and - while I could just call the police and report them missing - I often spent a lot of time trying to find these troubled kids and getting them either back home or at least making sure they were in a safe place.
6. Sarah is correct - the first option is always reunification with the birth parents, and the second option is to place children within their own families. Children go into licensed foster care homes only when the birth family is unsuitable, or when there are no willing/suitable family members. Again: we have fostered children from almost every possible demographic, and abuse and neglect happen all over the community.
7. Are there abuses in removing children without sufficient cause, or in foster parents who blled the system for every nickel? Certainly, just like there are in any other system. However, I have seen or heard of little of this in LCCSA, and every foster parent I have met has one goal first in mind: caring as best they can for the children in their homes.
8. Until you have walked a mile or ten in the shoes of a foster parent, cut us some slack. This is a hard, mostly thankless job, whose only real reward is knowing that you did the right thing for children in crappy situations.
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
that you post expenses involved in fostering you should have told him to stick it up his ass. You're far too polite.
I've asked him this before, I believe without getting an answer:
Are you responsible for anyone else in your life other than yourself? Responsible for the daily care of another human being, a child (foster or otherwise), an elderly parent or other relative, perhaps a sick friend? Hell, do you have a pet?
Do you do anything in your life for anyone else other than yourself? I've never, ever gotten that impression from any post I can remember from you, GZ.
HistoryMike asks you to walk a mile in his shoes as a foster parent. My guess, an educated one based on what I recall of your posts, is that you don't have the stones or the backbone to do anything like that, unless somehow it's to be of benefit to yourself.
Perhaps you should take up foster parenting if you feel it's such a financial bonanza. That way you could sock away more money, for yourself of course, for the up-coming 'Depression II".
I am always concerned and suspicious when the numbers don't add up.
Probably the reason 67% of the children are in their own homes or relative/kin situations is because there are not enough foster homes. I don't know if you noticed or not but there has been a mad rush for more foster homes. It was even mentioned on this blog. CSB is literally begging for people to become foster "parents." This new law will guarantee more children going into care and being adopted by strangers.
It is a known fact that black/hispanic children stay longer in foster care and generally are the ones not at home or with relatives/kin. LCCSB is not above misrepresenting figures.
LCCSA is recruiting foster parents simply because there are not enough foster homes, and children sometimes have to get sent out of the county toa place where there is an opening. This is not rocket science; economists call this "supply and demand."
This is not part of some conspiracy to snatch away more Hispanic and black children, though nothing I say will convince Purnhrt otherwise. After all, I am an EVIL FOSTER PARENT, who is PART OF THE CHILD-SNATCHING MACHINE that PREYS ON THE POOR AND MINORITIES.
Bottom line: foster care is extremely hard work that pays poorly, and it is no surprise that people are not lined up around the block for this often-thankless calling. Yet those who take the plunge rarely regret their decisions, since we know how much positive influence we can have on the future.
But go ahead, Purnhrt, and continue to spout your borderline paranoid theories about the foster care system's evil designs to feast on children. Don't bother to talk about the adults who molest their children (or the children of their lovers), or the drug-addicted parents who choose the crack pipe or the needle over buying groceries. Make sure that you ignore the parents who think that curling irons and shovels make appropriate disciplinary devices, and by all means: never let parents who pimp their children to crack dealers for $200 worth of rock ever enter your thoughts.
These stories, you see, are just fiction to folks like Purnhrt, and they have been invented by devious social workers as excuses in their hell bound efforts to DESTROY FAMILIES and KIDNAP MINORITY BABIES.
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
I am sure do a good job and are worth the "pay." But what I have a problem with is the "woe is me" I am a foster parent and I don't get paid for this. But foster parents do get paid and get paid well.
HistoryMike, if you had foster children with all of the problems that you said you did, you are not paid the minimum amount for a child in care. If you were paid the minimum, you should ask for a hearing to increase the amount if you don't think that it covered the child's expenses.
Foster parents are given free child care, respite care, food stamps, memberships to the Y and many more perks.
Your insistence on repeating falsehoods is amazing, Purnhrt.
1. Any foster parent who receives the freebies you mention only did so because they already qualified by being below the income guidelines. At no point does LCCSA get involved with food stamps - that is a completely different agnecy - Lucas County Department of Job & Family Services, and it is not even in the same building. All they can do is point to the agency responsible.
2. Could we have complained and griped and weaseled our way into more money because a kid threw a tantrum? Perhaps, but that's not the kind of people we are. Maybe you could teach me how to be a better leech - how exactly does a person go about demanding more money for a child in their home? Maybe I could run around saying "gimme gimme gimme" until the money magically appears.
3. "Woe is me"? Oh, please. I'm telling the hard truth, and I could fill a book with the experiences we endured. My point was not to whine about broken windows and doors yanked off their hinges, but to illustrate that every child - birth, foster, or adoptive - breaks things and adds to the costs of paremting. My youngest birth child broke two windows himself: one on the garage while playing baseball and his bedroom window while throwing a football in the house. More children equals shorter lifespans for washers and dryers (more clothes to wash), dishwashers, refrigerators, and just about everything else in the house.
4. Respite care: if you put a foster child in respite care, this just means another foster parent watches the child for a weekend or predetermined amount of time. During this time, there is no per diem. How is this a "benefit," except perhaps a much-needed break from a stressful situation?
5. YMCA: Again - there is no formal program for foster families to get YMCA memberships. We were Y members for almost all of the time we have been foster parents, and we paid full price. The only "break" we got was to include the foster child as part of our family membership, which would be the same for any large family. Go ahead and show us where you find this information, Purnhrt.
6. "Many more perks" - what would these be? Tell us so we can be enlightened, Purnhrt. Or can it be that you are just talking smack out of ignorance? Here are the facts: the only money foster parents get is the per diem, mileage reimbursement, and the $10 an hour for the 20-40 hours of foster parent training each year. Vouchers can only be redeemed at specific retailers for clothing for the foster child, and Medicaid only applies to the foster child's medical care. That is it. Period. Zip. Nothing more. Either provide a link to prove your misinformed claims, or continue to babble your nonsense. For the rest of the followers of this thread, here is the LCCS info link on foster parenting:
http://www.co.lucas.oh.us/LCCS/fostercare.asp
7. You need to separate your anger about the foster care system and broken homes (some of which is justified) from your ignorant and mean-spirited attacks on foster parents (completely off base). If you think foster parents are raking in big old piles of cash, you are so far from the truth as to be laughable, were it not for the fact that your wild accusations just go to further the stereotype of foster-parents-as-greedy-bloodsucking-thugs.
8. Finally, your implications above ("all the problems you said you did") suggest that I am untruthful, which is both irritating and strangely funny. Unfortunately, confidentiality prevents me from discussing some of the REALLY problem behaviors I have encountered. Every kid that comes into the system is angry, depressed, and/or anxious, and they react in unpredictable ways due to their immaturity and the abuse and neglect they suffered. Just because a kid gets mad and puts his fist through a section of drywall does not mean the agency is going to label him SBH - it just means you have to patch a wall and work on the child's issues.
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
by LCCS own statistics anyone can see that the majority of children in foster care are black even though blacks only make up 24% of people living in Toledo.
Go look at "a home for keeps" on WTOL. Who do you see---black children. So it is not a theory. People who abuse their children, smoke crack, molest their children, don't buy groceries, use shovels and curling irons came in black skin and white skin.
With this new law we will definitely see an increase in children "taken into care."
It's about poverty. People in lower income settings lack the resources to recover from family trauma. Wealthier families are more likely to have decent medical insurance and thus access to things like inpatient drug treatment programs and psychological counseling. Wealthier homes rarely lack basic amenities, generally have enough food, or - to be brutally honest - can afford the added expense of lawyers to fight when the system intervenes.
Does this mean that abuse and neglect do not happen in the suburbs? Hell no - it just means that people with higher incomes are better able to manage crises. Of course, when addiction breaks apart a famly, a fairly well-to-do family can get mighty poor in rapid fashion.
There are higher rates of poverty among African Americans and Hispanics, and thus there are higher rates of children from these groups in foster care. But you can go right ahead and believe whatever you want. If you want to see this as institutional racism, be my guest - I see this in large measure as a function of income, not race.
Are some social workers predisposed to assume the worst about African Americans? Sure - just like any other profession, such as police officers or prosecutors. But is this the same as saying police departments are filled with raving racist thugs just itching to crack some minority skulls? No way.
Most social workers - like most cops - do a tough job without demonstrably racist outcomes. However, I suppose that you and I will have to agree to disagree about whether poverty or race is the determining factor.
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
http://historymike.blogspot.com/
reveal to me that you know the deal. Call me whatever name you want but you know the truth about LCCS, if you are a foster "parent."
Any anger that I have about LCCS is well deserved especially when you see the destruction of children and families as I have. I have never been a foster "parent" because when I committed to a child it was to be forever not until the child punched a hole in the wall.
Most children after being in and out of foster "homes" find it difficult to live in a family, even a "forever family." That is why this new law is going to be a disaster for children and families.
Foster homes are an abnormal and destablizing(sp?) force in the lives of children.
reveal to me that you know the deal. Call me whatever name you want but you know the truth about LCCS, if you are a foster "parent."
Any anger that I have about LCCS is well deserved especially when you see the destruction of children and families as I have. I have never been a foster "parent" because when I committed to a child it was to be forever not until the child punched a hole in the wall.
Most children after being in and out of foster "homes" find it difficult to live in a family, even a "forever family." That is why this new law is going to be a disaster for children and families.
Foster homes are an abnormal and destablizing(sp?) force in the lives of children.