English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The foster care program we have in this country is not working. Not only is it separating parent ,children, and siblings and other family members.It's causing a financial burden for the Parents and
State. Each child has a attorney,and each family has a attorney with endless financial burden.The state is picking up most of the cost for legal and personal care for each child. All the money we spend on these things could be used for educating , giving moral support to the family and keeping the family unit together. How do I come to this conclusion? I was a Foster Mother.When these Children came to my home not only were they tramatized but literally ill from being taken from their parents.Most of these children have to undergo endless therapy and professional care,leaving them wanton from a normal childhood. Which then leads to maladjusted adults and a weak link in our society. This alienation can be prevented by strengening the family unit by Christian Leadership instead of state.

2007-02-07 04:07:45 · 12 answers · asked by ann c 1 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

12 answers

I am sure that would work in some cases, but there will always be the need for some foster care. I am the child of a mentally challenged woman who was taken advantage of by a man who should have known better. Mom is not high functioning enough to care for herself, let alone a child. Her family is very dysfunctional and none of them were in a position to take care of me. There were no other options for me but foster care. BTW - we do not all grow up to be maladjusted. I am one of the most level headed, well-adjusted adults most people could ever hope to meet. I think a lot of foster kids could be this way if we had a better system.

2007-02-08 06:58:16 · answer #1 · answered by wisegirl1204 3 · 1 0

I have to disagree: the children, as traumatized as they are from being separated from their parents are better off than the emotional, physical and sexual abuse they have been exposed to by the time they are extracted from their parent's care. There are a lot of things a parent has to do wrong before the State will remove a child from a parent; if anything it is a too leinent standard.

The endless therapy that the kids receive it to help them adjust to a normal environment, not cope with a horribly dysfunctional one.

As our country is founded on the basis of separations of Church and State, there is no way to force feed Christian values down the parent throat...in many cases the parents are to hyped up, drugged up, too drunk to see even realize anything beyond their selfish needs or pain.

In the rare cases where an strongly Christian family can help bridge the gap and reach the birth parents, but again, that is rare. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

2007-02-07 04:30:30 · answer #2 · answered by bottleblondemama 7 · 1 0

i know a family that has taken in foster kids for a few years and has actually adopted two kids...i say good for these people and think that if a kid is being abused, neglected, or not loved at home...they need to know someone out there cares about them....as for the parents..well, its not against the law to be poor or stupid, or even to ignore your kids as long as you give them the basics of food clothing shelter...but i think the care and attention a kid needs is more important than actually having the best clothes or place to live...and yes...there is a huge cost to the state for this situation, but as a compassionate country with a christian ideal ...so far... we must do whats right for these kids..i personally know these two kids will have a lot better chance at life now than they would with a jailed, crack addicted parent, who is too immature to realize that once you have kids, your life ends and the raising of that kid becomes the most important thing.....

2007-02-07 04:16:15 · answer #3 · answered by badjanssen 5 · 0 0

If the parents didn't pose a danger to the children, then why were they removed from their homes? Also, the government makes a point of actually trying to keep biological families together. I think that in this case the government's intentions are noble, but unfortunately, a lot of kids have been returned to abusive situations as a result and many of them have either ended up dead or injured.

2007-02-07 04:14:22 · answer #4 · answered by tangerine 7 · 2 0

Does this Christian leadership include Fred Phelps? How about that woman in Texas who drowned her children to save them from Satan? How about the religious leader under fire in my own city, whose sister-in-law died of septic shock after giving birth to a stillborn child? Do we include persons whose religion believes girls should get married at 13? Do we include persons who don't believe in doctors? How about the Christian man who speaks the same words you do, but uses them as an excuse to beat his wife and children?

Individual followers of religions are no different than the rest of humanity. Even within the same church you will find good parents and bad parents. People are all a complex mixture of good and bad, the product of their heredity and environment - upbringing and culture. And like everyone religious people do good and bad deeds, think good and bad thoughts.

Yes, the foster care system needs to be reformed. But where you take your faith to a good place, the next person can just as easily take it to a bad place...and nothing will change.

2007-02-07 04:21:14 · answer #5 · answered by mamasquirrel 5 · 2 0

We need a license to drive a car, but not to be a parent. That says it all.

I realize that the state should have no control over procreation, but they certainly jump in and get involved once the child is born! They don't legislate birth, but they legislate parenting. Too little, too late.

And I'm sorry to be contrary, but your last comment about Christian Leadership is exclusionary and inflammatory. And I take exception to it. I agree with your concern for the children, but you cannot bring religion into your argument if you want it to be taken seriously.

2007-02-07 04:15:14 · answer #6 · answered by Super Ruper 6 · 2 0

Removing children from a home is usually the last resort....and only becuase if the DANGER to a child......I don't care how bad I want to see families to gether....I am not going to leave a kid in a home where the parents were growing pot, or the kids were being beaten.....Kids don't get removed for no reason....are you telling me that if a kid was being beaten by mom

2007-02-07 04:25:51 · answer #7 · answered by yetti 5 · 2 0

I find that many foster parents are not any fitter than the parents that the children were removed from. I have a neighbor that is a chain smoker - in her home - with two foster kids. How can that be allowed? Smokers shouldn't be allowed to be foster parents if they are going to smoke around the kids - and all foster parents should have to go through drug testing as well.

2007-02-07 04:12:37 · answer #8 · answered by lifesajoy 5 · 5 1

I imagine being bought into slavery, not being allowed to marry, bearing the youngster of the owner who raped you, and observing that child bought off to a unique plantation had a lot to do with it....why do you ask?

2016-12-03 20:40:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

it's not republicans or democrats, but there are powerful forces at work and they know, if they can destroy family. they can divide the country. and they have, and if your not saved. I hope you get saved, because it's gonna get worse. Good luck and God bless.

2007-02-07 04:20:48 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers