Showing posts with label newt gingrich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label newt gingrich. Show all posts

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Family Preservation vs. Child Safety

In response to Hillary Clinton's denouncing Newt Gingrich's 1994 proposal to bring back orphananges, Richard McKenzie, who grew up in an orphanage himself, said "If the nation had few problems with its current child welfare system, no one would consider bringing back orphanages. But the country's child care problems are grave and getting worse...

He continued, "Our child welfare system today is guided by the idealogy of 'family preservation.' Before taking children from unfit parents, we wait until they have been gravely and repeatedly abused. Then, after a short respite during which we seem to expect magical reforms, we return the children to be neglected and abused once again." - Richard B. McKenzie, National Review, 9-28-98

I'm going to start this blog by taking a risk and stating my true feelings: The emperor has no clothes. The more I research the current foster care system, the more concerned I am that in many ways and for many children, it is worse than the foster group facilities where I resided between the ages of 12-16.

Why would I say this? Let outline some of the challenges I faced and how I don't think those problems are being addressed by current foster care. I'll start with two, for this post:

1.) No incest taboo. When I spent time in an all-girls group home, a male houseparent made a pass at me. I was fourteen years old, and blossoming. He felt attraction, and since I wasn't a family member of his, there was no incest taboo.

However, his attraction to me did not culminate in sexual abuse. Why? Well, because of the group home setting, it would have been hard for him to act on his feelings. There were always other girls around. There was his wife and the other set of houseparents around. So... I got lucky.

What if I had been in a foster home and he had been my foster father? What if he had had more time alone with me? If there had been actual touching on his part and I told a social worker, would I have been believed? See #2.

2.) The turnover rate for social workers... I spoke recently with a foster mother who has had five different social workers for one little boy in her care within a period of six months. When the fifth stranger came to visit the home, the little boy freaked out, thinking that he was going to be taken away.

How could a child or teenager possibly build trust with so many changing faces? Also, once a child or teen spends time in foster care, they tend to get "labeled." If the files says that a child might be troubled, it is less likely that the child will be believed if he or she reports abusive treatment.

Also, the social workers aren't coming from the angle of being deeply invested in any one particular child. Foster care is an underfunded system. Most social workers have a large caseload. They don't have much time to concentrate on any one child's particular needs.

I've spent a lot of time lately meeting with social workers and interviewing them. Some of them have said things that let me know that they are coming from an entirely different perspective than I am:
  • “I just need to find a bed for these children.”

  • “It’s late-afternoon on Friday, and I just want to go home.”

  • “This child is almost 18 anyway. Once she turns 18, she is no longer the state’s problem.”
Let me state right now these children are all the state's problem. They are our nation’s problem. If we do not build into neglected and abused children when they are young, it will cost us in the long run. Would we rather spend money on prisons than on preventative measures?